著者

野津 幸治

出版者

天理大学地域文化研究センター

雑誌

アゴラ : 天理大学地域文化研究センター紀要 (ISSN:13489631)

巻号頁・発行日

no.11, pp.55-70, 2014

---

Various activities of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu (1906-1993), a representative reformist monk in Thailand, were carried out on the basis of the "three resolutions": to help all people realize the heart of their own religions, to help bring about mutual good understandin among religions,and to work together to drag the world out from under the power of materialism. Actual practices to implement these"three resolutions" were his mission activities focused on sermon and publication,exchange with religious leaders other than those of Theravada Buddhism and the study of their traditions, and return to the age of the Buddha. By examining Buddhadasa's discourse concerned with the spirit called phi, this article explores on what ground he criticized people's animistic faith. It will further attempt to analyze the same issue in connection with the"three resolutions." I will use for this analysis three sermons in which Buddhadasa referred to phi, all of which were given to monks to be dispatched for foreign mission. Buddhadasa's critique of animistic faith contended that people's avijja,or ignorance,causes them to be afraid of phi and do such wrong deed as enshrining guardian spirits of the land, and that such animistic faith deviates from the Buddha-Dhamma,or the doctrine of the Buddha. It then asserted that this deviation can only be corrected by vijja,or wisdom,which leads to the way of the extinction of suffering. This study will show that Buddhadasa's sermons conveyed his desire to bring correct understandings of the Buddhist teaching to the faithful whose insufficient acceptance of the teaching had them look for salvation in the animistic faith. His sermons furthermore expressed his anxiety about selfish and materialistic society. He maintained that people do away with materialism by discarding their materialistic adhesion caused by their ignorance. Thus he strongly called for the implementing of two of the "three resolutions," while criticizing the animistic faith

著者

野津 幸治

出版者

天理大学地域文化研究センター

雑誌

アゴラ : 天理大学地域文化研究センター紀要 (ISSN:13489631)

巻号頁・発行日

no.11, pp.55-70, 2014

---

Various activities of Buddhadasa Bhikkhu (1906-1993), a representative reformist monk in Thailand, were carried out on the basis of the "three resolutions": to help all people realize the heart of their own religions, to help bring about mutual good understandin among religions,and to work together to drag the world out from under the power of materialism. Actual practices to implement these"three resolutions" were his mission activities focused on sermon and publication,exchange with religious leaders other than those of Theravada Buddhism and the study of their traditions, and return to the age of the Buddha. By examining Buddhadasa's discourse concerned with the spirit called phi, this article explores on what ground he criticized people's animistic faith. It will further attempt to analyze the same issue in connection with the"three resolutions." I will use for this analysis three sermons in which Buddhadasa referred to phi, all of which were given to monks to be dispatched for foreign mission. Buddhadasa's critique of animistic faith contended that people's avijja,or ignorance,causes them to be afraid of phi and do such wrong deed as enshrining guardian spirits of the land, and that such animistic faith deviates from the Buddha-Dhamma,or the doctrine of the Buddha. It then asserted that this deviation can only be corrected by vijja,or wisdom,which leads to the way of the extinction of suffering. This study will show that Buddhadasa's sermons conveyed his desire to bring correct understandings of the Buddhist teaching to the faithful whose insufficient acceptance of the teaching had them look for salvation in the animistic faith. His sermons furthermore expressed his anxiety about selfish and materialistic society. He maintained that people do away with materialism by discarding their materialistic adhesion caused by their ignorance. Thus he strongly called for the implementing of two of the "three resolutions," while criticizing the animistic faith

著者

川島 静

出版者

天理大学地域文化研究センター

雑誌

アゴラ : 天理大学地域文化研究センター紀要 (ISSN:13489631)

巻号頁・発行日

no.8, pp.75-86, 2011

---

Anton Chekhov (1860–1904) wrote many works in which female protagonists play an important role. Although never fully sympathetic to the contemporary feminist movement, he was highly critical of gender bias and biological determinist theories and denounced the inequality of education as a source of negative gender discrimination. As Barbara Heldt (1987) and Carolina De Maegd-Soёp (1987) point out, the variety of female characters in his works is unique in the history of Russian literature. Chekhov, who began his career in the early 1880s as a comic short story writer for humor magazines and then for popular newspapers, progressed at the end of the 1890s to write for more intellectual, general magazines such as The Northern Herald and The Russian Thought. In this period, he wrote several stories dealing with the theme of the women's participation in the public sphere. Beginning in the 1860s, because of industrial development and increased freedom of speech in late Imperial Russia, a type of civic public sphere developed as a space of critical discussion, which Jürgen Habermas (1961) defined as the foundation of democratic society. While Habermas sees the exclusion of women from public discourse as a crucial element of the western civic public sphere, the beginnings of the Russian public sphere were characterized by the active participation of intellectual women, encouraged by the relatively higher quality of women's education in Russia at that time. In his novellas "Three years" (1895) and "My Life" (1896), Chekhov described women who try to commit themselves to the public discourse regarding cultural and social issues. Their commitments are not seen entirely negatively, but these women are represented as unnatural and superficial, which may correspond to the expectations of the contemporary (male) readers. Chekhov continued the same theme in "The House with a Mezzanine: An Artist's Story" (1896), but from a different perspective. This story highlights sisters Lida and Zhenya (Missius), who provide a striking contrast: while the protagonist, a cynical landscape painter, allegedly modeled after the author's friend Isaak Levitan (1860–1900), falls in love with the latter, a gentle girl with childlike manners, he discusses public matters with the zemstvo (local self-government) activist Lida. This comparison may allude to the biblical story of the sisters Martha and Mary, a favorite theme of contemporary Russian paintings. Lida is described as a rather intolerant and humorless person who dominates her mother and sister with a pseudo-patriarchal attitude. However, her devotion to social work and education in the zemstvo is reminiscent of Chekhov himself, who as a physician engaged in medical services to peasants in the zemstvo. Lida's character must have evoked strong sympathy among readers at a time when the "Small Deeds" movement, led by Iakov Abramov (1858–1906), acquired popularity after populist activities had been suppressed by the government. With the dichotomized representation of two sisters, Chekhov expressed the dilemma between the ideal of womanly love and intimacy in the private sphere and the argument for women's empowerment.

著者

新井 美智代

出版者

天理大学地域文化研究センター

雑誌

アゴラ : 天理大学地域文化研究センター紀要 (ISSN:13489631)

巻号頁・発行日

no.12, pp.61-73, 2015

---

The poet Arseny Tarkovsky wrote over 10poems about a woman named "Maria". One of these poems "First Dates" is read aloud in Andrei Tarkovsky's film The Mirror. At first Arseny's daughter Marina hoped that the portrayal of "Maria" should be represented by Maria Vishnyakova, her mother and Arseny's first wife. However Marina discovered that this was not true. The woman who was represented in the poems was Maria Fal'ts, a beautiful and clever widow, who was a teenage acquaintance of Arseny in his hometown of Elisabetgrad. In contrast the model of heroine of The Mirror is Maria Vishnyakova. It might therefore seem that "First Dates" is an inappropriate choice for the theme of The Mirror. However "First Dates" is used as an independent work in The Mirror separate from its author's reference to Fal'ts. Indeed, as L. Boiajieva and L. Batkin state, the reading of "First Meetins" in combination with the film's screen image produces a wonderful effect. Marina Tarkovskaia's hope that the above-stated poems were dedicated to Maria Vishnyakova is reiterated by P. Volkova and this writer. In order to clarify the reason why I hope so, I would like to trace Maria's life. Maria Ivanovna Vishnyakova was born in 1907 in Moscow. In 1916, her mother Vera eloped with a doctor named Nikolai Petrov. Several years later Maria was taken in by her mother. In 1925, Maria began studying literature at the University College in Moscow and met Arseny. They married in 1928. In 1929, the college was closed and Maria gave up a transfer admission examination into Moscow State University at Arseny's insistence. Andrei and Marina were born in 1932 and 1934, respectively. Because of that Maria had to devote herself to child rearing and housework. In 1936, Arseny left home, and in the following year he started to live with Antonina Bokhonova, who was then Bladimir Trenin's wife. Nevertheless, Maria maintained good relationship with Arseny for the sake of their children. In 1943, Arseny was wounded at the front and his left leg was amputated. In 1950, Arseny and Antonina divorced. In the folloing year Antonina was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer. Maria kindly took care of her until Antonina died. In 1973, Andrei asked Maria to appear in his film The Mirror. Maria resisted taking the part out of shyness, but ultimately agreed to play the role for the sake of her son. In 1979, Maria was diagnosed with lung cancer. She died, on October fifth surrounded by her children.

著者

Bhatte Pallavi

出版者

天理大学地域文化研究センター

雑誌

アゴラ (ISSN:13489631)

巻号頁・発行日

no.7, pp.81-94, 2010

---

インドとパキスタンの国境沿いのパンジャーブ州発祥のシク(Sikh)教は、カーストを否定する平等主義的な教理をもつ。インドとパキスタンの独立時、シク教徒はインド帰属を選んだが、独立国を求めるシク教徒過激派をインド政府軍が弾圧した1984年の黄金寺院事件など、その歴史的な背景から、シク教徒は「祖国を追われた民」(Diaspora)としてのアイデンティティを持つ。1938年、英国ではコベントリーに最初のシク教徒組織が設立されて以来、ロンドン、バーミンガムなどの大都市ばかりではなく、英国各地に300もの寺院を建築し、42万人以上の教徒が在住している。この発表では、寺院がシク教徒の子弟のための施設としても利用されるなど、宗教的アイデンティティが継承されていることが示された。今そのようなシク教徒勢力は、英国社会にとっても軽視できないほどとなっている。

著者

Lopez Lupianez Nuria

出版者

天理大学地域文化研究センター

雑誌

アゴラ (ISSN:13489631)

巻号頁・発行日

no.3, pp.1-16, 2005

---

Handbooks of art history usually consider Dada — the avant-garde art movement born in 1916 and finished in 1923 — as an essentially nihilistic movement. In other words, Dada is supposed to be a kind of destructive movement, which would be surpassed by Surrealism later on. Nevertheless, clearly this widespread historical judgment conceals from us the very force with which Dada movement was experienced at the time as well as the actuality of its main ideas that have been repeatedly embraced by artists of later generations. This article studies the notion of "spirit" and the concomitant idea of "dictatorship of the spirit" in Tristan Tzara (1896-1963) — author of the main Dada manifestos and doubtlessly the key theoretical figure of the movement — in confrontation with the philosophy of Henri Bergson whose books we know Tzara read with his fellow Dadaists. And through this study we will show that Dada's creative force indeed go beyond any historical judgment, or beyond history tout court. Tzara says in one of his manifestos: "Dada is a spirit". In fact, the "spirit" for Tzara is something vital, creative, essentially irreconcilable with any external limitation, just as Tzara conceives Dada. This conception of "spirit", on the other hand, is very close to Bergsonian notion of spirit: "a reality which... is being created or recreated incessantly, and is essentially refractory to the measurement" because it is always active. And it is precisely from this point of view that we can understand the singular characteristic of Dada movement (as a movement of spirit) that is at once destructive and affirmative; it is destructive, on the one hand, because the great vivacity of spirit cannot help breaking the social and cultural order of the modern capitalist world which is essentially bourgeois and utilitarian; it is affirmative, on the other hand, because that vivacity of spirit has nothing nihilistic, it simply expresses an affirmation of life itself. This is exactly the idea Tzara defended by the name of "dictatorship of the spirit". And we can affirm that in this aspect Dada has totally maintained its actuality not only for later artists that have explicitly taken Dada as their reference but also for those other people —artists or not— that have practised their "dictatorship of the spirit" without knowing it.