Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)
Not a member yet
4321294 research outputs found
Sort by
<論説>アウンサン将軍と「アーザーニー・ベイッマン」(殉難者廟)
No full textビルマ (ミャンマー) の民主派は、ビルマ国軍の歩みを整理し、同軍がアウンサン将軍の時代には国民の側に立っていたが、その死後に変質して、国民を抑圧するようになったと主張している。だが、史料の断片から窺うに、このような理解は単純に過ぎる。本稿は、アウンサンの複雑な実像に迫る作業の一部として、「アーザーニー・ベイッマン」(殉難者廟) の建設の問題を分析する。アウンサンと国軍は、日本軍の指導部の影響を受け、ラングーンに靖国神社を模倣したこの施設をつくろうとした。戦後も、「アーザーニー」(殉難者)の顕彰を継続した。一九四五年以後のアウンサンは、選挙を重視する姿勢を打ち出して、自らを民主主義者としたが、国民が国と軍に奉仕することも強く求めたのだった。そのようなアウンサンも、一九四六年以後、慰霊の対象を広げて、ナショナリズムに縛られた「アーザーニー」の理念からの脱却を始めた。Pro-democracy groups in Burma (Myanmar) have viewed the history of the Burmese military systematically, arguing that the army stood with the people during the time of General Aung San, but after his death it degenerated and began to oppress the people. However, as we can see from the fragments of historical documents, such an understanding is too simplistic. This paper analyzes the issue of the construction of the Arzani Beikman as part of an approach to grasp the complex reality of Aung San. Conventional research has mainly discussed Aung San's political vision based on his speeches in 1946-1947, but if it is viewed during the period of Japanese occupation period as well, a different picture of Aung San should emerge. Such an analysis is also an important question in Japanese history: what effect did the Japan army have on Burma? The Arzani Beikman was an attempt by Aung San and the Burmese military under the influence of the Japanese military leadership to build a shrine in Rangoon modeled on Yasukuni Shrine. Aung San, who was assassinated in 1947, was buried in the Arzani Beikman in 1948. If this is interpreted as being buried in the “evil symbol” of Japan militarism transplanted to Burma, then Aung San and the Burmese military continued to be bound by Japan militarism. However, it is necessary to consider whether Aung San, who launched an uprising against Japan in 1945 under the banner of “anti-fascism, ” can be evaluated so simply. In this paper, I will contrast Aung San and Ba Maw and analyze their responses in depth. The first section of this paper examines the education of the Burmese people about the memorial and Yasukuni Shrine by the Japan military. Aung San and the Tatmadaw affirmed the construction of the facility and decided to refer not only to the dead of the anti-British movement but also to those who responded to the call to arms as arzani. Ba Maw, on the other hand, had set out to honor Burmese historical figures, but he integrated his activities with the recognition of the arzani. Section 2 reveals how Aung San and others continued to be interested in the construction of the Arzani Beikman in Rangoon, while Ba Maw emphasized the importance of honoring heroes in various regions after 1944. The two sides thus fought for control over how to honor the arzani. Section 3 shows that Aung San and others who led the uprising against Japan insisted on honoring the arzani even after the war. Eventually, however, Aung San began to change his perspective on the victims of the war, such as trying to commemorate all victims without distinguishing friend from foe. The second half of the section also addresses the era of U Nu, who buried the assassinated Aung San and others in the Arzani Beikman. In the end, it should be said that Aung San was indeed influenced by Yasukuni thought. This is something that has not hitherto been pointed out, but it is an important fact for understanding him and the Burmese military. However, Aung San was not completely imbued with this view, and it can be said that he began to break from it after 1946. Furthermore, Aung San's successor, U Nu, positioned the Arzani Beikman instead as a symbol of democracy. However, Ne Win later seems to have wanted to return to the wartime ethos and tried to redefine the Arzani Beikman as a symbol of heightened nationalism
<論説>死者をまつる --南アジアのムスリム聖者廟のウルス-- (特集 : まつり)
No full text南アジアのムスリム聖者廟には、ウルスという祭りが見られる。ウルスという言葉の原義は婚礼の祝いであり、聖者廟でのウルスは、人間は死ぬことによって神に見えるというイスラームの世界観、その出会いを愛する相手との初めての夜に擬えるスーフィズムの文学的表現を背景に、聖者の命日を祝う行事である。本稿では、一五世紀にデカンで書かれたペルシア語のスーフィー伝記、二〇世紀半ばのスーフィー団体発行のウルドゥー語雑誌、現在のインド共和国の聖者廟におけるウルスの事例から、南アジアにおけるウルスの実践について検討し、スーフィーが導師や先人を偲ぶ行事であるウルスが「祭り」に変質するにあたっては、死した聖者を「まつる」聖者廟と、ウルスの時期に廟を訪れる人々、特に巡礼者の存在が大きな役割を果たしていることを指摘する。‘Urs is a popular festival celebrating and commemorating the death of Muslim saints in South Asia. The Arabic word “‘urs” originally means a wedding ceremony. Death of a saint became a wedding based on the Islamic worldview that holds that humans return to God through death and the metaphor in Sufism that compares Sufis' pursuit of God to longing for the beloved and the moment of death to the first encounter with the beloved. This article examines the practice of ‘urs in South Asia from the early period to the present day in the Republic of India. It consists of three sections: the first section is based on Persian Sufi biographies written in the Deccan in the 15th century, the second concerns the views on ‘urs by ‘ulamās and Sufis with different viewpoints during the 19th to 20th centuries, and the third deals with examples of ‘urs and Mīlād al- Nabī (festival for the birth/ death date of Prophet Muhammad) held in Sufi shrines (dargāh) in the Republic of India. The first section analyzes the lists of ‘urs conducted by Muhammad Gīsūdarāz, a famous Chishti Sufi master active in the Deccan during the 15th century. The lists in his two biographies contain names of seventeen and twenty people respectively, the dates of their ‘urs, and whether samā‘ and food distribution would be done on the occasion. The people included in the list can be categorized into three groups: the masters of Gīsūdarāz (with Uways Qaranī as an exception), Prophet Muhammad and his family members, and Gīsūdarāz's own family members, including women such as his mother, sister and daughter. For Gīsūdarāz and his followers, an ‘urs was a social event in which they could commemorate the deceased, either with religious significance or personal affection, even though their tombs and shrines might be in distant locations. The second section deals with the various opinions on ‘urs in the 19th to 20th centuries when the “proper” or “orthodox” practice of Islam became an issue among Muslim intellectuals. After briefly summarizing the criticism against ‘urs by intellectuals belonging to the Ahl-e Hadith and Deoband schools, this section introduces the practice of ‘urs by Anjuman-i Khuddām-i Sūfīya, a Sufi organization established by Jamā‘at ‘Alī Shāh (d. 1951), and an article justifying his ‘urs published in their Urdu magazine Risāla-yi Anwār-i Sūfiyya. Though the festive features, such as the consumption of intoxicating substances or the presence of dancing girls, were the most attacked aspects among the various features of ‘urs, those who supported ‘urs tended to avoid mentioning these aspects in their discussions. This avoidance, consciously or unconsciously, might be based on their image of “proper” ‘urs, consisting of religious sermons and commemoration of the religious figure. It can also be pointed out that the ‘urs of the founder, Jamā‘at ‘Alī Shāh, were held in remote branches and contributed to retaining the cohesion of the organization and the identity of its members. The third section describes the present-day ‘urs and Mīlād al-Nabī festivals held in famous shrines of Sufi saints in the Republic of India, such as the dargāh of Nizām al-Dīn in Delhi or Mu‘īn al-Dīn in Ajmer. Though ‘urs can be held at any place, tombs or shrines of the deceased are popular places for ‘urs as a festival. ‘Urs in a shrine attracts many pilgrims, groups of ascetics claiming a religious connection with the saint, merchants and businessmen, tourists and so on, in addition to the people managing the shrine who are often descendants or disciples of the saint and who carry out the core rituals of ‘urs such as washing the tomb and offering prayers. The area surrounding the dargāh also serves to create the festive character of the ‘urs. The essential nature of ‘urs is a commemoration of the deceased. It becomes a celebration with the background of Sufi worldview, transforming death into a happy moment of true meeting with the beloved, God. Then, when it is held at the shrine, where groups of people with different social backgrounds gather, it becomes a festival. In the ‘urs as a festival, people behave according to their own norms of conduct, sharing the common purpose of celebrating the death of a saint, and this makes the ‘urs an orderly, albeit somewhat chaotic, event
<論説>古代中国の墓と霊魂のまつり --前漢時代における墓と廟の変革-- (特集 : まつり)
No full text中国では戦国後期から漢代にかけて、陵墓制度に大きな変化が生じ、陵園内外に寝や廟などの建築が造営されるようになった。秦始皇帝陵では墳丘の北西に陵寝建築を置き、前漢皇帝陵ではそれを踏襲しながら墳丘の東南に陵廟を設置した。その陵廟の構造は、長安南郊の明堂や王莽九廟の構造と近似し、明堂と宗廟の構造を同じものとする漢代の学者たちの解釈をもとに設計されたと推定される。漢代における陵廟の出現は、墓に死者の霊魂がとどまるという観念にもとづくもので、それにともなって墓の内部にも霊魂の居処となる神坐が設置された。その初期の事例が前二世紀の馬王堆漢墓と満城漢墓である。それらの神坐は、宗廟での祖先祭祀にならい、西側に帷帳・席・几などを東面して設置し、その前に食膳具などをならべたものであった。そして、本来は目に見えることのない死者自身があたかもそこにいるかのようにして、霊魂のまつりがおこなわれたのである。According to the traditional Chinese view of the soul (霊魂), a living person is composed of two elements, the spirit (魂) and the body (魄), and it was believed that a person died when the two were separated. Custom deemed it proper to bury the body after death in a tomb (墓) and to worship the separated soul in a mausoleum shrine (廟). According to the Confucian view, a funeral ceremony in which the body is buried was an inauspicious rite, while a ritual worshiping the soul was an auspicious one, and a clear distinction should be made between the two. However, this was only the Confucians ideal of correct ritual protocol, and since ancient times, rituals for the souls of the dead were often performed in front of tombs and inside tomb chambers. I wish to note in particular that the ceremonies performed inside the tombs, which have been reconstructed from archaeological studies, are very similar to descriptions in classical texts of how rites for ancestral spirits were worshipped in ancestral shrines (宗廟). Based on this understanding, this paper aims to elucidate the relationship between ancient Chinese tombs and rituals in ancestral shrines by comparing the results of archaeological excavations with descriptions in classical texts. First, I organized the contents of the rituals described in the Yili (Book of Rites) and examined the relationship between mourning and funeral ceremonies (喪葬儀礼) and ancestral shrine rituals (宗廟祭祀) in ancient China, as well as the space in which they were performed. The Yili summarizes the procedures for ceremonies such as weddings and funerals performed by the ancient aristocracy, and describes in detail the behavior, clothing, and arrangement of offerings of the people participating in the ceremonies. According to these accounts, in the last stage of the mourning and funeral rites, the body of the deceased was buried in the grave and then the soul that had been brought back from the grave was comforted in a ritual known as the yu 虞 through which mourning gradually becomes lighter, and the inauspicious ritual was transformed into an auspicious one. In addition, by focusing on the ceremonial place, I confirmed that the seating for both the yu ritual and the ancestral spirit rites were placed in the southwest corner of the room facing eastward, and that this was the place where the spirits of the dead or of persons dressed as the dead were worshipped. Next, I examined the structural characteristics of the archaeologically excavated ancestral shrines and revealed that their structure and layout changed greatly during the Western Han Dynasty. I then concluded that these changes in ancestral shrines reflected changes in mourning and funeral rites and views of the soul in the same era. From the late Warring States period to the Han Dynasty, there was a major change in the tomb (陵墓) system, and ritual structures began to be built inside and outside the mausoleum's precincts (陵園). In the Mausoleum of Qin Shi Huang, a ritual building was placed near a mound in the northwest to serve as a living space for his soul, and the mausolea of the emperors of the Western Han dynasty followed this pattern, but the shrines for rites for their souls were set up in the southeast of the mound. The structure of the mausolea are similar to those of the Mingtang and Wang Mang Nine Temples 王莽 九廟 in the southern suburbs of Chang'an. They are similar in that they were decorated with tiles with the four directional gods. This structure is very different from the temples of the pre-Qin period, and it is presumed that that design was based on the views of Han Dynasty scholars who interpreted the Mingtang as the temple of the Son of Heaven. The reason that a mausoleum was set up next to the tomb during the Western Han Dynasty was because it was thought that the soul of the deceased would continue to live in the tomb, and in addition, a spirit seat (神坐) was set up inside the tomb to serve as a place for the soul. The earliest examples are found in the Mawangdui tombs 馬王堆漢墓 and the Mancheng tombs 満城漢墓 from the 2nd century BC. The spirit seats installed inside these tombs were set up on the west side facing eastward, and the food utensils were placed in front of it, following the ancestral rituals at ancestral shrine. Then, as if the dead themselves who would have been invisible, were there in attendance, rituals were performed for the souls of the dead
