84 



Ijeads ehange, so do tli9 plienomenal appaarances of individuals (if \ve think 

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

 have spoken before ; and thej in the Hmited sense of phenomenal appaarances 

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

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

 beads to the genes, yet the former denoiie onlj fixed quahties of something 

 generated, while the latter indicate generating quaUties united with something 

 generated. I maj here add another simile* as an explanation of mj 

 concaption of individuals and genes. The universe is Hke a boundless net 

 with innumerable miUions of crjstaUine beads, each on a mesh of a different 

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

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

 present different hues, according as thej are observed from this point or tliat. 

 It is, however, onlj in their phenomena that thej are different ; in their real 

 entities, thej are aU and ever the same crjstaUine beads. Each bead \vith 

 iunumerable miUions of reflected images (saj dots) of aU varieties of colours 

 (of which it must be understood some are visible, but sorae are invi>iible, 

 accordiug to the position of tlie 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 which I have spoken above. 



The most important pjint in mj theorj is that, however much we maj 

 liave spoken both of real entitj and of the phenomenal appaarance, of 

 individuals and genes, indepandentlj one from the other, jet the two should 

 onlj be thinkabla iu their identitj in oneness, and be inconceivable indepen- 

 dentlj of one another. 



As can be seen from tlie explanation given above, the first tlieorj tliat 

 au individual is not to be considered as a character of a siugle quaUtj, but 

 as in realitj a compound of different things generated bj different genes, is 

 called the theorj of the mutual participatiou of the gene ; the other theorj 

 tliat the relation of individuals to others in their particularitj is the relation 



* Tn prestnting this metaphor to my reader, I have been influenced by a stiggestion from 

 the Indra - nets, an allegory found in one of the Briddhist seriptures, which is called the Mahavai- 

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

 Matsumuka ; I have not myself consulted the oiiginal scripture. 



