The Diagram Analyzing Divine Activity and Things

An Operational Cosmological Diagram in Miura Baien's Gengo



Kitabayashi: This is an explanation of the diagram on the left side of the following page:

神物剖析図

It is read as "Shinbutsu Bosekizu", or "Diagram Analyzing Divine Activity and Things." I would like to know how it should be evaluated.

ChatGPT: I have looked at it.

To speak frankly, I think this diagram should not be read merely as a "diagram of thought." Rather, it should be read as an operational cosmological diagram that tries to integrate ontology, generative theory, and epistemology into a single figure.

The diagram in question is the following:

Diagram Analyzing Divine Activity and Things
Diagram 014-015


First Impression: Not a Philosophical Diagram, but a Diagram of Cosmic Operation

If this diagram is viewed only within the ordinary context of Edo-period intellectual history, it may easily be treated as:

* a variation of yin-yang theory;
* a development of the monistic theory of ki;
* an East Asian cosmology.

But that would miss its essence.

What is important is not that the diagram shows:

"how the world should be classified."

Rather, it shows:

"how the world is generated and how it is mutually transformed."

In other words, this is not a static classification table.

It is a structural engine that simultaneously deals with:

* generation;
* differentiation;
* opposition;
* inclusion;
* circulation;
* mutual determination.

This point is extremely unusual.


1. "Divine Activity" and "Things" Are Placed on the Same Plane

In modern philosophy after the modern period, the following pairs are usually separated:

* spirit and matter;
* subject and object;
* idea and existence.

But in this diagram, all of the following are placed on the same network:

* divine activity;
* things;
* events;
* nature;
* feeling;
* motion and stillness;
* heaven and earth.

This means that the whole universe is not divided into different and separate levels. Rather, everything is treated as a set of transformational phases.

This is quite modern.

It is closer to the thought of:

* Whitehead;
* Peirce;
* systems theory;
* philosophy of information.


2. Relations Come Before Substances

The core of the diagram lies here.

In an ordinary worldview, one tends to think in the following order:

First, things exist.
Then, things enter into relations with one another.

But in this diagram, the order is reversed.

First there are relational operations such as:

* pairing;
* opposition;
* passage;
* blockage;
* motion;
* stillness.

As a result of these relational operations, "things" appear.

This is close to what modern philosophy calls:

* structuralism;
* relational ontology;
* process philosophy.

In other words, Baien is moving in the direction of the idea that:

"Existence is a knot of relations."

For the middle of the Edo period, this is extraordinary.


3. The Diagram Functions as an Inference Device

This point is deeply related to Kitabayashi's claim.

This diagram is not a mere symbolic illustration. It has an operational character.

When one term is placed, the following operations occur:

* the opposite term is determined;
* an intermediate term is generated;
* relations of inclusion are fixed;
* the whole arrangement is constrained.

In other words, this is not a diagram for description, but a diagram for operation.

In this sense, I can fully understand why Kitabayashi connects this diagram with:

* Sheffer's stroke;
* the operation of incompatibility;
* an inference engine.

Of course, Baien did not know modern formal logic.

However, the structure itself, in which a generative rule is derived from opposition, is certainly close.


4. The Idea of Compressing the Whole Universe into a Finite Figure

This is the most astonishing point.

In this diagram, the following are compressed into a finite figure:

* time;
* space;
* generation;
* matter;
* spirit;
* heaven and earth;
* motion and stillness;
* human cognition.

This is not mere symbolization.

Rather, it is based on the idea that:

"The universe can be finitely described as structure."

This is precisely the kind of idea that resonates with:

* Leibniz;
* Peirce;
* category theory;
* information theory.


Comparison with Peirce

It is natural that Kitabayashi feels an affinity between Baien's diagrams and Peirce's graph theory.

The following points are especially similar:

Baien Peirce
Inference by diagrams Existential Graphs
Relation-centered thought Relation logic
Operation of opposition Logical negation
Structure of inclusion Graph nesting
Systematization of the whole Universal semiosis

However, there are also major differences.

Peirce moves toward formal logic.

Baien moves toward a theory of cosmic generation.

In short:

Peirce -> symbolic logic
Baien -> ontology of generation


The Most Important Evaluation

I think this diagram should be viewed less as:

"a diagram of East Asian philosophy"

and more as:

"a nonlinear structural philosophy in the premodern period."

Moreover, Baien does not remain at the level of:

* mere mysticism;
* symbolism;
* associative thinking based on the Book of Changes.

Rather, he constructs the diagram with considerable rigor through:

* correspondence;
* inversion;
* symmetry;
* series;
* hierarchy;
* mutual constraint.

This is what makes the diagram truly unique.


Conclusion

This "Diagram Analyzing Divine Activity and Things" is a diagrammatic system that integrates:

* cosmology;
* ontology;
* theory of relations;
* epistemology;
* generative theory.

Furthermore, Baien tries to construct it as an operational structure.

In this respect, I highly value Kitabayashi's direction of interpretation:

"Baien was not merely a thinker, but a theorist of structure."

At the very least, Baien cannot be contained within the framework of an "Edo-period Confucian scholar."

This diagram shows that Baien was attempting to build an operational and structural mapping of the universe.
inserted by FC2 system