104 



of something generated, while the latter indicat generating qualities united 

 with sometliing 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 innumera- 

 ble milhons of crystalhne beads, each ou 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 difterent ; in their real entities, they 

 are all and ever the same crystalhne beads. Each bead with innumerable 

 milhons of reflected images (say dots) of all varieties of colours (of which it 

 must be understood some are visible, but some are invisible, according 

 to the position of the observer) is sometliiug Hke an individual, and the 

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

 to the genes of which I have spoken above. 



The most imporfcant point 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, yet the two should 

 only be tliinkable 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 quahty, but 

 as in reality a compoimd 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 

 of the mutual sharing of genes in phenomenal appearance (potent genes) in 

 individuals, is called the theory of the mutual sharing of the gene. 



According to these theories, all individuals or species are one and the 

 same in their real entity, and that there are so many different spedes is due 



1) In presenting this metaphor to my reader, I have been inflnenced by a suggestion from 

 the Indra-nets, an allegory found in one of the Bnddhist scriptures, which is called the 

 Mahavaipiilya buddha-ganda vyuha-sutra (Kegonkyo). For this allegory, I am indebted to 

 Professor J. Matsumuba ; I have not myself consulted the original scripture. 



