Bulletin of Portuguese - Japanese Studies ISSN: 0874-8438 [email protected] Universidade Nova de Lisboa

Jorissen, Engelbert Reseña de " in Early Modern . Belief & Practice" de Ikuo Higashibaba Bulletin of Portuguese - Japanese Studies, núm. 8, june, 2004, pp. 107-115 Universidade Nova de Lisboa Lisboa, Portugal

Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=36100806

How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative BPJS, 2004, 8, 107-130 Book Review 107

BOOK REVIEW

Ikuo Higashibaba convert to Christianity in early mod- ern Japan. Christianity in Early Modern Japan. Ikuo Higashibaba starts his in- Kirishitan Belief & Practice, quiry from the background of such (Brill's Japanese Studies Library, questions. He wants to move away edited by from a traditional research which H. Bolitho and K. W. Radtke, focuses on historical events and fig- Volume 16, ures and ends up by measuring the Leiden, Boston, Koln, Brill, 2001) effect and results of the early Catho- lic in Japan according to the During an international confer- exspectation of the , come ence held on occasion of the 450th from outside, and within the frame of commemoration of the arrival of the a European understanding of Chris- first Portuguese in Japan in, as far tianism, and Christian as it seems today, 1543, there was behaviour. Instead, Higashibaba as- one contribution about Otomo Sorin serts: “We need to explore the his- as a crucial figure in the history of torical experiences of these people, early Japanese Christianity. At the whose existence has been so often end of his explanations the speaker ignored in the traditional histories of asserted the audience that Otomo the Christian century” (p. xiv). And Sorin, for the Jesuits as well Dom in the conclusion of his study he says Francisco, once having been baptized, that he has given "an example of how had remained up to the end of his a people accepted a foreign religious life “a good Christian”. Seen from system and developed it within their the speaker's personal view this may own religious, social, and political have been so. However, problems circumstances” (p. 164). To this pur- may arise if one begins to reflect pose Higashibaba concentrates on one upon what is a good Christian, and text, that is the Dochiriina Kirishitan does so with historical perspectives, published first in Japanese in 1591 regarding aspects of cultural anthro- and in a revised edition again in 1600, pology, with respect to sociological what underlines the importance of facts, and this again with respect to the text (cf. Higashibaba p. 53). two different socio-cultural-historical The Japanese version of the backgrounds of the European Chris- Dochiriina Kirishitan is basically a tian missionary and the Japanese translation of the Doctrina Christa 108 Book Review written by the Jesuit Marcos Jorge, Chapter Three. He then reflects upon a catechism, after the fashion of that the attractivity of Kirishitan teach- time put into the form of a dialogue ings for the contemporary Japanese and published first in Lisbon in 1566, and on some of their practices in however with decisive alterations comparison with traditional Japa- for use in Japan (for the history and nese religious concepts and prac- description of the text cf. Higash- tices, focusing on “Afterlife... Sal- ibaba, Chapter Three, pp. 50 ss) vation” and “[t]he Kirishitan Divin- Considering the conception of the ity”, Chapter Four, and on “Ritual Dochiriina Kirishitan and attempt- Practice[s]”, as e.g. “Baptism and ing to reconstruct the reception of Penance”, Chapter Five. In Chapter this text, together with some other Six he outlines the beginning and catechetical texts, by the Japanese progress of “Anti-Kirishitan Policy” converts, the Kirishitan, Higashibaba and looks at forms of Kirishitan life tries to approach to what Kirishitan “under the Tokugawa Persecution”. daily life might have looked. As Discussing aspects of “Apostasy, Un- Higashibaba writes, compared with derground Practice, or Martyrdom" Jorge's text “the Japanese Dochiriina Higashibaba tries as well to draw is not simply the same text translated conclusions about possible forms of into another language” (p. 56). And Kirishitan communal life before the as becomes clear from his analysis policy of persecution began (all cita- this has further implications, that is, tions here from the table of Contents, that the translation, in the sense of pp. vii-viii). transfer, of Christianism and Chris- Higashibaba underlines the fact tian faith as a whole into another cul- that Christianity was not the first reli- ture is a much more complex process gion imported to Japan from abroad. than rendering them into another He describes how the arrival and language. Higashibaba consequently acceptance of in Japan had calls the Japanese converts always become an enrichment to the people “Kirishitan” and speaks as well of (pp. xxiii-xxxi). Higashibaba stresses “Kirishitanization” (e.g. p. 14). This the fact that it would be “seriously means Higashibaba's book is as misleading” if one would assume well a contribution to the study of the Japanese Christian in 16th-17th translation of culture(s) (cf. as well century Japan would have seper- Higashibaba, p. 16). ated and Buddhism, and that After giving a brief overview of “the ‘seperate-tradition model’ that the early Jesuit mission in Japan, stresses the independence of reli- Chapter One, and first receptions gious traditions based on doctrinal of the Jesuit and their difference” (p. xxx) should be given message, Chapter Two, Higashibaba up. Such presuppositions make him describes the Dochiriina Kirishitan, compare the acceptance of Christi- Book Review 109 anity with that of Buddhism, that is Christianism as a religion became a above all with various forms of amal- sort of shared social identity, as in gamation, and to propose to think of the case of the ikko ikki movement a new form of Christianity as there (pp. 156 ss). had developed “Japanese Buddhism” Chapter One deals with the crucial (p. xxx). That is, Higashibaba's wants question of translating in a double demonstrate a distinctiveness of ear- sense. That is first of translating in ly modern Japanese Christianity due literal sense. Anjiro from to a Japanese tendency of combining who introduced Xavier to Japan, up and amalgamating “... indigenous to today has been repeatedly made and foreign organized religious and responsible for difficulties the first folk elements ...” (p. 162, this is a missionaries found themselves con- citation from Byron Earhart's “Ge- fronted with when explaining Chris- datsu-kai and Religion in Contempo- tian messages in Japanese (Higash- rary Japan: Returning to the Center ibaba, pp. 6 ss). Here, especially the (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana Univer- translation of “God” with “Dainichi” sity Press, 1989), 10”, Higashibaba, has become famous. Higashibaba p. 163.1). shows the mechanisms which must As an additional factor for the have led to the misunderstandings. 'change' of Christianism Higashiba- It was not only the lack of knowledge ba mentions at various places how in about Japanese religion that created the early time of the mission insuf- problems, he stresses, it was indeed ficient capacity of language and the the fact that “Anjiro ... probably had lack of written texts enhanced mis- more knowledge of Christianity, understandings, and how through which he learned in a college [i.e. the whole time of early modern in ], than he had of Japanese re- Christianism the number of mis- ligion”. It was exactly this knowlege sionaries was insufficient, with the which made him explain Japanese exception of certain periods and spe- religion, which he will have done “in cific regions. That means that many Portuguese”, in “Christian terminol- Christians who had participated in ogy”. The missionaries on their side, mass conversions could not obtain again, used “Buddhist terminology” adequate teaching of Christian doc- to explain the Christian message” trine which would have made clear (p. 10). its difference from already existing Another aspect of translation is, forms of cult and . then, demonstrated with the Jesuits' In addition Higashibaba points to method of adaptation to Japanese the interaction of the development of customs. In order to be acceptable secular communal life and religious for the common Japanese the foreign activitity. Integration into a commu- missionaries had to find their place nal system could mean as well that in Japanese society, and for this they 110 Book Review had to adopt Japanese customs to a by Valignano and Francisco Cabral certain degree. Here Higashibaba respectively, what, of course, is men- cites Valignano's: “Now we have no tioned by Higashibaba. However the rules in Japan to guide us in these limitedness of the Jesuits', including forms of etiquette and social inter- Valignano's, willingness for accomo- course save those which were in dation to superficial things in every- vogue with the Japanese themselves day life could have been stressed between lay folk, and their priests, more strongly, for example by citing the bonzes” (p. 19). However before Valignano's Iruman kokoroe no koto, the missionaries understood where where Valignano is very critical they should place themselves in about the character of the Japanese Japanese society, so Higashibaba, members and stresses the necessity their “status as a padre or an irmao ... of their accomodation to European had to be translated and redefined”, ways of thinking and acting. Some and before doing so, they had even passages in that text make me re- to “define who they were before they member even an often cited phrase began adopting Japanese manners” from Thomas Babington Macaulay's (p. 17). Minute on Indian Education, “We In Higashibaba's study the figure must at present do our best to form of the Visitor Valignano appears in a class who may be interpreters quite a good shape. When he dis- between us and the millions whom cusses Valignano's consideration we govern; a class of persons, Indian about the importance of the study in blood and colour, but English in of language one might detect a very taste, in opinions, in morals, and slight critical tone in the observation in intellect” 1. Higashibaba does about Valignano's description of the mention himself that “[t]he Jesuits Jesuits' linguistic reliance on Japa- wanted their accomodation to be nese, which, for the fact that the only external ...” (p. 162). Jesuits were dependent, must “not Chapter Two and Chapter Three [have been] necessarily a positive may be seen as essential chapters for appraisal of the Japanese members” Higashibaba’ study as a whole, and (p. 23). However various remarks therefore I want to concentrate on throughout the text leaves the reader these parts of the study. Chapter Two with the impression of Valignano's deals with the way Japanese Kirishi- readiness for accomodation because tan understood new symbols intro- of “his sensitivity to the condition duced by the missionaries and with of the people whom the Jesuits were the figure of the ‘missionary’ himself trying to convert to Christianity” as a ‘sign’ in social-cultural context. (p. 4). It is true that there was a great Starting from theoretical reflections difference in the attitude towards the by Clifford Geerts, The Interpreta- Japanese and their culture as shown tion of Cultures, Higashibaba defines Book Review 111 a symbol as a sign which does not 36) or in the case of “holy water” have any “inherent” meaning (p. 30). which could remind of “purification This leads Higashibaba to suppose, ritual[s]” (p. 32). The synchretism that because of misunderstandings which, thus, came into being is illus- due to linguistic difficulties in the trated with examples of Kirishitan first stage of the , practicing at the same time Chris- because of mass baptisms without tian and non-Christian acts, as with sufficient catechetical instruction and the use of beads of the rosary and then because of a continuing lack of Buddhist prayer beads (pp. 37-38). catechetical education (pp. 34 etc.) He mentions as well how even non- the Kirishitan filled or could fill the Kirishitan exspected effects from Christian symbols with contents scourging as used by the Kirishitan known to them from Japanese reli- (pp. 31-32). This leads to the conclu- gions. sion that Kirishitan “popular faith Higashibaba underlines the im- was essentially the same as the gen- portance of “gaining protection from eral popular in Japan” (p. 35). And illness, disaster and misfortune in this again, so Higashibaba, makes it this world and in lives to come” and necessary to read the reports writ- “peace in the afterlife” (gosho zen- ten by the missionaries critically, sho) (p. 36) among the Kirishitan. because they believed that the Japa- And these gifts, so Higashibaba, they nese had become really ‘Christians’. exspected to gain from Christianity, And they often used these observa- that is through Christian symbols and tions of Kirishitan practices in order rituals as they had before becoming to underline the faithfulness of the Kirishitan from their original faith. Japanese Kirishitan. It would be wrong he repeats to The second part of Chapter Two think of a “purity of tradition” (p. 38). deals with the role of the priests who Scourging one’e body “for gaining are compared, with Japanese local meritorious power” (p. 32), the use of non-Christian priests and persons, “holy water” (p. 32) and the collect- with commual leading functions, ing and veneration of “holy images, comparable to the Jesuists. Special articles, and relics” (p. 35) coulde attention is given to the role of the asily become a replacement or even Shugenja. Higashibaba argues that an addition to traditional symbols and the missionaries were attributed rituals. This could be so especially ‘overnatural or magic powers for in case the Christian symbols and healing or taking away evil’ in a sim- rituals resembled traditional ones, ilar way as was done in case of the as in the case of the cross which Shugenja. could be put on the door or wall of In Chapter Three Higashibaba the house as a kind of charm instead concentrates on the Dochiriina of Buddhist “charms (fu)” (pp. 31, Kirishitan as a “useful source for in- 112 Book Review vestigating the Kirishitan teachings arguments referring to respect to to Japanese followers” (p. 54). This “Buddhist intellectual traditions” he explains with four reasons, that is and the Jesuits accomodation to the character of the text for “popular Japanese customs (p. 63). By this the edification”, its distribuition in a uni- character of the text, as Higashibaba fied form, the possibility to compare does not forget to mention, was mod- the text for Japanese with its origi- ified substantially, because in this nal form, and finally with the fact changed form the catechism was no that the text of the Dochiriina had longer intended in order to “test the arrived in Japan already in 1568 and, followers’ memory and knowledge probably, partly repeatedly trans- of the teachings” (p. 63). lated from 1570 onwards. From the After an overview of the structure last argument he concludes that the of the text Higashibaba makes refer- published “parts were fairly well- ence to texts which reflect some un- established when they appeared in derstanding of the catechism among the finalized printed edition” (p. 54). the Kirishitan (73-75). As for letters It is easy to follow these arguments. by Kirishitan collected in 1617 by Then Higashibaba points out how Matheus de Couros Higashibaba the Japanese edition of the text has correctly questions the reliability of been edited with special attention to this source and other letters edited Japanese needs, that is with explain- by the missionaries themselves in ing additions as to the nature of God an edifying mode in order to show or the meaning of Christ’s death on there work and effect to a European the cross to redeem humanity. The reader. In case of the Myotei mondo editors took regard as well to Japa- by Fucan Fabian Higashibaba points nese social norms, e.g. where the out that this dialogue written by a obligation to forgive is presented in highly intellectual Japanese cannot an alterated form which takes respect be seen as a mirror of an average to the difficulty for Japanese to for- understanding of Christian doctrine. give “humilation by others” due to The examples of confessions collect- “the Japanese military norm” (p. 62). ed by Didaco Collado are estimated The most obvious change is visible by Higashibaba as a relatively relia- at once in the form of the dialogue ble source. Because the text was not in the catechism. Whereas in the intended for edifying purposes one original form the Chrisitian disciple can agree on this, but one might per- answers to the question of the priest haps ask whether it is justifiable to in the Japanese edition it is the priest use this text compiled by a Domini- who answers the question of the can missionary without further com- Kirishitan. To explain this change ments on the different approaches by Higashibaba refers to already by the different orders in Japan. How- other researchers brought forward ever, Higashibaba himself considers Book Review 113 all the mentioned sources as not forword to the Japanese translation sufficient for his following analysis of Valignano’s Sumario, Nihon jun- which focuses on Kirishitan believe satsuki, (Heibonsha, 1973) and from in the context of “popular Japanese the English edition of Josef Schutte’s religious thought” (p. 75). important study Valignano’s Mission Chapter Two and Chapter Three Principles for Japan (p. 102, footnotes form the background for the second 1 and 2). part of the book in which Higash- Such use of sources leads to the ibaba illustrates vividly how the life somewhat ironical situation that he of the Kirishitan took shape under cites, in English, a Portuguese letter the pre-conditions described. from a Japanese translation which Higashibaba has used for his itself refers to another English trans- study texts in published form. The lation (pp. 27.68), a situation which Dochiriina Kirishitan as well as remains me of that experienced by several other texts used and cited he Sir Thomas Roe who, when visiting takes from the collection of Kirishi- the Mughal emperor at the begin- tan and Anti-Kirishitan texts pub- ning of the 17th century relied on lished by Ebisawa Arimichi et.al. as “an Italian who knew Turkish but Kirishitan sho Haiya sho, Iwanami, no Persian. Roe spoke to this inter- 1970. As for Jorge’s Doctrina he uses preter in Spanish, a language he had the edition of the text, a photocopy learned in the Carribean; the Ital- with Japanese translation, made by ian then would translate this into Kamei Takashi, et.al. of the edition Turkish for an officer of Jahangir’s from Lisbon, 1602, Marcos Iorge, court who knew both Turkish and DOCTRINA CHRISTA. Ordenada a Persian”.2 Irony lies in the fact, maneira de Dialogo, per ensinar os that this happens in a context in mininos ..., Iwanami, 1983. A look at which the Jesuits’ difficulties with the Bibliography makes understand language in Japan are discussed. Higashibaba’s book is not a study However it should be stressed that which wants to provide new and/or Higashibaba’s book does offer new additional information from primary approaches to the study of Christi- sources and/or from texts still unpub- anity in early modern Japan, and lished. That means, the Bibliography this is here possible without being a is divided into I. Primary Sources new study of the object in terms of (pp. 180-182) and II. Secondary Sources historical developments and up to (pp. 182-190). Perhaps, sometimes now unknown historical events. The Higashiyama could have checked book offers interesting insights into some texts in their original language, the concrete events in Christianity in e.g. when discussing the important early modern Japan from an angle of figure of Organtino Gnecchi Soldi the history of religion. The study had who is cited from Matsuda Kiichi’s originally been a “doctoral thesis sub- 114 Book Review mitted to the Graduate Theological life” (p. 46) should be “commoners' Union in Berkeley in 1996” (Acknow- daily ...”; then one finds “his argu- ledgments, p. ix). ments ... demonstrates” (p. 64), and Going through its six chapters “[t]he benefits ... is taught” (p. 84). one should hold in mind that one of The “audience wish” in the transla- Higashibaba's main attempts is to tion of a citation (p. 106) should be show, how early modern Christian- “the audience wishes”, and in another ism in Japan became a Christianism translated citation there is “there is of its own kind. And that is due to no padres” (p. 111) which should be reasons already mentioned, and due “there is no padre” or “there are no to factors which must be seen in the padres”; “though” (p. 123) should be specific situation of the missionaries “through”, and “Mania” (p. 135.21) who had to act not only in a cultural “Manila”. There appear some other setting for which they knew no prec- slight mistakes in citations as e.g. edent but in addition in a culture “cadidade” (p. 71) instead of “cari- which went through a period of dade”, William Christian's “Local crucial socio-political change. Religion in Sixteenth-Century Spain” It is understandable that Higash- (p. 42) is cited without “-Century”, ibaba limits his study to almost only and the name of Francisco Perez is the Jesuit mission in Japan. He gives transliterated from the Japanese as some hints for the changed situation “Francisco Perre” (p. 32). Finally, when other orders as well arrived in there remain some questions, as e.g. Japan. However, conceding the pos- why a differentiation is made between sibility of such an approach, that is “Arima Harunobu (Dom Protasio)” with view of the long period of mis- and “Omura Sumitada (Dom Barto- sionary monopoly by the Jesuits lomeu)” but “Otomo Yoshihige (King (from 1549 to the 1590) in Japan and Francisco)” (p. 16). When repeatedly with a larger numerical potential as discussing the question of translat- well after the arrival of the mendi- ing or not Christian terminology as cants, there could have been at least it arose in the year 1555 one may ask some more hints for the items and whether Higashibaba, mentioning problems not discussed. As for non- “Nunes” (p. 39) really refers to “O. P. Jesuit figures, perhaps, the role and M. Melchior [Nunez Barreto]” (cf. impact of the franciscan missionary J. F. Schutte, S.J., Textus Catalogo- Francisco Sotelo might have become rum Japoniae, 1975, p.16), or should discussed in some more depth. it not be “Padre Balthazar Gago” In the text have remained some who was already introduced with his mistakes which could have been avoid- letter from 1555 in which he reflects ed, as e.g. “the missionaries role” upon this question (cf. pp. 8-9). (p. 44) should be “the missionaries' However, let me repeat that Hi- role”, as “commoner daily religious gashibaba's study presents an impor- Book Review 115 tant approach to the study of early Michael Cooper (editor) Christianity in Japan and gives an interesting overview of many prob- João Rodrigues’s Account lems of the time. What may be most of Sixteenth-Century Japan. important, the author hints at the (London, The Hakluyt Society, necessity of new approaches, after Series III, Volume 7, 2001) 428 pp. his own (in the Conclusion (pp. 161- 164) Higashibaba points at what Almost one hundred years ago, he himself sees as limits of his own the writer Cristóvão Aires published, study and concrete possibilities to for the first time, some chapters of continue and develope it further), to the manuscript copy of the Historia the study of the so called 'Christian da Igreja do Japão by Fr João Rodri- Century', a term, sometimes, more gues Tçuzu SJ preserved in the library or less directly, used by Higashibaba of the Ajuda Palace, Lisbon (MS Je- himself, but, most fortunately put suítas na Asia, 49-IV-53, ff. 1-181).1 into doubt by his own study itself. In Between December 1894 and January addition the study is written in a way 1895, Léonard Cros visited Ajuda in that it may be used, too, as an intro- order to prepare his biography of ductory text for students. In addition, Francisco Xavier. He must have been the book is nicely made, and despite the first scholar to make use of this of mistakes as hinted at very readib- highly important missionary history able. The Glossary (pp. 191-195) of or chronicle written in Macao from Japanese terminology, especially of c. 1620 to 1633, the year of João the Kirishitan context and the Index Rodrigues’s death.2 Nevertheless, (pp. 196-201) are very useful. In two neither Cros, nor Aires were able to Appendices are given translations identify the man behind the work, from the Dochiriina Kirishitan (1591), as the Lisbon copy does not show (“Chapter Eleven”, about the sacra- Rodrigues’s name as author. The cor- ments, pp. 165-175) and “Articles rect authorship identification would for the Kirishitan” from “Orasho no come after the publication of a paper hon'yaku ...» (pp. 176-179). by Georg Schurhammer in 1919- 1920.3 From then on, the German Engelbert Jorissen orientalist repeatedly quoted excerpts University, from Rodrigues’s Historia, as is the Graduate School of Human case of a well-known article on the first and Environmental Studies European reports on Japan in post- 4 1 Here cited from: Th. B. M., Selected Writings, 1543 era. Between 1952 and 1954, John Clive, Thomas Pinney, eds., Chicago UP, José Luis Alvarez-Taladriz translat- 1972, p. 249. ed into Spanish, with copious notes, 2 Cited from: Bernard S. Cohn, Colonialism and its Forms of Knowledge. The British in four sections of the same text. Two India, Princeton UP, 1996, p. 18. of those translations became quite