There is a key word in traditional Japanese thought that expresses intransitivity: “naturally.” The same word, composed with two Chinese characters, is used today mainly as a noun meaning “nature.” The more recent use was established around the end of the nineteenth century under the influence of Western ideas. In premodern times, the word was used mainly as an adverb meaning “of itself” or “of its own accord.” Already in medieval times, this concept was an idea common to different cultural fields. It permeates the idea of “original enlightenment” (hongaku) of the Tendai sect, which is at the basis of theories of waka, nō plays, the tea ceremony, flower arrangement, and so on. Zeami’s thought developed against this background. In modern times (seventeenth to eighteenth centuries), the nee-Confucian notion of “natural” as “mui” (inaction, doing nothing) exercised a very strong influence so as to establish the adverbial use “naturally,” which is very familiar to us today. Historians of Japanese thought agree that this concept is one of the most fundamental elements in Japanese philosophy. However, Buddhism and neo-Confucianism were originally foreign philosophies. There must have existed an indigenous concept of nature for these great philosophies to find a fecund ground in Japan. As a matter of fact, the same spirit can be found in indigenous religious praxis (Shugendo), which is permeated with a primitivism that rejects all aspects of “culture” (including vegetables and grains cultivated by human beings) as impute.
The poetics of Intransitivity
by Sasaki Ken’ichi
in Japanese Hermeneutics: Current Debates on Aesthetics and Interpretation
edited by Michael F. Marra
The “Peerless Realm” or “myō” in Japanese, is the final stage of perfection in artistic training. At that stage, the artist no longer needs to be concerned about technical details. Moreover, in communicating the religious teachings of Buddhism, no difference exists any longer between poetry and dtama. “Myō” is originally a religious concept developed by the Tendai school of Buddhism. It points to a universality or indifference that perfect masters achieve in all fields (arts and religion alike) since they have transcended all artifice, which is what diffetentiates patticulat atts. A masterpiece is to be realized in absolute intransitivity: It must be as if it forms itself or appears spontaneously, beyond any intetvention of the artist, whether technical or conceptual. This is one of the most basic ideas in traditional Japanese aesthetics. We find similar arguments in all Japanese art theory from all periods. I am sure that the same idea is still present today.
There is a key word in traditional Japanese thought that expresses intransitivity: “naturally.” The same word, composed with two Chinese characters, is used today mainly as a noun meaning “nature.” The more recent use was established around the end of the nineteenth century under the influence of Western ideas. In premodern times, the word was used mainly as an adverb meaning “of itself” or “of its own accord.” Already in medieval times, this concept was an idea common to different cultural fields. It permeates the idea of “original enlightenment” (hongaku) of the Tendai sect, which is at the basis of theories of waka, nō plays, the tea ceremony, flower arrangement, and so on. Zeami’s thought developed against this background. In modern times (seventeenth to eighteenth centuries), the nee-Confucian notion of “natural” as “mui” (inaction, doing nothing) exercised a very strong influence so as to establish the adverbial use “naturally,” which is very familiar to us today. Historians of Japanese thought agree that this concept is one of the most fundamental elements in Japanese philosophy. However, Buddhism and neo-Confucianism were originally foreign philosophies. There must have existed an indigenous concept of nature for these great philosophies to find a fecund ground in Japan. As a matter of fact, the same spirit can be found in indigenous religious praxis (Shugendo), which is permeated with a primitivism that rejects all aspects of “culture” (including vegetables and grains cultivated by human beings) as impute.
自動詞性の詩学
by 佐々木健一
http://koara.lib.keio.ac.jp/xoonips/modules/xoonips/download.php/AN00150430-00000132-0001.pdf?file_id=89209
藝の修業の目指すこの「妙風」という最高の境地に到れば、藝術家はもはや技巧のあれこれを思い煩うこともなくなる。そればかりか、うたか能かという区別もなく、宗教上の修業に通じる。この引用に見られるように、「妙」とは天台宗の教えから借りたことばである。このような普遍性もしくは無差別が実現されるのは、宗教であると藝術であるとを問わず、あらゆる領域の達人が、その領域の別をなすわざや作為を乗り越えているからである。この境地において、傑作は完全に自動詞的に生み出される。構想面にせよ、技巧面にせよ、藝術家の介在なしに、作品はあたかも独りでに形成されてくるかの如くである。
このような考えは、日本の伝統的な美学における最も基本的な思想の一つである。どの時代の、どの藝術に関する理論書にも、同様の議論を見出すことができるのではなかろうか。
〈わざを超えるわざ〉の理念、言い換えれば自動詞性の詩学は、洋の東西を問わず見られる。しかし日本では、自明の理と見られるほどに、深く文化に根をおろしている。日本の伝統的な思想において自動詞性を表わすキーワードがある。右の定家の言葉にもあった「自然」という語である。この語は、このままの形で名詞にも、形容詞にも、副詞にも、時には動詞にも用いることができる。今日では nature を意味する名詞としての用法が普通だが、それは一九世紀末、西洋語の影響のもとに確立した用法である。近代以前には、「おのづから」の意味での副詞的用法が主であった。この語は、中世において既に、さまざまな文化領域における「共通の理念」となっている。特に、その源泉である天台宗における「本覚思想」は、和歌、能楽、茶の湯、生け花などの理論の中核的概念となった。上に見た世阿弥の思想はこのような背景のもとで形成されたものである。近世になると儒教における同意の概念である「無為」が思潮において強い影響力を及ぼし、われわれに馴染みの「自然に」という副詞形が成立する。今日、日本思想史の研究者たちは、これが日本思想における最も基本的な要素のひとつであることを認めている。しかし、仏教にせよ儒教にせよ、外来の思想である。その受容の過程において日本化されたにもせよ、それが可能であったためには、土着の自然概念が存在しなければならなかったであろう。事実、修験道のなかに、同じ精神が確認される。すなわち、人間の栽培した野菜や穀物を含めた文化的なもの（culture）の一切を不純として斥ける意思が、この原初的な思想を貫いている。
(sk)
「自然」という言葉が、名詞の自然ではなく、副詞の「自然に」だったとは。そして「自然な」という形容詞だったり、「自然」という動詞（ってなんなんだ？）だったりしたとは。
私はなにも知らないということを、改めて思い知らされている。
でも、「自然」という動詞って、いったいなんだろう。