Jindai moji: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:11, 7 December 2011

Jindai moji or Kamiyo moji (Japanese: 神代文字 “scripts of the age of the gods”) are characters that was said to be scripts used in ancient Japan. Debates since Edo period and Japanese academic society regard Jindai moji as forgeries^[1] . Although ancient character researchers insisted the existence as Uetsufumi or Hotsumatae found, it is denied in historiography because of no existence of earthenware with it^[2]. It is said that there is no academic value to study Jindai moji because the conclusion will point out they are forgeries if you research them in academic manner^[2]. People who believe in the existence use the word Jindai moji in the meaning of "ancient characters". Since around mid-Edo period some people have been saying ancient characters were found in remains, Kofuns and mountains such as Chikushi characters, Hokkaido characters. Hundreds kinds of Jindai moji were said to be found.

History

Jindai moji was firstly addressed in the end of Kamakura period by Urabe no Kanekata (卜部兼方) in Shaku Nihongi mentioning his father, Urabe no Kanefumi, assumed ancient people could not have performed oracle bone style fortunetelling with turtles (亀卜, Kameura; turtle fortunetelling) as described in Nihon Shoki without having characters. Though there was no Jindai moji characters introduced in Muromachi period, some types of Jindai moji appeared in Edo period and each of them named after the source article or the place the characters discovered. Debate over the existence erupted in Edo period. Japanese academic society denies the existence^[1] . In 1930, there was the case that the religious group called Amatsukyō was charged with Lese-majesty by special higher police. Amatsukyō used documents that was partly written in Jindai moji (introduc Koshikoden into as the Scripture) and some famous scholars or educators in linguistics had to give testimony in court to prove how the documents written in Jindai moji were forgeries. Since positive opinions on Jindai moji sound as occultism to Japanese people^{[citation needed]}. Jindai moji is completely denied in Japanese academism^[2]^[3].

Criticism

In Edo period, the existence of Jindai moji was disputed. The existence was supported by scholars such as Tsurumine Shigenobu (鶴峯戊申). Hirata Atsutane changed his opinion from negative to positive. Some scholars denied the existence of Jindai moji such as Kaibara Ekken, Dazai Shundai (太宰春台), Kamo no Mabuchi, Motoori Norinaga and Tō Teikan (藤貞幹). The most famous article that denied the existence of Jindai moji was Jindaiji ben (神代字弁) attached to Kana no motosue (仮字本末) by Ban Nobutomo (伴信友) which empirically denied the existence and concluded they were forgeries.

Summary of the general negative reasons were shown below.

Ancient document
Kogo Shūi written in 808 clearly denoted there had been no characters before Kanji arrived to Japan. It was about 500 years before Urabe no Kanekata mentioned Jindai moji. Also, there was no document mentioning unique characters before that^[1].
Number of syllables and writing method of Kana mismatched with Old Japanese
Shinkichi Hashimoto studied documents in Nara period written in Man'yōgana and found Jōdai Tokushu Kanazukai that proved there were 88 syllables. However, the syllables in most of Jindai mojis matched Gojūon and Iroha which were formed in Heian period. Also, Jindai moji is not following order of Old Japanese writing method of Kana^[1] .
No existence before Heian period^[1]
There must have been no need to use Man'yōgana and to invent Hiragana and Katakana if they had unique characters before^[1].

Jindai moji is denied at Japanese academic societies because there are poor scientific evidence^[1]. Recent archaeology evolution strengthen the negative reasons as Jindai moji was not found at any place.

Affirmation

While scholars generally have negative opinions, Some scholars such as 忌部正通、Arai Hakuseki、Hirata Atsutane 、Takamasa Omiya(大国隆正) affirmed the existence of Jindai moji which Urabe no Kanekata (卜部兼方) first mentioned in Shaku-Nihongi in Kamakura era.
Summary of the general positive reasons were shown below.

Ancient document
Shaku Nihongi says "There are six or seven documents which was written in “characters of Hi Province"(肥人の字、Ahiru characters) in Ministry of the Treasury"
Discovery in recent years
Some sort of characters were found also in Ryukyu^[4], or Ezo^[5].

The usage of Jindai Moji

Representative uses are as follows.

To use for Shinto.For example,Shintai of Jinja,Amulet,Ofuda,and so on.
To dedicate for Jinja.(Jingū Library of Ise Grand Shrine has a lot of document)
Jindai Moji was used as a kind of code of Ninja.
To prevent forgery of the money

Famous Jindai Moji

Ahiru characters（阿比留文字、肥人書）
Ahiru kusa characters（阿比留草文字、薩人書）
Tsukushi characters（筑紫文字）
Katakamuna characters（カタカムナ文字、八鏡化美津文字）
Hokkaido characters（北海道異体文字、アイヌ文字）
Ryukyu characters（琉球古字）
Toyokuni characters（豊国文字、神宮文字）
Tsushima characters （対馬文字）

Notable references

『上古文字論批判』新村　出 (1898) Shinmura Izuru Criticism on ancient character theories
『國語学概論』橋本進吉[1] (1925) Shinkichi Hashimoto Introduction of national language study
『藝林』(藝林會発行)第4巻(1958) ("Geirin" vol.4 Geirinkan)
『日本古代文字考』落合直澄(1888) Naozumi Ochiai Thought on Japanese ancient characters
『神代文字研究原典』吾郷清彦(1975)Kiyohiko Ago The original of Study of Japanese ancient characters

References

^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g Tsukishima, Hiroshi (1964). National language study 国語学 (in Japanese). Japan: Tokyo University Publishing. p. 47–48. {{cite book}}: More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)
^ ^a ^b ^c Kawaguchi(川口）, Kōfū（高風） (1994). Debate over Jindai moji with Tainin-Risshi [諦忍律師の神代文字論をめぐる論争]. JP: Aichi Gakuin University Journal volume41-3. p. 214. Quote:[In the world of national language study(Japanese), it is completely denied that Jindai moji had ever existed.]現在の国語学界において、神代文字が存在したことは全く否定されている。 [Moreover, from the historical study view point, the existence is denied by not having found any earthenware.]さらに歴史学の上からは出土器の有無などにより、存在が否定されている。 [Regarding Jindai moji, it is said that there is no value to study because the conclusion will be they are forgeries if you cite the fake source written later in history even though you try to describe it academically.]神代文字について学問的に論及しようとしても後世の偽作資料による偽作の結論となるため、考察すべき価値はないとも言われている。
^ Naozumi Ochiai Thought on Japanese ancient characters [日本古代文字考] Komakisha 1888; republished by Yahata Shoten 1982
^ 神谷由道（1886）『東京人類学会報告』第9号 Yoshimichi Kamiya（1886）Anthropological Science（Japanese Series） No.9
^ 坪井正五郎（1887）『東京人類学会雑誌』第18号 Shogoro Tsuboi(1887) Anthropological Science（Japanese Series）No.18

http://eos.kokugakuin.ac.jp/modules/xwords/entry.php?entryID=1225

External links

Kamiyo Moji (ancient origin theory)
Template:Ja icon Jindai moji fonts
Template:Ja icon Gallery of jindai moji
Template:Zh icon Another such gallery

This article relating to Shinto is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

[tsukishima-1] ^ ^a ^b ^c ^d ^e ^f ^g Tsukishima, Hiroshi (1964). National language study 国語学 (in Japanese). Japan: Tokyo University Publishing. p. 47–48. {{cite book}}: More than one of |pages= and |page= specified (help)

[Kofu1994-2] Kawaguchi(川口）, Kōfū（高風） (1994). Debate over Jindai moji with Tainin-Risshi [諦忍律師の神代文字論をめぐる論争]. JP: Aichi Gakuin University Journal volume41-3. p. 214. Quote:[In the world of national language study(Japanese), it is completely denied that Jindai moji had ever existed.]現在の国語学界において、神代文字が存在したことは全く否定されている。 [Moreover, from the historical study view point, the existence is denied by not having found any earthenware.]さらに歴史学の上からは出土器の有無などにより、存在が否定されている。 [Regarding Jindai moji, it is said that there is no value to study because the conclusion will be they are forgeries if you cite the fake source written later in history even though you try to describe it academically.]神代文字について学問的に論及しようとしても後世の偽作資料による偽作の結論となるため、考察すべき価値はないとも言われている。

[jindaimoji-3] Naozumi Ochiai Thought on Japanese ancient characters [日本古代文字考] Komakisha 1888; republished by Yahata Shoten 1982

[4] 神谷由道（1886）『東京人類学会報告』第9号 Yoshimichi Kamiya（1886）Anthropological Science（Japanese Series） No.9

[5] 坪井正五郎（1887）『東京人類学会雑誌』第18号 Shogoro Tsuboi(1887) Anthropological Science（Japanese Series）No.18

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Unreliable sources|date=November 2011}}
 {{Original research|date=November 2011}}
+{{cleanup|reason = poor English}}
 '''''Jindai moji''''' or '''''Kamiyo moji''''' (Japanese: {{lang|ja|神代文字}} “scripts of [[The Age of the Gods|the age of the gods]]”) are characters that was said to be scripts used in ancient Japan. Debates since [[Edo period]] and Japanese academic society regard Jindai moji as forgeries<ref name=tsukishima /> .
 Although ancient character researchers insisted the existence as Uetsufumi or Hotsumatae found, it is denied in historiography because of no existence of earthenware with it<ref name=Kofu1994 />. It is said that there is no academic value to study Jindai moji because the conclusion will point out they are forgeries if you research them in academic manner<ref name=Kofu1994>{{cite book|last=Kawaguchi(川口）|first=Kōfū（高風）|title=Debate over Jindai moji with Tainin-Risshi [諦忍律師の神代文字論をめぐる論争]|year=1994|publisher=Aichi Gakuin University Journal volume41-3|location=JP|page=214}} Quote:[In the world of national language study(Japanese), it is completely denied that Jindai moji had ever existed.]''現在の国語学界において、神代文字が存在したことは全く否定されている。''  [Moreover, from the historical study view point, the existence is denied by not having found any earthenware.]''さらに歴史学の上からは出土器の有無などにより、存在が否定されている。''  [Regarding Jindai moji, it is said that there is no value to study because  the conclusion will be they are forgeries if you cite the fake source written later in history even though you try to describe it academically.]''神代文字について学問的に論及しようとしても後世の偽作資料による偽作の結論となるため、考察すべき価値はないとも言われている。'' </ref>.