| dc.description.abstract | The main concern of this essay is about the body theories associated with “nature” and “energy.” On the strength of naturalistic thought of Japanese Qi, in particular, the essay focuses on the “energy of mutuality” derived from the “way of the operation of the self-acting truth,” theorized by the unique thinker of the mid Tokugawa period, Ando Shoeki (1703?-1762), and “energy-cultivation” that evolved from the “nature of everlasting energy,” articulated by the late Tokugawa Youmeigaku scholar, Yamada Hokoku (1805-1877), exploring characters of thought of “righteousness-cultivating” body theory and “righteousness-nurturing” Kung Fu theory, respectively. First, the essay points out that the implication of the term “righteousness” in both cases means “nature” in the cultural context of the Japanese language. Second, it has an insight into the characters of thought expressed in different body views of both energy theories, illustrating that Ando Shoeki’s “righteousness-cultivating” body theory, as a body theory of objectified energy, held that body movement itself was the meaning of being. So this was a naturalistic, materialistic body view, resulted from the concept of atheism, to which inner spirit was unnecessary. In addition, the essay also makes a point that Yamada Hokoku’s righteousness-nurturing Kung Fu theory, as a body theory of objectified energy, held that body movement itself was the meaning of being. So this was a naturalistic, materialistic body view, resulted from the concept of atheism, to which inner spirit was unnecessary. In addition, the essay also makes a point that Yamada Hokoku’s righteousness-nurturing Kung Fu theory, as a body theory of subjectified energy, was neither idealistic body view nor materialistic body view. Instead, it was a naturalistic body view with the meaning of divine concept. Albeit the highlights of both body views were absolutely different, based on the meaning of the term “nature,” they turned to be identical in some regard. | - |
