The present article offers the new category of Zenritsu禅律 (the Zen and Ritsu Sects) to accompany that of Kenmitsu顕密(exoteric/esoteric sects) in further clarifying the cheracteristic features of the ten different sects of Buddhism active in medieval Japan.The reasons why this new typology should be effective are twofold.The first concerns differences in how sects regarded Buddhism itself.The eight Kenmitsu sects developed as indigenously Japanese in character and looked upon their beliefs and liturgy in the same way as the medieval state, forming an exoteric/esoteric political ideology.In contrast, during the Kamakura period, monks who went to Song China to study, beginning with Eisai栄西(Rinzai臨済 Zen) and Shunjo俊〓 (Ritsu Sect), brought back with them the Chinese idea of a Zen-Kyo-Ritsu classification of Buddhist sects, added the newly formed Zen and Pure Land Sects to the traditional eight Japanese sects, and divided up the resulting ten sects according to those thress categories.It was this supradenominational classification that resulted in the formation of Zen temples, such Kyo Temples as Sangoji三鈷寺 Temple, the headquarters of the Pure Land Seizan Sect, and such Ritsu Temples as Saidaiji西大寺Temple.This idea of Zen-Kyo Ritsu also exerted influence on the secular world, as a new concept of "Zenritsu" came into being for understanding the three newly formed sects in medieval Japan.The second reason involves such aspects as the Buddhist temple system and medieval culture.Kenmitsu Buddhism, which developed as indigenous to Japan, was first introduced in an esoteric form from Tang China in the ninth century,but personal ties with Chinese Buddhism decreased, as exoteric/esoteric liturgies and practices developed with a unique Japanese character.On the other hand, all the institutional aspects of Zen and Ritsu temples, including the titles given to abbots, the names for temple buildings, names and portraits of monks, reflected both song Buddhist institutions and culture.Therefore, the Buddhist reform movement that arose during the Kamakura period can be considered at the result of the introduction of contemporary Chinese Buddhist norms.

View full abstract

In the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, the relationship between the king and the clergy changed from a mutually dependent to an independent one by the 1130s.However, after that time, they continued to tie up with each other in the area of repairing the disorder which had resulted from power struggles involving the king.The main aim of this essay is to consider the following questions.Was such a relationship reflected in the sphere of politics within the kingdom?Can we understand the background of such a relationship through investigationg that sphere?An analysis of charters reveals that the king and the clergy had sepatated from each other also in the area of domestic administration during the 1130-40s.There were three changes in the background of this separation : the division of secular and ecclesiastical jurisdiction in the 1120s, the activation of clergy as ambassadors to Western Christendom(that is, their removal from the domestic to the diplomatic sphere), and the removal of royal city from Jerusalem to Acre in the 1140s.In spite of these changes, we must not fail to notice that specific clergy members kept close relationships with the king and played an active role in both the domestic and diplomatic sphere.It is true that some of them ,for example Radulfus, the bishop of Bethlehem, and Whilermus, the archbishop of Tyre, maintained personal relationships with king, but on the whole, most of them had bishoprics that had been established under royal authority.Furthermore, such bishops had the advantage of being able to move with comparative ease.Under conditions peculiar to the kingdom, such as the threat of Muslims attack and a lack of man-power, mobility could be a decisive factor in forming the political structure.So, we should consider that differences in mobility makes a difference in understanding the whole structure of the kingdom.However, we must pay attention to the point that the purpose of participation in military or missionary activities itself was to defend the Holy Land.The clergy cooperated with the king to defend the Holy Land and the maintain it's order.Thus, it should be emphasized that the clergy supported the king because the king was a military leader of the Holy Land, and as a result, supported him as a feudal sovereign.

View full abstract

The Louisiaba Purchase Exposition in St.Louis was held in 1904.This Exposition, usually referred to as the St.Louis World's Fair, surpassed all previous expositions.It was a product of imperialism.That year, Japan was a "winner" at the fair and elsewhere.The Japanese exhibit was the only foreign display ready when the fair opened, despite its war with Russia.The Japanese drew attention to their displays at the fair and were victorious in the war effort.The Japanese display emphasized the country's modernization and industrialization.In the transportation pavilion, they displayed topographical maps and photographs of not only Honshu and Formosa but also the Kirean peninsula and a part of Manchuraia, although these latter territories did not belong to Japan when the maps were drawn.During the fair, Japanese officials held receptions in the official pavilion, taking the opportunity to justify the Russo-Japanese War in Korea and Manuchuria.At the receptions, Japanese officials emphasized "peace", the International Exposition was competition in peace."Peace" ,meant that territory and its people in need of Japan's protection.The Japanese sought to promote a way to consolidate a dominant position in the Far East.So, "peace" was rhetoric for success in the Russo-Japanese War, because the Japanese government was worried about intervention like the triple intervention that occurred after the SinoJapanese War.

View full abstract