Many
people seem to believe that Shinto and Buddhism are the main Japanese religions.
Japanese religion is however, the collection of good values from many different
religious traditions. Although Shinto and Buddhism are the religious traditions
that represent contemporary Japanese religion, other religious traditions are
also involved. With historical and archaeological discoveries, Shinto, Buddhism,
Confucianism, Taoism and folk religion make up Japanese religion throughout
history (Earhart, 1). For example, Hori stated that
“[t] he Japanese people have accepted Buddhism
simply
humbly in sincere and almost childlike fashion and
they
have laid
the stamp of their transforming genius upon it.
Similarly they have interpreted and appropriated other
religious and semi-religious systems in terms of their
particular religious outlook and experience”(Hori,
6).
Since I am a Japanese person who grew up in Japan, I have a good
knowledge of Japanese culture, history and philosophy. Through my education in
Japan, I focused on periodical Japanese histories as well as the development of
associated social movements. Due to my background and since I am in North
America, I am interested in how Western people understand Japanese religion and
how it is presented to Western people by various authors in Western society. I
think it is important to note that my paper will be examined and discussed from
a Japanese perspective due to my heritage. Therefore, one of my biases toward to
my topic will be the fact that I am Japanese.
According to my research, I found that Earhart H
Byron, Joseph M Kitagawa, Ichiro Hori, Hideo Kishimoto, Masaharu Anesaki and
Shigeyoshi Murakami are the people who are well known in the field of Japanese
religion. It appears to me that the two most popular authors who are cited in
many texts are Earhart H Byron and Joseph M Kitagawa. For example, Japanese
Religion: Unity and Diversity by Dr. Earhart and Religion in Japanese
History by Dr. Kitagawa.
Dr.Earhart is a professor of religion at Western
Michigan University and he was named one of the most distinguished faculty
scholars. He studied under the Dr. Kitagawa and Dr. Eliade at University of
Chicago. According to Dr. Erahart, before he began to focus specifically on
Japanese religion, he learned about Japanese folk religion with the help of Dr.
Hori. They spent time studying together in Sendai, Japan. Dr. Hori is known as a
professor who focuses on Japanese folk religion. According to Dr.Hori, we know
that important roles are played by more self –conscious religions and
semi-religious systems such as Shinto, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, and
Christianity in the religious history of Japan. Within the folk level though,
various features of these religious and semi- religious systems were blended to
meet the spiritual needs of the common people, who had to find religious meaning
in the midst of their daily life (Hori, 11).
My
paper will be based on Dr. Earhart’s book which is called Religion of Japan
and Religion in the Japanese Experience: Source and Interrelations and Japanese
Religion: Unity and Diversity .The way he approaches and discusses Japanese
religion is well organized and I can agree with his book most of time, but what
he fails to discuss in regards to some specific aspects of Japanese history and
culture is what I tend to expand upon. This is the main reason why I chose his
books.
Some
of Dr.Earhart’s questions were concerned with how religion in Japan began.
Dr.Earhart questioned the notion of what are the earliest forms of Japanese
religion and how are they related to economic, social, and political
developments in early Japan. Another issue of concern was in regards to how
Shinto and Buddhism related to the earliest Japanese religious traditions. Also,
how folk religion differ from organized religion, and what major aspects of
Japanese folk religion and influences society (Earhart, 256).
Before
he discusses Japanese religion, he presents six themes of the sign of
unity of Japanese religion which are:
“1,
the closeness of human being, gods and nature; 2, the
religious
character of the family; 3, the significance of
purification, rituals, and charm; 4, the prominence of local
festivals and individual cults; 5, the pervasiveness of
religion in every day life; 6, the natural bond between
religion and the nation” (Earhart, 7).
Western
sources. This is important because Dr.Earhart demonstrates that he understands
the value of using Japanese material when exploring the significance of Japanese
religion.
My
selected main texts by Dr. Earhart were published in 1974, 1982 and 1984.
Comparing these three texts, I found that he seems to start focusing on Japanese
history and folk religion including local festivals more in the one written in
1984. One thing that comes to my mind is that influence from Dr. Kitagawa. He is
the one who stresses the importance of understanding Japanese history in order
to understand Japanese religion. In addition, he suggested to Dr.Earhart that he
should study Japanese folk religion since it interested him.
I think the reason why Dr. Earhart was interested in
folk religion is that he believed that in ancient times religious practices were
very influenced by dominant legends, customs and activities of the surrounding
region. For example, we can look at the origin of animism and Shinto in Japan (Earhart,
61). In a sense, the origin of Japanese religion is a folk religion.
The data or information, which Dr. Earhart used is
from other people’s articles and his own experience. For example, he uses many
different authors’ texts plus his own views and discusses them in each
chapter. This is what I found as his method for discussing Japanese religion. In
addition, Dr. Earhart uses many Japanese authors’s books and I believe that he
is doing it intentionally. It seems to me that he built his understanding of
Japanese religion based on previous authors, which he agrees with. This is why,
each book has intensive recommended reading lists as well as a clear indication
of the bibliography. The topic of my paper is to examine the points, which Dr.
Earhart seems to missing and I will cover his missing points with the Japanese
authors. Despite the fact that Dr. Earhart is not a Japanese person, he
understands Japanese culture and history very well. Although he understands
Japanese religion, from a Japanese point of view, Dr. Earhart is missing some
specific aspects of Japanese history and culture. I believe that to understand
Japanese religion, those points should not be excluded.
Dr.Earhart seems to miss three aspects of specific Japanese culture and
history. First, Dr Earhart says that:
Although
he says that there is no single origin of Japanese religion, what we, Japanese
people learn at school is that the origin of Japanese religion is the animism
which people believed that there is a sprit in river, mountain, tree and glass
and those sprits have a power to control the nature and gives problem to human
being. (Gendaisyakaini Okeru Ningen to Bunka, 20). It seems to me that Dr.
Earhart is missing the Japanese religious history from 7000 BC, which is known
as early Jomon period. Also, according to Anesaki:
“[t]
he sympathetic heart of the people is shown in their
sentiment
for nature and in their love of order in communal
life.
Close affinity with nature is shown in their life and
poetry.
This may be due partly to the influence of the land
and
climate and partly to the early attainment of settled
agricultural
civilization”(Anesaki, 4).
Secondly, Dr. Earhart notes in his book that:
“For
many centuries the religious traditions and practice
within
the Japanese islands were loosely organized around
family
lines, with no central organization , without even a
common
name. Gradually the imperial family and its tradition
came
to be considered supreme over all other families, but
still
no name was given to the larger or smaller traditions.
Not
until Buddhism and advanced Chinese culture entered
Japan(about
the middle of the sixth century) was there any
need
to distinguish the old traditional practice from any
contrasting
cults”(Earhart,30).
I have
understood through my education in Japan that in 239 AD, the Queen of
Yamataikoku named Himiko, organized the community which is now known as Kyushu
in Japan. At the same time, there were also small communities, but Yamataikoku
was the most advanced organized society. Himiko was deemed Shaman who could make
the contact with the sprits (Shinsyou Nihonshi, 23). In addition, there are
three Chinese records which lad us to believe that by the third century A.D.,
there were a number of tribal principalities in the Japanese archipelago and
that there was a female shamanic ruler, Himiko which in Japanese means the sun
daughter or sun princess who reigned over one of the principalities in Yamatai
(1 Kitagawa, 99, 2 Kitagawa, 6).
Third
point, Dr.Earhart notes that:
“Even today in the United states there remains a popular
conception that
the cause of the war was Shinto. According
to this view,
because Shinto commanded worship of an
emperor-God ,
Japanese soldiers were bound to follow the
emperor’s
command to extend the Japanese empire into
foreign
lands. However, this exaggeration is more representation
of American wartime wears than of the actual situation in
Japan”(Earhart,156).
I
do not think that it is an exaggeration. I have heard the story of the emperor
being an equal to God. My grandparents in Japan believe that those who have
fought War for an emperor is like
dying for God. Although Japanese people tend to not be able to criticize the
emperor in Japan, it is true that we ought to believe that emperor is our God
because of the explanations of dissidents of the Sun Goddess from Shinto. With
this strong belief, people were inclined to die for God, which means Japanese
emperor. For example, Totukoutai and Himeyurino tou are examples of people who
committed suicide to protect and give life for the Japanese emperor (Gendaisyakaini
Okeru Ningen to Bunka, 202).
I
intend to compare what the Japanese authors said and what Dr. Earhart had to say
by examining their points of view. It seems to me that there are three reasons
why those differences happen. First, the points that they think are important
are actually quite different. For example, if someone believes that the
relationship between Chinese influences and Japanese religion is very important,
he/she must write based upon their own beliefs, and it is important. Secondly,
the purpose of writing a book can affect the contents of a book. As Dr.Earhart
mentioned, his books are for American students who have no knowledge of religion
in Japan. On the other hand, Dr. Anesaki and other Japanese textbooks
are for people who already have knowledge of
the religion, the history and the culture in Japan. Thirdly, the interpretation
can affect the meaning of the sources. Dr. Earhart uses many books written by
Japanese authors that are translated into English. Some of books that he uses
are translated by Dr.Earhart himself or other western interpreters. If there are
five Western people who are translating the document from Japanese to English,
most likely, we can see five different ways of interpretations based on how they
translated the word. The same problem can occur among Japanese translators as
well.
Regardless
of who is studying or who is writing about religion in Japan, I believe that it
is very important for us to recognize where and how sources are documented and
who is writing for whom. Every one of us has own unique individual experiences
and if we could find out how other people’s experiences have affected them, in
regards to how they interpret Japanese culture, I believe that we can understand
Japanese religion deeper.
Anesaki
Masaharu, History Of Japanese Religion. London, 1930.
Earhart, Byron H,
Religion Of Japan.
San Francisco, 1984.
Earhart, Byron H, Japanese
Religion: Unity and Diversity . Belmont, 1982.
Hamajima Masaaki, Gendaisyakaini Okeru Ningen to Bunka. Nagoya,
1997.
1
Kiwagawa, Joseph M, Religion
In Japanese History. New York, 1966.
2
Kitagawa, Joseph M, On
Understanding Japanese Religion. New Jersey,
1988.
Maekawa
Tugijirou, Shinsyou Nihonshi. Tokyo, 1998.