In Part III of Brian Victoria’s essays series presented by the Library of Social Science, we encounter a curious and contentious idea: that Inoue and his assassins believed themselves to be killing compassionately, a concept with precedent in Mahayana Buddhism. Like the bodhisattva who slew a murderer before he could claim lives of 500 holy ones, Inoue may have believed himself similarly beyond reproach. Like a pawn moved by players who sought the end of the corruptive Taisho democracy and the betterment of Japanese society, Inoue could act selflessly, empty of mind and free from the karmic repercussions that accrue to personal motivations. 

In a broader sense, we encounter in Inoue Nissho a psychology similar to that of political and religious terrorists, not necessarily the hate-filled monsters we often feel them to be. Rather, they are individuals consumed by fantasies that transform violence into nobility, death and sacrifice. Understanding how this occurs is one of the objectives of our work here at the LSS. Brian’s essay offers striking insight into this phenomenon. Please stay tuned for the final installment of Compassionate Assassinations, coming soon.

Best regards,
Alexander Chirila, PhD 

Brian Victoria, author of Zen Terror, Zen War Stories, and Zen at War, is a well-known author specializing in Japanese  history, a career professor, and Buddhist priest of the Soto Zen sect--giving him a unique perspective on the intersection between Zen Buddhism and nationalist violence.

Brian holds a Master's in Buddhist Studies from Komazawa University in Tokyo and a PhD in Religious Studies from Temple University. His distinguished career has taken him around the world, including teaching positions in Buddhism, Japanese language and culture in the United States, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. From 2013-2015 Brian was a visiting research fellow at the International Research Center for Japanese Studies in Kyoto and is currently a Senior Research Fellow at the Oxford Centre for Buddhist Studies. Brian Victoria's work on Japanese militarism represents the highest standard of scholarly rigor and expertise.

Zen Terror in Prewar Japan by Brian Victoria To view Brian's wikipedia page click here. Zen Terror in Prewar Japan: Portrait of an Assassin For information on ordering through Amazon, PLEASE CLICK HERE. Zen Terror in Prewar Japan completes the trilogy detailing how Zen Buddhism gave rise to terrorism. Exploring the role of Inoue Nissho - the leader of the terrorist group of right-wing ultranationalism in prewar Japan, Brian Victoria sheds light on how the dark underbelly of a religion known for its promotion of peace was used to justify violence.  REVIEWS Brian Victoria masterfully describes how peace-practicing Zen Buddhism was utilized as an ideological weapon for justifying terrorist acts in prewar Japan, fervently supporting Japan’s emperor system ideology. The book is not just an historical study but also a dire warning of the danger that, if abused, a peace-loving religion can be exploited to rationalize violence. — Yuki Tanaka, author of Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crimes in World War II I am delighted to draw attention to the work of Brian Victoria. His expertise in Zen Buddhism comes both from intensive study of the Japanese sources and from his many years of personal experience. In both areas he has devoted himself to finding the truth and to conveying it with unflinching honesty and lucidity. His bold statements and candid judgments are supported by unambiguous evidence and deserve to be pondered on by all who care about Buddhism and have humane values at heart. — Richard Gombrich, Boden Professor of Sanskrit Emeritus, University of Oxford

INTRODUCTION TO PART III OF THE SERIES

This essay examines two questions. First, Inoue and his band members repeatedly emphasized the compassionate nature of their terrorist acts. But given Buddhism's well-known commitment to non-harm, how was it possible for them to believe that "compassionate killing" was part of their Buddhist faith? Secondly, what was it in their Buddhist faith that made them prepared to sacrifice themselves, as so many disposable "pawns," in order to restore total political control to the emperor? 

PART III: COMPASSIONATE KILLING IN BUDDHISM 

Readers will recall that in Part Two of this series both Inoue and his band members repeatedly referred to the compassionate nature of their terrorist acts. But given Buddhism’s well-known commitment to non-killing, how was it possible for them to believe that “compassionate killing” was a part of the Buddhist faith? Was there any doctrinal basis for their conviction or had they just invented this term to justify their own twisted acts?

Sadly, at least for those who believe that Buddhism is a religion of peace, there is doctrinal justification for “compassionate killing,” in the Northern, or Mahāyāna, tradition of Buddhism. Specifically, the Upāyakauśalya Sūtra (Skillful Means Sutra) contains a story about Shakyamuni Buddha in a previous life, when he was as yet a Bodhisattva (Buddha-to-be) on his way to Buddhahood. 

As a ship’s captain, named “Greatly Compassionate,” Shakyamuni discerned there was a robber onboard whose intent was to rob and kill all five hundred of the passengers who were themselves Bodhisattvas. Although reluctant to take life, Shakyamuni ultimately decided to kill the robber. He did so, however, not only without ill will but, on the contrary, with compassion for both the would-be victims and even for the robber himself. Shakyamuni sought to prevent the robber from being reborn and suffering in hell as the karmic result of his murderous deeds.

On the one hand, Shakyamuni’s act of killing is presented in accordance with the view that acts of killing are instances of unwholesome karma, given the latter’s universal and inescapable nature. Nevertheless, although the negative karma resulting from his killing of the robber should have accrued even to Shakyamuni, it did not, for, as he explained, “Good man, because I used ingenuity [skillful means] out of great compassion at that time, I was able to avoid the suffering of one hundred thousand kalpas [eons] of samsāra [the ordinary world of form and desire], and that wicked man was reborn in heaven, a good plane of existence, after death.”

In all Buddhist traditions, the intent with which an act is done is a key determinant in deciding whether it is ethical or not. Thus, this sutra has often been used by a wide variety of Mahāyāna adherents to support the claim that a good Buddhist may kill if the act is done without ill will toward the victim. For example, the Dalai Lama, who identifies himself as a Mahāyāna adherent, takes this position. Despite his reputation as a champion of peace, the Dalai Lama defended the CIA-trained and funded Tibetan guerillas who killed Chinese soldiers from 1957 to 1969. The Dalai Lama stated, “If the motivation is good, and the goal is good, the method, even apparently of a violent kind, is permissible.”

In the case of Inoue and his band’s terrorist acts, the three men killed, out of some twenty intended victims could hardly be called foreign invaders. However, according to Zen master Yamamoto Gempō’s testimony as Inoue’s trial, they nevertheless deserved to die. Yamamoto explained:

It is true that if, motivated by an evil mind, someone should kill so much as a single ant, as many as one hundred and thirty-six hells await that person. This holds true not only in Japan but in all the countries of the world. Yet the Buddha, being absolute, has stated that when there are those who destroy social harmony and injure the polity of the state, then even if they are called good men, killing them is not a crime.

Although all Buddhist statuary manifests the spirit of Buddha, there are no Buddhist statues, other than those of Shakyamuni Buddha and Amida Buddha, who do not grasp the sword. Even the guardian Ksitigarbha Bodhisattva holds, in his manifestation as a victor in war, a spear in his hand. Thus Buddhism, which has as its foundation the true perfection of humanity, has no choice but to cut down even good people in the event they seek to destroy social harmony.

Inoue and his band were prepared from the outset to perish in the process of the revolution. The “selflessness” of their Buddhist faith enabled them to willingly sacrifice themselves, firm in the belief that others, particularly their comrades in the military, would follow in their footsteps and bring about the ideal society they sought. By being prepared to sacrifice themselves, they sought to ensure that as few persons as possible became victims of revolutionary violence. In short, they described themselves as so many “revolutionary sute-ishi” (lit., “cast-off stones”). Similar to pawns in chess, the sacrifice of sute-ishi at opportune times in the Japanese board game of go may lead to final victory.

If the Upāyakauśalya Sūtra is to be believed, even the three victims of Inoue’s terrorist band would be better off having been killed, for this sutra taught these allegedly wicked men would be “reborn in heaven, a good plane of existence, after death.” By extension, even the terrorist perpetrators would, thanks to their great compassion avoid the suffering of one hundred thousand kalpas of samsāra. In short, everyone should end up a “winner.” Note, however, as Buddhist ethics scholar Peter Harvey points out, “If one’s ‘compassion’ is set within a deluded perspective and wrong view, it is in an unwholesome mind state! In the Mahāyāna, wisdom and compassion need to support each other.”

Finally, one question remains unanswered, i.e. how was it possible for Inoue to have been so completely and unconditionally devoted to the emperor? The answer is because Inoue believed that once complete political control had been restored to the emperor, he would, of his own accord, initiate the reforms necessary to mitigate unemployment, improve factory working conditions and institute land reform to end poverty in the countryside. Furthermore, the emperor would eliminate corrupt politicians and end the self-indulgent, luxurious lifestyle of the leaders of corporate conglomerates, the zaibatsu.

Like all Japanese of his era, Inoue had been taught from childhood that the emperor was the benevolent father of the Japanese people, all of whom were “His Majesty’s children” (J. sekishi). Moreover, the emperor was the divine descendant of the Shinto Sun goddess, Amaterasu. Thus, as a benevolent father of divine origin, why wouldn’t the emperor do his best to ensure the happiness and well-being of all his children?

Inoue’s absolute faith in, and subservience to, the emperor may rightly be seen as a form of “hero worship,” enabled, as it was, by his Zen faith of non-attachment to self. Both Inoue and the band members he trained were ever ready to sacrifice themselves on the emperor’s behalf. In this it should be remembered that a totalitarian state has no faith in the natural equality of humanity and promotes both hero worship and the social superiority of its citizens, fostering extreme ethnic chauvinism. This was as true in Hitler’s Germany as it was Imperial Japan. Ethnic chauvinism, the alleged superiority of the “Spirit of Japan” (J.Yamato damashii), was something that richly characterized the Japanese people during the wartime era.

Inoue and the members of his band took pride in the fact they embraced no fixed ideology. They were prepared to act as sute-ishi (pawns) and selflessly sacrifice themselves in order for “others” to bring about the ideal society they sought. For Inoue, as well as the members of his band, the “others” consisted of the emperor and those who faithfully carried out His wishes. Like so much of the “mindfulness meditation” movement today, facilitating its practitioners to, for example, make ‘a killing on Wall Street’, once Zen meditation is divorced from its roots in Buddhist ethics, anything is possible – with all too predictable tragic consequences.