Departmental Bulletin Paper 「新道教」再考 : 全真教研究の枠組みについての再検討
A Reconsideration of "Neo-Daoism" : Re-Examining the Framework for Research on the Quan-zhen Sect

松下, 道信

This paper re-examines the framework of research which has regarded the Quan-zhen sect(Quan-zhen-jiao 全真教) as “Neo-Daoism (新道教)”.The Quan-zhen sect, alongside the Tai-yi sect (Tai-yi-jiao 太一教) and the Zhen-da-dao sect(Zhen-da-dao-jiao真大道教) founded in the same period, has been considered as “Neo-Daoism”. The first person who used the term “Neo-Daoism” was Tokiwa Daijo (常盤大定). He appreciated theQuan-zhen sect as detached from the traditional superstition affected by Buddhism. But Tokiwa was a Buddhism researcher who was in the priesthood himself, so his research has a Buddhist perspective. And then, in China, Chen Yuan (陳垣) designated the Quan-zhen sect, the Tai-yi sect, and the Zhen-da-dao sect as “Neo-Daoism”, and appreciated that they resisted Jin (金) as refugees of the northern Song (北宋); therefore, there we can see a historical view of resistance.After World War Ⅱ, on the basis of the preceding studies, Kubo Noritada(窪徳忠) insisted that the Quan-zhen sect, the Tai-yi sect, and the Zhen-da-dao sect were “Neo-Daoism” by modeling after Max Weber’s sociology of religion theory. We can see that the designation of the Quan-zhen sect as “Neo-Daoism” was accomplished at this point.After new China was established, the Quan-zhen sect was negatively associated with Marxism. However, Chen Yuan’s view revived again recently. In Japan, Miyakawa Hisayuki (宮川尚志) researched Lin Linsu (林霊素) and southern school of inner alchemy regarded as “Old-Daoism”, and Akizuki Kan’ei (秋月観暎) insisted on designating Jing-ming dao(浄明道) as one of “Neo-Daoism.” Meanwhile, in Europe and the United States, the term “Neo-Daoism” has not been established currently yet.We can point out that the influence of modern history is reflected in the background of research history that regards the Quan-zhen sect as “Neo-Daoism” in Japan and China. However,the concept of “Neo-Daoism” risks of evaluating some sects as “Neo-Daoism” and “Old-Daoism”with prejudice, or emphasizing the break-off of both more than is required. It will be necessary for studies of the Quan-zhen sect to push forward a philological empiricism while paying attention to each era.

Number of accesses :  

Other information