二十世紀上半葉，禪宗佛教領袖積極的參與日本的帝國主義建設，因此在學界産生瞭有名的“帝國主義禪宗”（Kodo Zen）的現象。市川百元（1902-1986）教授通過數十年的研究揭示瞭日本戰前、戰時、戰後曆史上佛教僧侶團體對軍國主義戰爭的強烈作用和支持。市川百元發現佛教禪宗的“解脫”、形而上政治情結、以及東亞國傢傳統的佛教寺院-政府閤作關係、神道教政權都與帝國主義精神息息相關。本書是第一部試圖描繪市川百元的學術思想的著作。在闡述帝國主義禪宗意識形態和市川百元的批判之外，本書作者Christopher Ives也煩死瞭佛教倫理的現象觀。從1868明治維新到1945二戰戰敗，作者勾勒瞭佛教民族主義的脈絡。Brian Victoria認為佛教軍國主義是傳統日本僧侶和武士的緊密關係的傳承。Ives考察瞭戰後日本佛教界對禪宗政治立場和倫理的部分反思。

During the first half of the twentieth century, Zen Buddhist leaders contributed actively to Japanese imperialism, giving rise to what has been termed 'Imperial-Way Zen' (Kodo Zen). Its foremost critic was priest, professor, and activist Ichikawa Hakugen (1902-1986), who spent the decades following Japan's surrender almost single-handedly chronicling Zen's support of Japan's imperialist regime and pressing the issue of Buddhist war responsibility. Ichikawa focused his critique on the Zen approach to religious liberation, the political ramifications of Buddhist metaphysical constructs, the traditional collaboration between Buddhism and governments in East Asia, the philosophical system of Nishida Kitaro (1876-1945), and the vestiges of State Shinto in postwar Japan. Despite the importance of Ichikawa's writings, this volume is the first by any scholar to outline his critique. In addition to detailing the actions and ideology of Imperial-Way Zen and Ichikawa's ripostes to them, Christopher Ives offers his own reflections on Buddhist ethics in light of the phenomenon. He devotes chapters to outlining Buddhist nationalism from the 1868 Meiji Restoration to 1945 and summarizing Ichikawa's arguments about the causes of Imperial-Way Zen. After assessing Brian Victoria's claim that Imperial-Way Zen was caused by the traditional connection between Zen and the samurai, Ives presents his own argument that Imperial-Way Zen can best be understood as a modern instance of Buddhism's traditional role as protector of the realm. Turning to postwar Japan, Ives examines the extent to which Zen leaders have reflected on their wartime political stances and started to construct a critical Zen social ethic. Finally, he considers the resources Zen might offer its contemporary leaders as they pursue what they themselves have identified as a pressing task: ensuring that henceforth Zen will avoid becoming embroiled in international adventurism and instead dedicate itself to the promotion of peace and human rights.