D.T. Suzuki's Goodwill Envoy to the Republic of China, 1934

Michiko Yusa

Professor Emerita, Western Washington University

1. Background of 1934 Visit to China

     In the early 1930's, aggressive Japanese military maneuvering in Manchuria began to strain the robust cultural ties that existed between China and Japan for a millennium and a half. A handful of concerned Japanese men of consequence asked Daisetz. T. Suzuki  鈴木大拙 to visit China as a goodwill ambassador.

     The timing coincided with Suzuki's being awarded the degree of Doctor of Literature (D. Litt.) in the April of 1934 for his Studies in the Lankāvatāra Sūtra (1930). Suzuki's name was already familiar to the Buddhist scholars in the West, through his writings published in The Eastern Buddhist (established in 1921), and especially with his widely read Essays in Zen Buddhism, First Series (1927). He was also someone well known among learned Chinese Buddhist clerics.

     In those days, collecting antique was an expected part of gentlemen's hobby, and many of them were avid Sinophiles and harbored warm personal feelings towards China.  Saitō Risuke, president of Heisandō, the antique dealing firm in Tokyo and an auction house, worked closely with prominent antique lovers and collectors, and had a wide networking of distinguished discerning clienteles. Around the time Suzuki resigned from the Peers' School in Tokyo (in 1920) and considering accepting the offer of the faculty position at Ōtani University in Kyoto, Suzuki's scholarly accomplishments came to the attention of Makino Nobuaki, former Minister of Education and then the Minister of Imperial Household (Kunai daijin) in Japan. Makino asked Saitō to "look after Suzuki, as he is a living national treasure." (Saitō 1957, 259)

     It was not uncommon in the prewar Japanese society that powerful businessmen, financiers, and statesmen played the role of public intellectuals, and acted to facilitate significant intercultural exchanges in their private capacity. Also, these prominent "who is who's" were well connected through their pursuit of art, especially tea ceremony and their appreciation of antique objects of art. Their knowledge of classical Chinese literature constituted their personal character. It is not surprising that Suzuki's scholarship in Zen literature as well as his personal quality thoroughly imbued with his Zen practice, was appreciated by these cultured elites. Suzuki was naturally considered a distinguished honorary member of the gentlemen's club.

     Saitō recalls how the idea of sending a good-will envoy to China first came up in around 1933, following the Manchurian Incident, and the idea was vetted by Makino Nobuaki 牧野伸顕, Ikeda Shigeaki 池田成彬, Mutō Sanji 武藤山治, Ishii Mitsuo 石井光雄, and Suzuki Daisetz 鈴木大拙.

They were concerned about the strained relationship between Japan and China. They reached the opinion that it was most ideal to ask Prof. Suzuki to visit China to strengthen the friendship between the two peoples. He was to be accompanied by Fujii Jōsen藤井静宣 (of [Jōenji of] the Honganji sect), Takabatake Bizan 高畠眉山 (of Engakuji), and Nakamura Kaisen 中村戒仙 (of Daitokuji), while my son Teiichi 貞一, acting as secretary. The group departed for China in May and visited various Buddhist sites for two months.

    The travel expenses were covered by the financial support made by the business conglomerates, Kanebō (thanks to Mutō Sanji), Mitsui Bank (Ikeda Shigeaki), and Mitsubishi Bank. A tragedy struck, however. We learn from Saito:

When Mutō was on his way to speak to Mr. Katō Takeo of Mitsubishi Bank, he was gunned down by a terrorist, and died of the wound the next day. After this terrible incident, I consulted Makino and Ikeda to see what we might do, to which they responded without hesitation that they must go ahead with the original plan. Ikeda personally approached Mitsubishi Bank [managed by his brother-in-law] to secure the funds, and Prof. Suzuki and company departed for China. (Saitō 1957, 260)

This tragic news of Mutō's death reached his Chinese friends, who were deeply moved and helped open the openhearted dialogue with Suzuki and company.

     Suzuki on his part saw that such collaboration with Chinese Buddhists was essential in counterbalance the mentality of "scientific domination and the pull towards consumerism" that was engulfing the entire world. In his words:

If the cultural unity of Far-eastern civilization along the line marked by Buddhism is to be firmly maintained in order to make it stand against the modern spirit of scientific and economic materialism, the Buddhists of the two great nations of the Far East are to be solidly aligned. (Suzuki 1935a, 328)

     The idea that Buddhism offered an alternate worldview of peace, enlightenment, and universal brother- and sisterhood, had already been a tenet declared in the Editorial of the 1921 inaugural issue of The Eastern Buddhist. Those founding members of the Eastern Buddhist Society—Sasaki Gesshō, Yamabe Shūgaku, Akanuma Chizen, Beatrice Lane Suzuki, and D. T. Suzuki—took a hard realistic look at the horrific scars left behind by the recent World War on the European continent. (EB 1.1, 1921, 80-81) Standing for the message of peace, and himself erudite and bilingual in English and Japanese, Suzuki was considered an ideal good-will ambassador to the People of Republic of China.

     Even then, Suzuki and company were not free of apprehension. Were they welcome by the Chinese? Were they to expect violent hostility? No sooner than their arrival in Shanghai, however, where they were receive by one of the most influential lay Buddhist leader, Wang Yiting (J. Ō Ittei, 1867-1938) at his home, they felt reassured that their apprehension was groundless. Wang, agreeing with the tenet of their visit to China, introduced important members of the Chinese Buddhist sangha to Suzuki and company.

This was an auspicious start, because wherever they went, they were received with warm reception for the rest of their journey. I especially mention two Chinese Buddhists: Master Taixu (J. Taikyo, 1889-1947) of Xuedou Temple near Ningbo and Venerable Yinguang (J. Inkō, 1862-1940) of Baoguo Temple in Suzhou, the encounter with whom had a special meaning for Suzuki.

2. Itinerary: Suzuki and Company in China

The following is a reconstructed itinerary of Suzuki's envoy. Days missing from Suzuki's diary were most likely spent in transiting from one place to the next.

     May 4 (Friday), Port of Kobe.

     At 11 a.m., on the Nagasaki-maru the company departed Kōbe for Shanghai. They were sent off by a large group of friends and families.  

     May 7, Shanghai. Upon arrival in Shanghai, the first thing they did was to visit Mr. Wang Yiting at his private residence. He was the leading figure of Chinese lay Buddhists. Fujii Jōsen (or Sōsen), a member of Suzuki's group, had studied at the Tung Wen College in Shanghai for three years, and was quite fluent in spoken Mandarin Chinese. He personally knew Wang Yiting from his Shanghai days and acted as the invaluable liaison between the group and the Chinese Buddhists. (Sakaida 2017; Ishida 2017)

     The photo taken on this day in Wang's private Catalpa Garden is accompanied by the detailed annotation inscribed by Saitō Teiichi, who acted as the secretary.

As soon as we arrived in Shanghai, we got in touch with Mr. Wang, thanks to the good offices of Kanebō Shanghai. When we saw him, we explained to him that we came to China as pilgrims to visit important Buddhist sites, and that the blueprint of the tour had been drawn by the initiative of the late Mr. Mutō Sanji. Upon hearing this, Mr. Wang, visibly moved, told us that he supported the tenet of our visit. He then went into deep silence, and reminisced about the late Mutō—that Mutō was born in the same year as he, and how he was so saddened by his friend's sudden departure. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.615)

<from left to right, Mr. He (?), Rev. Nakamura, Wang Yiting, Szuki, Fujii, second row in between Suzuki and Wang is Rev. Takahatake; the rest were from Kanebō Shanghai offices and Japanese Buddhist clerics stationed in Shanghai> 

Mutō Sanji (1867-1934), as mentioned above, was the driving force behind this group's visit to China. He was the President of Kanebō Textile Company, which operated its overseas factories in Shanghai and had personal friends in China, including Wang Yiting. Wang, a businessman, a publisher, a lay-Buddhist activist, and an artist, was able to introduce Suzuki to leading Chinese Buddhist abbots as well as to the governmental officials who personally embraced Buddhism.

     May 10, Shanghai.

     Uchiyama Kanzō内山完造, the owner of Uchiyama Bookstore, arranged for Suzuki and company to share some time with Lu Xun魯迅, who was in hiding from the government authority, as Lu's freethinking and free lifestyle were deemed to present danger to Chinese society.

<photo: from left to right: Mr. Uchiyama Kanzō, the owner of Uchiyama Bookstore, Mrs. Uchiyama, Takahatake, Nakamura, Lu Xung, Suzuki, Fujii>

The photo of this occasion was especially cherished by Fujii Jōsen, who composed a waka poem years later in 1964, with the title "Life" (Seimei).

Daisetz to

Rojin to narabu

shashin nite

imada oizaru

ware mo utsureri

(Ishida 2017, 54)

      May 11, Hangzhou.

     On this day, Ruan Jianguan 阮艦光, most likely recommended by the local scholarly group, joined as interpreter and accompanied Suzuki and company for the rest of their journey throughout China. In this way, they were insured the utmost level of smooth communication.

     On this day they visited Jingci Temple 浄慈寺 (J. Jōzuji) on the Western Lake (Xihu), the temple where Dōgen's Chinese Master Rujing如浄resided until he moved to Tiandongshan as its abbot. Being at this temple made the two Japanese Zen priests, Nakamura and Takahatake, feel as if they "returned home." This feeling came from their deep veneration of Dōgen as someone who transplanted the meditation practice ("Chan" or "Zen") from China to Japan. They offered a prayer in front of Rujing's memorial tower. Suzuki shared this feeling of homecoming. (Suzuki 1934**, SDZ 29, 613)

     May 12, Hangzhou: Lingyin Temple.

     On this day, they unexpectedly witnessed the Tibetan Buddhist Kalachakra empowerment ceremony 金剛時輪会, celebrated by the Panchen Lama at Lingyin Temple 霊隠寺 (J. Rei'inji). It was a huge public event, and it was on the eve of the climax "anointment" ritual.

     Suzuki explains that the general social and political unrest, felt throughout China, drove wealthy donors to sponsor this elaborate ceremony. The Panchen Lama (who took refuge from Tibet in 1923) officiated this ceremony, to ward off the warmongering evil spirits. The ceremony was attended not only by these major donors and monastic leaders, but also by governmental dignitaries. Suzuki and company was welcomed by Chu Minyi 褚民誼, who held ministerial positions in Chang Kai-Shek's government there. What impressed Suzuki the most was the big crowd of ordinary Chinese folks, who came to the temple to take part in this ceremony. He noted his impression of that day:

The scale of this event was so huge. Sponsored by the key powerful figures of the financial, political, and religious sectors, the ceremony was intended to bring about peace and calm to the troubling volatile situations of the day. Lingyin Temple belongs to the lineage of Chan, and is usually a quiet place, but I must say we have witnessed something extraordinary here. During the Kalachakra initiation ceremony, not only many governmental dignitaries attended it, but also no small amount of material goods were transported to the temple precinct. For this scale of event to go on for three or four weeks, attended by numerous congregations that gather every day, there has to be some strong religious feeling that drives people. I spoke about this to a young self-acclaimed progressive Chinese Chan monk. He told me: "Rather than calling it genuine religious faith, I would think that many ordinary folks just come and attend the ceremony out of curiosity." Be that as it may, I must say that they were driven by some deep-seated religious sentiment to take part in this religious ceremony. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.562-3)

Suzuki was also impressed by how a large crowd of people moved about in an "orderly manner in seemingly disordered and chaotic situation," and wondered how the Japanese crowd would have behaved in such a case—possibly in an utterly chaotic manner. The fact that Suzuki was unable to locate the main building of the temple, buried in the huge crowd, indicated to him the robust presence of Buddhism on the grassroots level in the lives of the Chinese people. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.564)

     May 17, Ningbo: Xuedou Temple, and a meeting with Master Taixu

     From Shanghai, they traveled to Ningbo, to visit Master Taixu at Xuedou Temple. Taixu was the most recognized active Buddhist abbot in China at that time, vigorously promoting the education of Buddhist monks, and overseeing the running of his journal, Haichao'yin海潮音 (Kaichōon). He also traveled widely to Europe, and also to Japan at various times. So, he was an internationally recognized figure, representing the Chinese Buddhist sangha. Suzuki had in his possession a letter of introduction to Taixu, by Jiang Zuobin 蒋作賓, the Republic of China’s ambassador stationed in Tokyo. The letter was most likely obtained by the office of Makino Nobuaki, the Minister of Imperial Household (in office 1925-35).

     In order to get to the temple deep in the mountain, the group first took a few hours of automobile-ride, then were carried by the "sedan" up into the hills.

<photo: from left to right, Mr. Ruan, Takahatake, Suzuki, Taixu, Nakamura, Fujii, Mr. Kashida>

Their meeting with Taixu was brief, but it nevertheless was fruitful. It seems Suzuki was able to bring up the matter of establishing a study abroad program for Taixu's disciples to pursue Buddhist Studies in Japan at a university—today's Taishō University. It also appears that Suzuki relayed the invitation to Taixu's senior disciples to visit Japan. (In response to this invitation, Daxing, one of his eminent monks, visited Japan in May-June, 1935.)  

     May 19, Ningbo: Tiandongshan.

     The year 1934 marked the 2,500th anniversary of the birth of Śākyamuni Buddha, and major temples were preparing large scale celebrations. According to the lunar calendar, May 19th corresponded to the eve of Buddha's birthday. Continuous offerings to the dead (shuiluhui水陸会, J. suiriku-e) were performed at Tiandongshan Monastery 天童山, and the ordinary people from the local provinces made pilgrimage and took lodging at the temple. The temple precinct was inundated with people. Suzuki and company also stayed overnight at the temple, which enabled them to take part in the ritual of memorial service.  

     May 20, Ningbo: Ayuwang Temple.

     On this day the Buddha's 2,500th Birthday was cerebrated. The group visited the Temple of King Ashoka (Ayuwang 阿育王寺), where abbots of major monasteries and temples gathered to commemorate the very special day. Suzuki and company were graciously received by the abbot Yuanying of Tiandongshan Monastery. They were in the company of abbot Yuanlong of Ayuwang Temple and abbot Changgui of Emeishan Temple. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.533 for the photo caption) Abbot Yuanlong welcomed Suzuki and the company with utmost solicitude, serving them food and making sure all is well with their visit, saying "That we are able to have this get-together here is thanks to Buddha's  auspicious karmic doing. How grateful we are!" This left the impression on Suzuki that the "egalitarian monastic spirit" pervaded the Chinese Buddhist community. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29, 574)

<from left to right: Fujii, Mr. Kashida, Master Changgui of Emeishan, Takahatake, Suzuki, a wealthy lady doner, Master Yuanying of Tiandongshan, Nakamura, Mr. Ruan, Master Yuanlong of Ayuwang>

Among other things, Suzuki noted that just about one thousand pilgrims came to the temple and attended all sorts of ceremonies that were going on simultaneously at different quarters of the temple precincts throughout the day. What impressed him the most was the "finger offering ceremony" (ranzhi gongyang 燃指供養, J. nenshi-kuyō), which he witnessed for the first time, and which brought him the image of Master Bazhi八指—the revered master Jing'an 敬安 (1851-1912) of Tiandongshan. He noticed that there were even young women among those passionate devotees, who offered their fingers to Buddha in the burning flames. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.565)

     May 22-25, Mount Potalaka.

     From Ningbo, they took a ferry to the island of Putoshan, the sacred center of the Guanyin (Kan'non) worship. This cult actually went back to the Japanese monk, Egaku 慧萼 (Ch. Huie), who was dispatched to China by Empress Danrin (786-850). When Egaku was on his return voyage to Japan with a statue of Guanyin, the boat would not precede any further than this island. Egaku took this as the wish of Guanyin that she wanted to remain in China. Thus, he erected a temple to enshrine the Guanyin statue, which became today's Puji Chansi (J. Fuzaiji). Suzuki and company took Lianchi Chanyuan 蓮池禅院as their lodging temple, and visited holy sites dotted throughout the island. He noted that several thousand monks inhabited the island and practiced their devotion to Guanyin, but that he saw no female devotees inhabited the island.  

     Suzuki and company must have known that Dōgen visited Putoshan (ca. in 1227), at the conclusion of his study with Master Rujing at Tiandongshan. Dōgen composed a poem in Chinese, prefaced "At Mt. Potalaka in the Province of Changguo," in which Guanyin is addressing the Buddhist student not to look for her apparition in the grotto, which popularly had already been believed to be the place where she made herself visible to the faithful. Here is Dōgen's poem:

You, who are engaged in the inquiry into the true nature of the mind,

Shall not seek the apparition of my face in this cave.

I tell whoever comes to seek me here:

"Wake up! Guanyin is not here at Mt. Potalaka."

聞思修本証心間

豈覓洞中現聖顔

我告来人須自覚

観音不在宝陀山

(Kagamishima 1988, 268-271; Dōgen, Eihei kōroku, vol. 10)

     May 28, Suzhou: Baoguo Temple in Suzhou

     From Ningbo, they traveled north. In Suzhou, they visited Baoguo Temple to interview Venerable Yinguang (1862-1940), who was venerated as the authority of Pure Land faith. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.606) Yinguang, then 74 years old, was observing his "spiritual seclusion" (biguan閉関), in order to purify his faith for the remainder of his life on earth. He granted Suzuki an interview from his niche through the small opening on the wall.

<photo from left to right: Mr. Ruan (interpreter); Master Yinguang, Suzuki, Fujii>

Here, the language barrier turned out to be a serious problem. Venerable Yinguang's heavily accented Chinese dialect proved to be difficult to unravel, even for learned Mr. Ruan, and Suzuki resorted to writing out Chinese characters on a piece of paper to communicate with the master, but such a cumbersome method of communication proved to be impossible to carry out a philosophically complex discussion.

     Be that as it may, Yinguang communicated to Suzuki that Chan (i.e., seated meditation) practice was reserved only for the spiritual elite, and that it may offer an "understanding" (jie 解) of Buddha's teaching at best, but not an existential "proof" (zheng 證) of one's rebirth in Pure Land. Such proof was directly accessible only by the single-mindedly practice of nienfo念仏, which consists in an invocation of Amida's name.

     Suzuki asked Yinguang if he considered that the meditation practice had the dimension of spiritual "passivity," similar to what the followers of nienfo practice may experience in their utter devotion to the saving grace of Amitābha Buddha. For it was Suzuki's view that "self-power" (jiriki自力)—the path of self effort to attain religious salvation—and "other-power" (tariki他力)—the path of throwing oneself to the divine grace— were in the end artificial distinctions, and that the dimension of "passivity" was universal in any religious experience, be it in Zen (Chan) or Pure Land practice—the branch of Mahayana Buddhism that features the devotion to Amitabha Buddha and seek one's rebirth (salvation) in Amitabha's "Pure Land" (paradise). (Suzuki 1933, 326)

     Not only the linguistic barrier but also something more fundamental stood in their way of exchanging their views on this subtle and complex matter. Suzuki sensed that Yinguang's approach to "rebirth in Pure Land" remained moralist in core, which precluded a deeper investigation into the religious nature of personal sin. For Suzuki, Shinran's experience of exasperation in facing his own sinfulness and Amida Buddha's great compassion that shone through the dark night of despair transcended a moral view of good and evil.

     But for Yinguang strict observance of moral precepts was paramount in religious salvation. He responded to Suzuki's query with the statement that "the Japanese Shin priests eat meat and get married; that is not an authentic Buddhist practice." (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.609)

     Suzuki thought that if the Chinese nienfo-practitioners could open up their reflection on this existential-religious dimension, they might be able to get away from the mindset of rigorist moral bindings and make a stride into a deeper reflection on the religious nature of sin.

     Regardless of communication difficulties, Yinguang graciously expressed his appreciation for Suzuki’s visit, and presented him with the copies of his published writings and asked him to read them. Once back in Japan, Suzuki did exactly that, and carried out his in-depth study into the origin of "nienfo" practice in China, and how they came to be fused with meditation (Chan) practice. This resulted in his essay in English: “Impression of Chinese Buddhism” (Suzuki 1935a), in which he allocated considerable pages on Rev. Yinguang and introduced the latter’s ideas. (Suzuki 1935a, 359-370)

     May 29 (Suzhou), May 30-31 (transit to Nanjing), June 1-4 (Nanjing), June 6-7 (transit to Beijing).

     June 8: Beijing: University of Peking and Chinese College

     Suzuki and company visited the University of Peking, where they were warmly welcomed by the President Jiang Menglin. Suzuki also ran into Hu Shih at the university. The group also visited Chinese College and met with the acting president, Qi Dapang.

     June 10: Beijing: Younghe Gong, a Mongolian Buddhist Temple

     On this day, after the visit to the Daoist temple, Baiyu Daoguan, they were welcomed at Yonghe Gong, the Mongolian Buddhim Temple, where they took part in the evening service. Saitō Teiichi, the secretary, kept the following impression:

After our visit to the Daoist temple, we spent the whole afternoon at Yonghe Gong. We were shown throughout the temple. In the early evening, we heard the sutra chanting by young monks, which was accompanied by a big horn and a loud drumbeat. This conjured up a mystical atmosphere. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.619)

     June 11, Beijing: Beijing National Library

     Suzuki spent this day in the Beijing National Library, doing research into the Dunhuang materials housed there, and discovered a lost piece of writing attributed to Bodhidharma. After his return to Japan, he published the critical edition of the text titled Shōshitsu ishū (少室逸書 Shaoshi yishu) in 1935, and the annotated edition the following year. The study of this manuscript further developed into Suzuki's discovery of related manuscripts that were collecting dust in the old monasteries in Japan. Starting in June 1936, he published his findings, comparing these manuscripts with detailed analysis. He finally completed this line of research in 1943-44, in his "Daruma ibun nihen ni tsukite," On the two newly discovered pieces of writings by Bodhidharma). (Suzuki 1943-44, SDZ 2.108-221) This was Suzuki's concrete scholarly "souvenir" he brought back from his 1934 visit to China.

     June 13, Beijing:

On the evening, Japanese Government’s East Asian Cultural Affairs Beijing Bureau sponsored a dinner reception, to which Hu Shih and other Chinese academics and librarians were cordially invited. No doubt, these connections facilitated Suzuki to carry out his research at Beijing National Library. It was most likely on this occasion Suzuki was able to have an intimate conversation with Hu Shih on their research on the Dunhuang manuscripts.

<photo: third from the left Hu Shih, right next to him is Suzuki>

     June 15, Leave Beijing for Shenyang.

     June 18: Fengtian (Shenyang), Manchuria, then back to Japan via Korea

     In Fantien (today's Shenyang) in Manchuria, the group visited the National Library. It appears Suzuki did not see Kim Gugyeong, who was then a head librarian there. From Manchuria, they headed south to Korea, and via Seoul (June 21-22), Gyeongju (June 23) and Pusan (June 24), they finally returned to Shimonoseki, Japan. It was Suzuki’s third time to be in Korea (1918, 1930, and now 1934), and many Buddhist sites must have been familiar to him. Suzuki arrived by train at Kyoto Station on June 25, 9:30 pm, concluding his extended tour of 52 nights, 53 days.

3. Suzuki’s Impressions of Chinese Buddhism

In August of 1934, Suzuki wrote a small book of about 100 pages (in Japanese), titled Shina Bukkyō inshōki [Impressions of Chinese Buddhism], which included generous numbers of photos, each annotated by Saitō Teiichi. (Suzuki 1934c) Published in October in Japan, the book was promptly translated into Chinese and published in Taixu's journal, Haichaoyin 16.6 & 16.7 in 1935. (Suzuki 1935c) As to the translator, it was most likely Zhang (or Cheung) Maoji張茂吉—, as Zhang's translation in book form was published by a press in Xiamen City in 1936. (Suzuki 1936; Kirita 2005, 49, see "List of comprehensive publications")

     In this way, Suzuki's personal observations were directly communicated to Chinese readers, free of embellishment or alteration.

     In this book, Suzuki begins his observation with his view that "Buddhism is still fully alive and well in China," contrary to some notion spread by Japanese Buddhist clerics who had visited China and felt that "Buddhism in China was on the decline." (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.557-58, et passim)

     Here below, I shall summarize Suzuki's observations, not yet presented in the above reconstruction of the "itinerary."   

     (1) Suzuki was struck by the sheer scale of temple buildings and temple grounds. He remembered a gigantic temple building, most likely the Hall of Heavenly Deities, under reconstruction at Jingci Temple in Hangzhou. For a building of that scale to be rebuilt, there had to be a large base of financial support by the lay followers. After seeing how Buddhist temples attracted a huge number of ordinary people to their events, rituals, and ceremonies, Suzuki could not help but conclude that faith in Buddhism was alive and well among the Chinese.

     Apart from the scale of temple buildings, the layout of temple compounds gave him the feeling of "openness" in comparison with Japan. For one thing, the temple floors were made of a composite soil, and not covered with "tatami mats." He was impressed by how Chinese monks revered the written sutras and scriptures, and they took turns to keep the "torch of eternal light" lit at night to guard the Sutra Hall. He also felt that a kind of egalitarian spirit permeated the monastic community, in comparison with Japan where clerical hierarchy was more rigidly adhered. He also noticed how Chinese monks (and even abbots) were adept in the art of hospitality (something similar to the Benedictines in Europe).

    (2) What impressed him even more was the lively social work carried out by wealthy lay patrons, who established printing houses (e.g., Jinglin Press), modern hospitals, orphanages, schools, and dormitories for students. Also, he took a special note that every major city had plenty of vegetarian restaurants, which allowed them to keep to the Buddhist diet and avoided meat eating. Mrs. Beatrice Suzuki was a vegetarian, so this point was close to his heart.

     (3) Suzuki's teaching assignment included courses in religious studies at Ōtani, and thus he naturally paid attention to how different historical factors shaped Chinese Buddhism as distinct from Japanese Buddhism. He saw Chan as a uniquely Chinese adaptation of Indian Buddhism, and recognized that the Chan tradition that flourished during the Tang and Song periods was no longer found in China, which, however, did not mean the "decline" of Chan. Instead, he saw the "nienfo" (念仏 J. nenbutsu) practice, tracing back its origin to Pure Land practice, had been fused into Chan practice of "seated meditation." For Suzuki, Chinese Chan may be best described as "nienfo-Chan" (J. "nenbutsu-Zen"). That is, Chinese Buddhist practice has fused the vocal prayer and meditation into one, and created a different way of practicing "Zen" (Chan) Buddhism. He also saw how popular religious practice was alive and well in Daoist temples. He also observed that religious rituals and activities carried out in Daoist temples were essentially no different from those carried out in Buddhist temples. (An example occurs to my mind—a similar phenomenon is found in Japan, where Shinto and Buddhist practice had fused over the centuries, and for the majority of the Japanese, the distinction between Shinto shrines and Buddhist temples is immaterial.) 

     (4) Next, in the imposing figure of the smiling Buddha or Budai (J. Hotei), who is considered the incarnation of Maitreya Buddha, Suzuki found a presence of Chinese psychology that affirms the worldly values. Budai expressed the secular values of wealth, happiness, and large extended family. He saw the need for the mysterious and the religious was relegated to compassionate Goddess of Mercy, Guanyin (J. Kan'non).

     (5) Suzuki still wanted to see the current state of Buddhism in China, for instance, how Chinese novice monks were trained. He was especially curious if Baizhang's monastic motto of "A day without physical labor is a day without food" was still observed. (I would think that this is something similar to "labore est orare" in the Christian monastic tradition, as I observed in a Benedictine Monastery for Nuns in Barcelona.) The time limitation did not allow them to visit a Chan monastery to find out this point. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.599-601)

     (6) Suzuki concluded his "Impressions" with the renewed understanding of "karmic connections" that existed, and still exist to his day, between Southeastern China and Japan.

     He realized that he was writing his Impression of Chinese Buddhism at his small abode near the Reliquary Hall (Shariden) of Engakuji, which enshrines a small portion of the Buddha's relics that was venerated at Ayuwang Temple and was gifted to Japan about 700 years ago. The Reliquary Hall in Engakuji was modeled after the Song temple architecture, and it is the oldest surviving building in Japan from the Kamakura Period.

     Furthermore, the founding master of Engakuji was Mugaku Sogen無学祖元 (Wuxue Zuyuan, 1226-1286), a Chinese Chan master, who was invited to Japan by Regent Hōjō Tokimune (1251-1284).

     As he looked back on the history of Zen Buddhism in Japan and on his recent visit to China, he could not help but be impressed by the "deep karmic connections between Kamakura and Southern China" he had recently visited. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.613)     

4. Suzuki's English Essay: "Impressions of Chinese Buddhism"

     In relation to his meeting with Yinguang, as mentioned above, Suzuki reflected on the Chinese Pure Land practice, especially in its relation to Chan. This resulted in his essay in English, bearing the same title as his Japanese book, "Impressions of Chinese Buddhism." (Suzuki 1935a)

     Suzuki focused on four main points in this essay: (1) the symbolic significance of the figure of laughing Buddha, or Budai (J. Hotei), who is the incarnation of the future Buddha, Maitreya; (2) the importance of the cult of Guanyin and the distinct "division of labor" between Guanyin and Amitābha; (3) the history of how meditation and nienfo practice became fused in Chinese Chan practice. In this context, he summarized Yinguang's view of Pure Land; and he added a chapter on (4) the "Recent Chinese Pure Land Masters" in this English essay. (Suzuki 1935a)

      Since the detailed treatment of points (3) and (4), above, are beyond the scope of the present essay, for those who are interested in this discussion, please access this essay by logging into https://otani.repo.nii.ac.jp (Otani University Academic Repository), then go to "The Eastern Buddhist Society," and download The Eastern Buddhist (original series) 6.4: 327-378.

5. Immediate Outcome: Response from China (abridged)

There were two concrete and immediate outcomes of Suzuki and company's 1934 visit to China. One was the visit to Japan reciprocated by Master Daxing 大醒 (J. Taisei), and by Master Zhifeng芝峰法師, eminent disciples of Master Taixu. (Daxing 1936, 92-100, 211-216) The other was the establishment of the study abroad program for Chinese monks to come to Japan to study at Taishō University—this student program, funded by the widow Mrs. Mutō, lasted into 1943. (Saitō 1957, 261-62) I must skip these points in this paper.

6. Hu Shih, Suzuki, and Kim Gugyeong: Intercultural Scholarly Collaboration on the Publication of the Ryōga-shijiki

     Suzuki became aware of Hu Shih (J. Ko Seki, 1879-1939) in 1927, when his Essays in Zen Buddhism, First Series, was reviewed by an anonymous reviewer in the Times Literary Supplement (London). He surmised that the reviewer to be Hu Shih, who was then in Europe, and discovering Dunhuang manuscripts in the libraries in London and Paris. But its author was actually Arthur Waley, who criticized Suzuki for not mentioning the Dunhuang manuscripts. It appears Suzuki never found out the real identity of the reviewer. (Barrett 1989)

     A word of caution is due here: long before Hu Shih's discovery of Dunhuang manuscripts in 1926, Japanese Buddhist scholars, including Matsumoto Bunzaburō山本文三郎 (1869-1944), who was Suzuki's lifelong friend (as well as Nishida Kitarō's) from his teenage days in Kanazawa, had already published on Dunhuang manuscripts as early as in 1910, and Suzuki was certainly cognizant of the existence of such documents. (Ibuki 2020, 168) But it was this book review in the Times Literary Supplement that actually awoke in Suzuki the desire to study the Dunhuang materials. So, 1927 marked for Suzuki to turn to his serious studies in this field. (Suzuki 1934a, SDZ 29.96-97)

     In 1931, Suzuki and Hu came to establish a personal contact, thanks to Kim Gugyeong 金九経 (or Ku-kyung, 1899-1950?), Suzuki's former Korean student who studied at Ōtani University. Kim returned to Korea in 1927 and by 1930 he had a position of instructor of Korean and Japanese languages at the University of Peking, where Hu was lecturing on Chan literature. (Son 2015, 99) When Suzuki published his Studies in the Lankāvatāra Sūtra (Suzuki 1930), he presented Kim with a copy. Kim, in turn, loaned it to Hu. Hu, on his part, wrote a letter of thanks to Kim (dated January 2, 1931) with detailed comments on Suzuki's work; Hu also talked about the photocopy of the Dunhuang MSs in his possession. Kim related Hu's letter to Suzuki (Son 2015, 100). Hu Shih's expressed interest in Suzuki's work was soon reciprocated, and Hu generously offered Suzuki the two sets of photographic copies of the Ryōga shijiki 楞伽師資記 (Lengqie Shiziji) (The Record of the Masters and Disciples of the Lankāvatāra Sūtra), (hereafter, referred to as the Shijiki) (Suzuki 1932, xlvii-viii, note 1). Hu had discovered one manuscript in the Bibliothèque Nationale de Paris, and the other in the British Library in London. (Son 2015, 98-9) This generous gesture of Hu impressed Suzuki and became the source of his admiration and respect for him for the rest of his life. (Suzuki 1948, SDZ 30.496) Despite the widely publicized picture of the two in disagreement and at loggerhead, Hu and Suzuki in reality enjoyed each other's company and sported in their lively "debates." The most public of such debate was Hu's essay published in the journal, Philosophy East and West, and Suzuki's response to it, also contained in the same issue. (Hu, 1953; Suzuki 1953)

     When Hu offered the photocopies of the MSs, Kim Gugyeong volunteered to examine the Paris MS and the London MS side by side to come up with a critical edition of the Shijiki. Kim's painstaking work was completed in 1931, but its official publication was delayed due to the "general confusion" caused by the Manchurian Incident. It was eventually published in September of 1933, graced by two prefaces, one by Hu Shih, and the other by Taixu. (Son 2015, 99)

     As soon as the tentatively bound critical edition of the Shijiki was ready in 1931, Suzuki summarized its outline, and published it in the November issue of The Ōtani Gakuhō 12.3 (Suzuki 1931). No doubt he considered this new discovery to benefit his fellow Japanese Buddhologists. Suzuki introduced the Shijiki, as one of the earliest surviving Chan documents, dating from the mid- 8th century, composed by a monk Jōkaku清覚 (Ch. Jingjue), who delineated the transmission line of the Chan School with Gunabhadra as the founder, and Bodhidharma as the second patriarch. One can see that Suzuki was working in collaboration with Buddhist scholars across national boundaries.

Suzuki & Hu Shin (Part 2)

     In 1933, Hu and Suzuki met in person for the first time, on October 21, as Hu was passing through the Port of Yokohama. The meeting took place at Hotel New Grand, adjacent to the peer. (Kirita 2005, 86; Saitō 1957, 261) Saitō Risuke accompanied Suzuki on that day, and kept a record of the day as follows:  

When Prof. Hu Shih went to the U.S. to attend the Pan-Pacific Conference, the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs refused to issue him a visa to come on land. Therefore, Prof. Suzuki arranged a private meeting with him in Yokohama, at the Hotel New Grand. Nomura Yōzō, the owner of the New Grand, and I joined Prof. Suzuki, and we spent half a day in conversation with Mr. Hu . . . .   

　  At that time, Suzuki emphasized that the East Asian affairs should be settled by the East Asians themselves through their mutual discussion, and that it would be a shame for Japan and China to get bogged down in a political stalemate out of resentment. Suzuki insisted on his point that China and Japan could strengthen their mutual interaction and come up with some amicable solution. Hu Shih, while agreeing with the tenet of Suzuki's position, nevertheless insisted that the majority of the Japanese did not think like Suzuki did, and he said, "Look! The Japanese government has officially recognized Manchukuo as an independent country!" In this way, Professor Suzuki and Dr. Hu could never reach agreement. (Saito 1957, 261)

     Suzuki wrote about this day years later, in which he recollected that he and Hu spoke about the importance of scientific thinking versus the traditional humanistic view (that included Buddhist view). Hu was the leading proponent of the diffusion of natural scientific thinking as something that is most urgently needed for the Chinese people. In contrast, Suzuki was of the opinion that the East Asians "should preserve the way of eastern thinking and make its merit known to the rest of the world; it was one way East Asians could contribute to the development of knowledge globally." It was Suzuki's conviction that the cultural progress of the West was not the sole paradigm for the entire humanity to emulate. He further elaborated on this point:

In the East, we have our own lived space, shaped by historical events and psychological makeups. Both the Chinese and the Japanese youth ought to study eastern thought. Mr. Hu said that I had a point, but he maintained that in the present age it is most urgent for the Chinese people to be awoken from the slumber of the traditions of the past. . . .

     I said I fully understood where he was coming from, as I certainly appreciated the importance of scientific thinking for the Japanese people. But the younger generation of Japanese was enamored with the outward brilliant achievements of the West, without paying attention to the fact that modern western cultures were the outcome of the western mode of thinking developed over the centuries. The young Japanese nowadays do not bother to study what nurtured western thinking. My point was that whether in China or in Japan, it is most urgent to train each person to think independently, deeply, and critically. (Suzuki 1948, SDZ 30.497-98)

     The following year in 1934, during Suzuki's visit to China, their paths crossed a few times again in Beijing, as noted previously in the itinerary. Their conversation touched on the Collection of Shenhui's writings神會遺集 (Shenhui yiji), which Hu Shih edited, as well as the manuscript variant Suzuki discovered in Japan, a study of which he published prior to his visit to China. (Suzuki 1948, SDZ 30.497) At one of these meetings Hu confided to Suzuki: "I get no reaction from my Chinese colleagues on my work. Instead, you, from my neighboring land, find my work interesting and respond to it. I am grateful to you." (Suzuki 1948, SDZ 30.498) Because Hu and Suzuki could directly communicate in English, they were able to engage in meaningful exchanges, which for Suzuki was essential in intercultural communication and delighted him. (Suzuki 1948, ibid.)

     Hu acted as the chief cultural advisor to Chiang Kai-shek, and in this capacity, he was dispatched to the United States between 1938 and 1942 as an ambassador. When Chiang Kai-shek's army retreated to Taiwan in 1948, Hu was obliged to take a political asylum in the U.S. In the following year, 1949, Suzuki also left for the U.S., first to attend the East-West Philosophers Conference at the University of Hawaii, and then lectured at major universities in North America. Suzuki was offered the position of visiting professor at Colombia University in New York, thus prolonging his temporary visit to the U.S. into an extended stay. There on the East Coast of the U.S., Hu and Suzuki resumed their personal relationship, extending into 1958, when Hu moved to Taiwan to be in charge of the Academia Sinica. The two continued their scholarly collaboration, and Hu edited and published in 1958 the outcome of the research conducted by Suzuki and De Martino in 1957 on the two newly discovered Shenhui documents in the Pelliot collection. (Hu 1960, 18)

     Suzuki on his part concluded his sojourn in the U.S. in 1959, and returned to Japan, via Hawaii, where Hu and Suzuki crossed their paths one last time. Together with Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (1888-1975, then Vice President of India), the three were decorated with honorary doctorate by the president of the University of Hawaii, during the East-West Philosophers Conference. Suzuki wrote about this occasion:

What a strange turn of events! Three of us, who had attended the same academic conference some years ago, were again invited back by the University of Hawaii and awarded the honorary doctorate. We three became a curious “trio.” What is too bad is that Mr. Hu Shih recently underwent a surgery, and his health was not as robust as it once used to be. He and I do not agree on scholarly matters, but I am fond of him as a person, and each time I see him, I am always so happy. A melancholic thought crossed my mind—when will I see him again?

     It is truly a shame that presently Chinese scholars cannot remain in their homeland and have to live scattered all over the world. Whenever I see those Chinese colleagues, I feel for them—could something be done for them? In comparison, it is true that Japan had lost the war, and that we had to endure horrific postwar years, but at least we remained on our land and were able to carry on with our business. So, we were more fortunate than our Chinese colleagues. The fact is that those who were displaced by the recent war are everywhere, not only in Asia but also in Europe. (Suzuki, 1959, SDZ 20.260)

     Contrary to a popular perception that the two were at adds with each other, in actuality, profound mutual trust and respect bonded Hu Shih and Suzuki.  

7. Significance of his Visit to China on his Scholarly Path: In his Own Words

Suzuki's visits to major Buddhist sites in China and friendly encounters with abbots of various Buddhist monasteries and temples, and his association with socially engaged lay Buddhist philanthropists led him from "historical book-knowledge" to the embodied appreciation of "the present actualities" of Buddhism in China. In this way, his scholarly research up until that time into the history of Chan tradition and its relation to Indian Buddhist thoughts raised new queries for him. He also became aware of the unique characters of Buddhism practiced in Japan. In short, he returned to Japan from China with new questions, which were to inform his new directions of research.

     We have a rare piece of writing by Suzuki, in which he candidly talks about his path of Zen practice, from its initial bafflement and confusion to how he gradually got a clue as to how to go about answering his questions by asking the appropriate kinds of questions. It is in the Preface to his 1948 collection of essays (Suzuki 1948, SDZ 2.3-4) It reads:

 Over 50 years ago, I began my study of zazen. At first, I was given such kōan as "the sound of one-hand clapping" or "Letter Mu," and I expended a lot of energy on them.

In those early days, Imakita Kōsen Roshi at Engakuji in Kamakura was still alive, and he used to give the dharma talk (taishō) on the Biyanlu (J. Hekigan-roku) at Shōzokuin—the Founder's temple on the Engakuji compound.

One day, he was talking about Case 42, in which there was the phrase, "wonderful snow flakes fall but not on different spots." The Roshi would ask us such questions—in the monologue fashion—as "What about the wonderful snow flakes?" and "What does it mean that they don't fall on different spots?"

Of course, I had no clue as to what the Master was talking about. He went on repeating his praie of the poetic expression of Xuedou [J. Secchō], which ran: "thoroughly pure, impeccably pure" (zes-shōsha, shōsha zetsu)—as these lines apparently captured for him the crux of the matter, and he was totally impressed by them.

The precious exposition of Master Kōsen fell on the deaf ears of the young student, who had no clue as to the Zen teaching, just like a piece of marvelous zither music fell on the donkey's ears.

Since I had not the foggiest, I picked up any book I could lay my hands on—regardless of whether it was on Buddhism in general or on Zen literature. While doing this, I got further lost in the dense fog, and I found the situation hopeless. But at one point, a ray of light began to shine through this dense fog.

The next question that occupied me was the relationship between the so-called "kōan" practice and the teaching of the Chinese Six Patriarch. I wondered how the experience induced by kōan practice and the . . . the teaching of Bodhidharma, or Huineng? How did their teaching develop into "kōan" (gong'an) practice?

It is said that Bodhidharma transmitted the Lankavatara Sutra to Huike, while Huineng attained his awakening upon hearing the passages from the Diamond Sutra. What was the connection with the kōan of "the sound of one hand," for instance?

How are we to bridge the poetic expressions by such Chinese Chan masters as Dahui or Xuedou ("The lotus leaves are round and round like a mirror; the prickly fruit of water chestnut is as sharp as an ice pick?" or "The rain stopped and the clouds parted in half to reveal the dawning sky; countless mountain peaks are like a painting of grotesque rocks of lapis lazuli color") and the Indian Buddhist expression of "prajñā is non-knowing, and therefore it is knowing"?

What sort of common experience sustains these different linguistic expressions that prima facie do not appear to have any common ground, and yet contain coherent message of what Zen teaching is?

These questions popped up in my head one after another. At the same time, I was rather 'preoccupied' with my desire to solve these questions in view of the history of Zen (Chan), or in terms of specificities of verbal expressions, or by deepening my Zen practice.

 I have written many books on Zen, for sure, but they were not necessarily meant to "inform" the reader, or to "tell" the West what is in the East. Rather, my aim was always to clarify my own questions, one step at a time. I admit that from today's perspective, some of my published writings are rather "immature," but each of them is a witness to my attempt to answer my questions.

I would imagine my writings that I will produce from now on, too, will inevitably bear the same feature. That's all what I can do, I must concede.

The above remarks by Suzuki reveal why he took up the study of The Lankavatara Sutra, and from there he moved on to the study of Bodhidharma's writings (Dunhuang texts). His visit to China overlapped with this transition period in his scholarship. He did not remain long there, however, as his interest further moved onto the Huayan worldview, which he began to develop especially in his lectures on Buddhism at Columbia University, in the 1950s.  

8. Beyond borders ("Buddhist Scholars sans borders")  

      Suzuki's trip to China exemplifies the dialogical relationship that existed within the Buddhist traditions across cultures. From the inception of modern academic study of Buddhism that got started in the 19th century, Buddhist scholarship was by nature "diatopical (inter-cultural) and dialogical" both in methodology and in praxis.

Already in the 1890s, lively intercultural exchanges were blossoming between Chinese and Japanese Buddhists. For instance, a Chinese lay Buddhist-Businessman, Yang Wenhui 楊文会 (or Renshan 仁山, 1837-1911) sought to meet Nanjō Bunyū南条文雄 (1849-1927) in London, which turned into a productive and collaborative friendship, that signaled a renaissance of Buddhist textual studies in China. Nanjō was able to provide Yang with "over 300 lost sutra texts," once he was back in Japan, and Yang began a printing company of Buddhists texts, Jinling Press, to published them and disseminated them widely in China. These texts were imported from Japan facilitated by Nanjō. (Lau 2020, 106-7)

     Nanjō, an Oxford-trained accomplished Sanskritist, was also a dedicated educator, and was the second president of Ōtani University in Kyoto, and served in that capacity for 20 years, 1903-1923. It was during his presidency that Sasaki Gesshō 佐々木月照obtained the permission to invite Suzuki Daisetz to move to Kyoto to join the faculty. Suzuki accepted this offer and moved to Kyoto in 1921. (Suzuki 1934c, SDZ 29.569) Sasaki succeeded Nanjō as the third president of Ōtani University in 1924, until his untimely early death in 1926. (Rhodes et al. 2013, 1-31)

     Suzuki's visit to China in 1934 gave rise to lively exchanges that were to last for several years, until such friendly exchanges became impossible in the escalating Pacific War in 1943. (Saitō 1957, 262)

     One of the observations I can offer is that it would be too hasty to pass judgment on the activities of the prewar Japanese Buddhists in the wholesale fashion and to characterize that "the Japanese looked down upon Chinese Buddhism with a sense of cultural superiority" (e.g., Li 2020, 95), or to subscribe to the view that "there was a general complacency among the Japanese Buddhists to consider that Japanese Buddhism was the most perfect form of Buddhism developed in Asia" (Sakaida 2017, 34). Who are the "Japanese" who looked down upon Chinese Buddhism? And what kind of "Japanese Buddhists" considered Japanese form of Buddhism to be more "perfect" than other forms of Buddhism? It is time we move away from this sort of "generalization," and look into concrete individual situations and experiences.

     When speaking about Japanese Buddhists (or Japanese Buddhism) of the prewar period, it appears to me that it will be helpful to distinguish Japanese Buddhists who represented their "sectarian" interest to the rest of Asia, from Japanese Buddhologists  whose research interest transcended the sectarian boundaries, and rise above narrowly-conceived ideology of nationalism. 

     Through this study, I come to realize that the relation between Chinese and Japanese Buddhist Sangha was much more intimate and complex. Even Chinese Buddhist masters upheld conflicting views—whether to collaborate with the Japanese Buddhists or not, and whether to support the Kuomintang of Chiang Kai-shek, or the forces loyal to the traditional warlords.

     Within the Chinese Buddhist sangha, Taixu himself progressively came under the criticism for his international outlook. His program to establish a global association of Buddhists became much more complicated with the rise of nationalistic sentiment, and the criticism was aggravated by the outright invasion of China by the Japanese military in 1937. Taixu was obliged to appeal to the government authority that "all monks and nuns in the prime of life be trained to take care of soldiers wounded at the front, in conformity with the spirit of Buddhism." (Long 2000, 178) Japanese imperialist activities ultimately annulled any effort by the Chinese and Japanese Buddhists to stand together for world peace.  

9. To Conclude:

     Many leading Japanese Buddhist scholars of the prewar period were trained aboard and came to embody the critical scholarly methods developed in the West. This fact enabled those Japanese scholars to maintain a global perspective in their life and work. I would venture to say that the majority of Japanese scholars of Buddhism embraced a borderless outlook of scholarship and and maintained a-political non-nationalistic professional working relationship with their overseas colleagues.

That being said, there were exceptions to this general statement, as some Japanese Buddhologists trained abroad ended up advocating an extremely narrow-minded nationalistic superiority of the Japanese people.

     For now, I only mention those whom Suzuki considered his colleagues. Sanskritist Nanjō Bunyū, for instance, was trained at Oxford under Max Müller.

     Matsumoto Bunzaburō, Suzuki's lifelong friend and later a colleague, was at the University of Berlin for three years, 1899-1902, where he heard the last lectures by Max Weber on the Rig Veda. He also heard the presidential address given by Adolf Harnack on Socrates as the forerunner of Western spiritual humanism. (TZ 16 (1901), 167.87) Moreover, through his study of Indian philosophy, Matsumoto developed his interest in Indian Buddhist art. Indeed, many scholars of Buddhism cultivated aesthetic and philosophical appreciation alongside their academic work.  

     Sasaki Gesshō, the third president of Ōtani University, toured Europe and North America, 1921-1922, and implemented an internationally competitive academic standard for his students, specifically in language requirements. (Rhodes, et al., 2013)

     Among the sectarian Buddhist clerics, not all of them shared a Japanocentric view. For instance, when Suzuki's Shina Bukkyō inshōki (Suzuki 1934c) was published in October of 1934, Fujii Jōsen, the Pure Land sect priest, who accompanied Suzuki and company to China in 1934, wrote the book review for the newspaper, Chūgai Nippō, November 6-7, 1934, and noted that Suzuki's attitude towards Chinese Buddhism was "unbiased," and his effort to "understand the actual practice of Chinese Buddhism was outstanding and remarkable." (Sakaida 2017, 42)

Fujii steadfastly stood for the interest of the Chinese people, which brought him in conflict with the policies of the prewar Honganji sect. At one point, he settled the dispute with a Honganji representative by a judo match, and his win in the bout meant that the funds raised among the Chinese followers of the Honganji sect were directed to the Chinese schools (and not funneled back to Japan). On account of this incident Fujii was obliged to relinquish his post that he held in China at that time, and returned to Japan in 1937, never again to return to it. (Sakaida 2017, 49; Ishida 2017, 50-56)

     When all is said, I must conclude that Suzuki's approach to his study of Buddhism was unique; it stood on his experience, and in that sense "existential" and intellectually reflective. The source of his questions, which sustained his textual studies, was his desire to make sense of his religious experience of "awakening" (or satori). His 1934 exposure to Chinese Buddhist practice introduced him directly to the living reality of Chinese Buddhism as practiced then. This broadened his vista, especially concerning the connection between nienfo (nenbutsu) and meditation (dhyāna) practice—or the direction of the reliance on the salvific power of the Buddha (tariki) and the direction of reliance on one's self-effort (jiriki), as discussed above. He also continued his textual studies of Dunhuang manuscripts, as well as the related texts that lay forgotten in Japanese monasteries, which ended up filling the gap in terms of academic textual research.

     I submit that what Suzuki witnessed in China had a profoundly existential impact on him, which inevitably directed his attention to the common ground of Zen and Pure Land practices as Mahayana Buddhism, and this formed the kernel of his last phase of his scholarly research. All the while, his intellectual-spiritual exploration into the realm of "myō" 妙—the world of spiritual wonder and mystery—remarkably carried him through until the very end of his long life.

References

Abbreviation:

EB   The Eastern Buddhist. Original Series (1921-58); New Series (1966-to date).

TZ   Tetsugaku Zasshi (Journal of Philosophy), (1887-present) (University of Tokyo), cited by Volume, (year of publication), issue number, page number(s).

SDZ  Suzuki Daisetz Zenshū 『鈴木大拙全集』 [Collected Works of Suzuki Daisetz].  (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1980-83), 32 vols. (Note: The first edition, 1968-71, in 30 vols. The new expanded edition, 1999-2003, in 40 vols., have different placement of essays in various volumes; In this essay I used the 1980-83 edition).

**

Barrett, Timothy H. (1989). "Arthur Waley, D. T. Suzuki, and Hu Shih: New Light on the 'Zen and History' Controversy," Buddhist Studies Review 6.2, 116-21.

Daxing 大醒. (1936). Riben fojiao shichaji 『日本佛教視察記』 [Impressions of Japanese Buddhism], (Shanghai: Guoguang Yinshuyuan).

Dōgen. (1988). See Kagamishima (1988).

EB, The. (1921). Inaugural issue, 1.1. "Editorial," 80-81.

Hu Shih. (1953). "Ch'an (Zen) Buddhism in China: Its History and Method," Philosophy East and West, 3.1 (1953) 3-24.

Hi, Shih胡適. (1960). "An Appeal for a Systematic Search in Japan for Long-Hidden T'ang Dynasty Source-Materials of the Early History of Zen Buddhism." In Yamaguchi Susumu山口益, ed. Buddhism and Culture: Dedicated to Dr. Daisetz Teitaro Suzuki in Commemoration of his Ninetieth Birthday. (Kyoto: The Planning Committee for the Commemoration of Dr. Suzuki's Ninetieth Birthday), 15-23.

Ibuki Atsushi伊吹敦. (2020). "Suzuki Daisetz wa dōshite shoki-zenshū-shi kenkyū o hajimeta ka" 「鈴木大拙はどうして初期禅宗史研究を始めたか」 [What prompted D. T. Suzuki to turn to his study of the history of early Chan?], Kokusai Zen kenkyū 6, 131-95.

Ishida Takuo 石田卓生. (2017). "Mizuno Baigyō narabi ni Fujii Jōsen (Sōsen) to Tōa Dōbun-shoin: Hi-seiki gakusei kara miru Tōa Dōbun-shoin no ichisokumen" 「水野梅暁ならびに藤井静宣（草宣）と東亜同文書院 — 非正規学生から見る東亜同文書院の一側面」 [Mizuno Baigyō and Fujii Jōsen: What we learn about the East Asian Tong Wen College from the experience of non-regular track students], Dōbun Shoin Kinenhō同文書院記念報 (Nagoya, Aichi Gakuin) 25:35-60.

Kagamishima Genryū 鏡島元隆. (1988). Ed. and commentary, Eihei kōroku 『永平公録』[Records of Master Dōgen's activities], Dōgen Zenji Zenshū『道元禅師全集』  [Collected Works of Zen Master Dōgen], vol. 4, (Tokyo: Shunjūsha).

Kirita Kiyohide 桐田清秀. (2005). Suzuki Daisetsu kenkyū kisoshiryō 『鈴木大拙研究基礎資料』[Essential sources of Research into Suzuki Daisetz], (Kamakura: Matsugaoka Bunko).

Lau, Ngar-sze. (2020). "Recent Emergence of Theravāda Meditation Communities in Contemporary China," in J. S. Harding, V. S. Hori, and A. Soucy, ed., Buddhism in the Global Eye, Beyond East and West (London, New York, Oxford, New Delhi, Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic), 103-119.

Li, Jingjing. (2020). "D. T. Suzuki and the Chinese Search for Buddhist Modernism," in J. S. Harding, V. S. Hori, and A. Soucy, ed., Buddhism in the Global Eye, Beyond East and West (London, New York, Oxford, New Delhi, Sydney: Bloomsbury Academic), 87-102.

Long, Darui, (2000). "An Interfaith Dialogue between the Chines Buddhist Leader Taixu and Christianity," Buddhist-Christian Studies, 20: 167-189.

Otani University Academic Repository 大谷大学学術情報リポジトリ　https://otani.repo.nii.ac.jp.

Rhodes, R., N. Inoue, Conway, M., trans., "'Ōtani University's Founding Spirit'" by Sasaki Gesshō," in Ōtani Daigaku Shinshū Sōgō Kenkyūjo, Kenkyū kiyō, 30 (2013) 1-31.

Saitō Risuke 斎藤利助. (1957). Shoga kottō kaiko gojūnen 『書画骨董回顧五十年』[Looking back on my fifty years as antique dealer] (Tokyo: Shikisha).

Sakaida Yukiko坂井田夕起子. (2017). "Shina-tsū sōryo, Fujii Sōsen to Nicchū-sensō"「支那通」 僧侶・藤井草宣と日中戦争 [Fujii Sōsen: A Japanese Buddhist cleric versed in China, and the Sino-Japanese War], The St. Andrew's University Journal of Christian Studies, 52:19-53.

Son, Jihye 孫知慧. (2015). "Wasurerareta kindai no chishikijin, Kim Kyūkyō ni kansuru chōsa," 「忘れられた近代の知識人—金九経—に関する調査」 [An Investigation into the forgotten modern intellectual, Kim Ku-kyung"], in Ōtani Gakuhō [The Journal of Buddhist Studies and Humanities], 94.2, 91-119.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1927). Essays in Zen Buddhism, First Series. (London: Luzac).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1930a). Studies in the Lankāvatāra Sūtra. (London: George Routledge & Sons; Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1999, reprint 2007).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1930b). "Zen to wa nanzo ya?" 「禅とは何ぞや」 [What is Zen?], SDZ 14.1-193.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1931). "Ryōga shijiki to sono naiyō gaikan" 「『楞伽師資記』とその内容概観」 [Lengqie shizi-ji and its gist], The Ōtani Gakuhō 12.3 (November 1931), 1-33.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1932). Trans. from the Sanskrit, The Lankāvatāra Sūtra: A Mahayana Text. (London: George Routledge & Sons). (Reprint, Boulder: Prajñā Press, 1978).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1933). Essays in Zen Buddhism, Second Series. (London: Luzac).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1934a). Tonkō-bon, Rokuso Dangyō kaisetsu 「敦煌本 『六祖壇経』解説」 [On the Dunhuang manuscript, The Platform of the Sixth Patriarch], SDZ 29.96-97.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1934b). Essays in Zen Buddhism, Third Series. (London: Luzac).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1934c). Shina bukkyō inshōki 『支那仏教印象記』 [Impressions of Chinese Buddhism], (Tokyo: Morie Shoten), SDZ (1983), 29.521-619. (Note: This essay is found in SDZ (1968-71 edition) 30.463-561; SDZ (1999-2003 expanded New edition) 26.79-161).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1934d-1935). Various scholarly articles on the Dunhuang manuscripts in comparison with other manuscripts of Bodhidharma's writings, SDZ 29.115-201; "Daruma no ibun," [Bodhidharma's texts, newly discovered] 「達摩の遺文」SDZ 29.199-201.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1935a). "Impressions of Chinese Buddhism," The Eastern Buddhist 6.4: 327-378.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1935b). "Gisei no seishin" 「犠牲の精神」 [The spirit of sacrifice], SDZ 29. 201-210.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1935c). "Zhonghua fojiao yinxiangji" 「中華仏教印象記」, Chinese translation of Suzuki 1934b. Haichaoyin 『海潮音』 16.6: 26-36 & 16.7: 49-66.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1936). Trans. Zhang Maoji張茂吉, Zhongguo fojiao yinxiangji 『中国仏教印象記』[Impressions of Chinese Buddhism]. (Xiamen City: Nanhai Shibao).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1943-44). "Daruma ibun nihen ni tsukite" 「達摩遺文二篇につきて」 [On the two forgotten pieces of writings by Bodhidharma] , SDZ 2.108-221.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1948). "Koseki Sensei" 「胡適先生」 [Professor Hu Shih], Bungei Shunjū 『文藝春秋』26.7. SDZ 30.495-500.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1949). "Zen shisōshi kenkyū, Dai ni" 「禅思想史研究第二」 [A study of the history of Zen thought, vol. 2], SDZ vol. 2. (Preface, dated from 1948).

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1953). "Zen: A Reply to Hu Shih," Philosophy East and West, 3.1 (1953) 25-46.

Suzuki, Daisetz Teitarō. (1959). "Tōzai zakkan" 「東西雑感」 [Random Thoughts on East and West], Kokoro 『心』 (November); SDZ 20.260-267.