The Karma of Words

·期刊原文
The Karma of Words: Bnddhism and the Literary Arts in Medieval Japan.
By William R. LaFleur.
Reviewed by Heine, Steven
Philosophy East and West
Vol.35 (July, 1985)
p.319-320
Copyright by the University of Hawaii Press

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p.319

The Karma of Words appears to be a groundbreaking work in several respects. First, it highlights a relatively new but fruitful area of investigation which analyzes the Japanese literary and philosophical/religious traditions not as independent entities, but as entities that are mutually interactive and interdependent at every level of conceptual and historical development. As LaFleur notes, " ... the assumption made throughout this book that the medieval period of Japan is best viewed in terms of a strong conflation of the religious and literary dimensions of human experience" will probably still be disputed by those "insisting that religion and literature occupy separate territories and have intrinsically different subjects and modes of understanding" (p. 149). Also, this work claims to be unique in that it examines Japanese literary arts in light of recent Western methodological refinements, including even the history and philosophy of science. LaFleur argues that these approaches help to show that the progression of literature from the Nara to the Edo period forms a unified episteme based on the hegemony of Buddhist ideology. Thus, his reference to "medieval" corresponds not to the Japanese term chuusei, but encompasses movements normally divided into classical, neo-classical, medieval, revisionist, and so forth.

In the introductory chapter, LaFleur attempts to clarify two general issues involving the relation between literature and Buddhist thought. First, the didacticism of diverse literary

p.320

forms such as poetry, drama, and monogatari is not necessarily at odds with but generally enhances the aesthetic quality of the work; it should thus be acknowledged and pursued rather than overlooked. Second, the crucial role of Buddhist symbols in literature is characterized by tension and ambivalence due to the twofold attempt to construct symbols which express Buddhist truths and simultaneously to destructure symbols to reflect Buddhism's critique and mistrust of language in order to point to a new and deeper level of simplicity.

In the remaining chapters, LaFleur for the most part illustrates a single key example for each historical stage of the connection between Buddhist texts and literary expression and theory. These include the concept of rokudoo (karmic transmigration through the six realms), illustrated in Kyookai's Nihon ryooi-ki (given rather unusual attention here) as well as in kyoogen theater; the Buddhist philosophy and symbolism of impermanence, in the hermitage poetry of late Heian and Kamakura era pilgrims; and the "silence" of the Vimalakiirti Suutra, expressed in the diaries of Choomei. The most interesting observations concern the twelfth-century waka poet, Saigyoo, and in particular the relation between Saigyoo and the later haiku poet he so greatly influenced, Bashoo. LaFleur has published a praiseworthy translation of a small portion of Saigyoo's collection (see Mirror for the Moon (New York: New Directions, 1978)), and this area is clearly his strength.

Unfortunately, the examples of literature chosen in Karma of Words add little to the body of translation of Saigyoo and other writers already available-a serious limitation. Also, some of the connections drawn here are, if not obvious or overworked, rather superficially investigated, rarely even attempting to get to the heart of such crucial issues as the nature of language and emotion as it pertains to Japanese aesthetics with regard to Buddhism. In other cases, important points of relationship remain unexamined-for example the connection between the aesthetic quality of yuugen (untranslated here, but usually "profound mystery") as portrayed in the writings of Shunzei, the poet, and Zeami, the creator and theorist of Noh theater. The problem seems to be a lack of familiarity with or insight into Buddhist philosophy which emerges at critical times to undercut the argument. For instance, the complex doctrine of hongaku (original enlightenment) in its various interpretations is reduced to the generalized sense of nonduality; and much time is spent on a refutation of a Platonic view of Japanese Tendai, an issue outdated for Buddhist scholars.

Underlying these shortcomings is a fundamental structural and methodological prob-lem. On the one hand, despite its insistence on the notion of a Buddhistbased episteme, Karma of Words follows the standard ordering and guidelines of analysis of literary accounts. Yet, there is a curious sense of disconnection, or rather of no particular connection, between the chapters, except for the pervasive influence of Buddhism. Once the point of Buddhist influence is accepted, however, much of the discussion loses its impact. The problem is highlighted by the quotations that introduce the chapters which, with one exception, come from Western sources and, standing without commentary as to their relevance, are self-defeating. To put it in the terminology favored by the author, this is a conventional "diachronic" study which, in occasionally making a correspondence between historical periods, evokes an artificial "synchronic" categorization. Thus, Karma of Words will probably not be seen as bridging the interpretative gaps it sets its sights on.