to the Buddhistic teaching, however, the "in," or cause, is in one
world, while the "gwa," or effect, is in the other. The suffering, for
instance, or any misfortune that overtakes one in this present life,
is the "gwa" or effect of what was done in the previous, and is thus
inevitable. The individual is working off in this life the "gwa" of
his last life, and he is also working up the "in" of the next He is
thus in a kind of vise. His present is absolutely determined for him
by his past, and in turn is irrevocably fixing his future. Such is the
Buddhistic "wheel of the law." The common explanation of misfortune,
sickness, or disease, or any calamity, is that it is the result of
"ingwa," and that there is, therefore, no help for it. The paralyzing
nature of this conception on the development of character, or on
activity of any kind, is apparent not only theoretically but actually.
As an escape from the inexorable fatality of this scheme of thought,
the Buddhist faith of the common people has resorted to magic. Magic
prayers, consisting of a few mystic syllables of whose meaning the
worshiper may be quite ignorant, are the means for overcoming the
inexorableness of "ingwa," both for this life and the next. "Namu
Amida Butsu," "Namu Myo Ho Ren Ge Kyo," "Namu Hen Jo Kongo," are the
most common of such magic formulae. These prayers are heard on the lips
of tens of thousands of pious pilgrims, not only at the temples, but
as they pass along the highways. It is believed that each repetition
secures its reward. Popular Buddhism's appeal to magic was not only
winked at by philosophical Buddhism, but it was encouraged. Magic was
justified by religious philosophy, and many a "hoben," "pious device,"
for saving the ignorant was invented by the priesthood. It will be
apparent that while Buddhism has in certain respects a vigorous system
of punishment for sin, yet its method of relief is such that the
common people can gain only the most shallow and superficial views of
salvation. Buddhism has not served to deepen the sense of
responsibility, nor helped to build up character. That the more
serious-minded thinkers of the nation have, as a rule, rejected
Buddhism is not strange.

One point of great interest for us is the fact that this
eschatological and soteriological system was imported, and is not the
spontaneous product of Japan. The wide range of national religious
characteristics thus clearly traceable to Buddhistic influence sh