The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Volume 11 | Issue 24 | Number 3 | Article ID 4133 | Jun 16, 2013

1

Zen Masters on the Battlefield (Part I) 戦場の禅師（上）

Brian Victoria

Introductory Note:This is the first of a two partseries describing the wartime roles of two ofJapan’s best-known 20th century Zen masters,Sawaki Kōdō (1880-1965) and Nakajima Genjō(1915-2000). Beginning with the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5, followed by the Asia-Pacific War of 1937-45, these masters left arecord not only of their battlefield experiencesbut, more importantly, the relationship theysaw between their Buddhist faith and war.Additionally, each was affiliated with one ofJapan’s two main Zen sects, i.e., Sawaki was aSōtō Zen priest while Nakajima was a priest inthe Rinzai Zen sect. Finally, Sawaki served as asoldier in the Imperial Army during the Russo-Japanese War, while Nakajima was a sailor inthe Imperial Navy during the Asia-Pacific War.

Part I focuses on Sawaki Kōdō. Part II coversNakajima Genjō.

Any fool learns from his mistakes. The wiseman learns from the mistakes of others. -- Ottovon Bismarck.

Introduction

A cursory glance at the writings of Zen scholarslike D.T. Suzuki, with his proffered “unity ofZen and the sword,” suggests that at least inmedieval Japan there is no reason to besurprised at the presence of Zen masters on thebattlefield. A closer reading, however, revealsthis was not the case. That is to say, Zenmasters l ike the famous Takuan Sōhō(1573–1645) served as spiritual advisors to thesamurai class, not as warriors themselves. Theclosest that Zen masters came to engaging inwarfare are figures like Yamamoto Jōchō(1659-1719), author of the Bushidō classic,Hagakure (Hidden under the Leaves), or Suzuki

Shōsan (1579–1655) who urged his disciples todevelop a warrior's fortitude. Both of theselatter Zen masters had earlier been samuraiand entered the priesthood only afterretirement, i.e., upon reaching an age whenthey were no longer fit for battle.

Takuan Sōhō with samurai disciple

To some extent, this is not surprising, foraccording to the traditional Vinaya rulesgoverning the conduct of Buddhist clerics, evengoing to a battlefield was forbidden, much lessintentionally killing someone on it. Thus, a Zen

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

2

master on the batt lef ield ought to anoxymoron.1 Nevertheless, it is fair to say that inJapan the restrictions of the Vinaya code have,for many centuries, been honored more in thebreach than in reality.

This is especially the case when it comes toclerics involved in violence, for as early as thetenth century we see the emergence of priestswho engaged in warfare, commonly referred toas “priest-warriors” (sōhei), a pan-sectarianphenomenon emerging from within the Tendaisect. Priest-warriors not only used violence todefend their sectarian institutions but alsolaunched attacks on rivals, both secular andreligious, in order to maintain if not expand thewealth and power of their sect.

In 1571 priest-warriors entered into a period ofdecline when the warlord Oda Nobunaga, in hisquest to reunify Japan, ordered his army of30,000 to kill the Tendai-affiliated priest-warriors located on Mt. Hiei outside of Kyoto.Somewhere between 1,500 to as many as 4,000are estimated to have been slain. Theremaining priest-warriors, now mostly affiliatedwith the Shin (True Pure Land) sect, werekilled by Tokugawa Ieyasu. Tokugawa defeatedthe last of them and took control of the entirecountry in 1603.

Priest-warrior

It was not until the Meiji Restoration of 1868that it once again became possible for Buddhistmonks, regardless of sect, to become“warriors.” This time, however, it was thenewly established government that providedthe impetus, making priests subject to militaryconscription like any other imperial subject.That said, it was possible for Buddhist prieststo volunteer to become non-combatant militarychaplains and, as far as the Zen school isconcerned, it is here we find our first Zenmaster on the modern battlefield, i.e., RinzaiZen Master Shaku Sōen (1859-1919).

Inasmuch as I have previously writtenextensively about Shaku’s role in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-5, I will not repeat thathere.2 Nevertheless, it is notable that whileShaku did not engage in warfare, henevertheless described his motivation for goingto the battlefield as follows:

I wished to have my faith tested bygoing through the greatest horrorsof life, but I also wished to inspireif I could, our valiant soldiers with

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

3

the ennobling thoughts of theBuddha so as to enable them to dieon the bat t le f ie ld wi th theconfidence that task in which theyare engaged is great and noble. Iwished to convince them of thetruths that this war is not a mereslaughter of their fellow human-b e i n g s , b u t t h a t t h e y a r ecombating an evil and that, at thesame time, corporeal annihilationreally means a rebirth of the soul,not in heaven, indeed, but hereamong ourselves. I did my best toimpress these ideas upon thesoldiers’ hearts.3

Shaku Sōen

On the one hand, Shaku seeks to differentiateBuddhist belief concerning “a rebirth of thesoul” from its Christian counterpart. On theother hand, he invokes Christian “just wartheory” in the form of “combating an evil” to

justify Japan’s ultimately successful attempt toensure Japanese, not Russian, control of theKorean peninsula.

Sōtō Zen Master Sawaki Kōdō

Unlike Shaku, Sawaki Kōdō (1880-1965) was aZen priest who actually fought in the Russo-Japanese War. As noted above, this is notsurprising inasmuch as Zen monks of militaryage were treated as any other draft-ageJapanese male. After some initial failedattempts, Sawaki took his vows as a Sōtō Zenpriest at age eighteen followed by two years ofZen training. At the age of 21, however, heenlisted in the Imperial Army where he servedin the Thirty-third Infantry Regiment.

After completing an initial three-yearenlistment Sawaki left the service but wasimmediately recalled due to possible war withImperial Russia. Following the outbreak of theRusso-Japanese War in February 1904, Sawaki,aged 25, was sent to northern China to fightRussians in the summer of that year. However,he was seriously wounded with a shot throughthe neck on August 31, 1904 and nearly died.The severity of his wound required him to besent back to Japan for treatment and, uponrecovery, he once again returned to thebattlefield in January 1905. In January 1906,aged 27, Sawaki was discharged from themilitary. He had served for six years and risenthrough the ranks to become a non-commissioned officer and squad leader. Uponleaving military service, Sawaki immediatelyresumed his Zen training.

In Recollections of Sawaki Kōdō (Sawaki KōdōKikigaki), a book first written in 1950, SakaiTokugen (1912-96), one of Sawaki’s closestdisciples, records Sawaki’s description of hisbattlefield experience as follows:

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

4

Sawaki Kōdō

It was at the battle Baolisi templeon June 14 -15 , [ 1904 ] . Bycomparison with contemporarywarfare, fighting in those days wasan elegant affair. You just shot onebullet at a time, bang, bang. Therewas no rough and tumble about it.That is to say, there was no rakingmachine-gun fire spraying bulletseverywhere or big guys you had totake down. Nor were there anyatomic bombs that destroyedeverything and killed everyone.

Nevertheless, during the Russo-Japanese War my comrades and Igorged ourselves on killing people.Especially at the battle of Baolisitemple, I chased our enemies intoa hole where I was able to pickthem off very efficiently. Because

of this, my company commanderrequested that I be given a letterof commendation, but it wasn’tissued. The commander was deeplydisappointed and apologized to meover and over again for not havingsucceeded, saying: “It was becauseI wrote the request so poorly that Icouldn’t get one for you.”4

In the same book Sawaki recalled the followingconversation among his comrades, providingwhat is perhaps the first modern reference tothe effectiveness of Zen training on thebattlefield. Unlike centuries past, the referencedoes not concern a warrior who had receivedZen training, but rather a Zen priest who findshimself on the battlefield. Note that evenordinary soldiers recognized the efficacy of Zentraining in battle:

Everyone was asking, “Who thehell is that guy?”

“Oh, he’s just a Zen priest.”

“I see. Just what you’d expect froma Zen priest, a man with guts!”

Saying this, they were veryimpressed. I also thought I wassomething special. Looking back atit, I was very conceited.5

Before continuing, let me briefly interrupt thenarrat ive at th is point to descr ibe aphenomenon that has happened so often in thepast, most especially when describing D.T.Suzuki’s war-related activities. I refer to thefact that present-day disciples of wartime Zenmasters and scholars immediately spring totheir master’s defense, Sawaki in this instance,charging that translations like the above are

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

5

either incorrect or, at the very least, taken outof context. That is exactly what happened withregard to the above exchange, especially withregard to the sentence: “My comrades and Igorged ourselves on killing people.”

Readers interested in this question are invitedto read a detailed discussion of this and relatedtranslation issues in Appendix I of this article.Suffice it to say at this point, these translation-related issues are far more important, at leastto the disciples involved, than they mightappear to be to the disinterested reader.

The reason for this is that the Zen sect claimsthe Buddha Dharma is transmitted throughenlightened masters to their enlighteneddisciples. Thus, if the assumption is made that‘enlightenment’ entails a rejection of violence,should any of the d isc ip les ’ Dharmapredecessors have invoked Buddhist teachingsin support of aggressive warfare, then the veryauthenticity of both the masters’ and theirdisciples’ enlightenment would be thrown intoquestion. This in turn would bring into questionthe disciples’ authority or qualification to teachthe “true Buddha Dharma” to others. Thisissue, too, will be discussed further in AppendixI.

Returning to Sawaki, in later years hedescribed what he learned from his battlefieldexperience as follows:

Following the end of the fighting Ihad the opportunity to quietlyreflect on my own conduct. Irealized then that while as adaredevil I had been second tonone, this was nothing more thant h e g r e a t n e s s o f M o r i n oIshimatsu, Kunisada Chūji, andother outlaws and champions ofthe underdog. However, as adisciple of Zen Master Dōgen, Istill didn’t measure up. . . . I hadbeen like those who in the act of

laying down their lives soughtsomething in return. . . . That is tosay, I had been like those who sowanted to become famous, orawarded a posthumous militarydecoration, that they were ready tolay down their very life to get one.Such an attitude has nothing to dowith [Buddhist] liberation from lifeand death.

Such fellows have simply replacedone thing with another, exchangedone burden for another. Theysought honor and fame forthemselves through laying downtheir lives. This is nothing otherthan the substitution of one thingfor another . Even had theysucceeded in acquiring thesethings, one wonders whether theywould have been satisfied. In anyevent, this is what we identify inBuddhism as being endlesslyentrapped in the world of desire.

What can be said is that liberationfrom birth and death does notconsist of discarding one’s physicallife, but rather, of discardingdesire. There are various kinds ofdesire, including the desire forfame as well as the desire forwealth. Discarding desire,however, means giving up allforms of desire. Religion exists inthe renunciation of all forms ofdesire. This is where the way is tob e f o u n d . T h i s i s w h e r eenlightenment is encountered. . . .

Expressed in terms of our Japanesemilitary, it denotes a realm inwhich wherever the flag of ourmilitary goes there is no ordeal toogreat to endure, nor enemynumbers too numerous [ to

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

6

overcome]. I call this invoking thepower of the mi l i tary f lag .Discarding one’s body beneath themilitary flag is true selflessness.6

While at the beginning of the above quote itmay appear that Sawaki is criticizing hisparticipation in the Russo-Japanese war, acloser reading reveals that this is not the case.That is to say, Sawaki’s regret is not for havingkilled large numbers of the enemy, but, instead,he criticizes himself for having sought ”honorand fame” in the process, proof that heremained trapped in the world of desire, i.e., inan unenlightened state. Thus, it was not thekilling of his fellow human beings that botheredhim, but his failure to kill the enemy (and diehimself if need be) with a totally selfless spirit.

In adopting this attitude, he was very close tothe opinion expressed by the samurai turnedZen priest Yamamoto Jōchō in his book,Hagakure. Yamamoto believed that becomingone with death in one's thoughts, even in life,was the highest attainment of purity and focus.He felt that a resolution to die gives rise to ahigher state of life, infused with a beauty andgrace beyond the reach of those concernedwith self-preservation. Note, however,Yamamoto was not the first to assert whatsome scholars have identified as longstandingEast Asian (and possibly earlier) Buddhist‘values’.

Furthermore, when Sawaki talked of “invokingthe power of the military flag” it is important torealize that he was employing terminologynormally associated with the bodhisattva ofcompassion, Avalokiteshvara. In the well-knownKannon-gyō (Avalokiteshvara Sutra) the idea isrepeatedly advanced that one can be rescuedfrom a multitude of disasters and calamities ifone but “invokes the power of Avalokiteshvara”(nenpi Kannon-riki).

What Sawaki did in the last paragraph of thepreceding quote was to replace Avalokiteshvara

with a unit’s military flag, an object madesacrosanct by virtue of the fact that theemperor, as a divine being (arahito-gami), hadbestowed it on the unit. Thus, to invoke thepower of the military flag was tantamount toinvoking the invincible power of the divineemperor thereby ensuring victory. That said,this particular phraseology is unique to Sawakiand reveals just how thoroughly he conflatedhis Zen Buddhist faith with the emperor andImperial military.

In this connection, it is noteworthy that one ofthe today’s leading Sōtō Zen sect scholars,Hakamaya Noriaki, also directed his attentionto Sawaki’s claim:

When one becomes aware ofSawaki Kōdō’s [wartime] call to“Invoke the power of the emperor;invoke the power of the militarybanner,” it is enough to sendshivers down your spine. . . . Notonly was Sawaki not a Buddhist,but he also took up arms against[Sōtō Zen Master] Dōgen himself.7

This is very strong criticism coming from a SōtōZen scholar in that even today this sectcontinues, on the whole, to regard Sawaki asone of its greatest “scholar-priests” (gakusō) ofthe 20th century. While Hakamaya clearly hashis own normative perspective on this issue, atleast he cannot easily be accused of beingunable to understand exactly what Sawaki’swar-related statements meant.

Although Sawaki never fought again, hissupport for the unity of Zen and war continuedunabated. This is attested to by any number ofhis words and deeds during and prior to theAsia-Pacific War. For example, in early 1937Sawaki was a professor of Buddhist Studies atSōtō Zen sect-affiliated Komazawa University inTokyo. Although Japan would not begin its full-scale invasion of China until July of that year,

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

7

students were becoming worried about theirfutures as they sensed ful l -scale warapproaching. At this juncture Sawaki addressedan assembly of Komazawa students preparingfor the Sōtō Zen priesthood as follows:

There is at present no need for youstudents to be perplexed byques t ions concern ing therelationship of religion to the state.Instead you should continue topractice zazen and devote yourselfwholeheartedly to the BuddhaDharma. Should you fail to do this,and, instead, start to waver in yourpractice, when it comes time todefend your country in the futureyou are unlikely to be able to do sozealously.8

As this quotation makes clear, Sawaki saw noconflict between devotion to the BuddhaDharma and defense of one’s country, evenwhen, as in this case, that “defense” meant theunprovoked, full-scale invasion of a neighboringcountry. In fact, it appears that Sawakiregarded dedication to Zen training as thebasis for a similar dedication to militaryservice.

In any event, following Japan’s invasion ofChina proper in July 1937, the Japanesegovernment issued a call for a “Movement forthe Total Spiritual Mobilization of the People”(Kokumin Seishin Sōdōin Undō), the chief goalof which was “the enhancement of the Spirit ofJapan (Yamato-damashii).” Underlying this callwas the government’s realization that thesuccessful prosecution of a war fought in the20th century, i.e., “total war,” would require theincorporation of all segments of society, civilianas well as military, into the war effort. Ofspecial concern was the elimination of anyvalues that conflicted with the ideologicalmindset necessary to create a unified citizenry.Toward this goal all allegedly subversive

Western thought had to be eliminated, first andforemost communism and socialism butextending to liberal democratic ideals as well.

Zen was seen as an important method ofmobilizing the people in that, having longincorporated and propagated Confucian socialethics, it affirmed a hierarchical social orderwedded to an att i tude of unthinking,unquestioning and “selfless” loyalty to one’ssuperiors, most especially, in post-Meiji Japan,the emperor. As Sōtō Zen master YasutaniHaku’un explained: “In the event one wishes toexalt the Spirit of Japan, it is imperative toutilize Japanese Buddhism. The reason for thisis that as far as a nutrient for cultivation of theSpirit of Japan is concerned, I believe there isabsolutely nothing superior to JapaneseBuddhism.”9

For his part, Sawaki, together with hisdisciples, responded to the Japanesegovernment’s call by creating a lay-orientedZen training center attached to the Sōtō Zentemple of Daichūji in Tochigi prefecture. Justhow closely associated this effort was with thegovernment is demonstrated by the fact thatone of the major financial contributors to thecenter’s establishment was Prince KonoeFumimarō (1891-1945), the prime minister whohad authorized the full-scale invasion of Chinain July 1937. Konoe made a contribution of1,000 yen to the training center, a substantialamount of money in prewar days.

The training center commenced operation inOctober 1940 when Sawaki was sixty-one yearsof age. As his close disciple Sakai Tokugennoted, Sawaki frequently injected thegovernment’s wartime slogans into the Dharmatalks he gave at Daichūji:

In Sawaki’s lectures on Zen MasterDōgen’s writings, you will findsuch phrases as “the eight cornersof the world under one roof” and“the way of the gods” scattered

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

8

throughout. At that time we alltruly believed in such things as“one hundred million [citizens] ofone mind” and “self-annihilationfor the sake of one’s country.” Wewere consumed with the thought ofrepaying the debt of gratitude weowed the state, and we incessantlyfeared for the destiny our nation.10

With regard to his Shinto-related comment, itshould be noted that Sawaki also said: “As faras the national polity of our country isconcerned, the ‘way of the gods’ is the same as‘original enlightenment’ [in Buddhism].”11

The training center at Daichūji continued inoperation until the fall of 1944 when it closedin order to accommodate children beingevacuated from the cities due to Alliedbombing. In spite of the danger, Sawakireturned to live in Tokyo at a Komazawauniversity-affiliated student dormitory.However, due to the worsening war situation,this dormitory was closed in March 1945.Sawaki then accepted an invitation to live atthe home of the former Superintendent-Generalof the Metropolitan Police, MaruyamaTsurukichi.

Maruyama extended this invitation because ofSawaki’s longtime cooperation with Japanesepolice officials, part of whose wartime job wasto apprehend and imprison anyone suspected ofbeing opposed to the government and its wareffort. From 1938 onwards Sawaki found timeto give talks to those “thought offenders”(shisō-han) who had been freed from prisonfollowing disavowal of their previous anti-warviews but were still under police supervision.He also went into prisons holding suchoffenders in order to convince them tocooperate with the prosecution of the war.

Sawaki was viewed as being particularly goodat this kind of work not least because his ownpoverty-stricken childhood had contributed to a

down-to-earth attitude and an ability to identifywith offenders. For example, he typically beganhis talks with a description of his own one-month imprisonment at age eighteen when hehad been mistakenly arrested as a pickpocket.Furthermore, in describing his military serviceSawaki downplayed his heroism by saying:“Although I was decorated with the ‘Order ofthe Golden Kite’ for my meritorious deedsduring the Russo-Japanese War, it was just aquestion of being in the right place at the righttime - a time when a lot of killing was going on.I was lucky - that’s all.”12

Sawaki’s contribution to the war effort did notstop with the above. From December 23, 1939onwards, he served on a governmentcommission charged with promoting themartial arts among Japanese school children aspart of their preparation for military service. Itwas only natural for Sawaki to serve on thiscommission, for he had long believed that “theunity of body and mind as taught in Zen wasidentical with the ultimate stage of the martialarts.”13 Sawaki had come to this conclusionduring his late teens when he practiced bothkendō (swordsmanship) and jūdō while intraining at Shūshinji temple in Kumamotoprefecture.

Further, on November 22, 1941 Kōdō wasappointed to serve on a governmentcommission devoted to enhancing the physicalstrength of all citizens. This and relatedcontributions led the Japanese government’sBureau of Decorations to award a “Medal ofHonor” in the form of a silver cup to Sawaki for“promoting the public interest” on November 3,1943.

Significantly, Sawaki’s war support was notlimited to Japan alone. On three separateoccasions in 1941 and 1942 he traveled to theJapanese puppet state of Manchukuo(Manchuria) in northern China to promote themorale of Japanese military and civilianpersonnel stationed there. Sawaki’s dedication

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

9

led him, in May 1942, to board a truck boundfor a remote rural area of Manchukuo to delivera lecture to some three thousand armedJapanese colonists undergoing their annualmilitary training.

While no detailed records remain of Sawaki’stalks in Manchukuo, their tone if not theircontent can readily be inferred from thefollowing 1942 article that appeared in theBuddhist magazine Daihōrin. Entitled “On theTrue Meaning of the Zen Precepts,” Sawakiwrote:

The Lotus Sutra states that "theThree Worlds [of desire, form, andformlessness] are my existenceand all sentient beings therein aremy children." From this point ofview, everything, friend and foeincluded, are my children. Superiorofficers are my existence as are mysubordinates. The same can besaid of both Japan and the world.Given this, it is just to punish thosewho disturb the public order.Whether one kills, or does not kill,the precept forbidding killing [ispreserved]. It is the preceptforbidding killing that wields thesword. It is this precept thatthrows the bomb. It is for thisreason that you must seek to studyand practice this precept.14 [Italicsmine.]

The idea Sawaki advanced here concerningkilling was a popular position advocated by Zenexponents, including D.T. Suzuki. In his nowclassic Zen and Japanese Culture, Suzukiwrote:

Zen Master Dōgen

The sword is generally associatedwith killing, and most of us wonderhow it can come into connectionwith Zen, which is a school ofBuddhism teaching the gospel oflove and mercy. The fact is that theart of swordsmanship distinguishesbetween the sword that kills andthe sword that gives life. The onethat is used by a technician cannotgo any further than killing, for henever appeals to the sword unlesshe intends to kill. The case isaltogether different with the onewho is compelled to lift the sword.For it is really not he but the sworditself that does the killing. He hadno desire to do harm to anybody,but the enemy appears and makeshimself a victim. It is though thesword performs automatically its

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

10

function of justice, which is thefunction of mercy. . . . When thesword is expected to play this sortof role in human life, it is no morea weapon of self-defense or aninstrument of killing, and theswordsman turns into an artist ofthe f irst grade, engaged inproducing a work of genuineoriginality.15

In Sawaki’s case it is “the precept forbiddingkilling that wields the sword” while Suzukimaintains it is “the sword itself that does thekilling.” In both cases, Sawaki and Suzuki askus to believe that acts of violence areperformed independently of the individual’swill. Were their assertions true, it follows thatthere could be no question of personal choiceor intention, let alone moral responsibility, forone’s deadly acts, all cornerstones of Buddhistpractice. This point will be revisited inAppendix I.

Be that as it may, by May 1944 Sawaki went sofar as to claim that it was Zen Master Dōgen,the 13th century founder of the Sōtō Zen sectin Japan, who had first taught the propermental attitude for the imperial military.Sawaki wrote:

Zen master Dōgen said that weshould discard our self. He taughtthat we should quietly engage inpractice having forgotten our Self.Dōgen expressed this in thechapter entitled “Life and Death”of the Shōbōgenzō [A Treasury ofthe Essence of the True Dharma]as follows: “Simply discard bodyand mind and cast yourself into therealm of the Buddha. The Buddhawill then serve as your guide, andif you follow the guidance given,you will free yourself from life anddeath, and become a Buddha,

without any need to exert yourselfeither physically or mentally.”Expressed in different words, thismeans that the orders of one’ssuperiors are to be obeyed,regardless of content. It is in doingthis that you immediately becomefaithful retainers of the emperorand perfect soldiers.16

Inasmuch as Kōdō was already sixty-five yearsold when he wrote these words, one must, ifnothing else, admire him for his longstandingcommitment to employing Zen in the creationof the selfless “perfect soldier.”

Finally, Sawaki noted that Zen monasteries andthe military “truly resemble each otherclosely.” Among other things, this was becauseboth required communal life styles. Sawakicontinued:

The f i rs t th ing required incommunal life is to discard theself. . . . In battle those who havebeen living together communallycan work together very bravely atthe front. . . . Today the staterequires that we all follow acommunal life style wherever weare, thus repaying the debt ofgratitude we owe the state. Thespirit of Zen monastic life does notbelong to Zen priests alone butmust be learned by all the people.17

Conclusion

Taken as a whole, there can be no doubt thatSawaki Kōdō was a fervent supporter of Japan’swartime effort, constantly employing hisunderstanding of Zen to promote “selfless” andunquestioning allegiance to the emperor andthe state. His expressions of support for theAsia-Pacific War had particular strength as they

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

11

were based on his own earlier wartimeexperiences. In other words, he truly knewwhat he was talking about.

Furthermore, he was also a very seasoned andknowledgeable Zen practitioner. True, he wasstill a neophyte Zen priest when he had actuallyfought on the battlefield during the Russo-Japanese War, but by the time of the Asia-Pacific War more than thirty years later he wasalready highly respected as an authentic Zenmaster. Thus, he was able to blend his owncombat experiences into his “Dharma talks”producing a powerful narrative for those youngZen priests and other war-age laymen wholooked to him for guidance.

This said, it would be mistaken to view Sawakias more extreme in his support of the Asia-Pacific War than his Zen contemporaries. Theequally distinguished Sōtō Zen master, HaradaSōgaku (1871-1961), for example, wrote thefollowing in November 1939:

D. T. Suzuki

[If ordered to] march: tramp,tramp, or shoot: bang, bang. Thisis the manifestation of the highestwisdom [of Enlightenment]. Theunity of Zen and war of which Ispeak extends to the farthestreaches of the holy war [nowunderway]. Verse: I bow my headto the floor to those whose nobilityis without equal.

Similarly when we now read with greatskepticism, if not disbelief, Sawaki’s assertionthat “it is this precept [forbidding killing] thatthrows the bomb,” let us not forget that otherwartime Zen masters, e.g., Yasutani Haku’un(1885–1973), also twisted the basic Buddhistprecept of not killing into a war-affirmingcreed. Yasutani wrote:

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

12

Harada Sōgaku

At this point the following questionarises: What should the attitude ofdisciples of the Buddha, asMahāyāna Bodhisattvas, be towardthe first precept that forbids thetaking of life? For example, whatshould be done in the case inwhich, in order to remove variousevil influences and benefit society,it becomes necessary to deprivebirds, insects, fish, etc. of theirlives, or, on a larger scale, tosentence extremely evil and brutalpersons to death, or for the nationto engage in total war?

Those who understand the spirit ofthe Mahāyāna precepts should be

able to answer this questionimmediately. That is to say, ofcourse one should kill, killing asmany as possible. One should,fighting hard, kill everyone in theenemy army. The reason for this isthat in order to carry [Buddhist]compassion and filial obediencethrough to per fect ion i t i snecessary to assist good andpunish evil. However, in killing[the enemy] one should swallowone’s tears, bearing in mind thetruth of killing yet not killing.

Failing to kill an evil man whoought to be killed, or destroying anenemy army that ought to bedestroyed, would be to betraycompassion and filial obedience, tobreak the precept forbidding thetaking of life. This is a specialcharacteristic of the Mahāyānaprecepts.19

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

13

Yasutani Haku'un

As can be seen in these quotations, wartimeZen masters were aware of the contradictionbetween the precept that proscribed killing andtheir fervent support of Japan’s war effort.While each master had his own idiosyncraticmethod of addressing this contradiction, theynevertheless shared a common conclusion, i.e.,killing mass numbers of one’s fellow humanbeings, aka the “enemy,” was not a violation ofthis precept but rather fully in accord with it.

If there is anything surprising about Sawaki’sfervent wartime support it is something heshares with many other wartime Zen masters,i.e., his success in distancing himself from hiswartime record in the postwar era. In the firstinstance this was made possible by the long-held, Confucian-derived tradition withinJapanese Zen dictating that one’s mastercannot be criticized, at least publicly. Coupled

with this is the almost unbelievable naïvetéexhibited by those early postwar Westernersand their successors who failed to question thewartime roles of those masters under whomthey trained.

In Sawaki’s case, most of the Westerners whostudied in his “Dharma lineage” studied withone of his disciples, e.g., Uchiyama Kōshō(1912-1998) at Antaiji temple in Kyoto orDeshimaru Taisen (1914-1982), founder oftheAssociation Zen Internationale in France. Afew Westerners studied with Nishijima GudōWafu (1919-2014), a layman who trained underSawaki during the war years, beginning in1940, before later entering the priesthood inthe postwar era.

Uchiyama Kōshō

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

14

Deshimaru Taisen Nishijima Gudō Wafu

Unsurprisingly, neither Uchiyama, Deshimarunor Nishijima revealed the details of Sawaki’swartime record to their students. On thecontrary, following the publication of my bookZen at War, Nishijima defended Sawaki fromthe charge of war collaboration as follows:

Some American man wrote thebook which criticizes Master KōdōSawaki in the war so strongly. ButI think the book includes somekind of exaggeration. And meetingMaster Kōdō Sawaki-rōshi directly,he was not so affirmative to thewar, but at the same time he wasthinking to do his duty as a man inJapan. So in such a situation I thinkhis attitude is not so extremelyright or left. And he is usuallykeeping the Middle Way as a

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

15

Buddhist monk. I think such asituation is true.20

In light of claims like this, it is hardlysurprising that Westerners who venerateSawaki as one of their Dharma ancestors, someof whom are now Zen teachers in their ownright, refuse to accept the idea that Sawakimight once have twisted Buddhist doctrine andpractice into a fervently war-affirming creed.Of course, if one adopts a Critical Buddhistperspective, it was less a question of Sawakihaving ‘twisted’ Buddhist doctrine than it is ofhis adoption (albeit in an extreme form) ofcertain aspects of (Mahayana) Buddhism thathad been around for centuries, if not millennia.Be that as it may, Sawaki’s wartime record isclear, reminding us that we forget Bismarck’sadmonition at our peril: “The wise man learnsfrom the mistakes of others.”

Appendix I

The most sustained critique of my descriptionof Sawaki war-related statements has beenmade by Muhō Nölke, a German-born, Sōtō Zenpriest, who is currently the ninth abbot ofAntaiji, a temple with which Sawaki was closelyidentified, having served as its fifth abbot.Thus, within the Zen tradition Sawaki becomesNölke’s “great, great grandfather in theDharma” and is, moreover, the best known ofNölke’s predecessors. In e-mail exchanges wehad during the summer of 2007 (later postedon his temple website at the beginning of 2008)Nölke took issue with my presentation ofSawaki’s war-related writings.

Nölke explained why he felt the need tocriticize my presentation as follows: “Thereason why your presentation of Sawaki Kodoconcerns me (and that is why I write this e-mail), is simply that I am translating his booksand practicing in his lineage. So if it should betrue that he was a war monger or a zen fascist,as he is called by some, and that this issomehow expressed in his teaching, it would be

a great problem for me.”21

Despite his concern, Nölke admitted that hehad not read the book in which I describedSawaki’s wartime record, i.e. Zen at War. Hewrote: “I know that I shouldn't be demandingany of your time by asking questions about abook which I haven't read myself so far. I onlyknow about quotes which appear on theinternet, especially in discussion forums, fromtime to time.”22

Apart from internet discussion forums, Nölkeused information supplied to him by MatsuokaYukako, one of Sawaki’s postwar lay disciples.Based on these sources, Nölke first assertedthat Sakai Tokugen, the author whom I quotedin Zen at War, had not accurately conveyedSawaki’s words. In particular, Nölkequestioned the validity of the two paragraphlong passage previously quoted in the main textthat begins with the statement: “It was at thebattle Baolisi temple on June 14-15, [1904]. . .”He wrote:

This quote seems to be from SakaiTokugen's biography of SawakiKodo, which - as you know for sure- was not written or dictated bySawaki himself, but by Sakai usingthe first person, thus creating theimpression of an auto-biography.Only the f i rst pr int ing waspublished under Sawaki's name, alllater editions mention Sakai as theauthor. Sakai mentions andapologizes for this in his forword[sic] in later editions. What I findinteresting about this forword [sic]and the one by Tanaka Yoneki is,that while Tanaka claims thatSakai used notes by UchiyamaKosho, Sakai makes the point thathe didn't use those notes becausethey were full of mistakes. He alsoadmits that his own version ofSawaki's life was contradicted by

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

16

some after the publication of thebook, but says that this was onlyabout "nuiances" [sic]. This means,to say the least, that Sakai'sversion of Sawaki's life is not theonly one, it is not generallyaccepted by everyone, nor is itdirectly out of Sawaki's mouth.Thus, the quote above is not bySawaki, but by Sakai writing in away that HE THINKS Sawakiwould have talked.23

The key question raised by this quotation iswhether Sakai’s description of Sawaki’sbattlefield experiences is accurate or, as Nölkecharges, was Sakai just writing “in a way thatHE THINKS Sawaki would have talked.” Theanswer to this question is contained in thePreface Sakai wrote for the 1984 paperbackedition of his book Sawaki Kōdō Kikigaki.Describing how the book first came to bewritten, i.e., in 1950, Sakai stated: “Everythingincluded in the book is not only what I butanyone who had trained under the master[Sawaki ] for many years had heard.Nevertheless, when it came to putting it downon paper, I checked each point with the masterto make sure it was all correct.”24

It is noteworthy that Sakai was one of Sawaki’slongest and closest disciples. Additionally,Sakai, a Ph.D., was not only a professor ofBuddhist Studies at Sōtō-Zen affiliatedKomazawa University but, as a “scholar-priest”(gakusō), was entrusted with providingguidance in Zen meditation to all of theuniversity’s neophyte priests over many years. Isay this based on my own personal experienceof having received meditation instruction fromhim during my graduate studies at Komazawa.By 1998 Sakai’s book on Sawaki had gonethrough some twenty-one printings. While it isimpossible to verify the accuracy of Sakai’sbook, its contents certainly concur withSawaki’s own wartime writing, suggesting that

Sakai did not write his book simply “in a waythat HE THINKS Sawaki would have talked.”

Nölke’s criticism did not stop here. He went onto introduce evidence from a second book, thisone carrying Sawaki’s name, that contained apassage similar yet somewhat different fromthat contained in Sakai’s book. This passagewas included on page 414 of the first edition ofShōdōka o Kataru (Commentary on the “Songof Enlightenment”) published in 1940. Nölketranslates the relevant passage as follows:

i [sic] went to the russo-japanesewar and killed people until i hadmy fill/enough of it/my stomachwas full [hara-ippai, "gorged" - inthe German version of "Zen atWar," they have an expression thatmeans "we just couldn't getenough of", which is quite wrong,as "hara-ippai" means the pointwhere one has enough], but if youthink about it soberly/normally/inpeace [heijo], this is a seriousmatter [ ta ihen] . today thenewspaper writes about theextermination of the enemy or howwe clean [sosha] them away withmachine gun fire. that almostsounds like everyday householdcleaning [soji]. they fire theirmachine gun and call it "cleaningaway the remains of the enemy".imagine that would happen in themidst of the ginza: people getting"cleaned" as if you were shootinganimals! it would be a seriousaffair. compared with today theformer war was old fashioned[furyu]. We shot only one bullet ata time. That was not so gross likeshooting your machine gun as ifyou were spreading water with awatering can, or throwing bigbombs, or poison gas. i also once

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

17

killed enemies at the battlefield ofBaolisi, chasing them into a hole,and i was never punished for it. ieven received monthly paymentsas a veteran [onkyu] after i cameback from the war. that means thatyou do not always get punished forkilling a person. it depends on theregulations of the time if you getpunished or not . but theseregulations are made by men. [sicfor the entire passage]25

Having supplied this translation, Nölkecomments on it as follows:

Now I do not know what you makeout of this, but at least I do nothear a Zen fascist boast about hisdeeds here, but rather a quitecourageous criticism of unhuman[sic] ways to fight a war. In thiscontext, the quote above hardlyserves as proof for any supportthat Sawaki showed for the war.Also, there are many sources thatsay that Sawaki Roshi [Zen master]thought about the "onkyu" hereceived after the Russo-Japanesewar as "dirty money" and wouldn'tuse it for his personal life, butrather to print Buddhist texts orsupport students of Buddhism,which is surprising, as even todaymany think that this war was anhonourable war that saved Japan'sindependence against the threat ofWestern imperialism.26

In examining the passage in question, it is clearthat the opening words are quite close toSakai’s version as quoted in the main text ofthis article. However, the two passages divergequickly and the latter passage does providesome additional insight into Sawaki’s wartime

thinking. That said, and as the reader mightsuspect, I am not entirely satisfied with Nölke’stranslation. However, before introducing myown translation, let me provide the relevantpassage in Japanese, something that Nölkethoughtfully included for those readers familiarwith Japanese:

私などは日露戦争に行って腹いっぱい人殺しをして来たが、これが平常だったら大変な話だ。此の頃新聞に、どこそこの敵を殲滅したとか、機銃の掃射をしたとかよく出ている。まるで掃除でもしているような気がする。残敵掃射などといって機関銃でシュウッとやるのである。これを銀座の真ん中で遊んでいる奴を、動物掃射などと云うようなことをやったら大変なことになる。昔の戦争は、今からかんがえるとよほど風流なもので、一発一発パンパンと弾を射ったものだ。如露で水を撒くように機関銃でバラバラやったり、大きいヤツをドカンドカンと落としたり、毒瓦斯で一ぺんにやったり、そんなに荒っぽくはなかった。私も得利寺で敵を落とし穴に追い込んで殺したことがあったが、それでも罰を食わなかった。その上に恩給を貰ってしまった。それだから人を殺したらいつでも罰になるとはきまっていない。罰にするとかしないとかは其の規定によるのだ。この規定は人間がこしらえるのである。27

My own translation of this passage reads asfollows:

My comrades (nado ) and Iparticipated in the Russo-JapaneseWar and gorged ourselves onkilling people. If we had done thisunder normal conditions (heijō)there would have been a big fuss(taihen na hanashi). These days,newspapers often talk aboutexterminating the enemy here and

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

18

there or rak ing them wi thmachinegun fire. It sounds just likethey’re describing some kind ofcleaning.

Newspapers talk about such thingsas mowing down the remainingenemy using a machinegun tospray them with. If this were doneto fellows relaxing in the heart of[Tokyo’s] Ginza area, i.e., strafingthem as if they were animals orsomething, it would be a big deal.Looking back at it now, wars in thepast were, to a considerabledegree, an elegant (fūryū) affair.You just shot one bullet at a time,bang, bang. There were nomachineguns spraying bulletsabout or big guys you had to takedown with a bang. Nor was therepoison gas that took care ofeverything. There wasn’t anythingrough and tumble about it likethat.

While at [the battle of] Baolisitemple I, too, chased the enemyinto a hole and killed them, but Iwas not punished. Moreover, Ireceived a pension. For that reasonjust because you kill someonedoesn’t mean that you will alwaysbe punished. Whether you arepunished or not depends on[society’s] rules, rules created byhuman beings.

Reflecting on this passage, the first questionthat comes to mind is why Sawaki saw fit todiscuss his battlefield experiences in hiscommentary in the first place? That is to say,the “Song of Enlightenment” (Ch. Zhèngdào gē,J. Shōdōka) is a Zen discourse written sometime in the first half of the 8th century C.E.,traditionally attributed to Yongjia Xuanjue. Thefirst commentaries on it appeared as early as

the 11th century during the Song Dynasty. Thisdiscourse deals with the methods of andattitudes towards daily Zen practice and,unsurprisingly for a Zen text, emphasizespractice over sutra study. It is most certainlynot a text that requires a discussion of one’sbattlefield exploits.

The answer to this question is, of course, auniversal one, i.e., clerics of all religionsconstantly seek to make the ancients texts oftheir faith relevant to the conditions faced bytheir modern day adherents. In this case, i.e.,1940, Sawaki’s readers were in the fourth yearof a full-scale Japanese invasion of China albeitnot yet at war with the US and its allies. Giventhis, Sawaki may well have felt he had a duty tomake teachings relevant to the events of hisday. Nevertheless, this certainly didn’t requirehim to teach such things as “Discarding one’sbody beneath the military flag is trueselflessness,” etc.

Second, when the two versions of Sawaki’srecollection of his battlefield experiences arecompared, it is clear that the differencesbetween them are, at most, a question of tonenot substance. That is to say, the secondversion contains less of what, for lack of abetter term, may be considered “bravado.” Forexample, in the latter version Sawaki does notrefer to the conceited attitude he had about hismilitary prowess at the time. However, giventhe ongoing wartime situation they were thenin, not to mention his subsequent remarks asrecorded above, it would not be surprising ifSawaki had, on multiple occasions, referred tohis battlefield experiences exactly as Sakairecords him having done.

A second question Nölke fails to address is theutter lack of reference to Buddhism or Zen inthis latter passage other than, ironically, thearea where the battle took place, i.e., Baolisi,the Chinese characters of which [得利寺]clearly indicate that it was a Buddhist temple.Instead of any mention of Buddhism, the

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

19

second version focuses on a series ofcomparisons, beginning with a comparison ofthe consequences of killing large numbers ofpeople during “normal conditions,” i.e.,peacetime, when such actions are proscribed,versus killing them during war when they arenot only encouraged but rewarded, rewarded inthe form of a military pension for having doneso. Many observers, both before and afterSawaki , have long remarked on th isincongruity.

Sawaki makes a second comparison betweenthe “elegant” (fūryū) manner he killed theenemy during the Russo-Japanese War, i.e., oneat a time, versus the much more mechanizedand massive way they were being killed in thecurrent war with China. Yet, apart from whatmight be deemed his “common-sense”observations of this fact, there is no suggestionof Sawaki’s opposition to war with China letalone any dissonance he may have felt betweenhis Buddhist faith and the vow he had taken,and long since broken, to abstain from killing.At most, some of his words might be considereda lament concerning the extent to which killinghad become mechanized and mass killingcommonplace.

Finally, and not least, is the question of themultiple disparities between Nölke’stranslation of this passage and my own. For themost part these disparities are minor in naturebut with one important exception, i.e., thetranslation of the term hara-ippai (lit. stomach-full) to describe the manner in which Sawakikilled Russian soldiers. The exact same term isfound in both the passage quoted in Sakai’sbook as well as the second passage.

Nölke claimed this term should be translated asfollows: “. . . killed people until i had myfill/enough of it/my stomach was full” andfurther: “ . . . ‘hara-ippai’ means the pointwhere one has enough.” On the other hand, Itranslated this term as: “. . . gorged ourselveson killing people.” It is a relatively minor yet

stark difference. Why?

In order to answer this question, let us firstexamine the translation of this key termaccording to the authoritative 5th edition ofKenkyūsha’s New Japanese-English Dictionary.Here we find hara-ippai defined as follows:

(omouzonbun) to one's heart's content, as inthe following examples:

(hara-ippai taberu) eat one's fill; eat heartily;gorge oneself [be gorged] with 《meat》

(manpuku suru) have a full stomach; be full

(hara-ippai nomu)　drink one's fill.

(hara-ippai no) a bellyful of《food》

Based on these meanings it can be seen that“gorged oneself” is certainly one possibletranslation. On the other hand, at least intheory it can also be translated as “to eat one’sfill” and therefore, in this case, as “to kill one’sfill.” This latter translation is certainly closer inspirit to Nölke’s translation, i.e., “. . . killedpeople until i had my fill/enough of it/mystomach was full.” Needless to say, Nölke’stranslation is clearly less emotive in characterthan use of the word “gorge.” This difference isimportant to Nölke because this and additionalevidence allows him to claim that “. . . at least Ido not hear a Zen fascist boast about his deedshere.”

Needless to say, I have never charged Sawakiwith having been a “Zen fascist” even whileidentifying him as a strong supporter of Japan’s20th century wars. That said, the questionremains why I selected the more emotive word“gorge” over the less emotive words, “fill” or“enough”? The answer is simple - context. Asthe reader will recall from the relevant passagein the main text, Sawaki’s comrades on thebattlefield were so impressed with his martialprowess that Sawaki stated: “I also thought Iwas something special. Looking back at it, I

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

20

was very conceited (ii ki na mono de atta).”

Was Sawaki boasting about his having killedmany Russians? Yes, at least in the words Sakaiattributed to him the context reveals that at thetime he clearly was. Thus the more emotiveword “gorged” better fits in the tenor of thepassage, certainly in Sakai’s version. It can beargued that even in the second version this isthe case since “gorge” serves to strengthen thecontrast Sawaki was making between killing inwartime and peacetime.

Be that as it may, if we were to judge Sawaki’swartime record solely on the basis of either thefirst or second versions of his battlefieldrecollections as presented here, it would beimpossible to claim they reflect the words ofsomeone who invoked his Buddhist faith infervent support of Japanese militarism. Yet, asrepeatedly demonstrated in the main text,these are far from the only war-relatedstatements Sawaki made. In particular,Sawaki’s subsequent written assertions that “Itis the precept forbidding killing that wields thesword. It is this precept that throws the bomb”are literally some of his most explosive if notdamning of his wartime statements. Thus it isnot surprising that Nölke would address thisissue as well. He wrote:

It seems to me that there areroughly three different approachesto the precepts:

1) The orthodox or common-senseappoach [sic] to the precept asforbidding certain actions. You caneither "keep" or "break" theprecepts. In some traditions youcan stay "clean" by excusingyourself from the percept (bydisrobing etc) for the time youwant to practice the action that isforbidden, i.e. have sex, kill peopleduring war time [sic] etc.

2) The precepts as stating a"universal law". This seems to bethe Mahayana interpretation thatmany Japanese Buddhist [sic] wereand are still using. When Sawakitalks about the precept throwing abomb, he is using this interpretion[sic]. Here you can not "break" theprecept at al l , because it isuniversal. You cannot kill universallife. Thus the precept becomes atautology.

3) The percept as contradiction orkoan, as Hisamatsu Shinichi'sbasic koan: What will you do whenthere is nothing at all you can do(and doing nothing at all is not anoption either)? So it is not possibleto "keep" the precept in the firstplace, but the function of theprecept is to keep you aware of thecontradiction of your life, andhumble. It prevents the illusion "Iam right, because I don't dowrong."

I tend to interpret the precepts inthe third way, although I am awarethat both the second and thirdinterpretation make one volnurable[sic] to the temptation of nottaking responsibility for one'sactions.28

Before addressing the key question thisquotation raises, it is noteworthy that Nölkerecognized that “both the second and thirdinterpretat ion make one volnurable[vulnerable] to the temptation of not takingresponsibility for one's actions.” The reader willrecall that this is the same point the authormade in the main text regarding Sawaki andD.T. Suzuki’s related assertions. It is indeed aserious question, and one cannot help but askwhether this “way of thinking” contributed tothe Japanese people’s postwar inability (or

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

21

unwillingness) even today, on the whole, toaccept responsibility for the massive wartimedamage done by Japan to the people of Asia,especially China and Korea?

What is truly breathtaking about Nölke’sexplanation of Sawaki’s bomb-throwing preceptis his claim that “you can not ‘break’ theprecept at all, because it is universal. Youcannot kill universal life.” While this statementcould easily lead to an extended philosophicaldiscussion, the essential element is far simplerthan that, i.e., how would the wartime readersof his words have understood what he said?Would they have become critical of Japan’s wareffort in any way? Would they have recognizedany conflict, or even incongruity, between thevow they had taken as Buddhist clerics andlaypersons not to kill versus their duty asimperial subjects to obey the emperor’scommand to fight a war launched in his name?

In fact, Sakai informs us that they did not. Asquoted above:

In Sawaki’s lectures on Zen MasterDōgen’s writings, you will findsuch phrases as “the eight cornersof the world under one roof” and“the way of the [Shintō] gods”scattered throughout. At that timewe all truly believed in such thingsas “one hundred million [citizens]of one mind” and “self-annihilationfor the sake of one’s country.” Wewere consumed with the thought ofrepaying the debt of gratitude weowed the state, and we incessantlyfeared for the destiny our nation.

Thus, whether one looks at Sawaki’s ownbattlefield experiences or those whom heinstructed during the subsequent Asia-PacificWar, nothing he said or wrote interfered theleast with the killing expected of his disciplesonce they became soldiers. After all, their

master had done likewise if not yet on such alarge scale. Any other explanation, aka excuse,falls into the category the Japanese soaccurately describe as herikutsu, i.e., sophistry.

I will not impose on my readers with a furtherdiscussion of Nölke’s criticisms other than tonote the entire correspondence between thetwo of us is available here.

In concluding this section, let me note thatNölke is not alone in criticizing my descriptionof the wartime records of well-known Zenfigures, most especially D.T. Suzuki. Readersinterested in this broader question are invitedto read the critiques of my previous work bythe Shin (True Pure Land) Buddhist priestKemmyō Taira Satō in the following twoarticles published in The Eastern Buddhist:

1.“D.T. Suzuki and the Question of War,”available on the Web here.

2. “Brian Victoria and the Question ofScholarship,” available on the Web here.

The results of my own further research on D.T.Suzuki’s wartime record are available on thewebsite of The Asia-Pacific Journal: JapanFocus:

“Zen as a Cult of Death in the Wartime1.Writings of D.T. Suzuki”

“D.T. Suzuki, Zen and the Nazis”1.

“A Zen Nazi in Wartime Japan: Count1.Dürckheim and his Sources—D.T. Suzuki,Yasutani Haku’un and Eugen Herrigel”

Needless to say, well-reasoned and researchedacademic debate is always to be welcomed inthe academy. That said, this author cannot helpbut note that Zen practitioners spend many,many hours seated on padded quilts or roundcushions interrogating both the nature of “self”and “real i ty .” Yet , when i t comes tointerrogating the historical record of their ownmasters, and those in their Dharma lineage, all

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

22

too often, especially in Japan but also in theWest, practitioners resolutely refuse to face thefacts. Given the stakes involved for them asnoted above, this is, at a human level, all toounderstandable. The result is that they employthe classic ruse of “shoot the messenger”rather than seriously examining the messageand its implications.

Buddha Shakyamuni is recorded as having saidin Verse 228 of the Dhammapada: “There neverhas been, there never will be, nor is there now,anyone who is always blamed or alwayspraised.” Thus, to truly accept and benefit fromthe undoubted good of many of Sawaki’steachings, as with other wartime Zen figures, itis also necessary to acknowledge his war-affirming ‘dark side’, i.e., his deadly ignoranceif you will. To do otherwise risks turningSawaki, et al. into yet more ‘sacred cows.’ Andin that case, as Mark Twain so aptly noted,“Sacred cows make the best hamburger!”29

This is the first in a two part series.

See also

Brian Daizen Victoria, “Zen Masters on theBattlefield” (Part II, forthcoming)

Brian Daizen Victoria holds an M.A. in BuddhistStudies from Sōtō Zen sect-affiliated KomazawaUniversity in Tokyo, and a Ph.D. from theDepartment of Religious Studies at TempleUniversity. In addition to a 2nd, enlargededition of Zen At War (Rowman & Littlefield),major writings include Zen War Stories(RoutledgeCurzon); an autobiographical workin Japanese entitled Gaijin de ari, Zen bozu deari (As a Foreigner, As a Zen Priest); ZenMaster Dōgen, coauthored with Prof. YokoiYūhō of Aichi-gakuin University (Weatherhill);and a translation of The Zen Life by Sato Koji(Weatherhill). He is currently a VisitingResearch Fellow at the International ResearchCenter for Japanese Studies (Nichibunken) inKyoto. A documentary on Zen and Warfeatur ing his work is avai lable here

http://clearviewproduct.com/zenandwar.aspx.

Recommended citation: Brian Daizen Victoria,"Zen Masters on the Battlefield (Part I)", TheAsia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 11, Issue 24, No. 3,June 16, 2014.

Sources (Part I)

Hakamaya, Noriaki. Hihan Bukkyō. Tokyo:Daizō Shuppan, 1990.

N ö l k e , M u h ō . “ L o t u s i n t h e f i r e , ”January/February 2008, available on the Webhere (accessed April 15, 2014).

Sakai Tokugen. Sawaki Kōdō Kikigaki. Tokyo:Kōdansha Gakujutsu Bunkō, 1984.

Sawaki Kōdō. “Shōji o Akirameru Kata” (TheMethod of Clarifying Life and Death). Daihōrin,May 1944.

_____.“Zenkai Hongi o Kataru” (On the TrueMeaning of the Zen Precepts) (Part 9).Daihōrin, January 1942.

Suzuki, D.T. Zen and Japanese Culture.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,1959.

Tanaka, Tadao. Sawaki Kōdō – Kono Koshin noHito (Sawaki Kōdō – Heart of an Ancient Man),2 vol. Tokyo: Daihōrin-kaku, 1995.

Victoria, Brian. Zen at War, 2nd ed. Boulder,CO: Rowman & Littlefield, 2004.

_ _ _ _ _ . Z e n W a r S t o r i e s . L o n d o n :RoutledgeCurzon, 2003.

Warner, Brad. “Gudo Nishijima Roshi: JapaneseBuddhism in W.W. II,” available on the Webhere (accessed April 29, 2014).

Notes

1 A complete list of the 227 basic rules ofconduct included in the traditional Code of

APJ | JF 11 | 24 | 3

23

Discipline (Pali: Bhikku Pāțimokkha) isavailable on the Web here.

2 For a more detailed discussion of Shaku’swar-related thinking, see Victoria, Zen at War,pp. 25-29.

3 Ibid., p. 26.

4 Sakai, Sawaki Kōdō Kikigaki, pp. 99-100.

5 Ibid., p. 99.

6 Sawaki, “Shōji o Akirameru Kata” (TheMethod of Clarifying Life and Death) in theMay 1944 issue of Daihōrin, pp. 5-7.”

7 Hakamaya, Hihan Bukkyō, p. 297.

8 Quoted in Tanaka, Sawaki Kōdō– Kono Koshinno Hito, v. 2, p. 462.

9 Quoted in Victoria, Zen War Stories, p. 70.

10 Quoted in Tanaka, Sawaki Kōdō–Kono Koshinno Hito, v. 2, p. 455.

11 Ibid., p. 458.

12 Ibid., p. 172. While nothing more is knownabout the circumstances that led to Sawakibeing awarded this decoration, it was typicallyawarded to a soldier upon his return to Japanfrom the battlefield in recognition of hisbravery, leadership or command in battle.

13 Ibid., p. 341.

14 Sawaki, “Zenkai Hongi o Kataru” (On theTrue Meaning of the Zen Precepts) (Part 9), in

the January 1942 issue of Daihōrin, p. 107.

15 Suzuki, Zen and Japanese Culture, p. 145.

16 Sawaki, “Shōji o Akirameru Kata” (TheMethod of Clarifying Life and Death) in theMay 1944 issue of Daihōrin, p. 6.

17 Quoted in Victoria, Zen at War, p. 186.18 Quoted in Victoria, Zen at War, p. 137.

19 Quoted in Victoria, Zen War Stories, pp.71-72.

20 Warner, “Gudo Nishijima Roshi: JapaneseBuddhism in W.W. II,” available on the Webhere.

21 Quoted in Muhō Nölke’s newsletter, “Lotus inthe fire,” January/February 2008, available onthe Web here.

22 Ibid.

23 Ibid.

24 Sakai, Sawaki Kōdō Kikigaki, p. 3.

25 Quoted in Muhō Nölke’s newsletter, “Lotus inthe fire,” January/February 2008, available onthe Web here.

26 Ibid.

27 Ibid.

28 Ibid.

2 9 Twain i s quoted, for instance, a t :http://quotations.about.com/od/marktwainquotes/a/twainsult.htm