Fujiwara Seika on Universal Brother/Sisterhood - Japanese Neo-Confucianism

Fujiwara Seika (藤原 惺窩; February 8, 1561 – October 19, 1619) was a Japanese Neo-Confucian philosopher and writer during the Edo period. His most well-known student was Hayashi Razan (1583–1657).  

'The first interview between Tokugawa Ieyasu and Fujiwara Seika (1561-1619) took place as early as 1593 when Toyotomi Hideyoshi was still the Tycoon of Japan and Ieyasu one of his lieutenants. The meeting was a momentous one, for it led eventually to wholesale renovation of the cultural and educational policy of the new shogunatc.

A scion of the Fujiwara aristocracy, Seika was a twelfth-generation descendant of Fujiwara no Tcika, the foremost poet and arbiter elegantium of the thirteenth century, and Seika himself was a poet of great skill. Much reduced by circumstances, he made his way to Kyoto to study Chinese poetry and prose at one of the Five Zen Monasteries, hoping to prepare himself for the post of emissary to China. Scika’s deep interest in Chinese studies can be seen in his Bunsho Talto\u Koryo, the most extensive and systematic study of Chinese poetry and prose until then attempted from the creative point of view. He also took every opportunity to acquaint himself personally with Korean captives and Chinese envoys arriving in Japan at irregular intervals. He even attempted to visit China in 1596, but a shipwreck upset his plans.

One thing he became aware of in the course of his preparatory studies was the complete change that had taken place in China and adjacent countries, through the establishment of Neo-Confucianism or Chu Hsi philosophy as the official basis of all instruction. The decline of Buddhism was already well-advanced in China. Zen teaching, especially, was held to be purely negative in regard to secular affairs; more particularly, as far as Seika was concerned, it failed to offer an ethical code such as was needed to govern the peaceful pursuit of international trade. Chu Hsi philosophy, however, being thoroughly secular and rational in character, and also by now officially accepted in all the countries of East Asia, could serve as a moral basis for international dealings.

It may be noted in this connection that Seika's adherence to Chu Hsi philosophy was qualified, being less exclusive than was later the case with his follower Hayashi Razan. For the latter, it was Chu Hsi alone that mattered; but for Seika, any system of philosophy (including the unorthodox Wang Yang-ming school) would suffice providing that it offered a secular and rational standard of conduct for the peaceful transaction of business, and was acceptable to all countries.

Seika’s awareness of the need for such a code or standard in international dealings must have impressed Ieyasu; for the latter was much interested in overseas commercial ventures, as he later proved when shogun. Indeed, he wished to enlist Seika’s services for this purpose, but the latter declined, and recommended in his stead one of his young and rising disciples, Hayashi Razan. It was through the efforts of Razan and his descendants that Neo-Confucianism became the official philosophy and code of the shogunate, in both external and internal affairs' (pp. 346-47).

Ship’s Oath

This oath was drawn up by Fujiwara Seika in connection with the same trading mission referred to above. It represented a policy declaration on the part of the owners and captain of the ship, whose crew members were to conform to ts provisions. Note the characteristic Confucian subordination of the profit motive to equity and mutual benefit.

1. Commerce is the business of selling and buying in order to bring profit to both parties. It is not to gain profit at the expense of others. When profit is shared the gain may be large but the benefits arc small. “Profit is the happy outcome of righteousness." So while the greedy merchant bids for five, the decent one bids for three. Keep that in mind.

2. Foreign lands may differ from our own in manners and speech, but as to the nature bestowed upon men by heaven there cannot be any difference. Do not forget the common identity and exploit differences. Beware even of minor lies and cheating, of arrogance and cursing. The foreigner may not be aware of them but you certainly will be. "Good faith reaches to the pig and fish, and trickery is seen by the seagulls." Heaven docs not tolerate deception. Be mindful, therefore, not to bring disgrace upon our country's tradition. In case you meet men of benevolence and education, respect them as you would your own father or teacher. In quire into the restrictions and taboos of the country, and act in accordance with its customs and religion.

3. Between heaven above and earth beneath all peoples are brothers and things are the common property of all, everyone being equal in the light of Humanity. It must be the more so with one's fellow countrymen and still more so with men on the same ship. In trouble and tribulation, in sickness and hunger, relief should go to everyone equally. Never should anyone think only of his own escape.

4. Raging waters and angry waves, dangerous as they are, are not so dangerous as human passions. Human passions arc numerous, but none arc so dangerous as the passion for liquor and women that drowns men. Those who go around together, wherever it may be, should act as a team for restraining and correcting each other. The old adage says that the dangerous road lies in a soft bed, in eating and in drinking. Be on guard. [From Fujiwara Seika shu, I, 126-27]

Sources of Japanese Tradition, Vol. 1 1958 William Theodore De Bary, Ryusaku Tsunoda, Donald Keene UNESCO Collection of representative works, Japanese series, pp. 348-49.

Orson Welles on Universal Brotherhood, Tolerance, Altruism, Freedom, Responsibility and Social Justice Part 2/2 (Isaac Woodard case, To Be Born Free, 1946)

Below is a transcript from Orson Welles Commentary: To Be Born Free August 11, 1946.  Orson Welles Commentaries (1945–46) is an ABC radio series produced and directed by Orson Welles. Featuring commentary by Welles, with reminiscences and readings from literature, the 15-minute weekly program aired Sunday afternoons at 1:15 p.m. ET beginning September 16, 1945.

It was part of a series of five episodes championing the cause of  Isaac Woodard Jr. (March 18, 1919 – September 23, 1992) was an American soldier and victim of racial violence. An African-American World War II veteran, on February 12, 1946, hours after being honorably discharged from the United States Army, he was attacked while still in uniform by South Carolina police as he was taking a bus home. The attack and his injuries sparked national outrage and galvanized the civil rights movement in the United States, with Welles thus becoming a pioneering voice for post-war social activism.

It seems to be based partly on two articles written for a political magazine,  “Moral Indebtedness”, Free World, October, 1943, and  ‘Race hate must be outlawed’, "Free World", July 1944 and is something of an ethical manifesto that touches upon universal brotherhood, tolerance, altruism, freedom, responsibility and social justice. At the time, Welles was associated with American Vice-President Henry Wallace, who was known to have esoteric interests, although he distanced himself from Wallace in 1948. In my opinion, it ranks as one of the greatest American speeches of the twentieth century and one of Welles' finest moments. Unfortunately, a month after this impactful civil rights action, Welles' radio show was cancelled, due to political pressure. A final radio editorial, found in an archive collection, touching upon the situation, has recently received some attention. 

And then there’s the soldier in the hospital. The blind soldier. The soldier said he was blinded, and the mayor and the chief of police in the place where the soldier says it happened, are most indignant with me for repeating what he said and swore to. The Times the other day was full of their official protests. Sent under seal all the way up to New York City via the inviolable borders of Aiken county, in South Carolina. My investigators are still hard at work on the case. If the soldier was wrong about the place, I’m going to do something about it. But he isn’t wrong about his eyes. He lost them. I’m going to do something about that. All the affidavits from all the policemen in the world won’t protest his eyes back in his head. Somebody, somebody who called himself an officer of the law, beat that boy with a stick, until he lost his sight. Now, that somebody is nobody. He’s vanished, he’s never been heard of, he hasn’t any name, well…he’s going to be heard of. The blind soldier has my promise of that. That somebody is going to be named. Editorials, and lots of newspapers, and lots of people, are writing me to demand to know what business it is of mine. God judge me if it isn’t the most pressing business I have.

The blind soldier fought for me in this war. The least I can do now is fight for him. I have eyes. He hasn’t. I have a voice on the radio, he hasn’t. I was born a white man. And until a colored man is a full citizen, like me, I haven’t the leisure to enjoy the freedom that colored man risked his life to maintain for me. I don’t own what I have until he owns an equal share of it. Until somebody beats me and blinds me, I am in his debt. And so I come to this microphone not as a radio dramatist, though it pays better, not as a commentator, although it’s safer to be simply that, I come in that boy’s name, and in the name of all who in this land of ours have no voice of their own. I come with a call for action. This is a time for it. I call for action against the cause of riot. I know that to some ears, even the word “action” has a revolutionary twang, and it won’t surprise me if I’m accused in some quarters of inciting to riot. Well, I’m very interested in riots. I’m very interested in avoiding them. And so I call for action against the cause of riots. 

Law is the best action, the most decisive. I call for laws prohibiting what moral judgement already counts as lawlessness. American law forbids a man the right to take away another’s right. It must be law that groups of men can’t use the machinery of our republic to limit the rights of other groups. The vote can’t be used to take away the vote. It’s in the people’s power to see to it that what makes lynchings and starts wars is dealt with. Not by well-wishers, but by policemen. And I mean good policemen. Oh, for several generations there may be men who can’t be weaned away from the fascist vices of race hate. But we should deny such men the responsibility in public affairs exactly as we deny responsibility to the wretched victims of the drug habit. There are laws against peddling dope, there can be laws against peddling race hate. But every man has a right to his own opinion as an American boasts, but race hate is not an opinion, it’s a phobia. It isn’t a viewpoint, race hate is a disease. In a people’s world, the incurable racist has no rights. He must be deprived of influence in a people’s government. He must be segregated, as he himself would segregate the colored and semitic peoples. As we now segregate the leprous and the insane. 

Anything very big is very simple.¸ If there’s a big race question, there’s a big answer to it. The big answer is simple. Like the word no. This is my proposition: that the sin of race hate be solemnly declared a crime. What makes this difficult is the conservative fear of raising issues. Well, let’s admit that this fear is often no more sinister than an honest dread of going to the dentist, but let’s respect the effectiveness of reactionary manipulations of that fear, which is the fear of anarchy and revolution. It is put to wicked use against the same general welfare conservative opinion seeks to protect. Forced to acknowledge Hitler’s enmity, conservatives are loathe to admit that even as he surrendered in Europe, he succeeded in America. Let conservatives evaluate the impudent candor of fascism in Argentina today. And be reminded that the heroic survival of our liberty is no proof of its immortality. Our liberty every day has to be safe from marauders whose greed is for all things possessed by the people. Care of these possessions is the hope of life on this planet. They are living things, they grow. These fair possessions of democracy. And nothing but death can stop that growth. Let the yearners for the past, the willfully childish, learn now the facts of life.

The first of which is the fact of that growth. In our hemisphere, the growing has begun, but only just begun. America can write her name across this century, and so she will, if we, the people, brown and black and red, rise now to the great occasion of our brotherhood. It will take courage. It calls for the doing of great deeds, which means the dreaming of great dreams. Giving the world back to its inhabitants is too big a job for the merely practical. The architects of freedom are always capable of hope. The lawmakers of true democracy are true believers. They believe quite simply in the people, in all of them. Only the devout deserve the trust of government, for only the devout can face the unimaginable vistas of man’s destiny. God grant them steadfast hope and the rest of us enduring patience. For we must not expect from any leadership a shiny ready made millennium in our time. No one of us will live to see a blameless peace. We must strive and pray and die for what will be here when we’re gone. Our children’s children are the ancestors of a free people. We send our greetings ahead of us to them.

To history yet unmade, our greetings.To the generations, sleeping in our loins. Be of good heart. The fight is worth it. 

Further Viewing 

I'm not aware of a comprehensive study of the political facet of Welles' work, which would make for a substantial book, but I would say that the above transcript serves as a good overview of his pro-active, participative, responsible perspective on political and civic deontology. A further text on political ideologies and bureaucracy in modern society can serve to round out a basic summary of his views: La jeunesse décidera, La Démocratie Combattante, décembre 1952 in Orson Welles, Maurice Bessy, 1964, pp. 114

 

Orson Welles Commentary: To Be Born Free August 11, 1946 Isaac Woodward anti-racism speech Academic commentary

https://youtube.com/watch?v=q_hnSgfNDTI

 

"Orson Welles' Sketchbook" discusses invasion of privacy by police, authorities, & overbearing, bloated bureaucracy. May 22, 1955; briefly summarizes Isaac Woodard case https://youtube.com/watch?v=Crn_mPWd1HQ&list=PLxEfOhTrjfv3_-imU-gapxapDRibaZTD4

 

Dick Cavett Show July 27, 1970 pro-active anti-tyranny stance https://youtube.com/watch?v=XsyXbeH0jko

 

Freedom River -  Orson Welles narration Compelling 1971 pro-democracy, pro-ecology, anti-capitalism parable, animation film 8 min Sam Weiss Joseph C Cavella Warren H Schmidt, Stephen Bosustow from the makers of Mr. Magoo..

https://wellesnet.com/freedom-river-orson-welles-narrated-parable-on-xenophobia-greed/

The Eyes of Orson Welles-documentary 2018 Mark Cousins Touches upon humanistic, ethical, political philosophy https://youtube.com/watch?v=27FyMnNdoxk

The Cave: A Parable Told By Orson Welles, 1973, Sam Weiss, Dick Oden

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaMN6oEKSX8  

Part 1

Orson Welles on Universal Brotherhood, Tolerance, Altruism, Freedom, Responsibility and Social Justice Part 1/2 i (Isaac Woodard case, To Be Born Free, 1946)

Below is a transcript from Orson Welles Commentary: To Be Born Free August 11, 1946.  Orson Welles Commentaries (1945–46) is an ABC radio series produced and directed by Orson Welles. Featuring commentary by Welles, with reminiscences and readings from literature, the 15-minute weekly program aired Sunday afternoons at 1:15 p.m. ET beginning September 16, 1945.

It was part of a series of five episodes championing the cause of  Isaac Woodard Jr. (March 18, 1919 – September 23, 1992) was an American soldier and victim of racial violence. An African-American World War II veteran, on February 12, 1946, hours after being honorably discharged from the United States Army, he was attacked while still in uniform by South Carolina police as he was taking a bus home. The attack and his injuries sparked national outrage and galvanized the civil rights movement in the United States, with Welles thus becoming a pioneering voice for post-war social activism.

It seems to be based partly on two articles written for a political magazine,  “Moral Indebtedness”, Free World, October, 1943, and  ‘Race hate must be outlawed’, "Free World", July 1944 and is something of an ethical manifesto that touches upon universal brotherhood, tolerance, altruism, freedom, responsibility and social justice. At the time, Welles was associated with American Vice-President Henry Wallace, who was known to have esoteric interests, although he distanced himself from Wallace in 1948. In my opinion, it ranks as one of the greatest American speeches of the twentieth century and one of Welles' finest moments. Unfortunately, a month after this impactful civil rights action, Welles' radio show was cancelled, due to political pressure. A final radio editorial, found in an archive collection, touching upon the situation, has recently received some attention. 

This is Orson Welles. I’ve spoken these words before, but not on the radio. To be born free, is to be born in debt. To live in freedom without fighting slavery, is to profiteer. By plane last night, I flew over some parts of our Republic where American citizenship is a luxury beyond the means of the majority. I rode comfortably in my plane above a sovereign state or two where fellow countrymen of ours can’t vote without the privilege of cash. I bought my breakfast this morning where Negroes may not come except to serve their white brothers. And there I overheard a member of some master race or other tell all those who listened that something must be done to suppress the Jews.

I have met southerners who expect and fear a Negro insurrection. I see no purpose in withholding this from general discussion. There may be those in that outcast ten percent of the American people who someday will strike back at their oppressors, but to put down that mob, a mob would rise. I’d like to ask please, who will put down that mob? The scaly dinosaurs of reaction, if indeed they notice what I’m speaking here, will say in their newspapers that I’m a communist. Communists know otherwise. I’m an overpaid movie producer with pleasant reasons to rejoice, and I do, in the wholesome practicability of the profit system. But surely my right to having more than enough is cancelled if I don’t use that more to help those who have less.

My subject today is the question of moral indebtedness. So, I’d like to acknowledge here the debt that goes with ownership. I believe, and this has very much to do with my own notion of freedom, I believe I owe the very profit I make to the people I make it from. If this is radicalism, it comes…automatically to most of us in show business, it being generally agreed that any public man owes his position to the public. That’s what I mean when I say I’m your obedient servant. It’s a debt payable in service and the highest efforts of the debtor. The extension of this moral argument insists no man owns anything outright since he owns it rent free. A wedding never bought a wife. And the devotion of his child is no man’s for the mere begetting. We must each day earn what we own. A healthy man owes to the sick all that he can do for them. An educated man owes to the ignorant all that he can do for them. A free man owes to the world’s slaves all that he can do for them. And what is to be done is more, much more, than good works, Christmas baskets, bonuses, and tips, and bread and circuses. There is only one thing to be done with slaves. Free them.

If we can’t die in behalf of progress, we can live for it. Progress, we Americans take to mean, a fuller realization of democracy. The measure of progress, as we understand it, is the measure of equality enjoyed by all men. We can do something about that. The way our fighting brothers and sisters looked at it, some of them dead as I speak these words, the way they looked at it: we’re lucky. And they’re right, we’re lucky. We’re lucky to be alive. But only if our lives make life itself worth dying for. We must be worthy of our luck, or we are damned. Our lives were spared, but this is merely the silliest of accidents. Unless we put the gift of life to the hard employments of justice. If we waste that gift, we won’t have anywhere to hide from the indignation of history.

I want to say this. The morality of the auction block is out of date. There is no room in the American century for Jim Crow. The times urge new militancy upon the democratic attitude. Tomorrow’s democracy discriminates against discrimination. Its charter won’t include the freedom to end freedom. What is described as a feeling against some races can’t be further respected. Feeling is a ninnyish, mincing way of saying something ugly. But the word is good enough for race hate when we add that it’s a feeling of guilt. Race hate isn’t human nature, race hate is the abandonment of human nature. But this is true: we hate whom we hurt. And we mistrust whom we betray. There are minority problems because minority races are often wronged. Race hate distilled from the suspicions of ignorance takes its welcome from the impotent and the godless. Comforting these with hellish parodies of what they’ve lost. Arrogance to take the place of pride. Contempt to occupy the spirit emptied of love of man. There are alibis for the phenomenon, excuses, economic and social, but the brutal fact is simply this: where the racist lies are acceptable, there is corruption. Where there is hate, there is shame. The human soul receives race hate only in the sickness of guilt.

The Indian, the Red Indian, is on our American conscience. The Negro is on our conscience, the Chinese and the Mexican American are on our conscience. The Jew is on the conscience of Europe. But our neglect gives us communion in that guilt. So that there dances even here the lunatic spectre of anti-semitism. This is deplored. But it must be fought. And the fight must be won. The race haters must be stopped. The lynchings must be stopped. No matter who’s going to be governor of Georgia, the murders in Monroe must be avenged. Gene Talmadge might call it foreign meddling, but the governor-elect who, you remember, campaigned on the Bilbo platform of race-hate needs to be told: that all the states in the Union and all the people in them are concerned. Immediately, personally concerned when a mob forms in the sovereign privacy of Georgia. The mob said it was taking care of things in its own way, well then, we’re going to have to take care of the mob. In our own way.

Those who take the law into their own hands are going to learn about some laws that’ll tie their hands. We’ll write those laws, and we’ll enforce them. To do him justice, old Gene went and issued himself a statement. After the killings in Monroe were public knowledge, he said the killings were regrettable. But old Gene’s made it plenty clear, he doesn’t figure any foreigner has the right to poke around asking embarrassing questions. I am sending old Gene a copy of the Donne sermon of the tolling bell, but I don’t suppose he’ll get the point. The point is, of course, that no man, even Gene Talmadge, is an island entire of itself. Point, of course, is that even Georgia is a piece of the continent. The American continent. And if a clod be washed away by the sea, or if a colored man and his wife are murdered on a dusty country road, America is the less. 

Further Viewing 

I'm not aware of a comprehensive study of the political facet of Welles' work, which would make for a substantial book, but I would say that the above transcript serves as a good overview of his pro-active, participative, responsible perspective on political and civic deontology. A further text on political ideologies and bureaucracy in modern society can serve to round out a basic summary of his views: La jeunesse décidera, La Démocratie Combattante, décembre 1952 in Orson Welles, Maurice Bessy, 1964, pp. 114

 

Orson Welles Commentary: To Be Born Free August 11, 1946 Isaac Woodward anti-racism speech Academic commentary

https://youtube.com/watch?v=q_hnSgfNDTI

 

"Orson Welles' Sketchbook" discusses invasion of privacy by police, authorities, & overbearing, bloated bureaucracy. May 22, 1955; briefly summarizes Isaac Woodard case https://youtube.com/watch?v=Crn_mPWd1HQ&list=PLxEfOhTrjfv3_-imU-gapxapDRibaZTD4

 

Dick Cavett Show July 27, 1970 pro-active anti-tyranny stance https://youtube.com/watch?v=XsyXbeH0jko

 

Freedom River -  Orson Welles narration Compelling 1971 pro-democracy, pro-ecology, anti-capitalism parable, animation film 8 min Sam Weiss Joseph C Cavella Warren H Schmidt, Stephen Bosustow from the makers of Mr. Magoo..

https://wellesnet.com/freedom-river-orson-welles-narrated-parable-on-xenophobia-greed/

The Eyes of Orson Welles-documentary 2018 Mark Cousins Touches upon humanistic, ethical, political philosophy https://youtube.com/watch?v=27FyMnNdoxk 

Part 2