Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 2001 28/1–2 REVIEW ARTICLE After the Storm Matsumoto Shirõ’s Transition from “Critical Buddhism” to “Critical Theology” Steven HEINE MATSUMOTO Shirõ Çûtμ, Dõgen shisõ ron Šâ„`Ç. Tokyo: Daizõ Shuppan, 2000. x + 672 pp. ¥15,000 cloth, ISBN 4-8043-0543-2. WHAT HAS HAPPENED to Critical Buddhism (hihan Bukkyõ -|[î) since the high point of “the storm”? That is how co-editors Jamie HUB- BARD and Paul SWANSON (1997) referred to the period of intense con- troversy concerning the movement’s methods and conclusions about “true” or pure Buddhism based on causality versus “impure” or cor- rupted Buddhism. According to Critical Buddhism, the contaminated „tmav„da-like doctrines of original enlightenment (hongaku û·), tath„gatagarbha (nyoraizõ Øû‰), and Buddha-nature (busshõ [§) have contributed to social de³ciencies in Japan, such as compliance with nationalism, militarism, emperor veneration, Japanism, and social discrimination. In the past few years the hyperbole of Critical Buddhism that dis- missed so many doctrines, schools, and individuals as heretical or un- Buddhistic has declined. The focus has largely shifted to a more localized debate on the role of theology (shðgaku ;¿) within Sõtõ studies. 1 MATSUMOTO Shirõ’s new book, Dõgen shisõ ron (Studies of Dõgen’s thought), 2 which advocates a position he refers to as “Critical 1 The term shðgaku literally means “sectarian studies” but has the broader implication of “theology” in the sense used by David Tracy: “intellectual reµection within a religious tradition” that is situated between talk about God and historical studies (cited in JACKSON 2000, p. 2). 2 The ³rst half of Dõgen shisõ ron deals exclusively with Dõgen and the debate about Critical Theology, and the second half—which is not discussed in this review—examines nearly three dozen post-Hui-neng masters of Chinese Ch’an, as a follow-up to MATSUMOTO’s previous