isomae eng 13viii08

8/13/2019 Isomae Eng 13viii08

1/25

Isomae Junichi

Religion, secularity, and the articulation of the indigenousin modernizing Japan

Post-colonial theories of religion

Recent debates about religionand secularityhave focused increasingly on the principle

of separating state and religion. Yasukuni hrine in !okyo and Islam are among the most

typical topics in "uestion. #enerally speaking, the so-called critical intellectuals in Japan

have fundamentally diverging reactions to these topics. In the case of the homage paid by

Japanese prime ministers to the $ar dead at Yasukuni hrine, the separation of state and

religion is almost inevitably put for$ard as the reason $hy they should refrain from doing

so. %n the other hand, Japanese intellectuals "uestion the validity of the same principle in the

case of Islam, since the separation of state and religion is seen as a product of &estern

enlightenment, $hich applies only to a specific historical and regional conte't. (ere $e

encounter t$o opposing attitudes regarding the "uestion ho$ a non-&estern society under

&estern influence should cope $ith its o$n social problems) in the first case, &estern

principles must be applied $ithout fail, $hile in the second case these principles are

regarded as not entirely appropriate for the realities of non-&estern societies. !his

behavioral t$ist may be best described in the $ords of social anthropologist !alal *sad, $ho

stated that even people outside the &estern $orld live in a $orld in $hich the &est is

hegemonic and $here the old opposition bet$een modernity and tradition no longer

functions. Instead they find themselves in a convoluted state at once modern and

traditional, both authentic and creative at the same time.+*sad / 0rom this point of

vie$, even the Islamist claim for the unity of state and religion and the revival of Islam are

fundamentally ne$ phenomena resulting from resistance against &estern secularization, and

cannot be e'plained only by principles directly derived from pre-modern Islamic traditions.

*s has been elo"uently described in recent studies on the relationship of colonialism and

religion, non-&estern countries, in order to avoid colonization by &estern superpo$ers,

have no other option than to promote &esternization if they $ant to have their autonomy


2/25

recognized. %n the other hand, a country that opens its doors defenselesslyto$ards the

&estern $orld may still end up in a state of colonization, culturally dominated and

politically e'ploited by the &est. If $e consider the above-mentioned separation of state and

religion under these suppositions, $e realize that the problem lies in the fact that non-

&estern societies are dra$n into the &estern concept of religion and its related systems.

!hus, rather than to ask $hether or not the separation of state and religion should be

enforced in Japanese society, it is necessary to concretely investigate $hen and ho$ this

principle $as introduced into modern Japan and $hich functions it performed.

In the Japanese post-$ar society, separation of state and religion has been seen as a universal

principle of &estern enlightenment introduced to prevent the instrumentalization of religion

by nationalist ideologies. Yet in &estern societies, separation of state and religion is rather

the e'ception than the rule and even among those that are generally believed to have

achieved its realization, i.e. the 1nited tates and 0rance, substantial differences still e'ist.

*sad comments on these heterogeneous aspects $ithin &estern societies)

0or even in modern secular countries the place of religion varies. !hus although in

0rance both the highly centralized state and its citizens are secular, in 2ritain the

state is linked to the 3stablished 4hurch and its inhabitants are largely

nonreligious, and in *merica the population is largely religious but the federal

state is secular. +*sad 5667, p. /

&hile elite intellectuals of the 8ei9i period, like hima9i 8okurai1 or Inoue :o$ashi,2

did not go as far as theorizing about the discrepancies bet$een political systems and social

realities, they $ere $ell a$are of this diversity at the time the first 4onstitution of Imperial

Japan $as drafted. !hey created labels like state-religion system for #reat 2ritain,

supremacy of state over churchfor Prussia, system of publicly ackno$ledged religion

for 0rance, or separation of state and religionfor the 1*, and finally opted for the

hima9i 8okurai+;7;-/, hin 2uddhist monk, part-time member of the I$akura 8ission +;


3/25

Prussian model of religious toleranceas stated in *rticle 5; of the Imperial 4onstitution,

$hich reads) Japanese sub9ects shall, $ithin limits not pre9udicial to peace and order, and

not antagonistic to their duties as sub9ects, en9oy freedom of religious belief +shinky no jiy

/.In contrast to the present constitution, $hich clearly provides that the tate

and its organs shall refrain from religious education or any other religious activity+*rticle

56.7/, the Imperial 4onstitution consciously avoided issues pertaining directly to the

separation of state and religion. !his $as readily accepted as soon as the 4onstitution $as

drafted, $hile critical vie$s addressing its religious provisions got lost. *fter Japans defeat

at the end of &orld &ar II, $hich meant the end of this system, religious policies $ere re-

installed under the guidance of the 1nited tates. !his time, the separation of state and

religion according to *merican la$ came to be regarded as the universal model.

tarting from the above-mentioned issues, this essay aims at a ne$ look on ho$ the

separation of state and religion in modern Japanese history $as related to tate hinto, and

in $hich $ay the dichotomy of the religious and the secular articulated itself in

modernizing Japan. I $ill conclude this topic $ith a discussion of the !enno system in

modern Japanese society.

!heories on tate hinto and the separation of state and religion

* recent essay on tate hinto and hinto shrines as religious bodies in post-$ar Japan,

published in 566> by the religion scholar himazono usumu , created a great stir in

Japanese society. In this essay, $hich $as meant as a comment on the general interest in the

Yasukuni "uestion,himazono argues that even in the post-$ar society tate hinto has

not vanished. &hat is more, it has never been abolished.*ccording to himazono, the $ord

tate hintohas been used in t$o $ays so far) in a narro$ sense used by hinto scholars

such as akamoto :oremaru or *shizu 1bihiko it refers to hrine

hintothat had been defined as non-religious and $as therefore e'cluded from the category

of religion, $hile in a broader sense used for instance by the scholar of religion

8urakami higeyoshi it refers to a combination of hrine hinto, Imperial

hinto, and the ?ational 2ody +kokutai / ideology.+himazono 566, p. 75=-5>./ In

7


4/25

other $ords, tate hinto in the latter sense also includes the pre-$ar !enno system and its

ideology of @?ational 8oralityA +kokumin dtoku / e'emplified by the veneration

of the Imperial Rescript on 3ducation and the imperial portrait +goshinei /.7

himazono himself advocates a broader definition of @tate hintoA that also includes the

ritualistic aspects $hich hinto originally consisted of. !his @imperial ritualism or imperial

hinto BCD is the core of tate hinto as it e'ists $ithin the present system of la$.A

himazono further e'plains the nature of this imperial tate hinto in the follo$ing $ay)

Imperial ritualism consists of rites performed by the !enno as a descendent of the

#reat Eeity *materasu. 2y their reverence to$ards the !enno, $ho possesses the

characteristics of a sacred king +saishi /, the Japanese people are connected to

a system of state deities. +himazono 566>, p. =;=/

*ccording to this interpretation, even post-$ar imperial rituals are obviously hinto-like

activities. ince any form of hinto is no$ regarded as a form of religion, and since the

!enno is regarded as a symbol of the Japanese people, his ritual performing of rites for the

native deities +kami/ must be interpreted as a breach of the post-$ar constitutionFs provision

of separating state and religion.

%n the other hand, constitutional 9urist (irano !akeshi , points out that @the $ord

Gtate hintoF +kokka shint/ $as not in common use before the $ar, but became $idely

kno$n only after the so-called hinto Eirective.A +(irano , pp. >7->=./ 2efore that

time, i.e. from the 8ei9i period to =, $hich according to post-$ar scholars $as the period

of tate hinto, the term $as virtually non-e'istent in official or academic conte'ts. Post-$ar

scholars therefore have not been able to find the term in pre-$ar society, even if they have

claimed its e'istence. !herefore, tate hinto must not be regarded as a precondition that

influenced all sorts of political decisions before the $ar, but as an analytical term for a

7In the pre-$ar period,every school had to have a copy of the Imperial Rescript on 3ducation +Kyiku chokugo,

drafted in ;6/ together $ith an imperial portrait. 2oth $ere the ob9ects of special ceremonies at important

school events.

=


5/25

political process that took shape in an erratic succession of legal provisions.

ince tate hinto is a terminus e' post, conclusions as to $hen it came into e'istence, or

$hether or not it indeed e'isted, depend largely on its respective definition +Isomae 566


6/25

*s already mentioned, in pre-$ar Japanese society it $as little "uestioned $hether or not the

system of tate hinto $as in conflict $ith the separation of state and religion. 0reedom of

faith $as interpreted in the sense that @the state should not intervene in personal matters of

religious activityA +ishi >, p. 57>/, $hich is, according to a $idely accepted 9uridical

interpretation, also possible under a system that does not provide separation of state and

religion. &ithin these preconditions, the Japanese government did not opt for the religious

system of any particular contemporary &estern nation, but applied a specific form of

religious tolerance that abstained from enforcing a single belief in a state religion. 4ertainly,

the !enno system, $ith hrine hinto as its main supporter, played the role of a state

religion. Yet in order not to be dra$n into an ideological contest $ith religions like

4hristianity or 2uddhism, or to avoid criticism from &estern countries for adopting an anti-

4hristian state religion, the government assigned hrine hinto to the realm of @moralityA

+dtoku / that defined the civic duties of @Japanese sub9ects.A !he distinction bet$een

@moralityA and @religion,A ho$ever, al$ays remained ambiguous, since morality, $hich $as

inseparably related to the po$er of the state, actually interfered in the realm of individual

religion. !he result of this policy $as that any religious body could gain official recognition

as long as it did not ob9ect to the !enno-centered nationalism spelled out in the form of

@peopleFs moralityA +kokumin dtoku/. #eneral opinion holds that hrine hinto actively

became a device of state ideology after the Russo-Japanese &ar +6=-6/. In principle,

ho$ever, the system had already taken shape bet$een the abolition of the @national

evangelistsA +kydshoku /> in ;;= and the proclamation of the Imperial

4onstitution in ;;.

!he fact that the religious policy of the 8ei9i government did not comply $ith the separation

of state and religion can also be gathered from the @4ritical petition regarding the three

teaching principlesA< issued in ;!he translation @national evangelistsA for kydshoku, lit. @agents of the $ay of the teaching,A is borro$ed

from (ardacre ;. !he term $as used as a title for activists of the #reat !eaching Institute +!aikyK-in/,

officially an autonomous religious body that $as meant to create a ne$ state religion after the abolition of the

hinto 8inistry +Jingi-shK/ in ;


7/25

petition is considered to be the first demand for the separation of state and religion ever put

for$ard in Japan. Yet, $hile hima9i maintains that @state and religion are different and

should never be mi'ed since ancient times,A he holds on the other hand that @it $as because

of the interrelationship of state and religion that country became country and man became

man for the first time.A 2ased on the dualism of absolute and mundane truth, he argues that

religion must serve the government as soon as it has been separated from the state. 0or the

sake of clarity, I $ould like to point out an inherent contradiction in hima9iFs claim for the

separation of state and religion. (e $rites @that institutional conspiracy of state and church

+religious institutions/ and institutional fusion of political and religious authority should be

avoided, and their domains and respective fields of authority should be kept separate. 2oth

should ackno$ledge the independence of their respective domains.A +nishi and 4hiba 566>,

pp. 6-./ !his assertion, ho$ever, does not fit $ell $ith $hat he calls the @interrelationship

of state and religion.A

0rom these facts $e can detect, among other things, that pre-$ar Japan did not comply $ith

a model of society $here @politics and religionA or @morality and religionA $ere clearly

differentiated according to the principle of separating state and religion. ?evertheless,

immediately after the $ar this principle $as installed by the #(, taking the 4onstitution of

the 1nited tates as its model. It $as a "uite common phenomenon also on an international

level) at this point in time, the lacit de l'tatbecame constitutional in 0rance, and #ermany

also carried out the separation of state and religion that had been present to some degree

already in the &eimar 4onstitution. Yet there $ere certainly different approaches to this

separation, ranging from the oviet 1nionFs hostility to$ards religion to the benevolent

@non-concernA of the 1nited tates. In the case of Japan, one might have easily e'pected a

hostile stance, since the separation of state and religion $as obviously motivated by the

desire to abolish tate hinto. Yet, $hile the first paragraph of the hinto Eirective states

the government in ;


8/25

that @militarism and ultra-nationalism perverted hinto principles and beliefs,A hrine hinto

itself $as ackno$ledged as a religious belief 9ust as 4hristianity or 2uddhism are. *s a

result, shrines $ere regarded favorably even by the #( but the ambivalence regarding their

relationship to the !enno remained, leading to continuous discussions concerning their role

in state ceremonies, discussions that continue to the present day. !his $as only partly in

accord $ith the intentions of the #(L to some e'tent it $ent against their e'pectations.

Regarding the intentions of the #(, the core principle of their occupation policies $as to

rule and reform Japan by means of the !enno system. !o this end they denied the status of a

living deity to the !enno but kept his relation to the people unchanged. Yet, $hile hrine

hinto ought to be @divested of its militaristic and ultra-nationalistic elements,A the #( did

not "uestion the intimate relations bet$een the various shrines and the !enno system +as

reflected in the fact that many shrines venerate kamirelated to the imperial family, or that the

!enno serves the kamiin various imperial rituals/. If only on a symbolic level, the !enno

system thus still kept its religious characteristics. 1nder the prete't of freedom of religion,

the !ennoFs performing of imperial rituals to his divine ancestors $as seen as @the !ennoFs

personal matter,A not$ithstanding the fact that he $as publicly regarded as a symbol of the

Japanese people. !his is the reason the "uestion of imperial ritualism has remained unsolved

in the post-$ar period, as has been pointed out by himazono usumu.

!his limited perception of the !enno system tells us at the same time ho$ the Japanese side

regarded the problem) cholars of religion, hinto scholars, and bureaucrats $elcomed the

#(Fs tolerance as a lucky turn of events. 3ven before the $ar, doubts had been raised time

and again $hether enforced reverence of shrines $as in accord $ith the constitutional

freedom of religion, but arguments that the !enno system itself might violate the constitution

$ere virtually unheard of. !his can be easily criticized from todayFs point of vie$, but if $e

consider that the !enno monarchy $as the very foundation of the modern Japanese nation

state, this kind of perceptional limitation, namely the tacit approval of the !enno system as a

kind of invisible entity beyond the la$, $as probably unavoidable.

!he "uestion $e have to ask at this point is ho$ this a'iomatic approval of the !enno system

;


9/25

became possible. &e $ill have to re-evaluate the genealogy of its @e'tra-legalA status. !his

$ill lead us to the introduction of the concept of religion in Japan and to the "uestion ho$

the !enno system, under the prete't of an @indigenous tradition,A $as seen as a blank space

left out in the &estern conception. In this respect, I $ould like to raise another point

included in the hinto Eirective, namely its definition of hrine hinto as a form of

@religion.A 2y addressing the concretizations of @religionA and @secularityA in pre-$ar

society, $hich included the !enno system, $e should arrive at a perspective different from

the post-$ar discussions, $hich are based on the precondition of the separation of state and

religion.

!he concept of religion and its fluctuations

&hen hrine hinto, $hich had hitherto been regarded as @ritualismA +saishi /, $as

redefined as @religionA +shky/ by the hinto Eirective, this led to tremendous changes

regarding the status of hrine hinto in Japanese society. 2ased on the doctrine of the non-

religious nature of shrines, religion and ritualism had belonged to different categories in pre-

$ar society or $ere at least officially regarded as different. !he borderline bet$een religion

and ritualism at that time is plainly illustrated in the follo$ing citation from a ne$spaper

essay published in ;6 by the Tky nichinichi shinbun)

&hen $e speak of ceremonies +matsuri/, $e refer to ritualism +saishi/ in the sense

of paying homage to the graves of our ancestors or offering flo$ers and incense to

their ancestor tablets at home BCD. 3very act of commemoration can be called a

ceremony. !eaching +oshie/ on the other hand, bears the meaning of religion

+shky/. It can refer to the !enno or to the 2uddha or to any other ob9ect of

veneration to $hich $e turn in a$esome piety as our place of spiritual peace and

refuge.;

!he categories established here reflect the official hinto policies embodied in the doctrine

;!he article $ith the title @%n the divisions of religionA +Shky bunri ron / by a certain (aanshi is

"uoted from Yasumaru and 8iyachi ;;, p. 5


10/25

of the non-religious nature of hinto shrines before the $ar. !his doctrine regarded religion

as a matter of individual faith that everyone could chose freely, in contrast to ritualism,

$hich $as a public activity and the duty of every loyal citizen. &orship at shrines $as

defined as ritualism in order to e'tricate it from missionary competition $ith religions like

4hristianity or 2uddhism +c.f. Isomae 5666/. *s many contemporary intellectuals $ere $ell

a$are, this $as fundamentally a distinction bet$een official and private, deriving from the

political 9udgment that @if hinto should become the foundation of our ?ational 2ody

+kokutai/ it has to be promulgated by a proper governmental institution.A &ithout this

distinction bet$een official and private, ritualism and religion $ould immediately flo$ into

one another, as the above-mentioned ne$spaper author observed) @ince rituals +saishi/ are

one part of any given religion, I $ould never say that religion has nothing to do $ith

ritualism.A6

In this $ay, the a$areness that hrine hinto could become a kind of religion as soon as it

$as released from political considerations led to the constant fear on the part of hinto

adherents that the veneration of shrines as a public duty might be in conflict $ith the right of

religious freedom. Regarding the above-mentioned non-religious-shrine thesis, as $ell as the

separation of religion and ritualism, (anada RyKun , a hin 2uddhist scholar,

pointed to @the $idely kno$n fact that there e'ists no 9uridical statement on the "uestion

$hether B$orship atD shrines is religion or not.A !he 4onstitution and other 9udicial

documents only granted freedom of faith @$ithin limits not pre9udicial to peace and order.A

uestions such as $hether $orship at shrines $as religious or ritual, or ho$ such categories

$ere to be defined $ere discussed much later in official pamphlets such as the Jinja hongi

+@%riginal meaning of shrines,A published in == by the Jingi-in/, yet their

conclusions never reached legal authority and remained merely a possible opinion. 1nder

such e'tra-9udicial conditions, or rather because they $ere never defined 9udicially, debates

regarding the nature of hinto shrines $ere left unresolved time and again. 0reedom of

@Personal opinion on the separation of hinto priests from the ?ational 3vangelistsA +hinkan kyKdKshoku

bunri ni tsuki ikensho , ;;7/, "uoted from Yasumaru and 8iyachi ;;, p. >


11/25

belief, therefore, could be $ider or narro$er depending on the official definition of shrines.

0or pre-$ar Japanese society this meant in practice that the amount of religious freedom

varied from period to period.5

1nder these conditions, the concept of @religionA became a matter of great concern for

intellectuals of the time. Intimately related to ritualism, the respective definitions of religion

determined not only the nature of shrines but also the e'tent of religious freedom. !he

Japanese termshkycame into common use as the standard translation of the 3nglish $ord

@religionA around ;


12/25

god+s/ and humans as @products of the human mind.A 0ocusing on the religious

consciousness of the individual believer, *nesaki maintains that in spite of their differences,

the various religions or confessions can be understood as variants of the same phenomenon

of @religion.A Religion is therefore not part of a sacred realm or a transcendental sphere.

ince everyone possesses some religious inclinations, it belongs to the mundane $orld and,

moreover, is secularized in the sense of @privatization.A ?o longer e'cluded from the secular,

the sacred can be found $ithin man himself, $hich in Japan parado'ically led to a ne$

mysticist search for the essence of religious e'perience. *nesaki, for instance, recounts his

o$n religious e'periences in the follo$ing $ay)

Nying alone on the sand at the seashore I enter the realm of the unconscious +mushin

no sakai / BCD. 3ven if time passes and people change, there is al$ays the

unchanging tune of @no$A in the flo$ of eons. Night, do you embrace meH &ave, do

you invite meH 2ody, dissolve in the $ater, heart, melt a$ay $ith the lightO &hen I

am in this $ay no longer myself, I cannot help being attracted by such reverberations

inside my breast. +*nesaki


13/25

?eedless to say that from this point of vie$,

BCD one arrives at the understanding that a national religion, as for instance state

hinto +kokkateki shint /, even if it does not possess all aspects of

a universal religion or a private religion, is of foremost importance among all

religions.A +Ibid., p. 5/

:atKFs understanding further led him to an affirmative recognition of hrine hinto as a form

of religion. ?evertheless, :atK $as in full accord $ith his colleague *nesaki and their

common teacher Inoue !etsu9irK that religious belief consciously held up by the individual

devotee makes up the core of any concept of religion.

In an attempt to overcome this limitation, Yanagita :unio +;5/, the founder

of Japanese 0olklore tudies, put for$ard an interpretation of hinto that initiated yet

another array of definitions of religion. In his @Personal vie$ of hinto,A first published in

;, he $rote) @*ny conclusion that shrines serve no other purpose than to pay respect to

our forefathers or to e'ceptional personalities is not based on firm ground, I believe.A

+Yanagita 5666 B;D, p. 5=/ (e thereby criticized the vie$point of the %ffice of hrine

*ffairs= $hich interpreted all kami as men, based on the conceptions of @?ational

8orality.A Nike$ise, he $as dissatisfied $ith the interpretations of hinto scholars $ho

understood shrines as non-religious phenomena. Instead, he regarded @the thinking about the

kamithat $e actually find in rural villages BCD, $hich has neither a doctrine nor a founderA

+ibid., p. 5=>/ $ith utmost esteem. YanagitaFs emphasis on communal practice rather than on

individual belief influenced a ne$ generation of scholars, $ho from the 76s on$ard began

to revise the ideas of *nesaki and :atK. In the form of Religious 0olklore tudies introduced

by 1no 3nkM +;;-=/ or Religious *nthropology established by 0uruno

:iyoto +;-


14/25

common approach to non-&estern religions.

!his practice-oriented vie$ of religion also spread in the &est, as the contact $ith

developing countries intensified through colonialism. &hile religious practices $ere initially

placed at the lo$est level of an evolutionary scale that $as topped by 4hristian theology,

they gradually came to be regarded as phenomena that deserve special considerations. In

present-day Japan, interpretations according to the Protestant model still prevail but practice-

oriented understandings of religion have begun to erode the preeminent importance attached

to religious belief. Shky+religion/ in the present sense of the $ord has therefore developed

from multiple levels of meaning. *t the beginning of the t$entieth century, *nesaki and

:atK, $ho $ere heavily influenced by a Protestant concept of religion, created the first

standard interpretation. *t the same time, the obvious differences bet$een 4hristianity, $ith

its fully developed theology, and Japanese hinto aroused a feeling of discomfort that found

its verbal e'pression in the $ritings of Yanagita :unio and 1no 3nkM. *s the fierce debates

$ithin the 4ommittee for the tudy of Religious *dministration > bet$een 5> and 5;

indicate, serious doubts $ere raised concerning the official doctrine of the non-religious

nature of hinto shrines. !he concept of religion, therefore, held conflicting implications that

$ere never resolved one $ay or the other. !hese @fluctuations of the concept of religionA are

still valid today, as himazono usumu e'plains)

!he above-mentioned social anthropologist !alal *sad, for instance, regards @the development of prescribed

moral-religious capabilities, $hich involve the cultivation of certain bodily attitudes +including emotions/, the

disciplined cultivation of habits, aspirations, desiresA as characteristics not only of Islam but also of medieval

4atholicism +*sad /. %riginally, this kind of religious practice must not be seen as @an autogenetic impulse

but as a mutually constituting relationship bet$een body sense and body learning.A It is a fatal error of modern

&estern interpretations centered on belief, to do$nplay such practices as @obscure meaningsA or as @symbols tobe interpreted.A +*sad 7, pp. 5./

*s *sad further states, @BCD in contemporary Protestant 4hristianity +and other religions no$ modeled on it/, it

is more important to have the right beliethan to carry out specific prescribed practices. BC 2elieveD has no$

become a purely inner, private state of mind, a particular state of mind detached from everyday practices. BCD

the system of statements about belief is no$ held to constitute the essence of Greligion,F a construction that makes

it possible to compare and evaluate different Greligions.FA +*sad />!he 4ommittee for the tudy of Religious *dministration +hMkyK seido chKsa kai / $as an

advisory board installed by the government bet$een 5> and 5;. Its purpose $as to devise the legislative

frame$ork for a religious policy that $ould treat the three religions 4hristianity, 2uddhism, and hinto as e"ual.

=


15/25

!he $ord @religionA $as not simply introduced in its original meaning as soon as it

began to be translated as shky. BCD In todayFs Japanese society, there is much

confusion as to $hatshkyactually means, especially $hen one asks $hat the main

religion of Japan is BCD. In this sense, the &estern concept of @religionA has not yet

neatly settled in Japan. Rather, it is $idely recognized that there is a certain

perple'ity regarding the concept of @religion.A +himazono ;, p. >7/

imilarly fluctuating meanings can be also observed in the case of @ritualismA +saishi/,

$hich served as the counterpart of religion in the non-religious-shrine doctrine. In the $ake

of the 8ei9i Restoration, the slogan @unity of administration and ritualA +saisei itchi

/ $as put for$ard as one of the ma9or political tenets. !his idea deteriorated "uite rapidly,

ho$ever, as can be gathered from the fact that state rituals $ere soon distributed to a number

of "uite different institutions) ordinary shrine rituals $ere overseen by the %ffice for hrine

8atters of the (ome 8inistry, rites of the Imperial Palace by the 2ureau for 4eremonial

8atters +hikibu ryK /, and ceremonies at Yasukuni hrine by the *rmy 8inistry.

tate rituals, therefore, $ere not performed according to a consistent, $ell-coordinated plan

of the government. 4ertainly, these rituals had some obscure characteristics in common,

since they $ere all directed to$ards Japanese kamiand did not belong to a @religionA such as

4hristianity or ect hinto, but neither the government nor the general populace had an clear

picture of the pantheon in $hich all these kami ranging from imperial ancestors to imperial

loyalists and heroic citizens e'isted and ho$ they might be related to each other.

!his lack of clarity, ho$ever, is not only a persistent feature of the !enno system, it is also a

most natural conse"uence of the fact that hinto does not possess an e'plicit theology.

!herefore, it should not be regarded as a fundamental defect. Rather it dra$s an important

meaning from its function as a blank space for ritualism that is beyond logical criticism. !he

fact that only shrine ritualism and its relation to religion became an issue $as probably due

to its intimate connections $ith @?ational 3ducationA +kokumin kyka /, $hich

$as al$ays in latent conflict $ith the peopleFs freedom of faith. 3specially at the time of the

Russo-Japanese &ar, shrine ritualism became intert$ined $ith the ?ational 8orality


16/25

discourse propagated by the 8inistry of 3ducation. In the $ords of :Kno hKzK,< @hinto

makes up our ?ational 8orality, it is indeed the force behind the Imperial &ay.A +:Kno

77, p. 5/ In this $ay, shrines $ere regarded as the arena of ?ational 8orality. !hus, the

oppositions @ritualismQreligionA and @moralityQreligion,A $hich had been regarded as being

different up to that time, became synonymous $ithin the non-religious-shrine discourse. 2y

regarding the non-verbal physical practice of rituals as @moral behavior,A the non-religious-

shrine doctrine $as e"ually dra$n into the secular realm of morality.

8orality, ho$ever, $as yet another term endo$ed $ith a number of meanings. &hile

scholars in the tradition of &estern enlightenment, such as Inoue !etsu9irK and others, simply

contrasted it $ith religion, adherents of hinto, as for instance :Kno hKzK, used it more or

less as a synonym for @?ational 2odyA +kokutai / or the !enno system, $hich defied

a precise definition. 3specially from the 56s on$ard, morality in the latter sense $as

emphasized by hinto scholars and conservative circles. 8orality embodied a public space

that subsumed also the private realm. In the same $ay, the indigenous ritualism at shrines

transcended the distinction bet$een the @secularA and the @religious.A In both cases, the

concepts of &estern enlightenment $ere increasingly re9ected. *t the same time, hrine

hinto $as purged of folk religion elements that $ere rooted in everyday life. Ironically, this

made the conservative plan to integrate hinto shrines into the curriculum of nationalistic

propaganda a fruitless effort.

ince Japanese society before the $ar did not separate religion from the state and did not

dra$ a clear-cut 9uridical distinction bet$een @religion and politicsA or @religion and

morality,A a definition of religion that allo$ed the non-religious nature of shrines and the

possibility to alter the scope of religious freedom $as probably the only possible strategy. *s

demonstrated above, both religion and morality $ere highly ambiguous terms that $ere

related to each other) a change in the meaning of one term $as likely to bring about changes

in the other termFs meaning as $ell. 2ased on this interrelatedness of religion and morality,

7/ $as a professor at !okyoFs hinto 1niversity :okugakuin Eaigaku, $hich he

headed from 7 to =>. * leading scholar of hinto, he $as also very actively engaged in the ideology of

tate hinto.

>


17/25

even the borderline bet$een public and private became fluid. ?e$ interpretations of $here

the one ended and the other began circulated one after the other. *ll in all, they pointed to the

e'tremely difficult choice bet$een a collectivist or an individualistic conception of human

life, and further, bet$een moral or religious norms of human behavior.;

*fter the $ar, the #(Fs policy of separating state and religion merely cemented the

ambivalences found in the concept of religion and the non-religious-shrine doctrine in its

background, by providing an institutional frame$ork for them. 4ertainly, the principle to

separate state and religion had learned a lesson from the long history of conflicts bet$een

religious and secular po$ers in &estern societies, but it cannot be regarded as fitting for all

societies, as Islamic societies demonstrate. Regarding present debates about Yasukuni

hrine, it is e"ually difficult to understand the relations of state and religion, or the role of

ritualism, if one does not consider ho$ religious discourses originating in the &est $ere

articulated under the above-mentioned peculiar circumstances of Japan.

*t this point $e should pay special attention to himazonoFs remark that by $ay of imperial

ritualism, religion leaks into the public sphere and may thus endanger the freedom of

religion. If $e consider this continuation of tate hinto only from a religious perspective,

ho$ever, our perception of reality becomes a problem. It becomes difficult to understand the

historical process by $hich religious and non-religious discourses articulated themselves if

$e attribute all these phenomena a priori to the category of religion. *s !alal *sad claims,

@there cannot be a universal definition of religion.A Rather, a @definition is itself the

historical product of discursive processes.A !his pertains also to the terminology of present

scholars, $hich cannot be treated as a trans-historical commodity +*sad 7, p. 5/. 2eing

the core of Japanese national identity, the !enno system assumed its multi-layered character

through various oppositions, such as @religionQmorality,A @religionQhinto,A and

;!he follo$ing statement by Jos 4asanova, $ho criticizes the dualism of &estern enlightenment, may help us

to understand the problem in the Japanese case) @BCD modern $alls of separation bet$een church and state keep

developing all kinds of cracks through $hich both are able to penetrate each otherL BCD religion and politics

keep forming all kinds of symbolic relations, to such an e'tent that is not easy to ascertain $hether one is

$itnessing political movements $hich don religious garb or religious movements $hich assume political forms.A

+4asanova =, p. =./


18/25

@&esternQindigenous,A not only before but also after the $ar, and is therefore not simply a

phenomenon of tate hinto or religion.

!he !enno-centrism of the kokutai ideology can be found in the first article of the

8ei9i 4onstitution, $hich stipulated that @the empire of #reat Japan $ill be

governed at all times by the !enno.A %n the other hand, *rticles = and provided

that the !enno, as a constitutional monarch, should be controlled by the

constitution, the parliament, and the government. In this regard, he $as confined

@$ithinA the constitution as the highest organ of the state. BCD !he first article,

ho$ever, clearly defined him as an absolute po$er @beyondA the constitution.

8oreover, his absoluteness of imperial po$er $as not 9ust founded on @divine

rights,A as in the case of &estern absolutism, but rather on @sacred kingship by a

kami.A !he @contradictionsA in these imperial conceptions could only be solved by

presenting the !enno as a @living kamiA +arahitogami /. +:an 566, pp. ;-

/

*s :an an9un indicates, the !enno in the modern !enno system $as at the same time a

sacred king clad in the traditional aura of holiness and a constitutional monarch $ho

embodied &estern civilization and enlightenment. !his status beyond the la$, $hich can be

neither described as religious nor as secular, is the core of imperial authority in the !enno

system. &e therefore have to ask ho$ the !enno system ever ac"uired such an e'tra-legal

status and $hy it continues to hold it even no$.

!he !enno system as an entity beyond the la$

*s $e have seen above, the non-religious shrine doctrine $as not shared univocally by the

entire population in pre-$ar Japan. Rather, hrine hinto $as open to different

interpretations depending on the respective definition of religion. In a 9udicial grey zone,

$hich prescribed neither a state religion nor the separation of state and religion, several

opinions, including those of the government, e'isted side by side. *s soon as these opinions

$ent beyond shrine ritualism and "uestioned the imperial authority residing in its

;


19/25

background, ho$ever, they $ere countered by immediate repression, even in times of

comparative religious tolerance, as the scandal in ;6 caused by the 4hristian teacher

1chimura :anzK refusing to bo$ to the portrait of the emperor, or the critical hinto

$ritings by :ume :unitake56 from ;5 sho$ us. ?either 1chimura nor :ume intended to

re9ect the !enno system as such, but since they e'pressed an ob9ection against its authority in

their speech and conduct, public punishment $as the only ans$er to be e'pected. 8oreover,

this punishment $as not e'ecuted directly by organs of the government, but $as initiated in

the name of the entire society by conservative scholars or right $ing political organizations.

It $as therefore not a 9udicial matter, but a kind of self-censorship arising from $ithin the

society, demonstrating ho$ deeply respect to$ards the !enno system $as rooted at that time.

In this sense, $e must not regard the !enno system as being held up forcefully by stately

po$ers, but rather as an entity beyond the la$ that in the eyes of the people could never

become the ob9ect of criticism. :atK #enchi, for instance, $ho insisted in the religious

nature of hrine hinto, did not point out the conflict $ith the freedom of faith inherent in

such a conception, but $hile pushing hinto up to the status of a state religion tried to

s"ueeze in religious freedom)

0ounded on the belief in the rule of our divine emperor, state hinto +kokkateki

shint/, the national religion of Japan, e'ists in the mind of the Japanese people

since times immemorial, long before *rticle 5; of the 4onstitution $as drafted.

Ranking even higher than the 4onstitution, it has formed the essence of the

4onstitution. *ccording to my understanding, the idea of *rticle 5; is to allo$

missionary religions from abroad, such as 2uddhism or 4hristianity, as long as

they accept state hinto as JapanFs national religion and do not get into conflict

$ith it. +:atK 566= B7;D, pp. 766-76/

1chimura :anzK +;>-76/ founded a particular form of 4hristianity in Japan. (e $as forced to

resign from his post as a high school teacher after his uncompromising refusal to bo$ to the portrait of the !enno

during a public ceremony.56:ume :unitake +;7-7/ $as forced to resign as a professor at !okyo Imperial 1niversity after he

published an article $ith the title @hinto is an ancient custom of imperial $orshipA +Shint $a saiten no ko!oku

/.


20/25

uch interpretations of hrine hinto as the state religion $ere not only held by hinto

scholars like :atK, but also by opinion leaders like 8inobe !atsukichi +;


21/25

@problematizationA $ould have been regarded as an unconceivable topic that

ought to be suppressed. &hat $as protected by the taboo of any "uestions of this

type $as probably the !enno system, $hich means that the !enno system can be

identified $ith kokutaiitself%+8atsuura 5666, pp. 7>-


22/25

result in the re9ection of the !enno system as such. &hile differing from the official

mainstream, most believers did not think that their convictions $ere entirely incompatible

$ith it. !he situation finally changed $hen true 8ar'ism entered the intellectual $orld of

Japan from the 56s on$ard, after a secular form of 4hristianity had prepared the ground in

the form of Niberal !heology.

People $ho believe in the doctrines of a specific religious group have al$ays been fe$ in

Japan. !herefore, "uestions of religious freedom arising from the @religionQshrineA

opposition never gained serious footing in the broad strata of society. (o$ever, $hen the

e'ploitation of the people through state po$ers represented by the !enno $as raised as a

ma9or topic as for instance in a statement by the 4ommunist Party in 75 this secular

problem, $hich pertained to the common people, aroused interest among large numbers of

intellectuals, regardless of $hether they $ere devotees of a particular religion or

agnostics. 8ar'ism in Japan began $ith the analysis of the capitalist economy and as an

anti-religious ideological movement. &hen 8ar'ists $ere confronted $ith the massive

enforcement of !ennoism from 77 on$ard, ho$ever, in their opposition they had to

address the historical origins of the kokutaiideology as $ell +Isomae 5665/.

*ccording to my e'amination of academic te'ts from this period, this $as the first time

that modern Japanese intellectuals repudiated the e'istence of the !enno system directly.

!he 8ar'ist criti"ue interpreted the !enno system as a secular phenomenon and

unmasked the limitations of the allegedly unbroken e'istence of the !enno dynasty. It

claimed that the origins of Japanese people reached back to much earlier times. 2y doing

so, ho$ever, it based the national identity on the same logic of historical essentialism as

did the !enno system.

In the end, 8ar'ism $as not able to pinpoint the e'tra-legal status of the !enno system

$ithin the realm of the secular, since the !enno system belongs not only to the sphere of

secularity but to that of religion as $ell. *s $e have seen in the case of ?ational 8orality, it

transcended the @secularQreligiousA dichotomy in a $ay that has not yet been ackno$ledged

$ithin the discourse of (istorical tudies. Rather, academic disciplines such as (istory or

Religious tudies, helped establish such oppositions as @secularity vs. religionA or @morality

55


23/25

vs. religion,A and these oppositions established the !enno system as an unfathomable entity.

!hus, it $as e'tremely difficult for these disciplines to "uestion the !enno system, of $hich

they themselves $ere part. In this perspective, the appropriate strategy for dealing $ith the

e'tra-legal nature of the !enno system today is not 9ust to repeat the criticism based on

historical essentialism or on the principle of the separation of state and religion. Rather $e

should ask ho$ phenomena like the !enno system $hich seem to to$er above historical

contingency that belongs to the secular and the religious, and at the same time that

transcends them manifested themselves $ithin the historical conte't. &e should ob9ectify

the process of this manifestation on the basis of an a-historical genealogy. It seems necessary

not to be content $ith the respective discourses of (istory or Religious tudies, but to create

ne$ forms of e'pression in order to characterize the e'tra-legal nature of the !enno system

$ithin society. !he established discourses of Religious tudies and (istory presume

universal validity for both the religious and historical conceptions of the !enno system,

although these conceptions are only one e'pression of it in their respective fields. In order to

ob9ectify $hat has been pro9ected as beyond history, $e must first deconstruct these

presumptions. *bove all, $e should not forget that the e'tra-legal status of the !enno system

is not a trans-historical fact, but a historical product resulting from the confrontation of

modernizing Japan $ith the &estern &orld. It appears in the guise of an e'traliminal entity

precisely because it occurred $ithin the frame$ork of &esternization.

References

*nesaki 8asaharu , 6=, @:okka no unmei to risK +aikokusha to yogensha/A

+ /. InKokuun to shink ,

!okyo) :KdKkan , pp. 766-5.

----, /. !okyo) :okusho :ankKkai.

57


24/25


25/25

!okyo) !KkyK Eaigaku huppankai, pp. 76-7.

?itta (itoshi, 5666, @hinto as a non-religion) the origins and development of an idea.A In

2reen and !eeu$en 5666, pp. 55-,Ken. to shky seido . !okyo) Yuhikaku.

nishi ?aoki 2345 and 4hiba 8akoto , 566>,+ekishi no naka no seiky bunri

;ibei ni okeru sono kigen to tenkai

. !okyo) hiryMsha.

himazono usumu , ;, @?ihon ni okeru GshMkyKF gainen no keisei Inoue

!etus9iro no kirisutokyK hihan o megutte +,6789:;?@

ABCDEFGHIJ)KLMNO .A In Yamaori !etsuoPQCR

and %sada !oshiki +eds/,"ihonjin $a kirisutoky o dono y ni juy

shita ka+,STFGHIKUVW6XYZ[\ . !okyo) :okusai

?ihon 2unka :enkyM entT, pp. >-.

----, 566, @:okka shintK to kindai ?ihon no shMkyK kKzK ]*+,;

.A In Shky kenky ;^_ , @engo no kokka shintK to shMkyK shMdan to shite no 9in9aA

;%`ZO . In !amamuro 0umio +ed./,"ihonjin no

shky to shomin shink +,S;a . !okyo) Yoshika$a

Yanagita :unio , 5666 B;D, @hintK shikan b .A In Yanagita :unio

zenshM cdefg% , vol. 5. !okyo) 4hikuma hobK, pp. 5=->

isomae eng 13viii08

Documents