2012年8月9日木曜日
2012年8月2日木曜日
Buddhism and kanji: two main borrowings of Kofun
02. 08. 2012
Last time we spoke of technical borrowings of Kofun. Today I would like to speak of two main intellectual borrowings of Kofun period:
Last time we spoke of technical borrowings of Kofun. Today I would like to speak of two main intellectual borrowings of Kofun period:
Buddhism and Chinese writing system.
According to Japanese chronicle Nihonshoki in 522 king
(wan) of Baekje
Songmyong sent his subject Norisa Chige with the following
gifts: a statue of Buddha some banners and sutras.
Norisa Chige also brought a letter of his king where
king of Baekje wrote that doctrine of Buddhism is a beautiful almighty magical mean
accepted by all states from distant India to three states of Korea.
Kimmei tenno didn’t want to decide himself about this
new belief so he let people of three most mighty clans (Soga, Mononobe,
Nakatomi) decide themselves about this new belief.
Soga decided that if all other states revere Buddha
the state of Yamato also was to do the same. But Mononobe and Nakatomi said
that if they set a cult of a new kami (Buddha) local traditional kami could be
offended.
After all Kimmei tenno said: “Let the statue of Buddha
will be given to that who desires it and let he tries to revere it”.
Soon after Soga clan began to revere Buddha happened
some epidemic diseases and Mononobe and Nakatomi decided that it happened due
to the new cult and threw statue of Buddha of Soga temple to the Naniwa
channel.
But Soga clan continued to revere Buddha and slowly
Buddhism spread.
The main point here is the following: in 5 – 6 centuries
there were some clans of high nobility who were believed to originated from kami
for instance Nakatomi were supposed to originate from Ame no Koyane no mikoto,
Mononobe from Nigi Hayahi no mikotob while Soga had no kami among ancestors, Soga
originated from Takuichi no Sukune a real person who was a successful militant
famous by his actions against so called “eastern barbarians”. Thus it is quite
obvious that Soga wanted to raise prestige of their clan.
It is important to note that tenno clan also was
interested in Buddhism cause Buddhism could be the base to unify interests of
different clans while traditional cults (Shinto) could not and instead were
good base for centrifugal tendencies.
Actually practically all groups were interested in
Buddhism cause they could get some profit from it.
First Buddhism was accepted outwardly without
understanding of its meaning, i.e. Buddha was considered just as one of mighty
kamuy/kami. And only a while later they started to grasp its real meaning.
But I am to tell that since the very beginning
Buddhism influenced to the Japanese culture. The main influence of Buddhism in
Japan is spread of Chinese writing system – kanji – Chinese signs.
All sutras were written in Chinese. To read them they
were to know Old Chinese or Wen Yan. Then they started to write original texts
in Chinese. It is important to note that hieroglyphs were convenient to
expression of Chinese language where words consisted usually of one syllable
but were not convenient for Japanese where words could consist of many
syllables.
So first Japanese wrote in Chinese then somebody
invented to use Chinese sings as signs for syllables: 多太 tada, 安佐 asa such way of writing
was called Man’yogana cause it was used in poetry anthology Manyoushuu
Since man’yogana they began to elaborate a standard
set of syllabary signs which resulted as katakana and hiragana.
Here are picture representing the development of signs
of katakana and hiragana from certain Chinese signs:
And finally we got kana kanji majiri bun: a system
where unchangeable part of word is written by kanji while changeable is written
by kana.
Kofun period
26.07.2012
Today I
would like to speak of Kofun period
Kofun is is
an era in the history of Japan from around 250 to 538
Kofun 古墳 means ‘ancient grave’. The period
is named Kofun cause its characteristic features is burial mounds.
The kofun
graves have assumed various shapes throughout history.
The most common type of kofun is known as a zempō-kōen-fun (前方後円墳, which is
shaped like a keyhole, having one square end and one circular end, when viewed from above.
The most common type of kofun is known as a zempō-kōen-fun (前方後円墳, which is
shaped like a keyhole, having one square end and one circular end, when viewed from above.
There are
also circular-typed empun 円墳, "two conjoined
rectangles" typed zempō-kōhō-fun 前方後方墳, and square-typed hōfun 方墳kofun (look at the first picture)
Also kofun
often were arranged with ditches.
Orientation
of kofun is not specified. Kofun range from several meters to over 400m long.
The largest, which has been attributed to legendary Nintoku emperor, is Daisen
kofun in Sakai City, Osaka Prefecture:
Haniwa (lit.: clay ring) figures, were arrayed above
and in the
surroundings to delimit and protect the sacred areas.
Haniwa (lit.: clay ring) figures, were arrayed above
Here are
some pictures of haniwa
Also there is a thought that haniwa could be substitutes of human
sacrifice. This thought is based on a legend of Kojiki/Nihon shoki describing
the rule of legendary emperor emperor
Suinin 垂仁天皇 who set practices of haniwa instead of burial of servants and slaves.
Kofun is obviously Korean influence. Burial mounds of
Japan are just development of those of Goguryeo.
it is especially
well seen in mural paint:
Korean:
Kofun:
Things
found in Kofun sites are obviously of Korean origin:
Swords:
Korean:
Kofun:
personal armor
A
reconstruction of male clothes:
A
reconstruction of female clothes:
History of Languages of Japan
19.07.2012
Because of it we have to pay most attention to structures in any linguistic question but especially while we deal with questions of genetic relationship.
What parameters should be the matter of research is a separated question but the fact that structures/grammar is much more important than lexis is the basement.
After the detecting of structural similarities we should of course find material similarities of exponents.
These two points i.e. structural similarities and material similarities of exponents seem to be necessary and enough to make a conclusion about genetic relationship.
Comparison of lexicon can't be proof of genetic relationship of languages. Still Swadesh himself warned against it. Moreover the term of "basic lexicon" is very questionable 'cause the whole of lexicon is culturally determined as it was shown by Hoyer.
Indefinite forms:
Past tense:
Today I
would like to speak of languages of Japan
Here are
maps which represent the history of spread of different languages of Japan:
well
First
language spoken pon Japanese islands was Ainu (here I use term Ainu just as a
convenient short term to denote Ainu stock in general; as well are “Korean” and
“Austronesian”).
why they decided
that language of Jomon was of Ainu stock? As I said in previous talks there are
firm proves of the fact that Jomon people were direct ancestors of Ainu:
anthropological
similarities of contemporary Ainu/Okinawan and Jomon people, Jomon people
existed in almost the same territory where Ainu exist now, many toponyms of
definitely Ainu origin (words consisted of Ainu roots and which can be clear
interpreted through Ainu language) were found there where never lived so called
“historical Ainu”.
When we
find many localities where site of Jomon epoch exist bearing names traceable to
Ainu roots, we can only assume that persons using the same language as the Ainu
were formerly established in such places.
Ainu
language is considered as an isolated by contemporary linguistics. Ainu
language differ radically from neighboor languages: Japanese, Korean, Nivkh,
Itelmen, Chinese, Tungusic languages and Austronesian languages.
Almost all of
Ainu language genetic relationship hypotheses were made with no care of
structure differences of compared languages but just on the base of coincident
similarities of some random lexemes so it is possible to state that research of
Ainu language in connection to its genetic relationship is in the very
beginning.
There are some
hypotheses trace Ainu to some stock of South-East Asia. One of the most
interesting is that of Alexander Vovin. Despite of lack attention paid to the structures of
compared languages and some serious mistakes of general kind his attempt is
very interesting and profound and is worth paid attention to.
By the
comparison lexis of contemporary Ainu dialects he made a reconstruction of so
called Proto-Ainu. Actually it’s not Proto but Upper-Jomon/Late Jomon language.
It was supposedly spoken in late Jomon (about 1000 – 500BC) Well, so he made a
reconstruction of phonology of that language and then compare it with
phonological systems of different SEA stocks: Hmong-Mien, Proto-Austronesian (Austronesian
stock: Polynesian, Micronesian and so on) and Proto-Austroasiatic stock
(Mon-Khmer). And came to the conclusion that phonology system of Proto-Ainu is
very close to that of Proto-Mon-Khmer, i.e. he stated that Ainu and Khmer are
distant relatives.
The main
critical note is that Vovin pays no attention to structural aspects. Ainu
language may be a distant relative of a certain language of a certain SEA
languages but should be shown more serious prooves of it, not only phonological
and lexical similarities. Should be shown structural similarities such as similarity of type of
linear model of word form, similarity of structure of verb paradigm. cause
language is not a heap of lexemes but is first of all a system of structures. So considering any linguistic
question we are to pay most attention to the structure but not to lexis or
phonology.
Each language is first of
all a structure but not just a heap of lexemes.Because of it we have to pay most attention to structures in any linguistic question but especially while we deal with questions of genetic relationship.
What parameters should be the matter of research is a separated question but the fact that structures/grammar is much more important than lexis is the basement.
After the detecting of structural similarities we should of course find material similarities of exponents.
These two points i.e. structural similarities and material similarities of exponents seem to be necessary and enough to make a conclusion about genetic relationship.
Comparison of lexicon can't be proof of genetic relationship of languages. Still Swadesh himself warned against it. Moreover the term of "basic lexicon" is very questionable 'cause the whole of lexicon is culturally determined as it was shown by Hoyer.
When I
tried to make some reconstruction by myself I made some similar conclusion on
Upper Jomon Ainu as Vovin did and I also I concluded that Upper Jomon Ainu
differed much from the contemporary one. I think that structure of ancient Ainu
was quite similar to that of SEA languages: morpheme is equal to a syllable,
auxiliaries could be placed on nuclear position as well.
Here I
would like to show an example of how it possibly could sounds alike:
Nga Res han
I am Tresi
Ta han pe nga
set han
This is is
my house
(actually
these examples a just a kinda conlang made after the facts of
reconstruction: it was made just to show
how it could be while real reconstruction is in process)
But under
the influence of Korean/Old Japanese ancient Ainu got morphology. I guess that Condition of permanent stress
and war cause the necessity of more economy use of speech. i.e.: make sentence
shorter and express more information in the same piece of speech, express it
more exactly, express all important facts in verb stem, thus appeared
morphology and so in modern Ainu we have:
Tres ku=ne
I am Tresi
And
Tampe
ku=cise ne
This is my
house
As it is
seen in maps
Japanese is
a relative of Korean (more exactly a descendant of Old Korean)
They have very similar
structure of sentence
SOV
And very similar structure
of word-form
(p)+( r ) + R + ( s )
Prefixation ain’t developed
well in Japanese as well as in Korean and most meanings are expressed by
suffixation
When we speak of comparison
of language we are to pay most attention to verbal structure cause verb is
spine of any language and in
verbal structures the most interesting and significant are way of expression of
tenses modality and so on. And in the case of Korean and Japanese we see the
following:
Indefinite forms:
Suru – hada – to do
Kuru “to come” – kada – “to
go”
Sumu – salda – to live
Past tense:
Sita - Hetta/haetta –
did/made
Kita – katta – came/went
(left form is Japanese and right is Korean)
(left form is Japanese and right is Korean)
Mul – midu -water
maɯl – mura – village
mwe – yama – mount
nun mul – na-mida - tear
(left is Korean and right is Japanese)
(left is Korean and right is Japanese)
Numerals of Old Japanese (left) and Goguryeo (right)
Mi mit 3
Itu utu 5
Nana nanɯm 7
Towo tok 10
Roots of Shintō
05.07.2012
Today i would like to speak of roots of Shintō/root Shintō.
First it is important to note that term Shintō should be revised because it is just an arctificial term invented in Heian period in order to distinguish local autochtonic beliefs from Buddhism and Taoism.
It is not possible now to say where from exactly Ainu came to the Japanese erchipelago (But there are some obvious facts that tell us that Ainu came from South for example the fact that Jomon culture began its spread from the south of Japanese archipelago. But it is well known that they settled all over archipelago from southern Ryukyu till Hokkaido and also Kuril islands and southern half of Sakhalin and southern end of Kamchatka.
Toponyms of Ainu origin corroborate this fact, for example: Tsushima <- Ainu.: tuyma – "distant", Fuji <- Ainu: huci – "grandma", "kamuy of fireplace"; Tsukuba <- Ainu: tu ku pa – "head of two bows", Yamatai <- Ainu: ya ma ta i - «place where harbour deeply cuts the land".
When beings die or when things are broken their ramat leaves them but doesn't disappear and goes to another place.
Some researchers, for example W.Aston, J. B. Sansom incorrectly interpreted gohei and nawa as development of sacrifice of phloem, hemp and dresses while under the influence of Ainu inaw which were substitutes even in Ainu culture, sacrifices got a form of gohei and nawa.
Today i would like to speak of roots of Shintō/root Shintō.
First it is important to note that term Shintō should be revised because it is just an arctificial term invented in Heian period in order to distinguish local autochtonic beliefs from Buddhism and Taoism.
This term
was invented according to Chinese samples: in Chinese culture there are many
doctrines, each of which is called as "a way something".
As far as
Chinese culture is culture of written signs, many doctrines and concepts can be
pretty fully expressed in written signs and through them gradually can be
pretty fully acquired.
Due to this
gradually acquire appears the analogy of "way", i.e. gradually moving
to a certain aim.
Actually Shintō
is not a "way", it is not a systematic religion but just a heap
of rather amorphous so called "atmospheric
cults".
However, it is possible to single out some basic concepts which are
common for all traditions belonging to Shintō.
These basic
concepts are: tamashii/tama 魂 “vital energy”/”soul energy” and kami 神 “a super human being”.
Tamashii penetrates by the whole world and
fills everything, fills all beings and all things. All beings and things are
endowed tamashii in different degree: some have a lot of tamashii but some have little.
It is good to have a lot of tama. More tamashii
you have more mighty you are. Kami have a lot of tamashii and can endow
tamashii 魂 or take
it away.
Therefore the purpose of any rite of
Shintō is to save present tamashii and
get it more: in order to save present tamashii and get
more it is need to contact with kami.
Both of
these concepts (tamashii and kami) are traced back to Ainu concepts ramat –
“soul exists” and kamuy “super human being”.
Ainu are
the most ancient population of Japanese archipelago, Kuril islands, Sakhalin
and Kamchatka peninsula.
From the
point of view of physical anthropology Ainu have no similarities with any
population of Asia and Pasific Rim except people of Japanese Neolithic culture
or so called "Jomon culture" (about 13000 BC till about 500 BC.)
Jomon is
Japanese calque of English term 'cord mark', 'cord marked pottery' which
describes a characteristic feature of the pottery of this archaeological
culture and on which this culture or a group of cultures was named.
Jomon
pottery is the oldest pottery of the world and one of the most beautiful also:
Situation
in historical linguistics is analogous of that of physical anthropology.
Ainu
language is considered as an isolated by contemporary linguistics. Ainu
language differ radically from neighboor languages: Japanese, Korean, Nivkh,
Itelmen, Chinese, Tungusic languages and Austronesian languages.
It is not possible now to say where from exactly Ainu came to the Japanese erchipelago (But there are some obvious facts that tell us that Ainu came from South for example the fact that Jomon culture began its spread from the south of Japanese archipelago. But it is well known that they settled all over archipelago from southern Ryukyu till Hokkaido and also Kuril islands and southern half of Sakhalin and southern end of Kamchatka.
Toponyms of Ainu origin corroborate this fact, for example: Tsushima <- Ainu.: tuyma – "distant", Fuji <- Ainu: huci – "grandma", "kamuy of fireplace"; Tsukuba <- Ainu: tu ku pa – "head of two bows", Yamatai <- Ainu: ya ma ta i - «place where harbour deeply cuts the land".
Also many
examples of Ainu toponyms can be found in Kindaichi Kyousuke works.
Later, when
so called Old Korean came Ainu were one of the main component of forming
Japanese ethnicity. Research of DNA of Japanese population showed that most
widely spread Y-japlogroup is D2 which is main Ainu Y-haplogroup (about 86% of
Ainu have it).
The most
notable fact is that Japanese and Korean have similar mtDNA while Korean have
practically no Y-DNA D2. (The Japanese are basically mix of ancient Ainu and
ancient Korean) That means that Ainu took Korean women but not vice versa. This
fact tells us that the rulers were Ainu. Most of Japanese nobility is of Ainu
origin.
Also Ainu
influenced seriously on forming Japanese creed, i.e. Shintō.
It is
notable fact that Japanese terms tamashii/tama and kami sounds much alike Ainu
terms ramat and kamuy and also expresses practically the same concepts:
Explaining
the meaning of this concept of ramat Neil Gordon Munro quotes the explanations
that he received from Ainu elders (ekasi): "KotanPira said ramat was
the backbone of Ainu religion.
Rennuikesh,
eighty years old, very active and intelligent, who came from the north of
Hokkaido, said: 'Whatever has no ramat has nothing'. Nisukrek and other elders
agreed with this: 'ramat is all-pervading and indestructible'.
Word ramat
consists of two morphemes: ram which means
"soul"/"mind"/"heart" and at which is similar to
such verbs as an/oka and oma which mean "to be"/"to
exist". So it can be interpreted as "soul exists"/"vital energy
exist".
(It is notable fact that many verbs of Ainu
language designating mental activity, are formed with ram root: ram
– to "think", e-ram-an – to "understand", e-ram-iskar
– "not to understand", e-ram-as – “to rejoice to something”)
Following
to Neil Gordon Munro it is possible to state that ramat is very much
alike to the Polynesian mana.
Every thing
and every being has ramat. One thing has a lot of ramat another
has little but nothing can exist without ramat. Ramat cannot be
annihilated.
When beings die or when things are broken their ramat leaves them but doesn't disappear and goes to another place.
So we can
see that features of ramat are very close to that of tama.
Also it is
interesting to note that tamashii/tama originated from the word ramat by its
sound:
In Ainu
language [ ɾ ] can easily become [ tɾ
] [ tl ][ dl ] [ t ] [ d ] [ l ]. In Old Japanese initial r was prohibited and
also there were no consonant claster and close syllables so Ainu word ramat
could become only tama/tamatV/tamasV in Old Japanese.
(Here sign
"V" means an unidentified vowel sound.)
As for
kamuy here there are some versions of etymology but following to John Batchelor
I think word kamuy consists of three morphemes: ka + mu
+ i and interpreted its meaning as 'something over us" or a
"super human being".
It should
be noted that concept kamuy differs seriously from European concepts
deus / god / Gott / dios / deux because European god (God of christianity) is a
transcendental being opposite to this world while kamuy exists in the
neighborhood of people and people can easily get kamuy mosir (island of
kamuy) and also people can become kamuy.
Because of
it, the word kamuy should not be translated as dew /god / Gott / dios /
deux into European languages. I think the best way is to leave the word kamuy
without any translation at all and explain its meaning with a certain context.
And
etymology of Japanese kami is the following: Old Ainu (Upper Jomon Ainu) ka-mu-'i
[kamuj] -> Old Japanese kamɯ -> Modern Japanese kami.
Meaning kami is completely the same as meaning of kamuy.
Kamuy has a lot of ramat and can
endow or take away ramat to other beings. Kamuy which endow ramat
are good, kamuy which take ramat away are bad.
Every event
of Ainu traditional life can be described in terms of ramat and kamuy. Any act
of Ainu tradition is intended to save and to magnify the existing ramat.
Because of it a thing which has much ramat and which can magnify ramat
is good thing; while thing which takes ramat away is bad.
Best way to
get more ramat is to communicate with kamuy. To communicate with kamuy we need
a special artifact – inaw – literary i-naw means "shaved",
"curled". Inaw A baton with savings
It is considered as an universal
pure thing for storage, getting or transfer ramat.
Having
offered inaw we set a cahnnel between our island/world and island/world of
kamuy. And by this channel ramat of kamuy flows to us.
The origin
of inaw is unclear, but there are ideas that it could origin from dogū - clay figurines of Jomon epoch of unknown means:
These
figurines are considered as substitutes of human sacrifice by some
anthropologists and inaw as they are development of dogū
have the same function.
But more
notable fact it that in shintō exist the same items as inaw. I
mean gohei 御幣 and and seminawa (締縄 or 標縄) or just nawa
縄 (word nawa itself seems to
originate from Ainu word naw/i-naw).
Some researchers, for example W.Aston, J. B. Sansom incorrectly interpreted gohei and nawa as development of sacrifice of phloem, hemp and dresses while under the influence of Ainu inaw which were substitutes even in Ainu culture, sacrifices got a form of gohei and nawa.
Japanese mechanically reproduced remotely an anthropomorphous form inaw,
without understanding its real content. Only this can explain why substitutes
of fabrics have the form, reminding substitutes of human sacrifices.
Thus we
have the following: tama/ramat is a clot of "living" a
concentration of spiritual energy or even just general energy. Tama/ramat
penetrates by the whole world and fills everything, fills all beings and all
things.
All beings
and things are endowed tama/ramat in different degree: some have a lot
of tama/ramat but some have little. More tama you have more mighty you
are. It is good to have a lot of tama.
Therefore
the purpose of any rite of Shintō/Ainu traditional creed is to save present tama/ramat
and get more.
Kami/kamuy is everything that has a lot of tama/ramat
and can endow tama other beings.
Kami/kamuy is all outstanding and
unusual, somehow, for example: thousand-year cedar, stone of a freakish form,
falls, mountain of Fuji, founder of the Panasonic company, emperor Meiji, master
of a calligraphy or, for example, famous musician or writer.
It is very
important to understand that often kami /kamuy is not any
personal/anthropomorphous being or a subject or a thing which can be presented,
touched or, in general, be felt by means of five feelings.
Much more
often kami /kamuy is certain amorphous force, for example, force of an
attraction of Earth to the Sun also is a kami/kamuy, forces operating in
an atomic nucleus between protons and neutrons also are kami/kamuy, and
other similar phenomena also are kami/kamuy.
The purpose of any rite of Shintō is
to save present tama/ramat and
get it more: in order to save present tama/ramat and get
more it is need to contact with kami/kamuy.
Does anybody have any questions?
登録:
投稿 (Atom)