2015 nishida memorial symposium: introduction and handout translation

2015 Nishida Memorial Symposium – Introduction and handout translation by Kenn Nakata Steffensen

1

Speaking of Nishida Kitarō:

Memorial Symposium on the 70th Anniversary of His Passing Away

FUJITA Masakatsu, KOSAKA Kunitsugu, Klaus RIESENHUBER, and TANAKA Yutaka

Monday 20th July 2015, Sophia University, Yotsuya Campus

Introduction and translation by Kenn Nakata Steffensen

Introduction

The following is a translation of the printed material provided to participants at the 2015

Nishida memorial symposium held to mark the 70th

anniversary of his death. The event was

organised by the Ishikawa Nishida Kitarō Museum of Philosophy and popular beyond

expectation; extra chairs had to be brought in, and even then some attendees had to stand up.

As the symposium was videotaped, the footage may eventually be made available by the

Nishida Museum or Sophia University. The beautifully designed poster and the speaker

biographies are available on the museum’s website. Scanned copies of the source texts are

attached after the translations.

The success of this meeting and a recent growth in publications, in for instance Shisō

(Taguchi in no. 1089, Fujita in 1093, Kadowaki in 1085) and other journals, indicate a

growing interest in the Kyoto School in Japan. As Fujita noted in his presentation, this is not

limited to Japan, since a number of South and Southeast Asian scholars have recently begun

to study Nishida and his contemporaries as groundbreaking theorists of Asian modernisation

who addressed the self-same problems that other Asian countries are facing in our day. And

as Kosaka’s anecdote about his ‘Ph.D. examination episode’ illustrated, not so long ago the

http://www.nishidatetsugakukan.org/

http://www.nishidatetsugakukan.org/mainmenu3/mainmenu3_kouen/nishida_botsu70tokyo.pdf

http://www.nishidatetsugakukan.org/mainmenu3/mainmenu3_kouen/nishida_botsu70tokyo.pdf

http://www.iwanami.co.jp/shiso/top.html


2

Kyoto School was considered too controversial to constitute suitable dissertation material at

Japanese universities. Had Nishida’s favourite student, Miki Kiyoshi, survived the war, he

would have recognised the extent to which the memory of his teacher has been shaped by the

vagaries of 20th

century political history. Hopefully, as the memories of the 15-year war

become more distant and the fog of the cold war lifts, a clearer view will emerge, allowing us

to know ‘wie es eigentlich gewesen sei’. As Fujita observed, temporal distance facilitates

more balanced scholarship.

With the partial exception of Fujita - and in a manner regrettably characteristic of

contemporary academic philosophers (but certainly not of the Kyoto School at its height) -

the speakers did not sufficiently historicise Nishida and his thought. More regrettably, we

cannot turn to Anglophone historians of Japan for a corrective, since their treatment has on

the whole been deficient both historically and philosophically, as David Williams and

Graham Parkes have thoroughly documented. There are, of course, scrupulous historians of

philosophy writing in Japanese, but they are rarely read by English-using scholars. If we have

to understand Nishida as a historical figure, and if his present-day defenders among

philosophers and detractors among historians are not up to the task, we may have to turn to

his students. Our understanding may thus be enhanced if we read Nishida through such

historicist second-generation Kyoto School thinkers as Miki Kiyoshi, Tosaka Jun, Kōsaka

Masaaki, Kōyama Iwao and Suzuki Shigetaka.

Fujita, Kosaka and Riesenhuber stressed the continuing, even perennial, relevance of

Nishida’s philosophy. Not surprisingly for an event of this nature, they also all espoused

fairly orthodox approaches: Fujita focused on the theory of place, Kosaka stressed the East

Asian background to what he called Nishida’s ‘metapsychics’ as opposed to Western

metaphysics, while Riesenhuber honed in on the relationship between Nishida’s philosophy

and neo-Platonism. The presentations were thus highly competent and representative of a

certain mainstream consensus but not surprising or challenging for anyone familiar with the

main debates in Japan and internationally. It was therefore not surprising that all speakers are

renowned philosophers of religion, or that one is a Jesuit missionary. This was not the place

to experience paradigm-busting revolutionary science, but it was nevertheless a great pleasure

to attend. I hope the following translations will give those who were not present and who do

not read Japanese some insight into that afternoon’s exchanges and thereby into the state of

Nishida studies in Japan today.


3

Speaker biographies

Klaus Riesenhuber

Born in Germany in 1938. Joined the Society of Jesus in 1958. Graduated from the

University of Munich in 1967, majoring in philosophy. Professor emeritus at Sophia

University. Among his works are Freedom and Transcendence in the Middle Ages 『中世に

おける自由と超越』 , Sources of Medieval Philosophy 『中世哲学の源流』 (both

published by Sōbunsha), A History of Ancient and Medieval Western Philosophy 『西洋古代，

中世哲学史』 , A History of Medieval Thought 『中世思想史』 (both published by

Heibonsha), Reason and Divinity in the Middle Ages 『中世における理性と霊性』, and

Fundamental Problems of Modern Philosophy 『近代哲学の根本問題』 (both published

by Sophia University Press). He is the editor, among others, of Studies in Medieval Thought

『中世思想研究』 (11 volumes, Sōbunsha) and Corpus of Primary Texts on Medieval

Thought 『中世思想原典集成』 (21 volumes, Heibonsha).

Kosaka Kunitsugu

Born in 1943. He completed his doctorate in 1971 at Waseda University Graduate School of

Letters. Professor Emeritus at Nihon University. He specialises in philosophy of religion and

modern Japanese philosophy. Among other works, he is the author of Nishida Philosophy

and Religion 『西田哲学と宗教』 (Daito Publishing), Studies in Nishida Philosophy, The

Group of Philosophers Around Nishida Kitarō (Minerva Shoten), An Annotated Complete

Edition of A Study of the Good 『善の研究全注釈』, The Philosophical Thought of Nishida

Kitarō 『西田幾多郎の思想』(Kōdansha Academic), The Substrate of Nishida Philosophy

『西田哲学の基層』 (Iwanami Gendai Bunko). He is the editor of Selected Works of Ōnishi

Hajime (3 volumes, Iwanami Bunko) and other works.

Fujita Masakatsu

Born in 1943. He withdrew from the doctoral programme at Kyoto University in 1978. In

1982, he earned his doctorate from Bochum University in Germany. He is a designated

professor at the Kyoto University Graduate School of Advanced Integrated Studies in Human

Survivability. His area of specialisation is the history of Japanese philosophy. He is the

author of The Young Hegel 『若きヘーゲル』 (Sōbunsha), Nishida Kitarō: Living and

Philosophy 『西田幾多郎一生きることと哲学』, Philosophical Hints 『哲学のヒント』

(both published by Iwanami Shoten), and Nishida Kitarō’s Intellectual Universe: From Pure

Experience to World Cognisance 『西田幾多郎の思索世界一純粋経験から世界認識へ』


4

(Iwanami Shoten). He is the editor of Selected Works of Tanabe Hajime (4 volumes, Iwanami

Bunko) and other works.

Tanaka Yutaka

Born in 1947. In 1967, he left the doctoral programme at the University of Tokyo Graduate

School of History and Philosophy of Science, as his time limit had expired. He was an

associate member of the Claremont University Center for Process Studies from 1984-91. He

is professor emeritus at Sophia University. He is the chairman of the Association for the

Study of East-West Religious Exchange 東西宗教交流学会 . He also chairs the Japan

Whitehead and Process Studies Associations. He specialises in philosophy of science and

philosophy of religion. He is the author, among other works, of From Paradox to Reality:

Debates between Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Religion 『逆説から実在へ一科

学哲学，宗教哲学論考』 (Kohrosha), Whitehead: The Philosophy of Organism (Kōdansha),

and co-author of Speaking of Takizawa Katsumi 『滝沢克己を語る』 (Shumpūsha).


5

20th June 2015

Nishida Kitarō Memorial Symposium ‘Speaking of Nishida Kitarō’

‘Looking back on the 70 years since Nishida’s death’

Fujita Masakatsu

1. The 70 years since Nishida’s death

Is there any significance to the 70-year period of time?

As time passes, it becomes possible to assess thought in an objective or scholarly manner.

However, to objectively make past thought an object of research does not mean to close it off as just another chapter in the history of philosophy.

2. Postwar studies in Nishida philosophy (1)

Publication of writings by people who were taught directly by Nishida, his friends, those who remember him and spoke about those memories. The publication of the Complete Works of Nishida Kitarō (1947-1953).

The critique of Nishida’s unscientific views of history and the state, and of his intellectual rationalisation of the war.

3. Postwar studies in Nishida philosophy (2)

The tendency to ‘throw the baby out with the bathwater’.

Questioning the historical and contemporary significance of Nishida’s thought itself. (Ueda Shizuteru’s Reading Nishida Kitarō (1991) and Nakamura Yūjirō’s Nishida Kitarō (1983) etc.

4. Developments 50 years after the death of Nishida

The provision of Nishida literature such as the new edition of the Complete Works (2002-2009), the three volumes of Nishida Kitarō’s Philosophical Essays (1987-1989), the new edition of A Study of the Good (2012) etc.

The publication of studies interrogating the meaning and potential of Nishida’s thought from today’s perspectives and linking it with such contemporary problems as knowledge, life, ecology and history.

The considerable development of Nishida and Kyoto School studies abroad.

5. Future tasks

Entering deeply into the contents and engaging in a ‘dialogue with the space of ideas’

The establishment of networks for research into Nishida philosophy and Japanese philosophy


6

Speaking of Nishida Kitarō

Kosaka Kunitsugu

1. My encounter with Nishida philosophy

o The memory of getting hold of a copy of the Complete Works of Nishida Kitarō in the

reading room of the Department of Literature after starting university.

o Having 5 paperback versions of A Study of the Good at hand

o Purchasing the second edition of the Complete Works of Nishida Kitarō (February

1965-September 1966)

2. An interest in modern Japanese philosophy

o Circumstances surrounding the publication of Studies in Meiji Philosophy 『明治哲学

の研究』 and Selected Works of Ōnishi Hajime 『大西祝選集』

o The Ph.D. examination episode

3. The appeal of the character called Nishida Kitarō

o Correspondence with Tomonaga Sanjurō, Tanabe Hajime, Watsuji Tetsurō and others.

o Suzuki Daisetz’s rating of Nishida

‘A sincere person in the truest sense of the word’

o ‘A person who had endless time to spare for others’

4. The character of Nishida philosophy

o A philosophy of self-awareness An intuitive awareness of pure experience

Reflective consciousness of self-awareness

Locational awareness of absolute nothingness

Awareness of the absolutely contradictory self-identity of the world

5. The significance of Nishida philosophy

o Presentation of an Oriental view of reality as against the Western view of reality

o Metaphysics of nature vs. metaphysics of mind

o The locationality of idea and of absolute nothingness


7

20th July 2015, Sophia University

Memorial Symposium on the 70th Anniversary of the Passing Away of Nishida Kitarō

‘Speaking of Nishida Kitarō’

Pure Experience and Reality in the Early Nishida

Klaus Riesenhuber

A. Introduction

1. The past and present of Nishida studies in Western Europe 2. The speaker’s background and interest 3. Subject of presentation: The foundation of a theory of philosophy and religion based on

pure experience

B. Raising the problem

1. A Study of the Good and the earlier Nishida: The problem of the ‘disjointed nature of A Study of the Good’

2. The pursuit of reality as motif 3. The will to philosophy as a system 4. Objective: Attaching grounds to the contemplation arising from experience, attaching

place to experience 5. The relationship between experience and cognition 6. Historical background of the concept of experience 7. The meaning and origin of ‘pure (experience)’ 8. The development and transfiguration of ‘pure (experience)’

C. Basic features of the concept of experience

1. The difference between experience and judgment 2. Experience as a given and as action 3. The self-manifestation of existence in experience 4. The intrinsic unity of experience 5. Individual will in experience 6. Experience beyond individuality 7. The bearer of experience 8. The truth and absoluteness of experience 9. The self-differentiation and development of experience 10. Experience and systems of thought


8

D. The core of pure experience

1. The essence and origin of pure experience: The dimension of absoluteness 2. The unity of consciousness 3. Supra-individual unity 4. The operation of a unifying force from behind consciousness 5. The existence of the absolute: ‘God’ 6. The immanence and transcendence of God 7. The limitations of cognisance of God and the possibility of experience of God 8. The human commitment to God: Self-transcendence and affinity 9. Religious sentiment founded in human nature 10. Yearning for unity with God: The core of religiosity 11. Religious sentiment: The primordial desire of human beings

E. The shape of Nishida’s thinking: Sources and their usage

1. The backdrop of Eastern thought 2. Western philosophy as source 3. Christian thought as source 4. The source of the intermediate dialectical world 5. Nishida’s religiosity: Religious understanding and experience in everyday life

* Reference: Fundamental Problems of Modern Philosophy 『近代哲学の根本問題』

(Chisen Shokan 2014), Part 4 ‘Pure Experience and Religion’, especially Chapter 14 on

‘Religious Aspects of Pure Experience’.


9

Speaking of Nishida Kitarō (discussion paper)

Tanaka Yutaka

1. The meaning of Nishida’s ‘logic of place’

Turning to Section 5 of Professor Fujita’s presentation, ‘Future tasks’, he re-examines

Nishida’s philosophy as a contribution to the philosophy of place

He re-reads the ‘question of existence’ from the later years of Heidegger’s thought as a

philosophical theory of place. The deepening of the argument for a theory of place that goes

from meaning of existence → truth of existence → place of existence will probably become a

lively topic in contemporary philosophy. This means going beyond a mere interpretation of

Heidegger and making ‘the relationship between experience and place’ into a root problem of

philosophy. Nishida’s ‘Logic of Place’ (Logos, The Word) is a search for the logic of the

‘place of nothingness’, which clarifies the meaning, and addresses the truth, of existence.

Nishida’s ‘Logos of the place of nothingness’ precedes the ‘theological turn’ in contemporary

French phenomenology, which designates ‘God without being’ as a problem. At roughly the

same time that Husserl’s phenomenology emerged, Nishida thinks about the ‘phenomenology

of intentionality’ in terms of the philosophy of religion and speaks about ‘noetic

transcendence’ as the logos of place.

Turning to Section 5 of Professor Kosaka’s presentation - On the ‘Oriental view of

reality’ or a ‘metaphysics of mind’

I would like to question the relationship between Nishida’s philosophy and the theory of ‘one

mind’ and ‘all living things’ in the Mahayana Discourse on the Awakening of Faith 大乗起信

論, which argues for an absolute that subsumes everything of this world/withdrawing from

this world 世間法/出世間法 into one. The ‘one mind’ in the Discourse on Awakening of Faith

is the ultimate subsumer known as ‘the big three of body, mind and purpose’. How should we

think about the relationship between the assessment of subsumption guided by the structure

of reality that was ‘deepened by the logic of place in Nishida’s philosophy’ and the

‘metaphysics of mind’ in the Discourse on Awakening of the Faith?

Furthermore, when the relationship between ‘idea and the place of absolute nothingness’ is

discussed, the relationship between Plotinus’ metaphysical theory of emergence, which is

based on the three principles of The One, Nous and Spirit, and Nishida’s philosophy becomes

a problem in terms of the relationship between sensory, physical existence and ideas. Turning

from theory of emergence 発出論 to creationism 創造論 , where might we be able to

positively assess and recognise the difference between Nishida’s philosophy and Plotinus’

metaphysics, in particular the non-Hellenic idea of ‘creation ex nihilo’?


10

2. Nishida’s philosophy and Christian Platonism: Approaching Professor

Riesenhuber’s assertions

Nishida’s relationship with Christianity was more profound than that of any other Japanese

philosopher of his era, and it centres on an internal conversation with Christian Platonism,

which is the wellspring of Western metaphysics. Even if Nishida’s thought is grounded in a

Japanese spirituality derived from Mahayana Buddhism and represented in Zen and Jōdo

Shinshū, one can ignore neither the fact that Nishida’s thought, from A Study of the Good to

The Logic of Place and the Religious Worldview, always had ‘God’ as a core motif, nor its

relationship with Christianity.

I would like to base the following discussion of the underlying commonalities between

Nishida’s philosophy and the tradition of Christian neo-Platonism on two books published in

Sophia University’s monograph series Studies in Medieval Thought, in particular the volume

on Eurigena’s Philosophical Thought and Medieval Neo-Platonism 「エウリゲナの思想と

中世の新プラトン主義」(1992) by Rafael López Silonis while also referring to Professor

Riesenhuber’s works.

1. Thinking about the absolute is based on the ideas and paradoxes of negative theology

(coincidence of opposites, contradictory self-identity).

2. The foundation of the absolute or the absolute as ultimate existence is simultaneously

the most transcendental and the most immanent.

3. Awareness of the absolute is realised through actually living persons. In the workings

of the personal self-which emerges out of the integration of intelligence and emotion,

intellect and sentiment, wisdom and love-contemplation and praxis are unified.

4. The path by which human beings attain experience of the absolute is found within the

self; it is the path through which ‘immanent transcendence’ or ‘transcendent

immanence’ is fulfilled. (Nishida expressed this as ‘the logos of place’, in which ‘the

self is transcended at the bottom of the self’.)


11

Appendices: Printed material provided to participants

1. Fujita Masakatsu


12

2. Kosaka Kunitsugu


13

3. Klaus Riesenhuber


14

4. Tanaka Yutaka

2015 nishida memorial symposium: introduction and handout translation

Documents