84 



beads change, so do the phenomenal appearances of individuals (if we think 

 of unlimited time). These beads somewhat correspond to the genes of which I 

 have spoken before ; and they in the limited sense of phenomenal appearances 

 correspond, at the same time, to what are called genes by the student of 

 genetics. It must be granted, however, that though I have compared the 

 beads to the genes, yet the former denote only fixed qualities of something 

 generated, while the latter indicate generating qualities united with something- 

 generated. I may here add another simile* as an explanation of my 

 conception of individuals and genes. The universe is like a boundless net 

 with innumerable millions of crystalline beads, each on a mesh of a different 

 colour, each reflecting the images of other beads, and each consequently 

 presenting different hues, according to the position of the observer. The beads 

 present different hues, according as they are observed from this point or that. 

 It is, however, only in their phenomena that they are different ; in their real 

 entities, they are all and ever the same crystalline beads. Each, bead with 

 innumerable millions of reflected images (say dots) of all varieties of colours 

 (of wliich it must be understood some are visible, but some are invisible, 

 according to the position of the observer) is something like an individual, and 

 the images on each bead (the dots of different colours) correspond, so to speak, 

 to the genes of wliich I have spoken above. 



The most important pjint in my theory is that, however much we may 

 have spoken both of real entity and of the phenomenal appearance, of 

 individuals and genes, independently one from the other, ye!; the two should 

 only be thinkable in their identity in oneness, and be inconceivable indepen- 

 dently of one another. 



As can be seen from the explanation given above, the first theory that 

 an individual is not to be considered as a character of a single quality, but 

 as in reality a compound of different things generated by different genes, is 

 called the theory of the mutual participation of the gene ; the other theory 

 that the relation of individuals to others in their particularity is the relation 



Jn presenting this metaphor to my reader, I have been influenced by a suggestion from 

 the Indra-nets, an allegory found in one of. the Buddhist scriptures, which is called the Mahavai- 

 pulyabuddhaganda vyuha-sutra (Kegonkyo s . For this allegory, I am indebted to Professor J. 

 I have not myself consulted the oiigin.il scripture. 



