Astronomy of the Afterlife: the Sandaikō Debate and the Establishment of a Kami Cosmology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Astronomy of the Afterlife: The Sandaikō Debate and the Establishment of a Kami Cosmology Item Type text; Electronic Thesis Authors Wimpey, Nathaniel Hunter Citation Wimpey, Nathaniel Hunter. (2021). Astronomy of the Afterlife: The Sandaikō Debate and the Establishment of a Kami Cosmology (Master's thesis, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA). Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction, presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 29/09/2021 16:26:02 Item License http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/ Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/660174 ASTRONOMY OF THE AFTERLIFE: THE SANDAIKŌ DEBATE AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A KAMI COSMOLOGY By Nathaniel H. Wimpey Copyright © Nathaniel H. Wimpey A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF EAST ASIAN STUDIES In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS In the Graduate College THE UNVIERSITY OF ARIZONA 2021 3 Acknowledgements This project has been guided and supported by a number of talented and patient teachers, colleagues, friends, and family. I would first like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Takashi Miura, whose knowledge and direction navigating the landscape of pre-modern intellectual and religious thought proved invaluable for both the formation and execution of this project. I would also like to extend thanks to Dr. Joshua Schlachet for his endless patience dealing with a deluge of emails, and for helping me to chart a path through graduate life. I would further like to thank Dr. Kaoru Hayashi for helping me to develop the necessary skills to explore the primary sources used in this paper, and giving me further insight into pre-modern textual analysis. I would next like to thank my colleagues in the East Asian Studies Department at the University of Arizona for their continued encouragement and uplifting comments during low points in the writing process. I am especially grateful to Jingyi Li and Len McArtor for the advice, motivation, and kindness they provided me. In addition, I would like to thank my friends Hunter Jefferson, Ben Lemli, Elysia Powers, Boris Fernandez, Niki Duff, Clark Ton, Foster Gorman, and Kyle Fox for their constant support and incredible endurance taking late-night phone calls and a torrent of anxiety. This project hinged on their emotional assistance. Finally, I would like to extend sincere thanks to my parents Brenda and Terry Wimpey whose constant encouragement and faith allowed me to summon the fortitude to complete this undertaking. I owe all that I have to them. I assume full responsibility for anyone I failed to give proper credit for their assistance with this project, and obviously all mistakes therein are mine alone. 4 Contents List of Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 5 Abstract .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Chapter 1: Development of the Debate: Kokugaku and the Sandaikō..................................................... 14 Chapter 2: The Sandaikō and the Influence of Western Sciences ........................................................... 34 Chapter 3: The Debate Begins: Initial Reactions of the Sandaikō ............................................................ 58 Chapter 4: The True Pillar of the Soul and the Fate of the Human Spirit ................................................. 67 Epilogue ................................................................................................................................................ 88 Appendix A: Sandaikō Diagrams ............................................................................................................ 91 Bibliography .......................................................................................................................................... 96 5 List of Figures Figure 1 ................................................................................................................................................. 45 Figure 2 ................................................................................................................................................. 47 Figure 3 ................................................................................................................................................. 47 Figure 4 ................................................................................................................................................. 48 Figure 5 ................................................................................................................................................. 49 Figure 6 ................................................................................................................................................. 51 Figure 7 ................................................................................................................................................. 52 Figure 8 ................................................................................................................................................. 76 6 Abstract The Sandaikō debate was a controversy that occurred within the Kokugaku school of Japanese intellectual thought during the Edo period. Beginning with the publication of the Sandaikō by Hattori Nakatsune in 1796 and lasting for three decades without a clear victor, the debate itself centered on issues of methodology and succession within nativist studies. However, the content of the debate focused on the development of a cosmology rooted in mythology and the Japanese kami. While one group advocated for philological analysis of classical poetry, the opposing faction aimed to direct nativist studies towards the examination of ancient mythology to recover archaic knowledge. The conflict surrounding the Sandaikō exacerbated issues on leadership within the movement, as competing figures vied for principal positions. The primary outcomes of the debate would be the development of a new cosmology rooted in the power of the Japanese kami as creative forces within the cosmos. The text of the Sandaikō established a cosmology that took Japan as the center of a divinely created world. The cosmology presented here would then be expanded by Hirata Atsutane in his text the Tama no mihashira by elaborating on the role of humanity within this cosmological system, and humanity’s relationship with the kami. By examining these texts, this thesis aims to frame the Sandaikō debate as a watershed moment in the history of Edo period nativism for presenting a cosmology centered around the Japanese gods, and in competition with other systems originating outside of Japan. 7 Introduction Now, the Land of Yomi emerged from descending material, and Heaven emerged from rising material, but whichever came first or second is unknowable. To speak of this using principles (理 li) is a Chinese way of thinking, and is misleading. Hattori Nakatsune, Sandaikō (1796) The preceding passage is from Hattori Nakatsune’s Sandaikō 三大考 or An Investigation on the Three Heavenly Bodies, an inconspicuous text within the Kokugaku (National Learning) school of intellectual thought which began during Japan’s Edo period. The text’s foremost objective was the establishment of a cosmology based on the creation myths of Japan as recounted in the opening sections of the Kojiki and Nihon shoki that describes the formation of heaven and earth, and the birth of the earliest generations of kami.1 Despite not being one of kokugaku’s more prominent texts, the Sandaikō gained some notoriety when it was published, leading to a decades-long-debate modern scholars have come to refer to as the Sandaikō debate. The debate primarily centered on issues of methodology concerning textual exegesis, as different factions held opposing views regarding which texts warranted detailed analysis, and how best to approach the study of classical literature. Moreover, the dispute also contained a personal dimension for some of the participants who used the controversy as a staging ground to lay claims to intellectual authority, and sought to influence the direction of nativist studies during the 1 “Kami” is a term generally used to describe Japanese deities and spirits, but due to the flexible nature of the term can refer to both anthropomorphic entities with a personality and a will, or more benign aspects and forces of nature. “Kami” in this thesis will refer to the former definition, conceptualizing them as willful agents in the world, and will be used interchangeably with other terminology such as “deities.” 8 Tokugawa period. The controversy spawned out of the Sandaikō text itself, but would not fully ignite until the publication of the Tama no mihashira 霊の真柱 (True Pillar of the Soul) written by Hirata Atsutane, one of the most prolific nativist scholars of the Edo period. Atsutane expanded on the cosmology of the Sandaikō by elaborating on the relationship between humans and the kami, which he held as integral to understanding