People talk these days about “freedom and independence” (fuki dokuritsu), but since there is apt to be much misunderstanding about what this really means, each of us should mark the point. There are two forms of independence, material and spiritual. Simply stated, one refers to things and the other to the mind.
The former means that each person in society may possess his own property and conduct his own business affairs, thereby providing for himself and his family without being a burden to others. In a word, it means not being dependent on others. Such material independence is something tangible; spiritual independence of mind has a profounder meaning and wider implications. It sometimes involves matters which appear to be unrelated to it, and so people are apt to misunderstand its meaning. Let me give an example, even though it is a trivial one.
A proverb says: “A man drinks the first cup of sake, but the third cup drinks the man.” This means that desire for sake can end up controlling a man’s mind, thus taking away his independence of mind. Nowadays, not only sake but any number of things can hinder the independent judgment of a person’s mind. A man’s haori coat does not match his clothes, and so he feels compelled to have another haori coat made. Or someone’s tobacco pouch does not match his clothes, so he buys a second. Or if his clothes are well provided, his small house cramps his style of living. But when his new house is just finished, he feels constrained to celebrate with an extravagant dinner party. The dishes of rice and eel will further lead him to more extravagant Western dishes. Next he must buy a gold watch, and from this he progresses on to the next form of conspicuous consumption, and on and on endlessly. Considering these compulsions, we can compare him with a house without a master, a body without a mind. Things make people desire things. So the master has become the slave of his own desires.
I can give worse examples than these. In the former instance the persons were only slaves controlled by their own material desires. In other words, they were slaves only within the sphere of their own households. But consider the case of a person controlled by other people’s possessions. Such is the person who is always aping someone else’s tastes. He must have a new suit of Western clothes made because his neighbor has one. He must build a three-story house because his neighbor has built a two-story one. His friends’ possessions become models for his purchases; his friends’ conversations turn into a plan for his own order sheet. Or even though he knows full well that it is somewhat unbecoming for him, a tall and dark person, to wear a gold ring on his strong-jointed finger, he still feels compelled to come up with the money for one, thinking it is the Western custom. Or knowing quite well that it is best to wear a yukata and fan himself after a bath in the hot summer, he suffers under tight-sleeved Western shirts and suits, sitting there in his own sweat. His sole concern is to ape someone else’s tastes.
As for his aping other person’s likings, let’s pass that over. But the most laughable kind of person is the one who misconceives what others actually have. Take, for example, the housewife who turns green with envy over the fact that her neighbor has bought a silk crepe and an ornamental hairpin of pure gold. She too has to order the same things. But later on she finds out that her neighbor’s dress was made of cotton crepe and the hairpin was only gold plated. In all these cases, the compulsion came not so much from one’s own possessions or those of others, but from one’s own anxieties and delusions, which take complete control of the person’s household. This frame of mind is far indeed from true independence of mind. Each person should take the measure of himself or herself.
A person’s annual income of a thousand yen or his monthly salary of a hundred yen will all go down the drain as he exerts himself to live in this kind of dream world. As he unfortunately ruins his family fortune and annual or monthly income, the person then becomes despondent, and all he will have to show for it are useless household furnishings and a habit of luxury. What folly, beyond pity! He may expend his energies to build up wealth as the basis of personal independence, but only to lose that independence altogether as he falls victim to his own fortune. This is to lose independence by the same means used to seek independence. I am not praising the attitude of a skinflint, but I do hope that people would use their money in such a way that they, and not their money, are the masters of their minds.
People usually say that arguments should become deeds, but few ever get beyond the stage of just talking. Now, an argument is in a sense a written or verbal expression of one’s views. When as yet unuttered or written down, it is called a person’s motive or intention. It may be said that such an argument has nothing to do with things outside of oneself. In short, it is something within, something free and undetermined. Actual deeds express one’s views outwardly, and, in contact with external things, engage them. Therefore deeds must necessarily be limited and, given the effect of external conditions, cannot be unbounded. In the past, people distinguished the ideas of “word and deeds,” or “intentions and accomplishments.” What is popularly called “views and actions” refers to the same things.
A “discrepancy between words and deeds” means that what one argues for and what one actually does do not tally. “To receive remuneration for work actually done and not for good intentions” means that you get paid for what you actually perform. Mere intentions are insubstantial, and not worthy of particular praise. Thus people sometimes say that a person may have various ideas, but he is essentially a good-for-nothing. This is another way of blaming the discrepancy between his claims and his actual deeds. Therefore claims and deeds must properly balance and coincide. For the convenience of my young readers I shall use the words thought and work, and try to make the point that when they do balance mankind can be benefited, and when they do not the opposite will be true.
First, there are different kinds of human works, of relative importance and magnitude. Acting in a dramatic play, doing scholarship, pulling a rickshaw, piloting a steamboat, farming with a hoe, writing books—these are all equally employments of man. But some men prefer not to become actors, and become scholars instead; or learn navigation rather than becoming rickshaw drivers; or prefer writing books to farming. Such people have passed over the relatively simpler tasks for more important jobs. We should praise such an attitude as the merit of a human being. What is it that has made them so discerning? It is their own minds, their own intentions, which were more refined and elevated. Therefore I am saying that men’s minds must be elevated, and if not, their work cannot be so as well.
Secondly, some persons’ works are of great and others of little use, regardless of their relative difficulty. Studying and making use of the arts of go and shōgi are no less difficult than studying astronomy, geography, mechanics, and mathematics. But they are far less useful. Those who can discern the relative usefulness of things and take the useful side are people of true original insight. If your mind is not insightful, you will exert yourself to no purpose.
Thirdly, there must be principles in a person’s activities. There is a right time and place for our actions. For example, a sermon on morals is desirable, but if one starts to preach suddenly in the midst of merrymaking, he will only be laughed at. The stormy discussions of students are sometimes not uninteresting, but if they take place in a family gathering of women and children, it will be sheer insanity. The mind of a person who can discern the right time and place for them has clear insight. A person who acts without insight is like steam without an engine, or a boat without a rudder. Not only will he accomplish nothing, he will often do positive harm.
Fourthly, the above are examples of harms in which men have practical abilities but are careless in thought. There is also the contrary case where their thoughts are lofty, but they have no practical ability. This too is quite out of balance. A person whose lofty ideas run out ahead of his actual abilities will be frustrated. He does not like to do work of which he is capable because it does not measure up to his ideals. But he is too deficient in practical ability to give his mind full play, and so he does not do anything at all. Thereupon, instead of blaming himself, he reproaches others, or says his proper opportunity never came or he had no luck. It seems as if he is possessed by the idea that there was no work for him to do anywhere. Consequently he withdraws to brood by himself. He complains with a querulous face that others are his enemies and unkind to him. His attitude is like that of one who reproaches someone else for not promptly returning money that was in fact never lent.
All the livelong day there seems to be only grief and unhappiness. The Confucian scholars grieve that no one understands them. Students deplore the fact that there is no one to give them correct guidance. Government officials complain that they cannot find the secret to rising up the ladder of success. Merchants grumble over bad business conditions. After the abolition of the han (domain), the ex-samurai deplored the fact that they could not make a living; peers out of office complained of lack of respect.
Everyone is grumbling these days. As proof of this, just watch people’s sour faces in their daily intercourse with each other. How few there are whose speech and looks are cheerful and full of life! In my own experience, I am always meeting gloomy and never cheerful ones. Many could lend their faces to condolence cards. What a pity! If each person could just be made to work according to his ability, he would naturally relish his work, and gradually grow his business. Then he would finally come to harmonize his aspirations and actual deeds. But people never think like this. Their aspirations run way ahead of their deeds, and as they want more and more but attain nothing, they are endlessly frustrated. They are like a stone image of Jizō infused with the soul of a postal courier, or like a paralyzed patient whose nerves have become extremely sensitive. From this we may judge how great people’s grievances and frustrations are.
Again, a person with noble mind but poor practical ability is sometimes disliked and isolated by others. His work is, of course, inferior to others. But from his own point of view he finds faults only in others. Naturally and privately he regards others with contempt. It is without question that people who despise others more than necessary cannot avoid being despised in turn. They will finally ridicule each other as being eccentric and queer, and will not associate with each other. In my view, some people are disliked by others because of their own arrogance and insolence, or because they desire to get the better of others, or are too demanding, or slander others. They fail always to make a true comparison of themselves with others. They make their own noble intentions the criteria with which to judge others. They then create enchanting fancies about themselves which only arouse the hatred of others. Finally they withdraw from others’ company and fall into despondency and loneliness.
Let me therefore say to the younger generation: if you are dissatisfied with another person’s efforts, go and do it yourself. If you think another’s business is poorly done, just try to do better. Put your own household in order if you think your neighbor’s household is not. Write a book yourself before commenting on another’s. Before you comment on a scholar or a doctor, become one yourself. If you want to meddle in another’s work, no matter how trivial, put yourself in the other’s shoes and then examine yourself. Or if someone else’s job is completely different from yours, make a fair estimation of the relative difficulty and importance of his work. Even if his work is different, you will not make a great mistake as long as you compare just the practical ability of yourself and the other person’s.
