NISHITANI Osamu, The Imperialism of Liberty. Another look at America

For me, it seems like a strange coincidence that I came across professor Nishitani's book. When I worked on the French translation of the first few chapters in America: An Aberrant Institutional Space, I was still a doctoral student studying waka and literature in Chinese of the Nara period. I was so preoccupied with Japan in the Nara period that I seldom thought about American or Western history. At that time, "West of Japan" reminded me not of the "West" but of "China" (especially the Chinese empire during the Tang Dynasty), which was mentioned throughout the references in my doctoral dissertation. Furthermore, like the people of the Nara period, I rarely thought of the Portuguese of the Age of Exploration, who play a very important role in professor Nishitani's book.
Having said that, when a proposal came in to translate a Japanese philosophy book into French, I decided to take it on. The first reason, as I am sure supervisors around the world are well aware, is that doctoral students like to work on something that allows them to forget, for a time, about their doctoral dissertations, which can feel like a burden. Another reason was that I was acutely aware of the necessity of providing French readers with essays written by Japanese authors, but not on Japanese studies. Japanese philosophy books, when translated into Western languages, are often very carefully crafted and well written, but the general trend is that they are rarely translated. As a result, the voices of Japanese scholars and intellectuals who take up topics other than Japanese history and Japanese philosophy rarely reach the Western discursive space. The reason why I regret this situation is not "in spite of" those voices coming from Japan, but precisely because they come from Japan, bringing new perspectives and discoveries. As professor Nishitani points out in his preface to the French edition, Japanese philosophy reached a turning point when it entered the Meiji era. It is undeniable that its philosophy expresses its concepts in terms borrowed from Western texts rather than in words that resemble Western philosophical terminology. At the same time, however, it must be admitted that it discusses things from a uniquely Japanese perspective. It can be said that a kind of sense of distance and sharpness of gaze that is unique to Japanese philosophy is precisely due to this positioning. In this sense, the Japanese conceptual space is superimposed on the Western philosophical tradition, and for this reason, among the specialists in Western philosophy that Japanese universities have produced, there are many outstanding scholars, and they maintain an externality that is difficult for Westerners to attain.
Speaking of the keen eye of Japanese philosophers, I had a realization on a day when I was discussing with professor Nishitani and the publisher's collections manager, professor Supiot. The discussion was about the extent to which the Japanese word for "world" ("sekai") overlaps with the Western concept of "monde." For professor Supiot, who has read and loved Simone Weil, the French word "monde" originates from the classical Greek word "cosmos," which, passing through the Latin word "mundus" (regular, clean), which reflects its connotation, means a world with a specific order. The "world" is not an empty space, so to speak, but a place filled with meaning, where human life can put down its roots. Needless to say, professor Nishitani has a precise grasp of this meaning. The history of the United States, as described in America: An Aberrant Institutional Space, is the history of a country of freedom released from the shackles of the past, and the history of a country that seeks to expand its freedom to the neglect of all cultural and symbolic meanings. At the same time, however, professor Nishitani, who sees the world as meaningful, was well aware that the concept of "world" ("sekai"), like "freedom" ("jiyuu"), did not exist or had taken on a different form before the philosophers and translators of the Meiji era translated Western philosophical terminology. Incidentally, in translating the word "monde" with "sekai," the Meiji people were using a term from Buddhism, which had already brought a shock to China and Japan more than a thousand years earlier.
I learned something important from that exchange. I learned something important from that exchange. Even when we study the present day, we will inevitably find a composition that intersects the more familiar axes of knowledge in the study of antiquity. These axes are the philosophical traditions of the West, Japan, China, and India. In other words, even I, who have a strong nostalgic streak, was familiar with them. My hope is that professor Nishitani's books will inspire readers in the same way, and that philosophy books written by Japanese today will continue to be translated, so that French readers can enjoy a small taste of the richness of Japanese philosophy as it is being written today.