ism tended to produce "impersonality," and if so, in what
sense. The doctrine of "ingwa,"[CZ] with its consequences on
character, demands fresh attention at this point. According to this
doctrine every event of this life, even the minutest, is the result of
one's conduct in a previous life, and is unalterably fixed by
inflexible law. "Ingwa" is the crude idea of fate held by all
primitive peoples, stated in somewhat philosophic and scientific form.
It became a central element in the thought of Oriental peoples. Each
man is born into his caste and class by a law over which neither he
nor his parents have any control, and for which they are without
responsibility. The misfortunes of life, and the good fortunes as
well, come by the same impartial, inflexible laws. By this system of
thought moral responsibility is practically removed from the
individual's shoulders. This doctrine is held in Japan far more widely
than the philosophic doctrine of the self, and is correspondingly
baleful.

This system of thought, when applied to the details of life, means
that individual choice and will, and their effect in determining both
external life and internal character have been practically lost sight
of. As a sociological fact the origin of this conception is not
difficult to understand. The primitive freedom of the individual in
the early communal order of the tribe became increasingly restricted
with the multiplication and development of the Hindu peoples; each
class of society became increasingly specialized. Finally the
individual had no choice whatever left him, because of the extreme
rigidity of the communal order. As a matter of fact, the individual
choice and will was allowed no play whatever in any important matter.
Good sense saw that where no freedom is, there moral responsibility
cannot be. All one's life is predetermined by the powers that be. Thus
we again see how vital a relation the social order bears to the
innermost thinking and belief of a people.

Still further. Once let the idea be firmly grounded in an individual
that he has no freedom of belief, of choice, or of act, and in the
vast majority of cases, as a matter of fact, he will have none. "As a
man thinketh in his heart, so is he." "According to your faith be it
unto you." This doctrine of individual freedom is one of those that
cannot be forced on a man who does not choose to believe it. In a true
sense, it is my belief that I am free that makes me free. As