Faith And Morals

Faith and Morality

Yasuyuki Suzuki

Contents
I. Introduction
II. Chikuro Hiroike’s Concept of God
1. Following the ‘sages’
2. Humans are ‘blessed with life’.
3. ‘God’ is the ‘reality of the Universe’.
4. The workings of God
5. The Divine Spirit
6. Living in Connection with God
III. ‘Faith and Morality’ for Chikuro Hiroike
1. Hiroike’s conceptual distinction between ‘faith’ and ‘morality’
2. The breadth of the concept of ‘morality’ for Chikuro Hiroike
3. The close relationship between ‘faith’ and ‘morality’
i. The source of Supreme Morality is ‘the mind of God’.
ii. ‘Having Faith in God’ is ‘living morally’.
iii. A moral life based upon inner conviction
IV. Proposals towards Common Morality from the perspective of Chikuro
Hiroike relating to ‘faith and morality’
1. At the root of morality ‘faith in God’ is necessary.
i. ‘Faith in God’ gives ‘depth’, ‘a solid foundation’ and ‘strength’ to
‘morality’.
ii. Only after having ‘faith in God’ can a ‘truly benevolent spirit’ be nur-
tured.
2. Religion should be implicit, Morality should be explicit.
3. ‘An Open Religiousness’ (‘Religious Pluralism’)
i. We need tolerant minds which respect and accept the faith of others.
ii. Suggestions concerning ‘Faith in God’
V. Conclusion

I. Introduction

The word ‘globalization’ has become quite popular recently. Today,
the interchange of people, products, money, and information on a global
scale is proceeding so far and so fast that when we look back such connec-

124 Part II Chikuro Hiroike’s Contribution to Common Morality

tions seem not to have existed in the past at all. As a result, not only people
involved in foreign diplomacy and trade, but ordinary people now have
encounters and experiences with cultures other than their own in their
everyday lives. These encounters with different cultures are growing in
number, and the frequency with which they take place is increasing. This
has been accompanied by the frequent outbreak of conflict between differ-
ent cultures in various areas. Political differences and economic friction
have been the main types of conflict up to now. But in future an increasing
number of clashes originating from differences in cultures and civilizations,
in world views and values, and in religious and moral perspectives, will cre-
ate immense problems for humanity as its members try to live together.

What kind of foundation can we today create to allow us to live togeth-
er? Each culture is the product of a long history, and the individuality of
each culture must be sufficiently respected. But at the same time, in order
for humanity to co-exist, made up as it is of a variety of religious groups, it is
imperative that the individual differences in cultures be transcended. The
fundamental layer buried beneath the varieties of cultures ( ‘the universal
value of Humankind’) must be brought to light, and a ‘common morality as a
common playing field’ has to be constructed. With the issues of this age at
the forefront of our mind, let us re-examine Chikuro Hiroike’s thoughts on
‘the relationship between faith (or religion) and morality’, and reflect upon
its meaning for our contemporary world.

In this chapter, I will first consider Chikuro Hiroike’s concept of ‘God’.
Following this I will discuss what he thought about the relationship between
‘Faith in God’ and ‘Morality’. Next, I will make an attempt to highlight a
number of points in the thoughts of Chikuro Hiroike which will provide sug-
gestions for the formation of Common Morality.

II. Chikuro Hiroike’s Concept of God

1. Following the ‘sages’
According to Hiroike, we have been able to come to understand the
existence, workings, and mind of God correctly and deeply due to the ‘great
teachers (spiritual leaders) of humanity’– Socrates, Jesus, Buddha, Con-
fucius, and others, called ‘sages’.

Extract 1:
All the sages of the world said that they believed in God, conformed
their will to the will of God, and adapted their conduct absolutely to

Faith and Morality 125

the will of God. We human beings can therefore recognize both
the existence and the nature of God in a rational manner, though we
have never been in the presence of God ourselves. ( TSM I, p. 2 )

Extract 2:
Moralogy wastes no efforts on such a humanly impossible business;
without probing into his nature, it goes directly to the sages and
with them assumes that the cosmic phenomena manifest the power
of God or Reality. It accordingly venerates all things, including
ourselves, as part of the divine being. Not only that: it gratefully
acknowledges, as the sages taught, that all our mental and material
life are made possible by divine grace.
..... Thus it is that all our thoughts and acts are primarily
enabled to exist by the grace of God, to whom we owe our thanks
for everything that comes our way. This is the rule regarding God
according to supreme morality. ( TSM III, pp. 105-106 )

Extract 3: (see Appendix: Hiroike Document 2)

2. Humans are ‘blessed with life’.
According to Hiroike, human beings have an existence in which they
are blessed with life. If we take away the connection to ‘that which surpass-
es human beings, and causes all things to live’, which supports human exis-
tence at the root, it is impossible to think about morality, the way in which
human beings should live. The foundation of this function is called ‘God’.

Extract 4:
VII. ii The principle for the Practice of Supreme Morality Is
Represented in the Conception that Human Behaviour Is
Not Solely a Matter of Man’s Discretion but Is under the
Control of the Law of Nature ( or, religiously speaking, the
power of God ). ( TSM III, p. 73)

3. ‘God’ is the ‘reality of the Universe’.
According to Hiroike, ‘God’ is referred to as ‘the basis of the Universe,
the only God’ as well as ‘the absolute God’, but in philosophical terms it is
‘the reality of the Universe’. Regarding ‘Reality’, Hiroike says: “According
to the sages’ doctrines, Reality may be described as: 1. The ultimate source
of all cosmic phenomena,” and “the prime mover of phenomena as contrast-
ed with phenomena themselves.” ‘Contrasted with the phenomena’ can be
interpreted as meaning ‘the background of the phenomena’.


Hiroike also wrote that “Moralogy axiomatically postulates the exis-
tence of the absolute God, in or out of the universe, from that orderly cos-
mic process of nature which may be conceived to be God’s work.” The
phrase ‘axiomatically postulates’ may give the feeling of not relying on any-
thing, but, in Moralogy as a science, it is the absolute edge beyond which
nothing can be said. Hiroike, in his practice, was firmly convinced of the
existence of God as evidenced by the quote: “according to the sages’ doc-
trines, Reality may be described as: 3. Real, neither hypothetical nor imagi-
nary.” (see HD 3)
Also, “If we are unable to know Reality of God directly, it will not be
irrational for us to form an idea or conception of God in a reverential
acknowledgement of Reality’s work with its mighty, accurate power of uni-
versal causality.” ( TSM III, p. 96)

Extract 5:
Supreme morality stands for ultimate moral principles running
through all the practices of the world’s great sages, who realized, in
themselves and amongst mankind, the mind of one primal universal
God, meaning ‘the basis of the universe, the only God’. It follows
as a matter of course that supreme morality acknowledges God’s
existence. By God here we refer to the Reality of the universe.
Different racial and religious traditions in the world have
ascribed to Reality different names and attributes as respective
objects of faith, whereas supreme morality is the universal standard
of human life over and above those divergent beliefs; it therefore
finds it irrelevant to adopt a name for Reality which is imbued with
some particular racial or religious usage. Hence the specific term
‘the absolute God’ in distinction from non-universal names.
Buddhism affirms the existence of the Absolute through con-
templation of the human mind; Christianity believes in divine reve-
lation in such a Spirit existing apart from the universe. Moralogy
axiomatically postulates the existence of the absolute God, in or out
of the universe, from that orderly cosmic process of nature which
may be conceived to be God’s work. ( TSM III, p. 95 )

Extract 6:
Now the substance of this one and only God, if we express it in sci-
entific terms, may be accepted as being nothing other than the
Universe itself. We may also say that the Divine Spirit is represent-
ed by the Universal Law of Nature. Although the true God is
always one and the same at all times and in all places, yet he is


known under various names by different nations or in different reli-
gious systems. These names are God, Buddha, Kami and so on.
(Chikuro Hiroike, THE CHARACTERISTICS OF MORALOGY AND
SUPREME MORALITY, 1930, Eng. trans. 1966, p. 151)

Extract 7: ( see HD 3 )

4. The workings of God
According to Hiroike, “cosmic phenomena” might be assumed to “man-
ifest Reality at work”, “the expression of the power of God (Reality)”, “the
expression of God” or in other terms “the workings of God”, and we can
“conceive that the natural and the artificial laws are demonstrative of a cos-
mic Mind.” Also, ‘the phenomena of the Universe’ are ‘the workings of
God’, within this we can find order, and within ‘the laws of the nature’
human beings can perceive ‘the mind of God’ ( the Universal Spirit).

Extract 8:
..... we might assume the cosmic phenomena to manifest Reality at
work. In fact, modern science rests for its progress on the finding
of laws in all the cosmo-natural phenomena and on the establish-
ment of scientific principles in all areas of inquiry. In the field of
human society as well there operate along with natural laws what
are called ‘artificial laws’, which in the totality of phenomena are a
part of the law of nature. It will therefore be legitimate for
Moralogy as a science to conceive that the natural and the artificial
laws are demonstrative of a cosmic Mind. ( TSM III, pp. 95-96 )

Extract 9: (see HD 1)

5. The Divine Spirit
According to Hiroike “the Divine Spirit is made up of Benevolence
which involves within it both Wisdom and Righteousness in inseparable uni-
ty.” It is ‘Universal Justice’ in which Righteousness and Benevolence are
unified. It is also the mind which fosters everything in the universe.

Extract 10:
We have stated that the Divine Spirit is nothing but the Universal
Law of Nature. ..... On this assumption, it follows that the Divine
Spirit is made up of Benevolence which involves within it both
Wisdom and Righteousness in inseparable unity. ( C. Hiroike,
Characteristics, pp. 151-152 )


6. Living in Connection with God
According to Hiroike, if we live our lives in connection with ‘the Divine
Spirit’ and ‘the workings of God’, we are able to develop a life which is full of
peace of mind and a sense of satisfaction.

Extract 11:
(1) Believe deeply in providence, and obtain spiritual peace and
absolute inner conviction
The Japanese word tendo, which means ‘providence’, is derived
from the Chinese tian dao, literally, ‘heavenly way’, which, like shen
dao or tian li, signifies the law of God, namely, the law of nature.
The existence of causality governing human mental activity and
conduct is not only expounded in the doctrines of the sages, but has
also been clearly proved by studies in modern science. If we, as
members of humankind, once understand this principle fully, we
can no longer doubt that we must practise morality, especially su-
preme morality. Since it is certain that one’s practice of supreme
morality forms the basis of one’s own future happiness, if a person
does not become happy, it is evident that he or she has not suffi-
ciently practised supreme morality. If that person continues in
such cases, however, to practise supreme morality, expressing sin-
cerity and following the heavenly way, no doubt he or she will attain
his or her end in the long run. This is what I have called the scien-
tific method of attaining spiritual peace and inner conviction. ( TSM
III, p. 509 )

III. ‘Faith and Morality’ for Chikuro Hiroike

1. Hiroike’s conceptual distinction between ‘faith’ and ‘morality’
Hiroike conceptually distinguishes ‘faith’ and ‘morality’ in the follow-
ing manner.

Extract 12:
We have already dwelt sufficiently on the differences between faith
and morals, but yet another remark seems necessary. They are, as
has been discussed, two entirely different things. The former
relies exclusively on a certain deity or deities, whereas the latter
denotes benevolence of thought and act towards fellow individuals,
the state and society at large. ( TSM III, p.104)


2. The breadth of the concept of ‘morality’ for Chikuro Hiroike
First, let’s look at an example of an ordinary definition of ‘morality’.

Extract 13:
The path that humans have to follow, the collection of norms
which are generally accepted by the members of a society as the
standards for the judgment of what is right or wrong behaviour.
Unlike legal sanctions, morality is an individual’s inner conviction.
In modern times, attitudes that an individual should take towards
the objects such as nature, cultural assets, and arts, are also includ-
ed. ( Kojien, 4th Editon)

In contrast with this, what kind of definition does Hiroike offer for ‘morali-
ty’? His concept of ‘morality’ is unusually wide. This is well evidenced by
extracts 14 and 15.

Extract 14:
II The Sphere of Supreme Morality
Supreme morality reveals itself to possess a profound significance
and embraces a wide and deep-ranging sphere when it is observed
at its fundamental source. The sphere of supreme morality, since it
originates and evolves from the mind of God, is naturally consid-
ered to cover the following: —
1. The highest moral principles commonly existing in the practice
of such world sages as conceived in this first book of moralogy.
2. The law of nature.
3. The laws of human society, or the laws concerning custom and
morality in human society.
4. The laws of mental activity.
5. The laws concerning the relation between mind and body.
6. The laws of heredity and other laws concerning human evolu-
tion.
7. The laws concerning agriculture, industry, commerce and econo-
my.
Supreme morality does not remain so narrow as the traditional
moral theories and religious beliefs. It includes, and ought to
include, all laws concerning human existence and development.
Supreme morality in view of its substance and method, therefore,
can be said to be the highest moral thought and the highest means
of living humankind can ever attain. ( TSM III, pp. 8-9)


Extract 15:
.... good or morality is man’s mental activity or conduct in line with
the principles for the achievement of the continued existence, devel-
opment, security and happiness of mankind, while bad or immorali-
ty is man’s mental activity or conduct contrary to this. Such true
good or morality can be found in the doctrines, precepts and deeds
of the great sages of the world. ( TSM III, p. 384)

The general way of apprehending things related to ‘morality’, as noted
in extract 13, was originally and mainly “action towards society, or the mutu-
al interaction of its members.” However, in recent years, reflecting the ris-
ing consciousness of environmental ethics, “Currently, morality also
includes the attitude in which human beings ought to live in relation to such
things as nature, cultural properties, and technological products.”
In contrast, the original meaning of Hiroike’s ‘supreme morality’ is the
way of living for man in connection with ‘Nature’ or ‘God’. Hence from the
beginning, it includes the attitudes and behavior human beings ought to
adopt not only towards other human beings but also towards all existence.
Hiroike’s use of the term ‘morality’, compared with the general usage, was
pioneering and broad in its employment.

3. The close relationship between ‘faith’ and ‘morality’
As we saw above, Hiroike makes a conceptual distinction between
‘faith’ and ‘morality’, but because his concept of ‘morality’ is unusually
expansive, in reality the two overlap. This is clear in the following concep-
tual distinction: “Faith That Requests God’s Favour Belongs to Conventional
Morality; That Which Aims at the Embodiment of God’s Mind and at
Practice Accordingly Belongs to Supreme Morality ( TSM III, p. 104).”
In Hiroike’s supreme morality, in looking at each of the extracts below,
it is evident that there is an unusually close relationship between ‘faith in
God’ and ‘morality’. (It is thought that Hiroike learned about the relation-
ship between the two from Confucius.)1

(i) The source of Supreme Morality is ‘the mind of God’.
According to Hiroike, the source of supreme morality is ‘the mind of
God.’ All of it’s practical principles have at their foundation the existence
and the mind of God.

Extract 16:
Supreme morality reveals itself to possess a profound significance
and embraces a wide and deep-ranging sphere when it is observed


at its fundamental source. The sphere of supreme morality, since it
originates and evolves from the mind of God, is naturally consid-
ered to cover the following ..... ( TSM III, p. 8)

Extract 17:
Supreme morality, again, since faithfully succeeding the line
derived from the mind of God which is the origin of the law of
nature and human life, can be said to be .... ( TSM III, p. 9)

(ii) ‘Having Faith in God’ is ‘living morally’.
According to Hiroike, faith in God and moral practice are two sides of
the same coin. ‘To believe in God’ is to be aware of the workings of God,
and with this reliance on and thankfulness to God, ‘to live in conjunction
with the mind of God.’ Thus, this is ‘practicing supreme morality.’

Extract 18:
In the light of the doctrines, precepts and practices of the world
sages, the essential nature of God is ‘benevolence’ and his activity
constitutes ‘the law of nature’ including psychological and physio-
logical laws that relate to man and social laws that work among
men. To believe in God, then, is to practise his law, i.e., morality.
( TSM III, p. 102)

Extract 19:
Thus, to reform the mind of man in the context of supreme morality
means to bring into accord the motive and purpose of one’s practice
and the benevolent mind of God, and next to devote the total result
of the practice to God. Namely, the man of supreme morality per-
forms all things, wishing, as a member of the universe in which he
lives, to help the noble work of the universe itself which aims at fos-
tering everything, and not to confine his efforts to a certain person,
group or country. this can be practised even in the forms of con-
ventional morality, and it was basic to the practice of the sages.
( TSM III, p. 10)

(iii) A moral life based upon inner conviction
According to Hiroike, supreme morality is practised on the basis of
belief in God.

Extract 20:
There are broadly two different attitudes in recognizing and believ-


ing in God. One is a complete reliance, a single-hearted trust in
him and his worship. The other basically is also God-reliant but
does not discard self-reliance. The former represents a life of faith,
the latter a life of morality based on inner conviction. (abbreviation)
It is different with those who live morally on true belief. They nei-
ther lean to mere faith nor to the mere intellectual practice of
morals. Their practice rests instead on a conviction of their belief
in God, although they may not profess it openly. Deep in their
hearts, however, they cherish faith and in their daily life walk in
obedience to God’s law.(abbreviation) Supreme morality works on
the one hand for the rational enlightenment of men and women by
means of orthodox learning and on the other hand for their embodi-
ment of divine benevolence, so that they may live spiritually and
materially in the way of supreme morality. Moreover, its method
and purpose of achieving that end are of universal nature, so that it
may be practicable in all ages and in all places. It is far more effec-
tive than any form of traditional morality based merely on faith as
well as on intellect. ( TSM III, p. 103)

IV. Proposals towards Common Morality from the perspective of
Chikuro Hiroike relating to ‘faith and morality’

1. At the root of morality ‘faith in God’ is necessary.
There is great merit in connecting ‘faith’ and ‘morality’. According to
Chikuro Hiroike, both religion (faith in God) and morality (the way in which
a human being should live or society should be), when joined together,
become living things. Only when religion is connected with morality, does
it come alive within actual life. For morality, too, when it is connected with
faith in God, it obtains depth and strength. If these are separated, both of
their values lessen. For these reasons, Hiroike has said that at the founda-
tion of morality, ‘faith in God’ is necessary. However, this God does not
need to be a specific God or Buddha. (Conversely, I want to call attention to
the fact that it can be said that there is a certain merit for morality in sepa-
rating and becoming independent of religion.2 )

(i) ‘Faith in God’ gives ‘depth’, ‘a solid foundation’ and ‘strength’ to ‘morali-
ty’.

Extract 21:
.... the spiritual attitude of aspiration towards the benevolence of
God, or Reality, which is the motive power essential for the practice


of morality, ... ( TSM II, p. 399)

Extract 22:
Now the follower of supreme morality rests his mind on faith and
his conduct both on that piety of mind and that soundness of ratio-
nal judgment. This enables him to practise near-perfect morality
and makes his success and happiness beyond doubt. ( TSM III, p.
105)

Extract 23:
If the practice of morality is based only upon knowledge, it is shal-
low. Instead it should be based on the Divine Spirit. Then it will
become supreme morality. ( Analects of Chikuro Hiroike, Revised
ed., p. 111)

Extract 24: ( See TSM III, Chapter 12, VII, vi, and Chapter 12, VII, x)

(ii) Only after having ‘faith in God’ can a ‘truly benevolent spirit’ be nur-
tured.

Extract 25:
In the second place, among those with learning, knowledge, wealth
or social standing there are some who conceited and proud of their
power or position, dare to ignore God and say to themselves: “If
God is benevolence I too will go in that spirit. I may then have no
need to rely on him.” No assertion could be more mistaken.
First of all, how can divine benevolence ever be realized by one
who is too proud to imitate the sages’ practice and bow down, and
dedicate his soul, before the absolute God introduced by the sages?
He is greatly mistaken if he imagines he has benevolence similar to
God’s in quality when it really is but self-conceit. Any act of charity
that might be performed in such a spirit would be an act of ‘sympa-
thy’ or ‘chivalry’ as mentioned in Section V of this chapter – an infe-
rior moral-mindedness of no value whatever. ( TSM III, pp. 102-103)

2. Religion should be implicit, Morality should be explicit.
‘Faith in God’ is an important thing, but it is not something that should
be brandished and bragged about. Rather it is something that each person
ought to hold within and to cultivate. In this way, religion should be implic-
it. Conversely, morality, as something that is actually and concretely prac-
ticed socially by those who make up society, creates the society and is use-


ful to each individual’s life. In this way, morality should be explicit.
In other words, it is necessary that a faithful heart is raised within, and
is manifested as mercy, or love of humanity in its social practice, i.e. morali-
ty.

Extract 26:
Morality is a thing that all mankind should practise openly, but a
religious belief is not necessarily so, for it is originally of implicit
nature. .....
In short, a clear distinction can be made about the spiritual
ortholinons: the ortholinon in morality is explicit while the ortholi-
non in religion is implicit. In other words, what is of scientific, edu-
cational or universal nature is explicit, while what is of pious, reli-
gious or partitive nature is implicit. It is necessary to make such a
distinction lest in the future religious causes should add to the
already rampant conflicts of sentiment or interest in the world and
eventually alienate human minds and destroy peace. ( TSM III, pp.
168-169)

Freedom for religious beliefs should be fully respected. Accordingly,
what religious people might wear or how they perform their religious rites
as a group or an individual should be fully respected, as being the way in
which they express their religious beliefs. The present world is getting
more diversified in terms of religious beliefs, values, and cultures, yet we
have to seek means and ways to connect with each other and live together
on this globe. In this regard, what Hiroike described above deserves care-
ful consideration in modern days.

3. ‘An Open Religiousness’ (‘Religious Pluralism’)
(i) We need tolerant minds which respect and accept the faith of others.
Hiroike asserted that at the foundation of morality ‘faith in God’ is nec-
essary, but despite this, he didn’t mention that we should accept a specific
God, religion, thought or belief. He stops at pointing out basic indications
regarding the way one recognizes God, one’s attitude towards God, and
one’s way of living in connection with God. In the world there are a variety
of faiths in existence, and Hiroike’s proposal can be said to be a broad and
open suggestion to them. It is important for us to have tolerant minds
which basically respect and accept the ‘faith in God’ of other people.

Extract 27:
To amplify with a simile, the top of a mountain is one, but the ways


leading up there are many; so God or Reality is one, but religions
having God for the object of faith are in bewildering variety. Which
approach is the nearest, securest and most practicable will be the
criterion for choice by individual believers. Since, however, there
are so many different classes of men intellectually, socially and eco-
nomically, an inherently superior religion or sect may not invariably
be the most widely followed. In the matter of personal belief moral-
ogy never poses as an importunate meddler. ( TSM III, pp. 96-97)

Extract 28:
Accordingly, supreme morality places little emphasis on the formal
aspect of worship, which it leaves free of any prescription. It cares
little what racial or religious usage may be followed. Among the
traditional formulas of worship are the clapping and clasping of
hands, the composing of finger-signs and many others; but in all
cases the first essential is never to lose piety of mind. ( TSM III, p.
107)

(ii) Suggestions concerning ‘Faith in God’
Hiroike makes some basic suggestions regarding ‘the way one recog-
nizes God’ and ‘the way one lives in connection with God’. For example, in
discussing ‘the way to worship in supreme morality’, he gives us sugges-
tions about ‘worship’.

Extract 29:
True worship in supreme morality follows this order: giving thanks
to God, pledging one’s own conversion in mind and conduct, pray-
ing for the good of the national and the family ortholinons, for uni-
versal peace, and for the well-being of the ortholinons and fellow
practitioners of supreme morality. If any illness happens to be
among them, prayer is given for an early recovery; if we ourselves
are ill, we pledge more firmly to reform our minds and conduct. In
any case we pledge from the bottom of our hearts to make yet
greater efforts than ever for the enlightenment and salvation of
human minds. We never pray for our own sakes.
The writer himself has always offered prayer for the sake of
his ortholinons, his seniors and his spiritual children; moreover, he
has always prayed for the security and happiness of people at large.
Never has he called upon God for his own good, instead, he con-
fessed each time his lack of benevolent spirit. ( TSM III, p.108)


V. Conclusion

In the world, truly many varieties of religions exist. ‘Faith in God’ is an
important thing, but if each religion can’t make compromises in its doctrine,
and each clings to the differences it has with other religions, the coexis-
tence of varying religions becomes impossible. In some cases, these differ-
ences can become the causes of friction between cultures and civilizations.
As a final word of caution, the pressing issue for the 21st Century is to over-
come differences in cultures, civilizations, and religions, and to create a
common playing field for humanity to coexist and cooperate.
In order for there to be understanding of the contents of the various
thoughts on God, as well as mutual respect, there must be efforts made to
construct ‘a common playing field’ (mercy, benevolence, humanity, a loving
heart, and a common morality as the concrete practice of these qualities) in
the dimension of a way of living (morality) within society.
Lastly, isn’t it required of humanity in this age to suggest, like Hiroike,
only a fundamental guideline about ‘Faith in God’, and to focus on the way
one lives in actual society (one’s attitude and action), namely ‘morality’, and
to make an attempt to create a common playing field, on which members of
humanity can make connections with each other? Hiroike’s thoughts on
‘the relationship of faith and morality’ will be able to restrain collisions
between cultures and civilizations, and make a great contribution towards
creating ‘a new religious and moral perspective’, from which people of the
world may proceed and cooperate, joining their hands together, for the
progress of mankind.

Note
1. According to Hiroike’s thoughts on Confucius, he seems to recognize that, as for
the understanding of ‘the relationship between faith and morality’, his thought most
closely resembles the basic thought of Confucius among the sages of the world.

Extract 30:
VIII. v The Influence of Confucianism on Oriental Countries
As has already been explained in detail in the preceding section of this chapter,
Confucius sincerely believed in God and attained a state of purely religious peace and
enlightenment. Different from Sakyamuni and Christ, however, Confucius depended on
learning and education for the means of the salvation of mankind, and he tried by this
means to infuse the spirit of the ancient sages into the spirit of mankind, and thus, as a
total effect, to promote the happiness of mankind. He did not say a great deal, therefore,
about the nature and grace of God, and yet, as for the precepts of the ancient sages, he
tried to hand them down in full detail. Thus, he placed emphasis on the practice of
morality rather than on faith, and on the practical life of man rather than on the ideals of
man, and therefore Confucianism which has handed down the teachings of Confucius
has fallen out of the category of a so-called religion and has developed as a form of pure
morality. With the passage of time after his death, the real spirit of Confucius gradually


came to be forgotten, and though his influence spread widely over East Asia, the influen-
tial power fell somewhat short of the power of religions, which were attended by numer-
ous abuses, since the fundamental principle of his morality, which is faith in God, was
always apt to be neglected. As for the influence on the intellectual class, however, there
was really a great deal to be valued. Thus, in Confucianism, the essence of Confucius,
that is, his faith in God, was not properly recognized, and consequently, his teachings
came to lack the motive power to transform fundamentally the spirit of man as well as to
improve and develop his moral sentiment. It is by no means fortuitous that Chinese civ-
ilization has come to lose rather than to increase the brightness of ancient times. ( TSM
II, p. 400)

2. I want to call attention to the fact that even if morality becomes separate from reli-
gion and becomes ‘a secular morality of modern citizens’, that it is not without merit.
(1) Supposing that even if religion falls into decline, morality should not share the same
fate.
(2) The various religions, faiths, and cultures of the world are not unified. Rather, if it is
better that they remain separate, ‘a secular morality of modern citizens’ is indispens-
able to the holders of various values in order that they can co-exist and cooperate.
Isn’t this precisely ‘common morality’?
(3) Regarding wars between religions and the activities of dangerous cult organizations,
something must be said about this from the perspective of morality and law. To the
extent that society protects ‘freedom of religion’, religion must respect the law,
human life, human rights and other social obligations.

Appendix
<Hiroike Documents (HD)>
(Hiroike’s writings which are cited in this paper appear here without abbreviation.
Please feel free to refer to these to grasp the context of the excerpts in the paper.)

HD 1:
It would after all be a futile attempt, however, to determine the transcendent divine
nature by human intellect. Moralogy wastes no efforts on such a humanly impossible
business; without probing into his nature, it goes directly to the sages and with them
assumes that the cosmic phenomena manifest the power of God or Reality. It accord-
ingly venerates all things, including ourselves, as part of the diving being. Not only
that: it gratefully acknowledges, as the sages taught, that all our mental and material life
are made possible by divine grace.
Moralogy is a science and all its methods of practising supreme morality are also
rooted in scientific principles; but that in no way means that it ignores the sages’ teach-
ings or the general experience of mankind. Science, with all its tremendous progress,
has yet to explore the infinite complexities of nature and man; its principles alone cannot
explain everything. Supreme morality, therefore, works not only on scientific principles
but on the sages’ teachings and the common experience of mankind as well.
In this way supreme morality starts by assuming with the sages that the cosmic phe-
nomena are divine manifestations and that the human mind is a division of the divine
mind. If, therefore, that division of mind is in keeping with the law of the divine mind,
then it is sure to attain happiness, while it is sure to be unhappy if it does not accord with
it. Thus it is that all our thoughts and acts are primarily enabled to exist by the grace of
God, to whom we owe our thanks for everything that comes our way. This is the rule
regarding God according to supreme morality. ( TSM III, pp. 105-106)


HD 2:
The one primal universal God constitutes the substance and content of the universe, and
governs all things in the universe. It controls the lives of men and all other beings
directly from within, as a prime mover working to preserve, develop and alter their
courses of destiny, for life or death, for ill health or good, and for all other vicissitudes to
which they all are subject. The incarnate God, on the other hand, was so supreme in
moral character as to be identified with the one primal universal God. He loved all
mankind, and gave his whole life in selfless efforts for the promotion of human exis-
tence, progress and wellbeing. He thereby let mankind know of the laws of spiritual and
material life, and left behind him the foundation on which to work and manage human
affairs, so that we might enjoy happiness as we do today. Such indeed is the way we
human beings have known of God’s existence and his laws and have actually achieved as
much happiness as we have today. ( TSM III, p. 98)

HD 3:
In Japanese tradition the word kami has been used in two ways. First, it means the one
primal universal God, or philosophically speaking, Reality. This last term Reality might
be substituted by substance; but in the present work a consistent use is made of Reality
when referring to the one primal universal God. Reality, then, and substance, whenever
it appears in this book, will mean the prime mover of phenomena as contrasted with phe-
nomena themselves.
According to the sages’ doctrines, Reality may be described as:
1. The ultimate source of all cosmic phenomena
2. The only one in the universe
3. Real, neither hypothetical nor imaginary
4. Absolute, being transcendent over time and space
5. Omnipotent, being infinite in its works
6. Actually alive in the universe, as a living existence at work ever since the begin-
ning of time without beginning, as a working ‘personality’ governing all things
All these points, it is remarked, may be explicitly inferred from the fact that life occurs
amidst the cosmic phenomena, although, as mentioned above, the existence and the
nature of Reality itself cannot be described or proved directly by science. ( TSM III, p.
97)

HD 4:
The question of whether ‘soul’, ‘spirit’ or ‘mind’ exists in man is beyond direct scientific
verification; but modern psychology has successfully determined the actuality of the
spirit or mind by conducting experiments and analyzing experiences as to how its work-
ing affects the body. By immediate analogy we might assume the cosmic phenomena to
manifest Reality at work. In fact, modern science rests for its progress on the finding of
laws in all the cosmo-natural phenomena and on the establishment of scientific principles
in all areas of inquiry. In the field of human society as well there operate along with nat-
ural laws what are called ‘artificial laws’, which in the totality of phenomena are a part of
the law of nature. It will therefore be legitimate for moralogy as a science to conceive
that the natural and the artificial laws are demonstrative of a cosmic Mind. If we are
unable to know Reality or God directly, it will not be irrational for us to form an idea or
conception of God in a reverential acknowledgement of Reality’s work with its mighty,
accurate power of universal causality. ( TSM III, pp. 95-96)

HD 5:


VIII. ix Faith That Requests God’s Favour Belongs to Conventional Morality; That
Which Aims at the Embodiment of God’s Mind and at Practice Accordingly Belongs to
Supreme Morality.

In the light of the sages’ words and deeds, true belief in God is the embodiment in and
through oneself of his mind. Not so with the so-called ‘belief’ in general practice: there
the greatest concern is with worship and prayer, that is, calling upon him for happiness.
That is simply conventional morality. In supreme morality, in which one embodies in
mind and deed the mind of God as taught by the sages, belief in him means something
different from the beliefs professed among organized religions and other groups or indi-
viduals. Those are essentially selfish in spirit and short of educational elements.
Whatever they may claim for themselves, the conventional beliefs are not universal in
their bearing to general happiness. Supreme morality on the contrary is obedient to
God in spirit, educational in constitution and therefore universal in its outlook towards
human well-being.
We have already dwelt sufficiently on the differences between faith and morals, but
yet another remark seems necessary. They are, as has been discussed, two entirely dif-
ferent things. The former relies exclusively on a certain deity or deities, whereas the lat-
ter denotes benevolence of thought and act towards fellow individuals, the state and soci-
ety at large. As a result, some people have had simple faith but no thought for morality,
while others have acted morally but with little faith. It is difficult to say which of the two
types is more commendable, but this much is certain: many, if not all, of those with sim-
ple faith are subjectively at peace in their minds, but they usually turn out to be unsuc-
cessful in material enterprise. In addition, their families are found more often than not
in misery. On the other hand, those with little faith but acting morally on good rational
judgment are as a rule more successful in life. Now the follower of supreme morality
rests his mind on faith and his conduct both on that piety of mind and that soundness of
rational judgment. This enables him to practise near-perfect morality and makes his
success and happiness beyond doubt. ( TSM III, pp. 104-105)

HD 6:
The Gospel teaching on the form of worship is much more serious than what we observe
in the practice of many individuals and religious organizations: it points to the future
form of worship for educated classes.
As for the spirit of worship, however, the sages’ teachings have entirely been lost,
for not only those in organized religions in general but even some who are studying
supreme morality are unwittingly governed by a spirit of egotism. They worship God in
selfishness, and pray and call for something from him for themselves and interested per-
sons. Such a spirit is a remnant of man’s instinctive beliefs left over from crude primi-
tive ages. It is contrary in spirit to the true faith of supreme morality based on the sages’
teachings.
True worship in supreme morality follows this order: giving thanks to God, pledging
one’s own conversion in mind and conduct, praying for the good of the national and the
family ortholinons, for universal peace, and for the well-being of the ortholinons and fel-
low practitioners of supreme morality. If any illness happens to be among them, prayer
is given for an early recovery; if we ourselves are ill, we pledge more firmly to reform our
minds and conduct. In any case we pledge from the bottom of our hearts to make yet
greater efforts than ever for the enlightenment and salvation of human minds. We never
pray for our own sakes.
The writer himself has always offered prayer for the sake of his ortholinons, his
seniors and his spiritual children; moreover, he has always prayed for the security and


happiness of people at large. Never has he called upon God for his own good; instead,
he confessed each time his lack of benevolent spirit. When anyone can pray in this way,
not for himself but for others, then, and then only, can he obtain salvation by supreme
morality. He is then qualified to be others’ spiritual father in the line of the ortholinons.
When such a spirit of worship becomes the ruling spirit of all his daily life, good health,
long life and good fortune will come to him of their own accord. This is something
which calls for the serious reflection of all mankind. ( TSM III, pp. 107-108)

HD 7:
There are broadly two different attitudes in recognizing and believing in God. One is a
complete reliance, a single-hearted trust in him and his worship. The other basically is
also God-reliant but does not discard self-reliance. The former represents a life of faith,
the latter a life of morality based on inner conviction.
Those who take the first course and live for faith trust solely in God to whom they
dedicate themselves; their whole minds are directed to salvation, devotion to the religion
they belong to, or mere worship and prayer. Many who live in this way are found at vari-
ance with the rest of the world in thought, sentiment and behaviour; there is much that
is out of tune with the time in their ways and purpose of bringing universal salvation.
Their narrowness of belief has in fact been more of a hindrance than help to a wider
acceptance of belief in God.
It is different with those who live morally on true belief. They neither lean to mere
faith nor to the mere intellectual practice of morals. Their practice rests instead on a
conviction of their belief in God, although they may not profess it openly. Deep in their
hearts, however, they cherish faith and in their daily life walk in obedience to God’s law.
Even if their practice of morals falls short of supreme morality, such people are found to
be successful in the business world, to attain positions in society, or are otherwise affect-
ed favourably in their lives on earth. Such have been facts manifest in historical and
sociological evidence.
Supreme morality works on the one hand for the rational enlightenment of men and
women by means of orthodox learning and on the other hand for their embodiment of
divine benevolence, so that they may live spiritually and materially in the way of supreme
morality. Moreover, its method and purpose of achieving that end are of universal
nature, so that it may be practicable in all ages and in all places. It is far more effective
than any form of traditional morality based merely on faith as well as on intellect. ( TSM
III, p. 103)

Faith And Morals

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (19)

Similaire à Faith And Morals

Similaire à Faith And Morals (20)

Plus de Alexandros Sfakianakis

Plus de Alexandros Sfakianakis (15)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Faith And Morals