広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号 ２ ０１２年６月

Japan’s Modernization and the of

Chisato Hotta*

Abstract

This paper explores the purposes and consequences of the persecution of Buddhism in the early period (1868–1912). The Meiji government attempted to establish the legitimacy of the new state through the Shinto-based divine status of the emperor while pursuing anti-Buddhism policies and promoting Shinto as the state religion. By reinventing Shinto as an independent religion and ending the Shinto-Buddhism syncretism, the policy of (separation of Shinto and Buddhism) aimed at the elimination of Buddhism’s influence on society in order to construct a new political and social order; simultaneously, the state tried to form national unity based on loyalty toward the emperor. As soon as the Separation Edict was ordered in April 1868, the persecution of Buddhism took place through- out , resulting in the destruction of many temples, statues, and images (). In this process, followers of Hirata Atsutane, the school of National Learning ( or Nativism), played an important role in executing anti-Buddhist policies and violent actions. Although some Buddhists like the Shin sect fought back, the damages inflicted on Buddhism were immense and resulted in an indelible change of Japanese cultural history. Buddhism was persecuted partly because of its association with the stagnant, hierarchi- cal order of the Tokugawa bakufu (1603–1868). Since Buddhism enjoyed a privileged position under the patronage of the old regime, many Buddhist temples became rich and powerful and performed the function of social control. However, many temples collapsed which evoked anger among ordinary people and low-ranking samurai who were faced with harsh economic realities. Furthermore, Buddhism was regarded as a foreign religion and its characteristics, including passivity and resignation were incompatible with bunmei kaika (Civilization and Enlightenment), which meant adopting the utilitarian, rational, and scientific aspects of West- ern civilization. Moreover, the state tried to modernize Japan to catch up with the West under a slogan of fukoku kyohei (a wealthy nation and a strong army) while proclaiming “returning to ancient time” (osei fukko) to unite a new nation under the emperor. Buddhism became the major obstacle to achieving such goals. Consequently, Buddhism’s status and governmental role were replaced by Shinto. By persecuting Buddhism, the Meiji government aimed to con- trol the institutional power of religion, as well as people’s daily lives and consciousness, through the emperor ideology. Although Buddhists struggled to find a way to regain their position in society, they had little choice but to conform with the new national policy.

The Meiji government promoted Shinto as the Introduction state religion in order to construct a new politi- Intending to establish the legitimacy of a cal and social order centering on the Shinto- new state based on the authority of the based divine status of the emperor. In 1868, the emperor, early Me iji government policy new government issued the Separation Edict attempted a separation of Shinto and Buddhism ordering the dissociation of the Shinto and (shinbutsu bunri) at the expense of Buddhism. Buddhist divinities. The proponents of Restora- tion Shinto of the school of Hirata Atsutane * Adjunct Lecturer, Hiroshima University of Econom- ics, Hiroshima, Japan (1776–1843), the most influential ideologue of 62 広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号 the school of National Learning (Kokugaku or bunri and the haibutsu kishaku, including their Nativism), by advocating a restoration of direct effects on the inner lives and religious attitudes imperial rule, played a major role in executing of the Japanese. this policy. １. The Restoration of Imperial Rule The purpose of the order was the removal and the Separation of Shinto from of Buddhist influence from Shinto shrines; Buddhism simultaneously, it aimed to control the institu- tional power of religion. Accordingly, Buddhist １.１ The Administrative Machinery of Sepa- priests and their institutions were deprived of ration the privileged status which they enjoyed under After the proclamation of the “ancient” the Tokugawa regime (1603–1868). While try- Japanese system of “unity of ritual and govern- ing to eliminate all Buddhist elements from ment” (saisei-itchi), in March 1868, the Meiji Shinto shrines, the government also invented government established the Department of the Shinto tradition. Since Shinto and Buddhism Shinto (Jingikan) and issued the Separation had been associated in a syncretic whole-a Edict (Murakami 1980, 21). This edict ordered prominent aspect of Japan’s tradition-the the separation of Shinto and Buddhism on the shinbutsu bunri eventually struck a blow to the grounds that the associations between continuity of Japanese cultural history. Buddhism and Shinto divinities that had been Meanwhile, the Separation Edict provoked accepted since the Nara period (710–794) were a wave of attacks upon Buddhism throughout contrary to the indigenous Japanese way the country called haibutsu kishaku, resulting in (Kitagawa 1990, 201). Because the Meiji govern- the destruction of many temples, statues, and ment had prioritized the “restoration of Imperial images. The central government was reluctant rule” (osei fukko), which attempted to recover to take decisive measures in response to this the authority of the Emperor who ruled the movement. Except in a few cases, Buddhist ancient state (Ketelaar 1990, 6), it was an urgent sects could do little to protect Buddhism. matter for the government to support this inten- Although anti-Buddhist thought and policies tion through legislation. In accordance with the spread widely in the late Tokugawa period, revival of imperial rule, the Department of Japanese Buddhism had never had such a trau- Shinto, which was instituted as the highest matic experience in its history. The govern- organ of government even above the Council of ment’s anti-Buddhist policy not only dealt State (Dajokan), functioned to supervise the Buddhism a heavy blow, it also caused , rituals, Shinto priests, and Shinto pre- Buddhist leaders to call for reforms that tended cincts (Murakami 1980, 21). to conform to the state ideology and “moderniza- Moreover, the Meiji government made fur- tion”. This paper examines the government’s ther efforts to nationalize Shinto. For example, anti-Buddhism policy and its intention as well as in 1869, the government established the Tokyo its impact on Buddhism. Additionally, I hope to Shrine where only soldiers who died in the civil clarify the historical meaning of the shinbutsu war of the Meiji Restoration were enshrined. Japan’s Modernization and the Persecution of Buddhism 63

This shrine later became the Yasukuni Shrine Buddhist priests had gained administrative con- (Murakami 1980, 21). In addition, prior to the trol of a large proportion of Shinto shrines Meiji era, each had maintained its through the so-called Dual Shinto (Ryobu autonomy. Nevertheless, in 1871 for the pur- Shinto) system (Thelle 1987, 21). In place of the pose of the nationalization of Shinto, the state Buddhist priests, the Shinto priests took over all organized all Shinto shrines hierarchically with administrative duties of the shrines (Ketelaar the Ise Shrine at the top. The Ise Shrine was 1990, 9). Some former Shinto-Buddhist priests believed to be the place of worship of the deity who were forced to enter secular life joined the Amaterasu Omikami (Hardacre 1989b, 28–32). Shinto clergy; however, the government soon In this manner, the state tried to make the prohibited this practice (Murakami 1980, 22). shrine play a role in education and politics in Furthermore, the state not only prohibited the just the same way as the Buddhist temples had use of Buddhist icons as images of kami in the previous era (Murakami 1980, 27). By (shintai), but also ordered the removal of all doing so, the Meiji leaders created the precondi- Buddhist images and objects from Shinto tions for state control of religion; at the same shrines. The state also banned “the use of time, they tried to establish the political author- Buddhist names attached to Shinto deities” ity of the state. (kami ) (Ketelaar 1990, 9). James E. Ketelaar describes the enforcement of these orders by １.２ Implementation of anti-Buddhist the Shinto priest Juge Shigekuni at the Hiyoshi Policies Shrine, Mt. Hiei, in this passage: In order to “reestablish” Shinto’s autonomy in accordance with the religious policy of the Juge and his band of self-proclaimed shinbutsu bunri, the Meiji state attempted to “restorations” ( fukkosha) proceeded to remove all Buddhist elements from Shinto remove every statue, bell, sutra, tapestry, shrines. The policy of the shinbutsu bunri aimed scroll, and article of clothing that could be at the elimination of Buddhism’s influence on even remotely linked to Buddhism form society through the removal of Buddhism from the shrine complex. All inflammable any public place (Ketelaar 1990, 69). Because materials were gathered together and burn- Buddhism was tightly connected with previous ed; all metals were confiscated to be refash- Bakufu rule, it was an essential task for the ioned into cannon or coin; stone statues Meiji leaders to execute this policy in order to were decapitated and buried or thrown into establish the legitimacy of the new state, which the nearby river; and wooden statues were was based on the emperor system and linked to used for target practice, or their heads for Shinto (Ketelaar 1990, 69; Murakami 1980, 22). impromptu games of kickball, and then The order was accompanied by the follow- burned (Ketelaar 1990, 9). ing measures. First, all Buddhist priests were ordered to relinquish their positions in Shinto These orders ended the Shinto-Buddhism shrines throughout the nation. In the past, syncretism which had been practiced for nearly 64 広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号 ten centuries (Collcutt 1986, 152). Dual Shinto tion of all temple and shrine estates in 1871 had deeply penetrated into the consciousness of (Ketelaar 1990, 69). Although the confiscation the people. Therefore, the Meiji government’s order was devastating to all Buddhist sects, the policy of shinbutsu bunri conversely demon- Shingon sects suffered the most because of strated the previously deep association of their heavy reliance on the temple estates. On Shinto and Buddhist divinities (Grapard 1984, the other hand, the Shin sects, especially 242). Buddhism was rejected as alien, and the Honganji, were less affected due to their lay- associations between Shinto and Buddhism oriented organization (Murakami 1980, 26). The were now considered a “defilement” of Shinto Meiji government, furthermore, initiated com- (Thelle 1987, 21). According to Martin Collcut, pulsory shrine registration (ujiko-shirabe) “It was, in effect, a mortal blow at what had instead of registration in temples (Ketelaar become the prevalent syncretic expression of 1990, 69 ). As a result, Buddhist temples lost Japanese religion” (Collcut 1986, 152). Further- their right to control land as well as people more, one can see the changes in people’s atti- (Murakami 1980, 26). tudes toward religion in the confiscation of ２. Haibutsu Kishaku temple bells and bronze objects to be used for cannons; that is, practical concerns prevailed. ２.１ Haibutsu Kishaku and its Outcome Other such measures included the govern- After the order for the separation of Shinto ment’s total ban on the Buddhist ceremonies and Buddhism, a total persecution of Buddhism which had been intricately connected to the syn- known as “ haibutsu kishaku” was launched cretic religious services of Shinto shrines throughout the country. M eanwhile, the (Ienaga 1965a, 9). In particular, they rejected movement accelerated through the spread of Buddhist funeral services and created Shinto rumors about the government’s intention to funerals (Kitagawa 1990, 201). The Meiji exterminate Buddhism. The Shinto priests, who ideologues believed that those who controlled had been forcibly subordinated in Shinto- death controlled life (Ketelaar 1990, 45). Buddhist monasteries, unleashed their pent-up The government attempted to weaken the fury and initiated of Buddhism economic power of Buddhist institutions (Hardacre 1989a, 28; Murakami 1980, 24). In through the abolition of the old networks of lay fact, there had been a long-term intellectual and sponsors (danka) (Collcut 1986, 152). In addi- emotional hostility between Shinto and tion, the government carried out temple clos- Buddhism. Such elements contributed to the ings or amalgamations, shrine relocations, and swift spread of this violence (Kishimoto 1956, tax reassessments (Ketelaar 1990, 69). How- 114). ever, the most decisive blow to Buddhism came One can see the nature of this violence in with the confiscation of temple estates (Collcut the following examples. In the domains (han) of 1986, 152). This order resulted in the elimina- Satsuma, present-day Kagoshima and Oki prov- tion of most of the temple’s external incomes. ince, which consisted of four islands in the Sea The government accomplished the nationaliza- of Japan and is now a part of Shimane Prefec- Japan’s Modernization and the Persecution of Buddhism 65 ture, the most severe persecution occurred. In enced by the Hirata school, but rather a timely 1869, the Satsuma domain not only ordered economic policy which aimed at stabilization of 1,066 temples to be abolished, but also obliged the people’s livelihood in the above-mentioned 2,964 priests to return to lay life. In addition, all domain (Shibata 1978, 75–78). subjects were ordered to become Shintoists. As I noted earlier, the violence accompany- The domain officials, moreover, destroyed ing haibutsu kishaku, which reached a peak in Buddhist images, sutras, and accessories 1871, clearly indicated an explosion of extreme (Thelle 1987, 22–24). The Satsuma domain anger by the masses toward Buddhism as the adopted Shinto ceremonies and restructured essential link of authority in the old feudal hier- the local festival calendar (Ketelaar 1990, 61). archical order. The lowest officials in the By the end of 1869, Buddhism in Satsuma had new government-those who had been most almost disappeared. Similarly, Buddhism in Oki oppresse under the previous regime-assumed had become totally extinct. In the , leadership roles in this Buddhist persecution which implemented the earliest and most thor- (Murakami 1980, 25–26). This fact is also ough anti-Buddhist policies (Murakami 1980, supported by Shigeyoshi Murakami, who 21), strong waves of anti-Buddhist violence took writes: “ This spectacle of ruined temples was place (Thelle 1987, 22–24). In some domains, an event that clearly indicated in the eyes of the people led by the Shinto priests even destroyed people the collapse of the feudal government the roadside stone statues of Jizo and Kannon. and the restoration of the imperial court” These domains also forbade the celebration of (Murakami 1980, 25). For the people, this the traditional Buddhist Bon festival (Murakami action denoted the process of purification 1980, 25–26). through the destruction of the past. In fact, the domains where Buddhist perse- In addition to these reasons, the relation- cution was most ruthless had been led by follow- ship between influential Western ideas and ers of Hirata Atsutane, who had already adopted haibutsu kishaku was another important factor- anti-Buddhist policies during the Tokugawa though under-recognized by most scholars-that period and had a considerable impact on contributed to how the persecution of samurai who supported the Sonno Jôi (Revere Buddhism was executed. According to Tsuji the Emperor and Expel the Barbarians) move- Zennosuke, in the early Meiji period, with the ment, which was centered in Satsuma. Reflect- encouragement of the government, people ing this, Satsuma ideologues were successful in made frantic efforts to adopt Western concepts, building a Shinto education and shrine system practices, and productions in order to become throughout the domain (Ketelaar 1990, 65). “civilized.” The adoption of the utilitarian However, Shibata Doken provides different per- aspects of Western civilization led to criticism of spectives on this issue than m ost other the traditional way of life and values. Under scholars. According to Shibata, the persecution these circumstances, people could easily of Buddhism during the Tokugawa period was destroy Buddhist arts and architectures regard- not merely a religious policy which was influ- less of their cultural value (Tsuji 1984, 317). 66 広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号

As a result of the haibutsu kishaku, by the status, priests, especially Shin and fifth year of Meiji, over 40,000 temples had been priests, still maintained extensive local net- victimized. This process was accompanied by works of true believers. The government feared the forced laicization of thousands of priests, that these priests would organize a grass-roots and the destruction of countless temple artifacts opposition movement. Accordingly, the govern- (Ketelaar 1990, 7). Japanese Buddhism had ment’s direct intervention in anti-Buddhist poli- never before experienced in its history such cies was implemented by local authorities and intense persecution (Ienaga 1965a, 9). took place only when a violent protest in Toyama in late 1870, an uprising in Mikawa ２.２ The Meiji State’s Response to Haibutsu (present-day Shizuoka) and Ise in 1871, and sev- Kishaku eral other places in 1872 and 1873 broke out The central government’s responses to the against haibutsu kishaku (Ketelaar 1990, 7). In haibutsu kishaku were aroused not so much out short, for the government, anti-Buddhist actions of concern over the destruction, but out of a were acceptable insofar as they did not impede deep fear of provoking the masses’ anger. state interests. Although the government denied that the elimi- nation of Buddhism was politically motivated, ２.３ Buddhist Response to Haibutsu and even publicly condemned acts of destruc- Kishaku tion, they made very little effort to contain the As I stated earlier, in response to haibutsu violence or punish the perpetrators (Collcult kishaku, people resisted violently in a number of 1986, 131). The government only stated that the cases. The most outstanding rebellion was the Shintoists were solely responsible (Ketelaar case of Mikawa, Ohama. Immediately after the 1990, 12). However, there were some considera- government’s dispatch of a new official to carry tions behind the government’s responses. The out the enforcement of its religious policies, the government could not help being sensitive to uprising at Mikawa took place. Since Mikawa intervention in affairs of the domains since the traditionally had a large number of the faithful political situation in the late 1860s and early in the Shin sect, Shin priests attempted to resist 1870s was still extremely fluid. They had to these oppressive new policies through the for- respect local authorities because each domain mation of a coalition. Their resistance erupted still maintained considerable autonomy in violence and some members of the move- (Collcult 1986, 131). Therefore, the state authori- ment killed a number of the clan officials with ties did not act as quickly as expected. bamboo spears (Kishimoto 1956, 122–23). How- The government, however, began to take ever, there are some differences in scholarly direct action as soon as they recognized the dan- interpretations of the Mikawa Incident. gerous elements in peasant population. The cen- According to Kishimoto Hideo, in order to tral government was, in fact, afraid that the combat the religious policies, Buddhists and haibutsu kishaku would generate peasant rebel- their supporters spread the rumor that the offi- lions. In spite of being denied their political cial policies targeted Christianity, not Japan’s Modernization and the Persecution of Buddhism 67

Buddhism. As a result, many people joined in ally developed anti-Tokugawa thought, was par- this protest movement against the official relig- ticularly harsh in its denunciations of the ious policies (Kishimoto 1956, 122–123). Tsuji financial drain caused by Buddhism (Kishimoto Zennosuke and Shibata Doken, on the other 1956, 15). hand, state that people in Mikawa believed that However, as I mentioned above, the strong- an official of the domain, Hattori, was a est anti-Buddhism force came from the school Christian; therefore, he wanted to suppress of National Learning at the end of the Buddhism to spread Christianity. Since Hattori Tokugawa period. They attacked Buddhism as a took decisive measures to reform the domain, main agent of the distortion of Japan’s authentic he incurred anger of the masses at that time way of life. In particular, Hirata Atsutane (Tsuji 1984, 295–297; Shibata 1978, 180–182). severely attacked Buddhism as a “ foreign” relig- Tamamuro Taijo has a different opinion ion which led to the contamination of pure from the above-mentioned scholars. He tries to Japanese culture. Its teachings impaired the explain government policies in favor of the unity of the nation and thus were not compati- Shinto activists who executed religious policies. ble with the policy of the Imperial Nation (Davis Tamamuro justifies the activities of Hattori, who 1992, 160; Ketelaar 1990, 132). Hirata had many was very much influenced by Nativism. Except followers among Shinto priests. They became for a few incidents involving direct resistance of the main force of anti-Buddhism in the domains haibutsu kishaku, faced with the anger of the as well as in the new government. Moreover, in masses, Buddhist sects in most places main- the early Meiji period Inoue Tesujiro tained a powerless silence (Murakami 1980, 26). (1855–1944), an influential philosopher who opposed Christianity as incompatible with Japa- ２.４ Anti-Buddhist Thought and its Roots nese culture, also denounced Buddhism’s spirit The criticism of Buddhism began in the as resigned and passive (Davis 1992, 160). Tokugawa period. Confucian thinkers such as Thus, Buddhism was an obstacle to the nation’s Hayashi Razan (1583–1657), Ogyu Sorai entering “civilization.” Such criticism culmi- (1660–1728), Kumazawa Banzai (1583–1657), nated in an outburst of Buddhist persecution. and Yamagata Banto (1748–1825) leveled harsh Even during the Tokugawa period, the per- attacks against the ethics, politics, and econom- secution of Buddhism had begun in domains ics of Buddhism (Davis 1992, 160). They such as Mito, Satsuma, Tsuwano, and Choshu, strongly criticized its socially useless elements present day Yamaguchi. These domains were and its inability to provide an adequate base for under the influence of either the Mito school or effective action. Hayashi and Ogyu denounced the Hirata school. Their anti-Buddhist policies priests as yumin, idle people, who lived a para- provided the government with precedent for its sitic life (Ketelaar 1990, 19). Kumazawa Banzai religious policy as well as a basic pattern for also contended that “ They are an extravagant anti-Buddhist action (Ketelaar 1990, 61). drain on the national treasury” (Thelle 1987, 20). The nationalistic Mito school, which gradu- 68 広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号

２.５ Haibutsu Kishaku and its Justifica- even the enthusiastic, though ritualistic, tion religious faith of the past was (Ienaga, Although the persecution of Buddhism, 1965a, 5). which had its roots in the Tokugawa period, had been justified in various ways, these argu- Except for “decadence” there were not enough ments were ideological rather than actual justifi- reasons to justify the persecution, which was cations. As previously stated, Buddhism had conceived to aim at the betterment of the nation been closely associated with the Tokugawa and “Buddhism.” As a matter of fact, for restora- system of social control (Davis 1992, 160). tionist bureaucrats, Buddhism was portrayed as People viewed Buddhism as a protégé of the decadent and inherently evil as a necessary pre- Tokugawa feudal regime; therefore, anti-Bakufu condition for the establishment of Shinto as the rhetoric could easily be linked with anti- state religion (Ketelaar 1990, 10–12). Buddhist action (Collcult 1986, 130). ３. The Meiji State’s Anti-Buddhist Pol- Scholars such as Tsuji Zennosuke justified icy and Japan’s Modernization the persecution of Buddhism on the grounds of Buddhism’s decadent character. Its inner cor- ３.１ Main Reasons for Government’s Anti- ruption was characterized by the prevalence of Buddhist Stance womanizers and drunkards, and the practice of There are several reasons why the Meiji money lending for profit and title selling state took an anti-Buddhism stance. First, the (Ketelaar 1990, 11–12). Tsuji states that Meiji leaders intended to establish a new nation Buddhism’s privileged social position invited based on the authority of the emperor. The spiritual and moral decay, resulting in indolence political ideal of the Meiji Restoration was the and degeneration among the priests (Thelle “Revival of Imperial Rule” (Kishimoto 1956, 1986, 19; Ienaga 1965a, 4–5). Echoing the cri- 112). This process necessitated minimizing the tique of Inoue Tetsuji, many scholars, therefore, power of Buddhism and promoting Shinto as argue that Buddhism could not comply with the the state religion. In Shinto the emperor was needs of the age of “ modernization” (Ketelaar regarded as a descendant of Amaterasu 1990, 10). However, one cannot place the blame Omikami, sun goddess and divine founder of solely on Buddhism. According to Ienaga Japan. In such a scheme, the emperor was con- Saburo: sidered to be a living kami. On the basis of this belief, people were forced to worship the tenno The policy of the Shogunate which as kami. banned the discussion and advocacy of new However, most scholars have overlooked ideas in all things, made it possible for the this very change in religious consciousness of priests, already living in idleness and Japanese people which arose due to the govern- bound by tradition, to slip into a state of ment’s religious policy. Prior to this change the stagnation. Not only was the development Japanese worshipped their ancestors as kami. of new thought and new faith inhibited, In this way, Shinto posited the emperor’s relig- Japan’s Modernization and the Persecution of Buddhism 69 ious authority in order to establish his political ate the unity of the people as a “ single spiritual authority (Murakami 1980, 20). Thus, while try- essence” which was symbolized by tenno ing to eliminate Buddhist influence from Shinto (Hardacre 1989b, 5). as well as from society through the shinbutsu Scholars such as Shibata Doken and bunri, the government strove to invent Shinto Murakami Shigeyoshi note that Buddhism was tradition to establish its own legitimacy regarded as “other”; therefore, it became an (Hardacre 1989a, 3). object of persecution. However, in contrast to In fact, Shinto had had neither an autono- Hardacre, they do not mention that Shinto mous existence nor a clear doctrine before the could be a component of Japan’s cultural iden- Meiji period. Shinto had been rather a mere tity. Moreover, in contrast to Buddhism, Shinto attachment to Buddhist institutions or tutelary possessed nationalistic elements which, deities in the cult of a local community. Shinto’s enhanced by much of Nativist scholarship, con- relations with the state before 1868 were vague tributed to the development of unity among the and limited. Shinto’s claim that it was Japan’s people. In this process, the government created “ indigenous religion” was totally false. In fact, a new form of rites and symbols that constituted the state and Shinto priests tried to rewrite the Shinto and signified its particular and nationalis- past in order to support such a claim (1989b tic meanings. In this period, the government cre- Hardacre, 4–5). Through this effort, the Meiji ated its first national ceremonial calendar, flag, leaders attempted to gain legitimacy for the new and national anthem (1989b Hardacre, 4). At Meiji government. Unlike Hardacre, Japanese the same time, the government tried to foster scholars such as Tamamuro Taijo and Tsuji loyalty to the nation as embodied by the Zennosuke, who have written a great deal on emperor. The new Meiji government promoted the issue of the haibutsu kishaku, have ignored the virtues of loyalty and filial piety as the twin or denied that Shinto was an invented tradition. pillars of national morality. In this context, the Neither Tamamuro nor Tsuji discuss a linkage people owed loyalty to the emperor (Gluck, between the tennosei and Shinto. 1985, 111). Secondly, the new government tried to At the beginning of the Meiji period, politi- unify the people under the emperor in order to cal and social conflicts such as peasant upris- pursue Japan’s modernization. At first, the gov- ings still prevailed throughout the country ernment strove to construct a cultural identity (Gordon 2003, 87). Also, because of the per- for the Japanese. Before the Meiji period, ceived threat of Western imperial powers, the people made sense of their own identity not in Japanese leaders were convinced that Japan had terms of the state, but in terms of their local to strengthen and enrich the nation (fukoku community. Beyond its religious component, kyohei) for its defense (Gordon 2003, 70–73). Shinto represented the essence of cultural iden- For the purpose of achieving the national goal tity for the Japanese; it was an “ irreducible” ele- of fukoku kyohei, unification of the people was ment of Japaneseness. Through the idea of a indispensable. Tennosei ideology served to mobi- homogeneous population, the state tried to cre- lize people with selfless devotion to pursue pub- 70 広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号 lic interests. It was essential for the state to 93). Miyoshi Masao’s argument is very impor- eliminate real opposition by depoliticizing the tant, since most scholars of Japanese Buddhism masses. By moralizing and mystifying the lack such a viewpoint. In particular, Thelle’s nature of the state, politics was depoliticized. book, Buddhism and Christianity in Japan, does People were socialized to obey and to sacrifice not point out the deleterious aspects of Christi- for the collectivity, which was symbolized by anity. In order to cope with Christian influence, the tenno (Gluck, 1985). the government considered that the unity of Third, the government executed anti- people was essential and Shinto was suitable for Buddhism policies because Buddhism could no this purpose (Yasumaru 1979, 4). longer serve as a counter-measure to the Another factor which contributed to the pro- Christian threat. As soon as the order of motion of the government’s anti-Buddhism poli- shinbutsu bunri was issued in 1868, the govern- cies was that Buddhism was no longer effective ment banned Christianity (the ban remained in as a means of social control. Buddhism was an effect until 1873) (Hane 1986, 108). The oppres- ideology of feudal authority and the temples sion of Christianity intensified (Thelle 1987, 2). played a major role in controlling the people. The persecution of Christian followers in the During the Tokugawa period, people were village of Urakami, Nagasaki, is one such exam- forced to belong to Buddhist temples in order ple. Since “ Christianity preached God as a spiri- to enforce the prohibition of Christianity. tual authority above any earthly lord,” Christian Buddhism, in its original form, was neither theology was contrary to the notion of the closely linked with political power nor the sup- emperor as divinity. In spite of its severe perse- port of hierarchy. On the contrary, Buddhism cution under the Tokugawa regime, Christianity strongly advocated the equality of all men. It gradually penetrated into the Japanese popula- goes without saying that some Buddhists, such tion. Christianity, therefore, became constituted as Gyoki and , maintained the Buddhist as a threat to the state in many respects (Ienaga tradition of an anti-authoritarian faith and tried 1965a, 13). to help the underprivileged masses (Ienaga The Meiji leaders perceived that the infiltra- 1965a, 4). tion of Christian influence was inevitable under Once Buddhism became an oppressive tool the modernization policy (Yasumaru 1979, 4). in the lives of the masses, people who lived Since Christianity was the religion of the wretched lives no longer perceived Buddhism advanced Western nations, the Meiji leaders as a means of salvation. Instead, they started to considered it a promoter of “civilization and look for something else. The eijanaika (“does it enlightenment” (bunmei kaika) (Ienaga, 1965a, matter?”) riots, which spread nationwide 12). On the other hand, Christian missions between the end of the Tokugawa period and whose tasks were to “civilize” people in non- the beginning of the Meiji, were an example of Western countries through propagating this phenomenon. The eijanaika activity devel- Christian faith always served the interests of oped into a belief in a kind of religious-political colonialism and expansionism (Miyoshi 1991, expectation. The followers of this movement Japan’s Modernization and the Persecution of Buddhism 71 believed that the sacred power of Amaterasu sary if Japan was to survive in the modern inter- Omikami in Ise Shrine would bring on a change national arena. In addition, “Civilization and into the world (Murakami 1980, 19). They Enlightenment” meant the adoption of the utili- found salvation in kami. However, this kami tarian, rational, and scientific aspects of West- never meant tenno (Yasumaru 1979, 8). ern culture. In this context, as I have explained, One of the reasons that the government Buddhism, which emphasized resignation, pas- harshly persecuted Buddhism was that a large sivity, and pacifism (Davis 1992, 160), was not number of people who subscribed to anti- compatible with Japan’s modernization and the Buddhism thought participated in the new gov- development of a capitalist economy. ernment. In particular, the proponents of Resto- ration Shinto of the Hirata school, who ３.２ Buddhism’s Changes in Order to Cope established the Shinto Office, played a domi- with Contemporary Conditions nant role in planning and executing the relig- In order to survive, Buddhism made ious policy (Murakami 1980, 21–22). Kamei special efforts to recover its influence by con- Korekiyo and Fukuba Bisei of Tsuwano were forming to the state. As a result of haibutsu the ones most responsible for drafting the Sepa- kishaku, Buddhism suffered deep and far-reach- ration Edict (Ketelaar 1990, 8). Furthermore, ing setbacks. Its priests were led to humble the leaders in the new government, who were reflection on the Buddhism of the past, and mainly from Satsuma and Choshu, had known those who were strong in faith committed them- shinbutsu bunri in their domains. As a result, selves to revive Buddhism (Kishimoto 1956, they devoted themselves to promoting Shinto 121). However, most Buddhist leaders strove to beliefs that would contribute to a strengthened gain support through ingratiating themselves imperial ideology. They had no sympathy for with the new authorities and the ruling class Buddhism (Collcut 1986, 130–31). (Ienaga, 1965a, 11). To begin with, Buddhism Finally, the aspects of Buddhist doctrine launched massive anti-Christianity agitation that were unsuitable for Japan’s modernization since the government had banned Catholicism were responsible for its persecution. According for many years as an “evil faith” (jashumon). to Ketelaar, “ The national policy which quested Although it is an obvious fact, very few scholars for a “wealthy nation and a strong army” have pointed out that Buddhism was not aware (fukoku kyohei) had “profound implications for that by attacking Christianity, it was ultimately the very possibility of certain forms of thought denying the principle of religious freedom and action” (Ketelaar 1990, x). When Japan (Komuro 1987, 5). began to modernize, most Asian and African In the meanwhile, Buddhist apologists took nations had been completely divided up among a conciliatory position towards , the Western imperial powers (Ienaga 1978b, 4). Shinto, and other popular movements, despite There is no doubt that Japanese leaders who rejecting their ideas (Thelle 1987, 24). The were subject to the influence of Social Darwinist Hongan-ji promoted the idea of “the inseparabil- ideology keenly felt that new ideas were neces- ity of the Kingly Law and the Buddhist Law” 72 広島経済大学研究論集 第３５巻第１号 during the summer of 1868. As a way of assert- Buddhism for its own political purposes. The ing the unity of Buddhism and the imperial government’s thoroughgoing suppression dem- system, Hongan-ji sent donations to the Impe- onstrated how firmly Buddhism was entrenched rial House when the new government got into in the Japanese mind. financial trouble. Moreover, Hongan-ji temples The Meiji Restoration in 1868 was the start actively participated in Hokkaido colonization, of Japan’s modernization, the race to catch up which aimed at protecting the homeland from with W est. The Restoration government European and Christian expansion. Through attempted to achieve two contradictory goals. making such efforts, Hongan-ji attempted to While trying to modernize the country, the state prove the worth of Buddhism to the state simultaneously established a political regime (Ketelaar 1990, 71–73). Later, Buddhist leaders that rested on a notion of a return to the ancient advocated the ancient theme of “Buddhism for order. Since the modern Japanese state was the protection of the state” (goho bukkyo), and based on the principle of imperial absolutism, it they were ultimately reduced to apologists for was essential to the Meiji leadership that a imperialism and war (Hardacre, 1989a, 216). All notion of loyalty to the emperor would develop these efforts made by Buddhism were aimed at among the people. For this purpose, National justifying itself as a religion compatible with Learning and Confucianism-not Buddhism or modern Japan. Christianity-were convenient ideas. The tennose ideology was needed to protect Japan from the Conclusion Western influence which accompanied moderni- The Meiji government took decisive meas- zation. In addition, this ideology was necessary ures against Buddhism as if they meant to elimi- to secure support for Japan’s modernization by nate it totally. Haibutsu Kishaku exemplified a means of the development of a national con- policy whereby religion without state authority sciousness. Meanwhile, in order to achieve was prohibited. Through the total control of Japan’s modernization in a competitive world, religion, the state attempted to intervene in and the state encouraged the people to adopt new control the daily lives and the consciousness of ideas and attitudes. In this sense, Buddhism the people. At the same time, state authorities was an obstacle to this purpose. attempted to change the pre-modern religious Moreover, the government’s anti-Buddhist consciousness that permeated the social system policy brought other significant developments. and popular consciousness. However, Bud- The establishment of a notion that only the peo- dhism had deeply penetrated into the people. In ple who served a worldly authority and ren- the eijanaika activity, which was a reaction to dered distinguished services would be oppression and anxiety, people found salvation enshrined (i.e., in Yasukuni Shrine) as kami in the “ kam” of Ise Shrine. The suppression of resulted in a transformation of the ideas about Buddhism, nevertheless, did not emerge from the death. In addition, the shinbutsu bunri policy an earnest desire of the masses. Rather the led to the denial of a syncretic expression and state authority initiated the persecution of practice which had a long tradition and impor- Japan’s Modernization and the Persecution of Buddhism 73 tant impact upon the cultural history of Japan. Contemporary Religions in Japan 1: 1–41, 1965a. ————. The Pacific War 1931–1945. New York: Pan- Finally, under the existing conditions, every theon Books, 1978b. religion had to comply with the values promul- Ketelaar, James. Of Heretics and Martyrs in Meiji gated by the new state. Consequently, the Japan: Buddhism and Its Persecution. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1990. capitulation of most Buddhist sects to the nation- Kishimoto, Hideo. Trans. John Howes. Japanese Relig- alistic demands of the new regime demon- ion in the Meiji Era. Tokyo: Obunsha, 1956. Kitagawa, Joseph. Religion in Japanese History . New strated the extent to which all York: Columbia University Press, 1990. became a tool of the state. Koga, Toru. “Meiji Ishin ki ni okeru Gakko Kyoiku to Shinbutsu Bunri: Haibutsu Kishaku to Kokugakush- References iso, Kyoiku no Kindaika tono Kankei ni Chu- monku Shite.” Nihon Daigaku Bunri Gakubu Collcutt, Martin. “Buddhism: The Threat of Jinbunkagaku Kenkyusho Kiyo.” 59: 207–225, 2000. Eradication.” Japan in Transition. Princeton, New Komuro, Hiromitsu. Kindai Byoshi Kenkyu. Kyoto: Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1986. Dohosha, 1987. Davis, Winston. Japanese Religion and Society: Para- Miyoshi, Masao. Off Center: Power and Culture Rela- digms of Structure and Change. Albany, New tions between Japan and the United States. Cam- York: State University of New York Press, 1992. bridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, Fujiwara, Masanobu. “ Oki Sôdô Saikô: Haibutsu 1991. Kishaku to no Kanren ni Oite.” Ryukoku Daigaku Murakami, Shigeyoshi. Trans. H. Byron Eaehart. Ronshu 472: 95–121, 2008. Japanese Religion in the Modern Century. Tokyo: Gluck, Carol. Japan’s Modern Myths: Ideology in the University of Tokyo Press, 1980. Late Meiji Period. Princeton, New Jersey: Prince- Ota, Yasuyo. Nippon no Kutsudaten: Meiji Ishin no ton University Press, 1985. Karetsu na Haibutsu Kishaku no nazo. Tokyo: Gordon, Andrew. A Modern History of Japan: From Goma Shobo, 2007. Tokugawa Times to Present. New York and Shibata, Doken. Haibutsu Kishaku. Tokyo: Koronsha, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003. 1978. Grapard, Allan. Japan’s Ignored Cultural Revolution: Tamamuro, Taijo. Nihon Bukkyoshi. 3 vols. Kyoto: The Separation of Shinto and Buddhist Divinities Hozokan, 1967. In Meiji. History of Religious 23: 240–265, 1984. Thelle, Notto. Buddhism and Christianity in Japan: Hane, Mikiso. Modern Japan: A Historical Survey. From Conflict to Dialogue, 1854–1899. Honolulu, London: Westview Press, 1986. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 1987. Hardacre, Helen. “ The Lotus Sutra in Modern Japan” Tsuji, Zennosuke. Nihon Bukkyo Kenkyu. 6 vols. in The Lotus Sutra in Japanese Culture. Honolulu, Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1984. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press, 1989a. Yasumaru, Yoshio. Kamigami no Meiji Ishin: ————. Shinto and the State 1868–1988. Princeton, Shinbutsu Bunri to Haibutsu Kishaku. Tokyo: New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1989b. Iwanami Shinsho, 1979. Ienaga, Saburo. “ Japan’s Modernization and Buddhism.”