Eom Seogin
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibakaki, Japan.
F1000Res. 2021 Apr 6;10:272. doi: 10.12688/f1000research.51001.2. eCollection 2021.
This paper discusses the ideological significance of the activities of Motoda Nagazane who, in the latter half of his life, became an attendant of Emperor Meiji as a member of the Kumamoto school of practical science. Whilst there were trends towards modernisation and Westernisation, Motoda Nagazane led a conservative reaction attempting to restore Confucianist politics/policies. I scrutinise the theories of revolution and lineage considering the history of East Asian Confucianism and comparing Motoda's assertions to the views expressed by Kumazawa Banzan. In doing so, I assert that Motoda's consistent attitude shows that he does not approve of the theory of revolution and that he regards the theory of lineage as an established fact. Thus, he highlights the cultivation of virtues in rulers, adopting the stance typically taken by Confucian scholars in the history of Japanese ideology. In 'Lessons of the Emperor's Way', Motoda attempts to support the meaning of 'The Three Sacred Treasures' through Confucian texts. My evaluation of this text results in the view that in this discourse, Motoda transcends the significance of harmonising the deep and difficult 'Lessons of the Emperor's Way' with Confucianism, which is easy to impart. I deduce that Confucianism was positioned above all else as the absolute/comprehensive standard in Motoda's thought and that his endorsement of the Emperor's way was proscribed within the ideological boundaries of Confucianism. Through the above analysis, I conclude that Motoda was an anachronistic Confucian scholar who truly endeavored to realise the kingship politics of Yao and Shun in the early Meiji era. While it is acknowledged that he was lagging behind his contemporaries, it is shown that this seemingly backward stance emanated from his serious Confucian scholarship. Further, his assertions differ from the plain-spoken Confucianist Emperor centralism that emerged in later years.
本文探讨了元田永孚活动的思想意义。元田永孚后半辈子作为熊本实学流派的一员,成为明治天皇的侍讲。当时虽然存在现代化和西化的趋势,但元田永孚却发起了一场保守的反动,试图恢复儒家政治/政策。我结合东亚儒家思想的历史,审视了革命和家系的理论,并将元田的主张与熊泽蕃山的观点进行比较。通过这样做,我断言元田始终如一的态度表明他不赞成革命理论,并且他将家系理论视为既定事实。因此,他强调统治者的品德培养,采取了日本思想史上儒家学者的典型立场。在《帝学》中,元田试图通过儒家经典来支持“三种神器”的意义。我对这篇文章的评价得出这样的观点,即在这场论述中,元田超越了将深奥难懂的《帝学》与易于传授的儒家思想相协调的意义。我推断在元田的思想中,儒家思想被置于高于一切的绝对/综合标准的位置,并且他对天皇之道的认可被限定在儒家思想的意识形态范围内。通过上述分析,我得出结论,元田是一位时代错误的儒家学者,他在明治初期真正努力实现尧舜的王道政治。虽然人们承认他落后于同时代的人,但事实表明这种看似落后的立场源于他严谨的儒家学术。此外,他的主张与后来出现的直白的儒家天皇中心主义不同。