Modern Buddhism - Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture...2014/02/02 · Enlightenment thinkers...

Modern Buddhism in

Japan

edited by

Hayashi Makoto Ōtani Eiichi

Paul L. Swanson

nanzan

Contents

i Editors’ Introduction: Studies on Modern Buddhism in Contemporary Japan

– Hayashi Makoto, Ōtani Eiichi, and Paul L. Swanson

17 Shin Buddhist Contributions to the Japanese Enlightenment Movement of the Early 1870s

– Mick Deneckere

52 The Movement Called “New Buddhism” in Meiji Japan

– Ōtani Eiichi

85 The Age of Teaching: Buddhism, the Proselytization of Citizens, the Cultivation of Monks, and the Education of Laypeople during the Formative Period of Modern Japan

– Tanigawa Yutaka

112 Suzuki Daisetsu and Swedenborg: A Historical Background– Yoshinaga Shin’ichi

144 Takagi Kenmyō and Buddhist Socialism: A Meiji Misfit and Martyr

– Paul L. Swanson

163 Religious Studies and Religiously Affiliated Universities– Hayashi Makoto

194 The Insect in the Lion’s Body: Kaneko Daiei and the Question of Authority in Modern Buddhism

– Jeff Schroeder

17

Shin Buddhist Contributions to the Japanese Enlightenment Movement of the Early 1870s

Mick Deneckere

Unlike the Enlightenment in Europe, the Japanese Enlightenment did not come about as a response to new scientific discoveries. For Japan, it was rather a matter of “civilizing” as quickly as possible along Western norms. Influenced by the views of Scottish Enlightenment thinkers, Japan’s foremost Enlightenment thinker Fukuzawa Yukichi 福沢諭吉 considered Japan to be at a semi-civilized stage and encouraged its rapid progress towards becoming fully “civilized.”1 Behind Japan’s civilizing rush was its wish for a revision of the unequal treaties that it had concluded with a num-ber of Western powers beginning in the mid-1850s. The Japanese Civiliza-tion and Enlightenment, or bunmei kaika 文明開化 movement of the 1870s was therefore a government-sponsored programme of sorts (Davis 1992, 164). The need to civilize was, however, not only felt in the political world. The short but violent anti-Buddhist movement during the years surround-ing the Meiji Restoration made Japanese Buddhism aware of the need to modernize in line with the state’s “civilization” project (Dobbins 2004, 108–

*Acknowledgments: The author wishes to express appreciation for the feedback and comments on this essay during the 2013 Seminar for the Study of Japanese Religions at the Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture that led to the publication of this paper.

1. For a recent study concerning the influence of Scottish Enlightenment thinkers on Fukuzawa’s view of stages of civilisation, see Craig 2009.

18 | Modern Buddhism in Japan

9). Among the different sects of Japanese Buddhism, it was True Pure Land (Shin) Buddhism that was at the forefront of this awareness.

Where civilization was concerned, the West was the model to be observed and emulated. Thus, in December 1871, the Iwakura Embassy left Japan to tour Europe and America with a number of purposes: “to pay the respects of the imperial government to foreign powers; to win foreign approval for an extension to the deadline (imminent in 1872) for treaty revision; and, finally, to investigate the culture and institutions of foreign nations” (Breen 1998, 151). A mere three months after the Iwakura Embassy, in March 1872, the Shin Buddhist Nishi Honganji temple sent five of its priests on a trip to Europe to observe the religious situation abroad. Later that year, the Higashi Honganji temple followed suit.

The knowledge and insights that the Japanese gained abroad were taken back to Japan and became the object of domestic debate. It is this engage-ment with Western thought and the investigation of how it could serve Japan that is usually referred to as “the Japanese Enlightenment.” A Meiji official, Mori Arinori 森有礼, initiated the intellectual society Meirokusha 明六社 (Meiji Six Society) upon his return in 1873 from America where he had served as Japan’s first ambassador. The first issue of the society’s journal, Meiroku zasshi 明六雑誌, was published in 1874 (Braisted 1976, xvii–xviii). As the most representative institutions of the Japanese Enlightenment, the Meirokusha and Meiroku zasshi have received considerable scholarly atten-tion. However, these institutions triggered activities in other intellectual circles, such as the Buddhist world, which remain insufficiently studied. The immediate response to the publication of Meiroku zasshi in the form of Hōshi sōdan 報四叢談 (A Collection of Stories on Repaying the Four [Obliga-tions]), the first dedicated Buddhist journal, exemplifies the Buddhist wish to engage in the intellectual debates of the time.

Thoughts on Enlightenment

One question that arises is whether the term “Enlightenment” is appropriate when referring to Japan’s bunmei kaika movement of the 1870s. Another question is that of the relationship between religion and the Enlightenment. Since the West served as a model for Japan in all aspects of “civilization,” it is not surprising that resemblances can be found between

mick deneckere | 19

the Western Enlightenment and its Japanese counterpart, such as the appearance of intellectual societies and the publication of journals. Simi-larities can also be found in terms of the issues that were subject to debate, but the reality behind these external similarities was quite different. One of the paradoxes typifying the Meiji period is that the government’s apparent advocacy of rights and freedom went hand in hand with a strong wish to control people’s thinking through its attempts to unify them as members of the kokutai 国体 (national polity) and to discipline them as subjects of the emperor and the nation, rather than nurture them as citizens in the full democratic sense (DuBois 2011, 155).2 Another way in which the Japanese Enlightenment differed from the movement in Europe and America was that, in addition to being an intellectual movement, bunmei kaika also con-stituted a project to educate and civilize the people at large.3 Furthermore, in contrast to Europe and America, where Enlightenment thinkers were secular philosophers and scientists, in Japan the debate on abandoning tra-ditional concepts in favour of new perspectives was not a prerogative of sec-ular intellectuals alone. Given the particular conditions in which Japan was propelled into modernization, many interest groups, including the Buddhist clergy, sought to be involved as well.

Because of the differences between Enlightenment movements in Japan and the West in both substantive and agentive terms, it would seem appro-priate to treat the Japanese Enlightenment as a separate movement, or per-haps as an offshoot of earlier movements in Europe and America. Recent scholarship, however, tends to treat “the Enlightenment” as a much broader movement than what took place in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century Europe and America and points out the need to look at the role of religion in studying this intellectual movement. For example, Sebastian Conrad challenges the Eurocentric character of the Enlightenment and emphasizes instead the global conditions and interactions through which the Enlighten-ment emerged. He also traces its trajectory throughout the nineteenth cen-

2. As a result, “like the Restoration itself, the secular Enlightenment of Fukuzawa Yukichi et alii ultimately was anything but liberal or democratic” (Davis 1992, 164).

3. The list of Meirokusha members reveals that a substantial number of Japanese Enlightenment thinkers were also policy makers, which attests to the fact that these two components of bunmei kaika were intertwined. A list of Meirokusha members and their backgrounds can be found in Tozawa 1991, 52–56.


tury (Conrad 2012, 999–1001). Jonathan Sheehan, for his part, explains how since the 1990s scholars have been reconsidering the relationship between the eighteenth-century Western Enlightenment and religion: whereas the Enlightenment has traditionally been equated with a process of seculariza-tion—the separation from and the decline of religion—they emphasize the need to consider religion as a partner of the Enlightenment in the secular-izing process and to move away from the definition of “Enlightenment” as a merely philosophical and anti-religious movement. Religion is thus put into dialogue with the Enlightenment in an attempt to overcome the traditional opposition of rational and religious thought, and to shift away from the dis-tinction between a religious premodern past and a modern secular future.4

These inclusive perspectives make it possible to refer to the intellectual movement that was part of bunmei kaika as “Enlightenment,” while also providing space for religious figures in the movement. They reflect Notto Thelle’s observation that “even though Buddhism seemed to be working against the general trend of the times, there was a strong Buddhist current in the Enlightenment movement in the 1870s, represented by such promi-nent Buddhists as Ōuchi Seiran, Shimaji Mokurai, Ōzu Tetsunen, Akamatsu Renjō and others” (Thelle 1987, 58). As an illustration of what this “strong Buddhist current” entailed, I will discuss the experiences of Shimaji Moku-rai 島地黙雷 and Ishikawa Shuntai 石川舜台, two Shin Buddhists who were representative of the Buddhist take on “Civilization and Enlightenment” in early Meiji. Both priests travelled to Europe as members of missions orga-nized by their respective temples, the Nishi and Higashi Honganji. I will look at the impact of their activities outside of Japan for the formation of the modern concept of religion and for the study of Buddhism. Upon their return, both priest-scholars were active contributors to the journal Hōshi sōdan. After briefly introducing the conditions surrounding its publica-tion, I will discuss a number of their essays published in the journal, as they formed part of the debates on religion within Japan in the context of the Japanese Enlightenment movement of the 1870s. I will suggest that the Bud-dhist world played an active part in this movement and that, alongside their

4. Through the media of the Enlightenment, such as salons, scholarship, translations, academies, journals and newspapers, Sheehan explains, “religion” was modernized, re-defined and reconstructed so as to “incorporate it into the fabric of modernity” (2003, 1076–77).

mick deneckere | 21

secular colleagues of the Meirokusha, figures like Mokurai and Shuntai were instrumental in enlightening the Japanese on the issue of religion, thus par-ticipating in the development of its modern understanding in Japan.

Shimaji Mokurai and Ishikawa Shuntai’s Journeys to the West

The Iwakura Embassy and the Nishi Honganji Mission

In 1872 the Nishi Honganji sent a mission abroad to observe the reli-gious situation overseas. The mission consisted of a group of five priests, one of whom was Mokurai, and left in the wake of the diplomatic Iwakura Embassy.5 There is reason to believe that the two missions were closely con-nected.6 Preventing Christianity from spreading within Japan was as much an issue for the young Meiji government as it was for Buddhism at the time. Like their Tokugawa predecessors, many Meiji leaders still feared the impact of Christianity on Japan and the Japanese. The topic of Christianity was dis-cussed in Japanese political circles well before the departure of the Iwakura Embassy and it was felt that a mobilization of the Buddhist world was neces-sary to maintain a long-lasting anti-Christian policy (Breen 1998, 153–54).7

5. The Buddhist mission is referred to as kaigai kyōjō shisatsudan 海外教状視察団. The other four priests of the mission were Umegami Takuyū 梅上沢融, as the Nishi Honganji abbot Kōson’s representative, Akamatsu Renjō 赤松連城, Horikawa Kyōa 堀川教阿 and Mitsuda Izen 光田為然. Aboard the ship was also Sakata Kan’ichirō 坂田乾一郎, who served as a translator for the mission (smz v: 104). Sakata went to France to study military science in Paris and Lyon. He was a good friend of Nakae Chōmin 中江兆民 and served as transla-tor and guide for Japanese who visited France to study technology. Sakata had travelled to Europe at his own expenses but during his stay in France he was included in the group of students sent abroad and supported by the government (官費生) (Tomita 2005, 320).

6. Some sources claim that it was Kido Takayoshi who had persuaded Mokurai to tour Europe after Ōtani Kōson 大谷光尊, the abbot of Nishi Honganji, had declined Kido’s invi-tation to join the Iwakura Mission (Breen 1998, 157). Others say that it was Mokurai who had lobbied Kido to make the Buddhist Mission possible (Horiguchi 1994, 58). Be that as it may, the initial plan seems to have been for the Iwakura Embassy and the Nishi Honganji Mission to travel to Europe together. However, due to the sudden death of Kōson’s father Myōnyo 明如 in 1871, the departure of the mission had to be delayed and Kōson himself could not join, appointing Umegami Takuyū as his official representative (Horiguchi 1994, 58).

7. This exemplifies the Meiji government’s ambiguous attitude towards religion in gen-eral and Buddhism in particular. The government’s awareness of the necessity to mobilize


Meanwhile, among Japanese officials abroad there were some who sought knowledge about Christianity and the role it had played in the progress of Western nations in order to assess its potential for a modernizing Japan. Others saw Christianity as a diplomatic issue that needed to be addressed; Western nations were asking Japan to abolish its ban on Christianity. While in Europe, Kido Takayoshi 木戸孝允, a former Chōshū official and now vice-ambassador to the Iwakura Embassy, sought the help of fellow Chōshū men Aoki Shūzō 青木周蔵 and Shimaji Mokurai to understand the issue of “religion” and its relation to the state.8 Consequently, the three men met a number of times in London during the summer of 1872. Mokurai’s active involvement in these discussions, which led to a constitutional draft that included an article on religious freedom, suggests that there were other milieus than that of the diplomatic exchanges that were influential in the formation of the category of “religion.”9 Religion was also defined in part through Japanese Buddhism’s search for a new identity as it sought to posi-tion itself against Christianity.10

For Buddhism, anti-Christian feelings were rooted in the long Buddhist tradition of considering it a heretical teaching. Moreover, now that Bud-dhism was struggling for its own survival, it wished to keep possible con-tenders in the religious field at bay. The suppression of Buddhism in favour of a Shinto-based doctrine had created a religious gap that could potentially open the floodgates for Christianity in Japan. For Buddhism, preventing the “Western religion” from spreading was a question of survival, and for this it needed political support (Breen 1998, 159). With the Iwakura Embassy, half

the Buddhist world contrasts with the short but intense anti-Buddhist movement haibutsu kishaku 廃仏毀釈, which it allowed to take place, even though it was not its official policy.

8. On the anti-Christian views of Kido, Aoki, and Mokurai, see Horiguchi 1996.9. For more about Kido commissioning Aoki to draft a constitution and on Mokurai’s

influence therein, see Breen 1998, 158–59. 10. Josephson states: “The category of religion was introduced to Japan in the diplo-

matic conjuncture of the mid-nineteenth century” (2012, 256). Mokurai’s involvement in the discussions suggests that the category of religion was not only formed in Japan out of diplo-matic necessity, but also out of the necessity of Japanese Buddhism to deal with Christianity both on the domestic and on the international scene. These two currents developed simulta-neously because, firstly, the caretaking Meiji government and Japanese Buddhism shared a common goal of a sustained ban on Christianity in Japan, and secondly, the political elite had realized that it could not achieve its anti-Christian policies without the help of Buddhism.

mick deneckere | 23

of the core leadership group of the new Meiji government went abroad to tour America and Europe (Healy and Tsuzuki 2002, viii). It goes without saying that it was a unique opportunity for Japanese Buddhism to be able to interact outside of Japan with half of those in power. Next to the Buddhist mission’s official goal of observing the religious situation in the West, we can therefore add the purpose of winning the Meiji political elite over to the Buddhist cause, something that Mokurai accomplished with success.11 As a result, while allowing Christianity in Japan was a conditio sine qua non for the revision of the unequal treaties that Japan had concluded since the mid-1850s with a number of Western powers, in reality it was Buddhism that benefited most from the Iwakura Embassy (Breen 1998, 151, 162).

An Intellectual Journey

As a member of the Nishi Honganji mission, Mokurai was given specific instructions “to ‘inquire into the hearts and minds of the common people’ in order to discover the strengths and weaknesses of Christianity in Europe” (Ketelaar 1991, 42). Whether Mokurai had much contact with the common people during his stay in Europe is questionable, but his travel diary Kōsei nissaku 航西日策 sheds light on his interests and meetings with European scholars that influenced the formation of his views on Christianity.12 After a six-week journey, Mokurai arrived in France on 20 April 1872, where he stayed for nearly four months. In August he briefly travelled to Britain to welcome Kido and the Iwakura Embassy and in early September he continued his journey to Germany where he remained for three months. The first segment of Mokurai’s journey was concluded with a second, nine-week stay in Paris.13

11. Mokurai did not restrict himself to discussing “religion” with Kido and Aoki. Even after they had come to the conclusion that Buddhism was the religion that Japan needed, he continued his exchanges on the subject with a variety of people, many of them members of the Iwakura Embassy. Entries in his travel diary, which will be further discussed below, suggest that, towards the end of his stay in Europe, he also discussed the religious situation of Japan with Ambassador Iwakura himself.

12. The diary is published in smz v: 19–114.13. During the second segment of his journey, Mokurai travelled with Fukuchi Gen’ichirō

福地源一郎, First Secretary to the Iwakura Mission, and visited a variety of places including Switzerland, Italy, Greece, Turkey, Egypt and Jerusalem, some of which had never before been visited by a Japanese. In his capacity of journalist and publisher, Fukuchi would later help with the publication of Hōshi sōdan.


On 9 October 1872, while in Germany, Mokurai noted in his diary that he was “Having the first part of A True Account of Jesus translated.” The work Mokurai referred to was The Life of Jesus that Ernest Renan had written ten years earlier (1863).14 A couple of days later Mokurai mentioned that he found the work very interesting, and by 29 October the translation was suc-cessfully completed. Since Mokurai was extremely brief in his diary, it is dif-ficult to say with certainty what exactly attracted him in this work. However, if he was looking for arguments to support his claim that while a nation needed “religion,” it did not necessarily have to be Christianity, and that for Japan (Shin) Buddhism could best fulfil that role, he may have found some answers in Renan’s work.

As the religion of civilized nations, Christianity was often seen at the time as the most civilized form of religion, which led some Meiji statesmen to believe that Japan would be best off with Christianity.15 One way of arguing that (Shin) Buddhism would be at least as qualified for the role was to find flaws in Christianity, preferably pointed out by a Westerner himself. Renan did just that. With his positivist approach to Christianity, Renan demysti-fied Jesus’ life by presenting him as a historical figure with human traits. Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, he offered rational explanations for what the Church claimed to be “miracles,” thus questioning the extent to which the words of the Bible could be literally believed in times when reason was triumphing. These views found resonance with Shin Buddhist doctrine, which rejected popular belief in miracles and superstitions, as well as with the mission that Shin Buddhism set itself to liberate the com-mon people from such beliefs by offering them instead the path of salva-tion through single-minded faith in Amida. The Life of Jesus thus provided Mokurai with the necessary tools to claim that Shin Buddhism would serve a modern Japan better than Christianity could.16

14. When referring to Renan’s Life of Jesus, Mokurai used both Yaso shinden 耶蘇真伝 and Yasoden 耶蘇伝. It was Sakata Kan’ichi who was charged with making the translation.

15. An entry in Aoki’s diary reveals that during a conversation in London in August 1872 between Kido, Aoki, and Itō Hirobumi 伊藤博文, it became clear that Itō was in favor of the idea of converting the entire country to Christianity, while Kido opposed it (Breen 1998, 157–58).

16. This would later on develop into the view that Shin Buddhism would better suit other “civilized” countries than Christianity, not only in Asia, but in Europe and the Ameri-cas as well (Koyama 2010, 17).

mick deneckere | 25

In addition to reading Renan’s work, Mokurai also benefited from a num-ber of encounters with the German Protestant Christian theologian and preacher Emil Gustav Lisco. Open-minded towards developments in mod-ern natural sciences, Lisco had triggered debate in 1872 surrounding the first Apostolikumsstreit through his lecture “On the Apostles’ Creed,” in which he described the virgin birth and the descent into hell as legends.17 Accord-ing to Kōsei nissaku, Mokurai met Lisco at least fourteen times.18 While the diary entries are short, they reveal that Mokurai discussed the following topics with Lisco: four differences between Judaism and Christianity, the difference between the Greek Orthodox Church and Protestantism, and the different doctrines on Jesus’ ascension into heaven. Mokurai also mentions looking at an illustration of hell together and grants that he had many of his doubts on Christianity clarified by Lisco. Probably under Lisco’s influence, Mokurai also started studying the “Acts of the Apostles,” of which he bought an annotated version.19

17. Lisco was born into a family of preachers in Berlin. He had become the minister of the Marienkirche in Berlin and from there worked for the Neue Kirche from 1859 onwards. Together with other theologians from Berlin, he was opposed to Friedrich Wilhelm iv’s support of a state church and was in favour of making the Landeskirchen independent. His position on church politics and his open-mindedness towards developments in the mod-ern natural sciences earned him the opposition of Berlin conservative theologians. While criticized in Berlin, Lisco found support for his ideas elsewhere, and in 1868 he received an honorary doctorate from the University of Heidelberg. His propositions encountered the opposition of the Hofpredigerpartei (Court preachers party), resulting in disciplinary action. Lisco’s investigation and his statements about the conflict are documented in vari-ous issues of the Protestantische Kirchenzeitung, the Neue Evangelische Kirchenzeitung, the Allgemeine Evangelisch-Lutherische Krichenzeitung and the Evangelisch-Lutherische Kirch-enzeitung of 1872. Lisco was co-founder of the Protestantenzeitung and the Protestantenver-ein (bbkl: 122–24).

18. The first meeting seems to have taken place on 28 October 1872: “I started taking classes (入門) with Lisco for the first time.” The last time Mokurai mentions meeting Lisco was on 30 November. A translator for the encounters with Lisco was arranged by Mitsuda Izen, also a member of the Nishi Honganji mission who had left for Germany soon after the mission’s arrival in France.

19. Shito gyōden 使徒行伝. One of the early chapters of the Acts discusses Jesus’ ascen-sion, a topic he had studied with Lisco. Although Mokurai had no command of any foreign language, he seems to have been motivated to tackle the work by himself for he mentions buying a small dictionary and also a bilingual dictionary, followed by statements in his diary that he was working on the translation of the Acts (smz V: 48–49). It is unclear how far Mokurai got into reading and understanding this fairly long passage from the Bible


In Germany, Mokurai thus found justification in the works of Renan and the encounters with Lisco for his claim that, in times of scientific discover-ies, religion needed to be rational. During his second stay in Paris, Mokurai met a number of times with the pioneer French japanologist Léon de Rosny, thus resuming meetings initiated during his first stay in the City of Light.20 Ever since the Japanese diplomatic mission to Europe of 1862, in which Fukuzawa Yukichi served as a translator, Léon de Rosny had been welcom-ing Japanese visitors in Paris. The arrival of the Nishi and Higashi Honganji missions offered de Rosny, who was particularly interested in Buddhism, the opportunity to meet Japanese Buddhists for the first time (Horigu-chi 1995, 131). However, de Rosny’s accounts of his meetings with mem-bers of both delegations reveal that he ended up a little frustrated by their exchanges. Apparently the Buddhists were primarily interested in learning about “scientific religion.”21 De Rosny’s feeling was that these missions, and all the Japanese he knew who were concerned about the religion of their country, were basically indifferent as to which faith their compatriots adopt. To him, their main concern seemed to be that Japan simply adopt a religion compatible with modern ideas and not contradictory to the advancements of European science.22 While it is doubtful that the Buddhists were indiffer-ent as to which faith the Japanese assume, the meetings with de Rosny sug-gest that they were keen to learn more about the way Christianity adapted itself to modern developments and to get inspiration as to how Buddhism could be modernized (Horiguchi 1995, 136). Meanwhile, this learning pro-cess also involved the creation of an Other (i.e. Christianity), to which Bud-dhism could be positively compared.

while he was in Germany, since it was only on 29 January of the next year that he noted that the translation was finished (smz v: 55).

20. Mokurai’s first stay in Paris took place from 26 April until 18 August 1872, and his second stay from 7 December 1872 until 18 February 1873.

21. They would have told him: “We [the Japanese Buddhists and even all the Japanese] believed in Yedo that the people of the West, who have accomplished so much progress in science and have developed the rational civilization to such a degree, would have a scien-tific religion” (Horiguchi 1995, 136).

22. While de Rosny may have been right in his assessment of the concerns of the Jap-anese in general, his understanding of the Buddhist missions’ purpose was a bit off the mark, for by this time Mokurai was already convinced that Shin Buddhism was the only proper candidate for “religion” in a modern Japan.

mick deneckere | 27

Because the Nishi Honganji undertook a mission to the West, the Higashi felt compelled to do so as well, and so a group of five—consisting of the newly appointed chief abbot Ōtani Kōei 大谷光瑩, Ishikawa Shuntai, Narushima Ryūhoku 成島柳北, Matsumoto Hakka 松本白華 and Seki Shinzō 関信三—left in secret on a French ship for France in September 1873.23 Narushima, who was not a priest, had been invited to join the mission for his presumed proficiency in French.24 While Kōsei nissaku provides some insight into Mokurai’s activities in Europe, no similar work by the hand of Ishikawa Shuntai seems to be extant. Therefore, our understanding of Shuntai’s experiences is based on other sources, such as diaries of fellow travellers. Narushima left a detailed diary of his impressions abroad, but the entries that mention Shuntai only provide a superficial glance into Shuntai’s experiences that are of interest to the discussion here.25 For example, his diary reveals that he visited de Rosny with Shuntai on 11 March 1873 and that they enrolled in de Rosny’s Society (Société d’ethnographie) (Fraleigh 2010, 244). Moreover it recounts how the entire party took French lessons, hinting at the influence of French scholarship on Shuntai’s thought, which will be discussed below.26 In Matsumoto Hakka’s diary we find some clues as to the books in which Shuntai was interested. On visiting an oriental book-

23. Apparently the Higashi Honganji was supported in its undertaking by the imperial branches Fushimi no Miya 伏見宮, Higashi Fushimi no Miya 東伏見宮 and the court noble Sanjō Sanetomi 三条実美. The reason the mission left in secret was that senior priests of the Higashi Honganji in Kyoto would never have allowed their newly appointed abbot to travel to Europe. When they found out the delegation had left they made a great fuss, but of course there was nothing that could be done (Tsunemitsu 1968, 166).

24. In the bakumatsu period, Narushima had worked with French military officers when the bakufu attempted to modernize its military. After the fall of the Tokugawa, however, Narushima ended up teaching kanbun and English in a school at Higashi Honganji’s branch temple in Asakusa. Because of his alleged knowledge of the French language and his connec-tion with the Higashi Honganji, Narushima was offered the chance to travel to Europe with the second Buddhist mission to act as its treasurer and translator (Fraleigh 2010, xlii–xliii).

25. In his Diary of a Journey to the West (Kōsei nichijō 航西日乗), for example, Narushima mentions on 11 January 1873 going to several Parisian bookstores with Shuntai and buying dozens of volumes. Narushima also mentions visiting a number of touristic places, restau-rants and possibly even a brothel with Shuntai (Fraleigh 2010, 207 (fn. 127), 214).

26. Despite his involvement in the French cavalry training in Japan, Narushima’s under-standing of and ability in French proved to be insufficient, and soon a tutor was invited to give Narushima and the rest of the group French lessons (Fujii 2004, 282).


store in December 1872, he wrote that Shuntai bought the Koran, a history of India, Renan’s Life of Jesus, and a German dictionary.27

In essence, where visits to de Rosny and the interest in Renan’s Life of Jesus are concerned, there were similarities between Shuntai and Mokurai.28 Unfortunately little is known about Shuntai’s contact with Western scholars. Nevertheless, the interest in Sanskrit studies he developed while in Europe suggests that an interaction of some sort must have taken place. On touring Europe, the abbot of the Higashi Honganji would have been “surprized to find that great progress had been made in the study of Sanskrit and Indian thought at the principal seats of learning there.” Aware of the need to study the subject in Japan,

he caused a member of his retinue, Mr. Shuntai Ishikawa, to begin at once the study of the sacred language of ancient India. This was while the party was staying at Paris, then the leading center of Oriental learning in Europe. Ishikawa lost no time in applying himself to the study of that difficult tongue, but before he made much progress, the party had to come home, and through want of a proper teacher and probably more through his stronger inclina-tion for activities of a non-academic character, the study was dropped by him never to be taken up again. (Zumoto and Takakusu 2004, 127)

Back in Japan, however, the abbot and Shuntai continued to promote the study of Sanskrit, an effort that led to the dispatch in September 1884 of “two promising young priests to England to take up this important study.… The choice fell upon Nanjio and a friend and colleague of his, Kenju Kasahara” (Zumoto and Takakusu 2004, 127).

It was thus their journey to the West that opened Japanese Buddhists’ eyes to the way Buddhism was being studied in Europe, and more generally to how religion constituted the subject of objective scientific inquiry, based on “comparative philology and religious history.” This approach to Buddhism was very different from the East Asian tradition of relying on “chronicles (den) and annals (ki)” (Ketelaar 1991, 40). This insight led to the develop-

27. Matsumoto Hakka himself bought the Lotus Sutra, the Koran, a dictionary, a Japa-nese-French conversation book, and a list of Indian books (Fraleigh 2010, 222–23 (fn.164).

28. It is quite possible that Mokurai inspired these interests in Shuntai since Mokurai changed his plans to travel from Germany to Rome, instead returning to Paris to welcome the Higashi Honganji Mission on its arrival in Europe in early December 1872 (smz v: 51).

mick deneckere | 29

ment of Sanskrit studies by Japanese Buddhists and, by implication, of the field of Buddhist Studies. However, as we will see later, it also triggered Shunt-ai’s interest in the general field of “religious studies” (shūkyōgaku 宗教学).

The Publication of “Hōshi sōdan”

In August 1874 the Buddhist layman Ōuchi Seiran 大内青巒 established the journal Hōshi sōdan together with Mokurai.29 The title was based on the meaning of shion hōshū 四恩報酬 (recompensing the four obligations).30 According to Seiran, Hōshi sōdan was the first dedicated Buddhist journal (hs: 223). In the journal’s mission statement Seiran explains:

Now that our culture and civilization start to flourish, the education of the people is a most urgent matter and newspapers are a means to that effect. Thus, recently, different companies’ newspapers are becoming increasingly popular and they are exhaustive in content. However these newspapers aim at publishing random stories of strange events that happen in the capital and making hot news available as quickly as possible. Although one can say that these newspapers publish a lot of articles and editorials that contribute to the education of the people, many of their authors remain anonymous or write under a pen name and either turn their stories into ridicule or use them to begin a dispute. This causes a mixture of brilliant and mediocre contributions in newspapers…. Because of this, scholars often neglect newspapers, but the question arises whether we should content ourselves with just lamenting the fact that brilliant contributions end up as bait for bookworms who do not even properly understand what they read. In answer to this predicament, the Meirokusha has determined a [limited] number of permanent members and the Keiō Gijuku has started a journal of its own…. While learning from their actions, our objective will be different. We will not necessarily determine [the number of] members or only welcome the contributions of one group of people. We look for contributions with sound arguments and theories from

29. Although Mokurai helped Seiran with the publication of Hōshi sōdan from the outset, it is generally assumed that the journal was more a personal undertaking of Seiran’s. Seiran was the editor of the journal until its seventeenth issue, whereafter he delegated the task to someone else, probably because he had become too busy managing the other journals Kyōzon zasshi 共存雑誌 and Meikyō shinshi 明教新誌, which he had meanwhile established (hs: 226).

30. When asking the publisher Fukuchi Gen’ichirō what he thought of the title, Fukuchi replied with a pun: “That would be interesting. Since it is a collection of stories (sōdan 叢談) by Buddhist priests (hōshi 法師), Hōshi (報四) sōdan is a good title” (hs: 223).


the general public, and publish those contributions that live up to the condi-tions of this journal. (hs: 12)

Seiran’s statement sheds light on the circumstances in which academic activity developed in early Meiji and reveals that Hōshi sōdan was started off in response to the activities of the Meirokusha and Fukuzawa Yukichi’s Keiō Gijuku. The format of the journal was, on the whole, based on that of Meiroku zasshi, which served as a model for most Japanese academic and review journals published until the mid-1880s.31 Hōshi sōdan was published at the Hōchisha 報知社, where Meiroku zasshi was also published.32 As for its circulation, no precise numbers are known for individual issues, but a table in the First Annual Report of the Ministry of Home Affairs reveals that on average Hōshi sōdan sold per issue only twenty to thirty percent fewer copies than Meiroku zasshi.33 These numbers indeed suggest that Buddhist Enlightenment thinkers played a more important role in Japan’s “Civiliza-tion and Enlightenment” movement than is generally assumed.34

31. The frequency of the journal’s publication was not fixed and depended entirely on the number of essays submitted, but the overall publication frequency was four issues every three months. For a long time it was assumed that issue 19 was the last to be published, until two more issues were discovered, adding up to a total of twenty-one issues identified so far. While the journal’s cover had a stamp that read Hōshisha 報四社 or “Hōshi Society,” it is highly doubtful that such a society ever existed; the stamp is thought to be a mere imita-tion of the Meirokusha (Meiroku Society) stamp on the cover of Meiroku zasshi. The num-ber of pages per issue was not fixed either, but averaged twenty pages. The price per issue depended on the number of pages but was usually four to six sen (hs: 225–28).

32. The main publication of the publishing company Hōchisha was the Yūbin hōchi shin-bun 郵便報知新聞 (hs: 228). The newspaper still exists today in the form of the sports daily newspaper Supōtsu hōchi スポーツ報知.

33. 「全國各社新聞類發行員數増減比較表」 in 『内務省第一回年報』. The table compares the fluctuations in the numbers of publishers, journals and newspapers of companies all over Japan. It reveals that Hōshi sōdan sold 14,300 copies in “the current year” (July 1875–June 1876) and that it had sold 30,750 the previous year. In comparison, Meiroku zasshi sold 12,004 in “the current year” but 81,725 the previous year (hs: 228). The fact that Meiroku zasshi had stopped its publication earlier than Hōshi sōdan explains its smaller circulation numbers in “the current year.”

34. While the circulation of Hōshi sōdan could be called surprisingly high and the jour-nal must have reached a substantial readership, there are no clues as to who its readers were. The fact that some of the contributors were guest members of the Meirokusha sug-gests that Meirokusha members were aware of their intellectual activities and followed their publications in the Buddhist journal.

mick deneckere | 31

The statement also makes it clear that Hōshi sōdan took pride in not being exclusivist. However, in reality most contributors to the journal were Bud-dhist laymen and priests. Nevertheless it is noteworthy that they belonged to different Buddhist schools.35 Given that one of the aims of this chapter is to locate the presence of Buddhism in established narratives of the Japanese Enlightenment, it is worth pointing out that the Meirokusha counted among its guest members four Buddhist priests, all of them Shin Buddhists: Shimaji Mokurai, Atsumi Kaien 渥美契縁, Ishikawa Shuntai, and Nanjō Bun’yū 南條文雄 (Tozawa 1991, 54–55). It is telling that three of them—Mokurai, Kaien and Shuntai—wrote for Hōshi sōdan.36

A glance over the titles of essays published in Hōshi sōdan shows a wide scope of interests.37 While the essays could each constitute the object of a study in their own right, here I will highlight Mokurai and Shuntai’s views on “religion” in Hōshi sōdan and discuss how they compare to those expressed

35. This pan-Buddhist effort can be understood in the context of the Association of United Buddhist Sects, which had been set up in 1868 by the Nishi Honganji as a means to cope with the challenges brought about by the Meiji Restoration and the ensuing politi-cal program that sought to dislodge Buddhism from its place of prominence. To show its allegiance to the new regime and in an attempt to shift the object of criticism from Bud-dhism to Christianity, the Association had put forward eight study themes at the time of its creation, the first two of which were “the inseparable nature of the Kingly Law and the Buddhist Law” and “the critique and expulsion of Christianity” (Ketelaar 1993, 73). These are recurrent themes in Hōshi sōdan. Although there is no obvious connection between the Association and Hōshi sōdan, the journal can thus be understood as an indirect result of an effort that had started a number of years earlier.

36. While the use of pseudonyms makes it difficult to retrieve the authors’ names, the information found shows that the majority of authors were Shin Buddhists, followed by Zen Buddhists and presumably three lay authors with close connections to the Buddhist world. Mokurai was by far the most regular contributor to the journal, with twenty-five contribu-tions (under different pennames), followed by the Zen Buddhist Hara Tanzan 原坦山（鶴巣）(10), Ishikawa Shuntai (7) and the journal editor Ōuchi Seiran (4) (hs: 232–236).

37. Titles (by different authors) include a variety of topics, such as, On Human Rights (Jinkenron 人権論), Reading “The Life of Washington” (Doku washintonden 讀華盛頓傳), The Origin of Freedom (Jiyū no moto 自由ノ原), On Reading an Outline of Essentials of British penal law (Doku eikoku keiritsu sekiyō 讀英國刑律摭要), The Bill on Revising the Chinese and Japanese Reading of Characters (Ondoku kundoku kaisei gian 音讀訓讀改制議案), On Bath-ing Utensils and Furoshiki (Yugu narabini furoshiki kōshō 湯具幷風呂敷考證), and Warnings and Instructions on Nakedness (On the Necessity to Cover One’s Body) (Ratai kaiyu 裸體誡諭), etc. For a full table of Hōshi sōdan contents and authors, see hs: 232–36.


in Meiroku zasshi. This comparison will reveal that, besides sharing some of the views of their secular colleagues, these thinkers developed unique and novel notions unseen in the writings of Meiroku zasshi authors, thus con-tributing to the intellectual movement of the Japanese Enlightenment.

Enlightened Views on “Religion”

State and religion, and religious freedom, in the “Meiroku zasshi”

As the public voice of the Meirokusha, the Meiroku zasshi is regarded as one of the major sites of the debate on religion in early Meiji Japan. The discus-sions revolved around a number of themes. Tsuda Mamichi 津田真道 saw religion (hōkyō 法教) as a channel for the moral education of the people and the promotion of the Enlightenment. While he felt that Christianity was the religion most conducive to achieving this goal, other Meirokusha members did not necessarily follow him in the idea of a “national religion,” let alone an imported, Western one. Nishi Amane 西周 explained in a series of arti-cles On Religion that religion (kyōmon 教門) was rooted in the absence of knowledge. He argued that since belief was emotional, it could not be forced upon people. Other Meirokusha members, however, held an entirely oppo-site view. Kashiwabara Takaaki 柏原孝章 argued that religion was not based in the absence of knowledge but was rooted in it, as “a kind of trust that begins after the resolution of doubt.” Since it was the government’s respon-sibility to take away doubt through legislation and education, Kashiwabara argued that ultimately “religion had the same end as government” (Joseph-son 2012, 205–17).

The debate on “religious freedom” led Meirokusha authors in opposite directions. Nishi thought that people must be permitted to believe as they choose, albeit with serious restrictions for expression of belief in the pub-lic sphere. Similarly Mori Arinori advocated freedom of religion (shūkyō) in the limited sense of religious non-interference by the government where inner worship was concerned, but subjecting its external expressions to reg-ulations. In contrast Kashiwabara considered that, while people in the West may be ready to believe as they choose, the Japanese were not, since they were still too confused by heresies.

mick deneckere | 33

State and religion in “Hōshi sōdan”

A number of essays in Hōshi sōdan also addressed the state-religion relation-ship. For example, in On National Religion Shuntai discusses the problems involved in naming Shinto “the national religion.” He thereby questions the combined use of the characters kuni 國 (nation) and kyō 教 (teaching) by comparing it to other expressions such as kokujin 國人 (national people), kokuhō 國法 (national laws) and kokki 國旗 (national flag).38 For Shuntai, the term “national” can only be used when something applies to the entire nation. In the case of a kyō, this would imply that all people of the nation believe in it. But since (religious) teachings deal with matters that are beyond human grasp, the government cannot judge the right and wrong of the religions that people choose to follow. Shuntai concludes that forcing a belief on people by defining it as “national” and punishing those who choose not to follow it are practices characteristic of authoritarian regimes, which can cause great harm, as European history has shown (hs: 87–88, 139–40).

Shuntai’s idea of religious non-interference calls to mind Nishi and Mori’s views and it is clear from Shuntai’s Review of Nishi Amane’s “On Religion” that he sought to engage in the debate on the issue.39 In addition to shed-ding light on Shuntai’s views, Review of Nishi Amane’s “On Religion” also provides evidence of the fact that the purpose of Hōshi sōdan was, indeed, to be the Buddhist answer to Meiroku zasshi.40 While Shuntai agrees with Nishi in many respects, his commentaries also include an in-depth analysis of Nishi’s views.41 He is particularly critical of Nishi’s explanation that all

38. Kokkyōron 國教論: the essay was written in two parts, published in issues 6 (Decem-ber 1874) and 9 (February 1875) of Hōshi sōdan (hs: 87–88, 139–40). At the end of the sec-ond essay Shuntai notifies the reader that he will continue his explanations in a future issue of the journal, but there is no other essay with the same title in any of the following issues.

39. Nishi shi kyōmonron hyōsetsu 西子教門論評説: the article was published in issue 14 of Hōshi sōdan (May 1875) (hs: 165–72).

40. Although Nishi’s text consists of seven parts, Shuntai only focuses on the first two (hs: 165).

41. For example, as for Nishi’s view of non-interference of politics with religion, Shuntai clarifies that it cannot be understood with traditional thinking that confuses learning (學問) with religious teachings (教法) (hs: 166). Shuntai thus adds a dimension to Nishi’s argu-ments by identifying the need for a shift in Japanese thought: the custom of amalgamating different traditions of thought is no longer suitable for the needs of a modernizing Japan in which the respective positions of politics and religion need to be reconsidered. Next


acts of faith whether that of common people to deify trees, stones, insects and beasts or that of the eminent and erudite to believe in Heaven, Reason or a Supreme Ruler are based on the same fact of not-knowing. In reply, Shuntai confirms that there are indeed different levels of faith, and that there is no comparison possible between faith in certain Buddhist notions and belief in natural features as kami. However, he disagrees with Nishi’s ascrip-tion of different types of faith to specific social groups: before the unknown, everyone is equal. While this critique can be read as a defence of Buddhism, and therefore qualified as conservative, it was also a progressive view that looked beyond the traditional divisions in society, thereby taking a step fur-ther than other Meiroku zasshi or Hōshi sōdan authors.

Christianity in “Hōshi sōdan”

While many Meirokusha members were not convinced by Tsuda’s proposal to make Christianity the state religion of Japan, no one criticized Christi-anity for its doctrine, let alone questioned its incompatibility with civiliza-tion. For Mokurai, Hōshi sōdan offered a platform for an outright critique of Christian doctrine, based on insights he had gained during his stay in Europe. In earlier writings Mokurai mainly had voiced concern about “the foreign religion,” both because it might submerge Japan due to the opening of its borders, and because of the spiritual gap created by the government’s anti-Buddhist policies and its promotion of Shinto. Some important reasons Christianity was to be feared included its superiority with regard to doctrine and the number of its followers throughout the world. Shinto, which was limited to Japan, had neither a founder nor a scripture, and fulfilled none of the conditions for being called a religion, let alone being able to withstand the giant that was Christianity.42

Essays published in Hōshi sōdan after his return from Europe, testify to a new development in Mokurai’s anti-Christian views closely related to

to separating learning and religious teachings, Shuntai also points out that “religious doc-trine” (kyōhō 教法) should not be confused with “religious community” (kyōkai 教會) (hs: 167).

42. Mokurai expressed these views for example in his Critique of the Three Doctrinal Standards (Sanjō kyōsoku hihan kenpakusho 三条教則批判建白書) (December 1872), which he wrote during his second stay in Paris.

mick deneckere | 35

the notion of “civilization.” Earlier, Mokurai was critical of the fact that Christian missionaries made people believe that the West had been civi-lized thanks to Christianity.43 Now he sought to criticize the irrationality of Christian teachings. This critique formed an important premise on which to build his argument that Buddhism was more rational than Christianity, and therefore more suitable to serve the modern, civilized world.44 Thelle notes that “it is quite astonishing how rapidly and to what degree the members of the first delegation to the West were able to collect material for apologetical purposes.” He recognizes Mokurai as one of the most active critics of Chris-tianity and points out the influence of Renan and Henry Ball’s Self-Contra-diction of the Bible on later essays about Christianity “in which he rejects the idea of ‘coming down from heaven’ as incompatible with modern science or criticizes the stories of Eden, the forbidden fruit, and original sin” (Thelle 1987, 79–80).45

Many of the essays that Thelle refers to were published in Hōshi sōdan. In On Descent from Heaven, Mokurai challenges a number of Christian tenets without directly mentioning Christianity.46 Based on scientific grounds and on human behavior, he questions the view that humankind started off with one man and one woman.47 With regard to the creation of things, he dis-

43. In his Critique of the Three Doctrinal Standards Mokurai states: “The attempt to attri-bute the merit of Europe’s Enlightenment to religious teachings comes from missionaries’ selfish motives.” However, Mokurai countered, “even a three-year-old knows that the founda-tion of Europe’s Enlightenment is not religion but learning, that it is not based on Christian-ity but on [learning that has developed since] Greece and Rome” (smz i: 25).

44. Mokurai had already implied this in his Critique of the Three Doctrinal Standards, but at the time had used Léon de Rosny—that is, the opinion of a Western scholar—to legitimize his point (smz i: 25). Now he no longer needed foreigners to back his views, feel-ing that the Christian teachings spoke for themselves.

45. As I have previously pointed out, Mokurai’s ideas were also nurtured by his encoun-ters with Lisco and de Rosny.

46. Amakudari setsu 天降說 ; The essay was published in issue 6 of Hōshi sōdan (Decem-ber 1874) (hs: 84–86).

47. As for human behavior, Mokurai argues: “If there were only one man and one woman at the beginning, then the next couple would necessarily need to have intercourse as sib-lings. If siblings had intercourse and thus reproduced the human race, then that would be the way of man today.” According to Mokurai, factual evidence also suggested that it was unfeasible that humankind started with one man and one woman: “When the earth was separated into separate continents by the oceans, every place had its creatures (things) and human beings and all of them lived and existed according to the conditions of that place.


putes the proposition that something can be created overnight, which may be read as a critique of the book of Genesis. Based on examples from primi-tive cultures, he challenges the notion of gods descending from or ascend-ing to heaven, thereby indirectly discrediting the Christian belief in Jesus’ ascension. A New Tale about the Resurrection starts with Mokurai’s observa-tion that, among the many strange stories in Christianity, the most bizarre is its core teaching that all will be raised from the dead and judged at the end times.48 He points out that the idea of rising from death goes back to the story of Jesus’ resurrection, when Mary Magdalene, “a mad woman pos-sessed by seven devils,” shouted out of devotion that Jesus had arisen. As to the feasibility of Jesus’ resurrection, Mokurai is clear:

Since death is the opposite of life and is used to indicate the moment when all vital power has been depleted, one can go from life to death but not from death to life. Therefore, if someone dies in this world but returns from being dead to being alive, it means that he had not actually died.… Even for sages and virtuous people, when they die there is no difference between them and ignorant or immoral people in that neither will return to life once they have died. (hs: 93)

Given this perspective, Mokurai ascribes Mary Magdalene’s utterances to her mental condition and finds it unbelievable that her words became an important foundation of Christianity, thereby “disturbing the brains” of thousands of people.49 He concludes that, ultimately, all Christian teachings are a series of absurdities that go back to its core teaching of Jesus’ death and resurrection. For example, the belief that all people will be raised from the dead is based on the fact that Jesus’ body was not found, which developed in the belief that he went straight to heaven with his physical body. Likewise the story of original sin—the subject of his essay On the Flawed [Christian]

Each place engenders creatures of the same species, but also different species.… This is how we know that every region has its plants and people but, since they do not originate in one single place, that human beings do not necessarily originate from one man and one woman” (hs: 84–85).

48. Fukkatsu shinwa 復活新話 ; The essay was published in three parts in issues 7 (Janu-ary 1875), 9 (February 1875) and 11 (March 1875) of Hōshi sōdan (hs: 93–95; 136–39, 149–52).

49. Mokurai points out that the events surrounding Jesus’ death suggest that his body may have been simply taken away from the tomb. To Mokurai, the fact that there is no unified version of these events, which constitute a fundamental tenet of Christianity, also shows that the resurrection story grew out of rumors (hs: 94–95).

mick deneckere | 37

Conception that Eating from the Forbidden Fruit Constitutes Original Sin—is needed to explain that Jesus died on the cross for the sins of humankind.50

This is the core teaching of Christianity. Since its core is like this, it goes without saying that the rest is nonsense, too. Christians find it difficult to understand, and as a result there are thousands of explanations, but not one is satisfactory. (hs: 211)

To critics who claimed that he merely wished to sully Jesus’ image, Mokurai replies by asserting that he is not the type of person to bend the truth to be victorious at all costs. He considers himself a neutral scholar, open to learn-ing something from teachings that he dislikes, and explains that the truth can only appear if it is investigated with a free mind, apart from conflicts and personal convictions (hs: 136). To nuance his opinions, Mokurai therefore points out that stories of strange and mysterious events can also be found in China, India, and Japan.51 In Japan, for example, people believe in foxes and badgers (a superstition, he is careful to note, that Shin Buddhists keep away from). While Mokurai is convinced that such beliefs have disappeared in the West due to the development of scholarship and the progress of knowledge, he remains puzzled as to why people in these civilized countries believe in stories such as that of Jesus’ resurrection without questioning them.

Mokurai’s critique of Christian tenets is accompanied by examples that testify to the scientific and rational nature of Buddhist doctrine.52 He points

50. Kinka wo shokuseru o mochite genzai to suru no hi wo ronzu 禁果ヲ食セルヲ以テ原罪トスルノ非ヲ論ズ. The essay was published in issue 20 (January 1876) of Hōshi sōdan (hs: 209–13).

51. Mokurai further explains: “[Certain people experience] the appearance of such and such a deity in a dream, or believe that a certain person is the incarnation of this or that kami, or that a certain master is the appearance of this or that buddha. However, people who experience such visions are those who strongly believe that this Buddha or kami will appear one day. In short, there is no doubt that their experiences are the fruit of their imagi-nation, for if this Buddha or kami really wished to appear, why would they not do so in the presence of a larger group of people?” (hs: 138).

52. For example, with regard to the creation of the world, he explains that according to Buddhist doctrine there is neither beginning nor end, and that the beginning of the world is therefore not conceivable. Everything is in constant flux and change, is interdependent, and follows the law of cause and effect. Things do not simply appear out of nothing. In this light, the Christian belief in a Creator God who created all things from nothing makes no sense. Mokurai expressed this view in an essay On Creation (Zōkaron 造化論) of September 1873, which was, however, not published in Hōshi sōdan (smz ii: 55–57).


out that creation stories are similar all over the world and thus explain the form of creation and the principles behind it. While the Old Testament’s account that the world was created in six days is nonsensical, he concedes that it deserves some attention in that it tells the process of creation in the right order. By contrast, the Buddhist teaching that everything is made of infinitesimal particles is a most accurate explanation of reality (hs: 186). As regards the Buddhist view on “beginning and end,” he explains:

The Buddha has taught the four kalpas (aeons) of formation, continuance, destruction and emptiness. Within the unpredictability of eternity, he has indicated [the existence of] a number of temporary kalpas as a way to explain the inevitability of formation and destruction. One should say that this teaching constitutes the best possible logic. When a time of destruction comes, what the cause will be, and how things will change, can of course not be predicted with human knowledge. It is truly the most unfathomable thing.

(hs: 188)53

Ultimately, what troubled Mokurai in particular was the desire among some of his countrymen to introduce Christianity in Japan, where people, in his view, were still ignorant. Given all the absurdities in Christian teach-ings, he felt that introducing Christianity would just add to the stupidity of the Japanese.54 It was a time when Japan needed to civilize, and for that purpose it needed rational explanations for “the big questions.” Mokurai was convinced that Buddhism did better in this respect than Christianity: in contrast to Christianity, its teachings could be explained rationally with modern science.55

53. From The Formation of the World (Sekai seiritsu setsu 世界成立說), published in issue 16 of Hōshi sōdan (September 1875) (hs: 186–88).

54. In his post-Europe essays, Mokurai relegates what he perceives as “the absurd sto-ries of Christianity” to the level of Japan’s ancient chronicles, which, as he explained in his Critique, were mythological in nature. For example, Mokurai explains that the story of “original sin” is simply made up to disguize “shameful behavior”: to eat the forbidden fruit refers to the intercourse between man and woman; to be tempted by the snake refers to the lust they feel; and the fact that the woman is first tempted and then followed by the man corresponds to the Kojiki tale where the female deity first spoke and was followed by the male deity (hs: 212).

55. From Commentary on [Ishikawa Shuntai’s] “On the Egyptians’ Custom to Worship Animals” (Ejiputojin dōbutsu wo hōzuru no setsu-fusetsu 俟及人動物ヲ奉ズルの說・附說),

mick deneckere | 39

Shuntai was also critical of Christianity. For example, he reports on a con-versation he had with Mokurai during their stay in Europe, during which Mokurai had described the infatuation with Christianity of some of their compatriots as “Western influenza” and a dangerous, contagious disease. Shuntai found the metaphor of the “contagious disease” extremely appropri-ate and explained how he had protected himself from catching this “West-ern cold” by reading the Bible beforehand.56 This passage again suggests that keeping Christianity out of Japan was paramount for Shuntai and Moku-rai in their capacity as Shin Buddhists. Their journeys to Europe and their study of Christianity and modern science equipped them with the confi-dence they needed to challenge Christianity. Not only did Mokurai show that Buddhist doctrine was more scientific (and therefore more civilized) than its Christian counterpart, he warned his audience of the dangers in importing Christianity into Japan: Christian absurdities would only further confuse the still ignorant Japanese, which meant that the civilizing effort of the nation would be slowed down. As a substitute for Christianity, Mokurai sought to link a “civilized” Buddhism to the modern Japanese state, thereby attempting to solidify the notion of the interdependence of the secular law and the Dharma.57

Mokurai and Shuntai’s critiques of Christianity—ranging from its doc-trines to the fact that people blindly followed it simply because it was West-ern and therefore thought to be civilized—went hand-in-hand with an increasing awareness of the need for objective scholarship on the issue of religion. Mokurai’s statement on being a “neutral scholar” already hinted at this. In the following section I will discuss how this insight contributed to the development of the discipline of “religious studies” in Japan.

published in issue 17 of Hōshi sōdan (September 1875) (hs: 194–95). Mokurai’s belief in the possibilities of science and its compatibility with Buddhism prompted him to say that the day would come when it would be possible to explain scientifically that everything is pro-duced by the mind (hs: 195).

56. Shuntai expressed this view in his Observations on the Contemporary Religious Situa-tion, which will be further discussed later (hs: 100).

57. In Shin Buddhism this view, known as ōbō buppō 王法仏法, developed into the shinzoku nitai 真俗二諦 discourse from the bakumatsu onwards to become an essential part of Shin Buddhist doctrine in the Meiji period (Kashiwahara 1975, 32–35).


The Burgeoning Field of “Religious Studies” in Japan

Shimaji Mokurai: Overview of Religions

Mokurai’s Overview of Religions in the Countries of Europe and America is serialized in seven issues of Hōshi sōdan.58 The explanations remain factual and contain neither commentaries nor conclusions, such as which religious model would best suit Japan. Most accounts start with an introduction of the country’s main religion or state religion, sometimes with a short his-tory of the religion’s foundation and an explanation of its current structure and of its relationship to the ruler. Much attention is paid to the number of followers and to the number and hierarchy of clerics. These figures are based on national censuses held in the different countries in the 1860s and early 1870s. Another point of interest is the salary and source of income of the clergy. Furthermore, the essays contain references to articles in national constitutions that specify the position of religion in the state structure or discuss religious freedom.59

The facts are not presented in a systematic way, and in the end the reader knows more about various aspects of religion in different countries of Europe, but not of all aspects in all countries. This approach calls to mind the eclecticism of the early years of Meiji that emerged in answer to article five of the Charter Oath, promulgated by the Emperor in 1868, that knowl-edge was to be sought throughout the world to strengthen the foundations of imperial rule. In his successful publications Conditions in the West (three

58. Ōbei kakkoku shūkyō ryakurei 歐米各國宗教略例; The series was published in issues 2, 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, and 12 of Hōshi sōdan between September 1874 and April 1875 (hs: 16–19, 75–77, 81–83, 88–90, 141–42, 147–48, 158–59). While the overview contains detailed information on religions in different countries, there is no reference to a textual source. The series pro-vides the reader with an overview of the religions of Great Britain (England, Scotland, Ire-land), France, Belgium, the German Empire (Prussia, Bavaria, Wurttemberg, Saxony), Italy (Rome), Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, Denmark, Holland, and Austria. Although the title speaks of “Europe and America,” the series does not discuss America. Despite the author’s intention to continue the series, it was never finalized.

59. Mokurai presents data from national censuses from the years 1864 (Prussia), 1866 (France), 1867 (Bavaria, Saxony), 1870 (Switzerland, Denmark, Holland), and 1871 (Wurt-temberg, Italy). In terms of the clergy’s income, Mokurai mentions financial support from the government, donations of parishioners, alms, and landed wealth. Where “religion” in national constitutions is concerned he quotes the constitutions of Spain, Switzerland, Den-mark, Holland, and Italy (Rome).

mick deneckere | 41

volumes published between 1866 and 1870) and Account of the Countries of the World (1869) Fukuzawa Yukichi introduced his readers to the politics, economy, and cultures of the different countries he had visited during his journeys to the West. In a clear and simple style he described the institu-tions and machinery he had met first-hand and that had been new to him (Blacker 1969, 7–8, 26–27, Cobbing 1998, 171). While social and political institutions received substantial attention in these works, there was a gap where religious institutions were concerned. Mokurai’s Overview of religions may well have contributed to filling that void.60

From the perspective of the development of the notion of “religion,” it is interesting to observe Mokurai’s use of the term shūkyō 宗教 as a translation for “religion” throughout the series. The first part of the series was published in issue 2 of Hōshi sōdan, September 1874. Mori Arinori had used shūkyō a couple of months earlier as the title of his contribution in issue 6 of Meiroku zasshi (April 1874). The studies by Isomae Jun’ichi (2003) and Jason Joseph-son (2012) explain that there was a lot of experimenting with possible terms for “religion,” kyōhō 教法, kyōmon 教門, shūkyō 宗教, shūshi 宗旨, shintō 神道, seidō 聖道 and shinkyō 信教 being some of them. This range of terms reflected both the lack of and the search for a definition of religion. What really seems to have sparked the need for a Japanese term that would render the Western word “religion” were the diplomatic negotiations on the unequal treaties with Western nations. In other words, the Japanese word for “religion” was initially not meant to reflect the religious situation in Japan (Isomae 2003, 34).

Given these circumstances, the first meaning that diplomats aimed to

60. This is not to say that no one else discussed or experienced religion abroad in early Meiji. For example, Kume Kunitake’s True account of the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary’s Journey of Observation Through the United States of America and Europe (Ōbei kairan jikki 欧米回覧実記) does contain information on religion in Europe, but it was not published until 1878. In his popular Record of Observations in the West (Seiyō bunken roku 西洋聞見録), published in 1869 and 1870, Nomura Fumio, who experienced life in Victorian Britain as a student in Aberdeen, placed great emphasis on the importance of religion. For example, he explained that religion was one of “the three pillars of political structure in Britain,” together with “generous government to safeguard [the people’s] lives, and taxation to supply the nation’s needs.” He also described the impact of religion on the Victorians’ daily lives and customs. However, Nomura’s observations were limited to the conditions in Victorian Britain (Cobbing 1998, 189–90, 198). They did not constitute an overview of the religious situation in the different countries of Europe.


convey with their translations of “religion” was that of “the worship of Bud-dhas and kami,” as it appears in the Treaty of Amity and Commerce with the United States. In the diplomatic milieu, shūshi became the common term but a range of other terms—shūkyō being one of them—were also used by government officials and intellectuals. But more important than the term itself was the understanding behind it. Even though the word shūkyō was used at the time, its inherent meaning was different from what it means today. Isomae argues that before shūkyō came into common use, the vari-ous terms could be divided into those that mainly referred to the “praxis” aspect of religion (e.g. shūshi, kyōmon) and those that alluded rather to “belief ” (e.g. kyōhō, seidō). The term shūkyō, if anything, belonged to the latter group.61

The use of shūkyō as something closer to today’s meaning of religion seems to have taken root from the late 1870s, and by the time it was entered in the Tetsugaku jii 哲学字彙, published in 1881, it seems to have been fairly well established. An event that may have directly triggered a more widespread use of the term was the removal of the anti-Christian notice boards in 1873, which made religion not just a diplomatic issue but an issue of domestic affairs as well. “Religion” thus became an integral part of Japanese society and of the vocabulary of the common people (Isomae 2003, 36–37). The meaning of shūkyō expanded to become a term that took into account the existence of different religions in society and their mutual relationship.62

Isomae and Josephson explain that the main debates on the meaning of religion in early Meiji Japan took place in Meiroku zasshi, and that Mori Ari-

61. Going back to the history of those terms, the former would have included the com-mon people, whereas the latter was a matter reserved for Buddhist scholars, Confucianists, and National Learning scholars who discussed doctrine and teachings. This explains why terms related to “belief ” were much less used in the diplomatic discourse than in the writ-ings of early Meiji intellectuals (Isomae 2003, 35).

62. The Meiji government had solved “the Christian problem” in Japan by removing the anti-Christian notice boards in 1873. While this move appeased the demands of the West-ern powers, the removal did not actually mean the end of the ban on Christianity or its offi-cial acceptance. Isomae argues that the reason shūkyō became the generic term for religion has to do with the fact that the schools of Christianity that were proselytizing in Japan at the time were Protestant: given the Protestant rejection of ritual and the emphasis on belief, it is no surprise that it was one of the terms referring to “belief ” rather than “praxis” that won the day (2003, 37).

mick deneckere | 43

nori was the first to use the term shūkyō, immediately after the anti-Chris-tian notice boards had been removed. Fukuzawa Yukichi also used the term shūkyō consequently in the publication of his Outline of a Theory of Civili-sation in 1875 onwards (Isomae 2003, 37). However, as Mokurai’s article under consideration here shows, and as will become clear from Shuntai’s article that I will discuss next, the discourse on “religion” and the influence on the widespread adoption of the term shūkyō was not the prerogative of Meirokusha thinkers. In his Overview of Religions Mokurai used the term shūkyō in its expanded meaning that covers both the individuality of sepa-rate religions and their mutual relationship, that is, in a sense that calls to mind the modern use of shūkyō. While Mori used the term as the title of his article in Meiroku zasshi a couple of months earlier, he mainly addressed the topics of the religion–state relationship and religious freedom, topics that could well have been discussed with the other available terms for religion (from the “belief ” category) at the time. With its factual, objective infor-mation on religion, Mokurai’s Overview of Religions could also be consid-ered a step in the direction of “religious studies,” the need of which Shuntai emphasized in his essay on the contemporary religious situation.

Ishikawa Shuntai: “Observations on the Contemporary Religious Situation”

Observations on the Contemporary Religious Situation is a set of three short essays.63 Here I will particularly focus on Shuntai’s introduction to his first essay Contemporary Thought, in which he says:

To deal in detail with the thought (shisō 思想) of people in the world, one needs to discuss thoroughly their respective religions. To discuss in detail the various religions of the world, one needs to look at them impartially. If one discusses religions from the position of a believer in a specific religion, one will naturally fail to offer an impartial account. Therefore, although I am a

63. Kankyō jiyō 觀教時様: Contemporary Thought (Jiyō no shisō 時様ノ思想), Misconcep-tions and Misunderstandings in Contemporary Thought (Jiyō shisō no byūgo 時様思想ノ謬誤) and The War Between Science and Religion (Rigaku to shūkyō no sensō 理學ト宗教ノ戦争). In the second and third essay Shuntai applies methods of religious studies and explains how the discipline can be used to overcome the impasse in which religion finds itself in Japan. The essays are published in issue 8 of Hōshi sōdan (January 1875) (hs: 99–108).


Shin Buddhist, I will step down from my position of Shin Buddhist believer for a moment and instead look at things from the viewpoint of science de religion (shūkyōgaku). (hs: 99)

In an article on the beginnings of the scientific study of religions in Japan, Suzuki Norihisa explains: “A month following Nanjō [Bunyū]’s return to Japan in May 1884, a certain Ishikawa Shundai [sic] spoke of “the science of religion”—to my knowledge the first usage of the term in Japan.”64 However, Shuntai’s article in Hōshi sōdan shows that he already used the term almost a decade earlier, in 1875. Shuntai uses shūkyōgaku 宗教学 as a translation of the French term science de religion スシャンスデレリジョン. The French vocabu-lary indeed suggests that there must have been a link with French schol-arship. Suzuki indicates that it remains unclear whether Shuntai “learned the word during his tour of several European countries in 1872 [sic] for the Higashi Honganji sect or only later acquired his familiarity with it” (1970, 158). Since the article under discussion was already published in 1875, within a year after Shuntai’s return from Europe and America, we can assume—in answer to Suzuki’s question—that Shuntai acquired his familiarity with the term in Europe.65

Given Shuntai’s assumed first use of the term shūkyōgaku in 1884, the beginnings of religious studies in Japan are usually situated in the mid-to late-Meiji period. However, the publication of Shuntai’s article in 1875 pro-pels the story back in time and raises the questions of how “religious studies” developed in Japan from as early as the 1870s. When establishing genealo-gies of fields of study, there is evidently no beginning point as such: one was always taught or influenced by someone previous. Thus, some scholars locate the origins of religious studies in Japan in the Edo period.66 While cer-tain connections with earlier thought may exist, the discipline of religious

64. According to Suzuki, Shuntai used this term “in an article entitled “Kankyō jiyō” [Observations on the contemporary religious situation] prepared for the sixth volume of the work Kyōgaku ronshū [Collected treatises on Buddhist doctrine]” (1970, 157–58).

65. It would take additional research to find out which French scholars Shuntai visited in France and whether it was a French intellectual who inspired Shuntai and taught him the French vocabulary, or a Japanese student or translator in France who was acquainted with either Müller’s ideas or some French intellectual’s views on religious studies.

66. Pye, for example, situates their origin with the Osaka-based intellectual Tominaga Nakamoto (1715–1746) based on the appearance of the single sentence nishūkyō 二宗教 in one of his texts (Josephson 2012, 7–8).

mick deneckere | 45

studies under discussion here is different in nature from pre-Meiji studies. During the Edo period there were three main teachings or ways, which were not entirely separate entities. The edicts to clarify Shinto and Buddhism and the end of the ban on Christianity in the early Meiji period put an end to this amalgamation, thus causing a sudden multiplication of religions and a profound change in Japan’s religious landscape (Isomae 2003, 39). It is as a result of this separation and in answer to this new religious reality that the need for an academic method to study religions emerged in Japan. Shuntai was early in reaching that insight, which seems to have been inspired by scholarship with which he had become acquainted in Europe.67

Modernity Shaping Religion and Religion Shaping Modernity

Japanese Buddhists of the Meiji period are not often considered Enlightenment thinkers or to have played a significant role in the bunmei kaika movement of the 1870s.68 While studies that focus on Meiji Buddhism may speak of “Buddhist Enlightenment thinkers,” the general historical narratives on bunmei kaika usually only focus on its secular thinkers.69 Evi-dently the motives of Buddhist priest-scholars were of a substantially differ-ent from those of secular Enlightenment thinkers. The Buddhists’ foremost concern was to protect Buddhism and to modernize the Buddhist institu-tion in hopes of returning it to what they considered to be its rightful place in Japanese society. In contrast, secular Enlightenment thinkers sought to serve the nation in the first place. Ultimately however, it was the challenges

67. Also in Europe, religion was still a very new discipline. Max Müller’s publication of Lectures on the Science of Religion in 1872 is generally considered the beginning of the mod-ern scientific study of religion (Suzuki 1970, 155).

68. Exceptions to this are Thelle (1987) and Davis (1989, 1992), but no substantial research seems to have been done.

69. Winston Davis speaks of the Buddhist enlightenment as a phenomenon of the 1870s and 1880s. He includes thinkers like Inoue Enryō, Shimaji Mokurai, Ishikawa Shuntai, Aka-matsu Renjō, Hara Tanzan, Katō Kurō, and Ōzu Tetsunen, and explains how “the men of the Buddhist Enlightenment were preoccupied with a new hermeneutic that would spell out the Dharma in Western philosophical terms.” Davis credits them for contributions to Japanese scholarship that resulted from their attempts “to make sense of their own religious tradition in light of the Western philosophical and scientific thought inundating Japan at the time” (1989, 314–15).


facing Japanese society at the time (religious or otherwise) that demanded a change of mentality and which subsequently led to the development of new ideas in Japan. This was not only so for policy makers but also for Buddhists, who faced both the external threat of a Christian invasion and the persistent internal threat of anti-Buddhist policies.

For all their lofty ideas and theories, the Meiroku zasshi authors had remarkably little to say about the government’s promotion of Shinto and its anti-Buddhist policies. Their advocacy of human rights and religious freedom did not include a critical assessment of the government’s reli-gious policies. Such a lack of reflection was perhaps due to the fact that the Civilization and Enlightenment Movement was a government-sponsored program. It would take Buddhist scholars like Mokurai and Shuntai, who endured the consequences of such policies, to call them into question and to come up with alternative notions and solutions where the field of religion was concerned.70 In their essays, Mokurai and Shuntai covered themes simi-lar to those addressed in Meiroku zasshi. The notions they developed were, at least as much as those of their secular counterparts, inspired by a study of the conditions and scholarship of the West. Perhaps the most obvious simi-larity between the thinkers of both journals was their belief in the evolution of religion from the primitive to the more sophisticated, whereby the model and enemy to defeat and transcend was Christianity, whether for national-istic or religious motives. However, Mokurai and Shuntai approached “reli-gion” also from a different angle.

Mokurai’s assessment of Christianity shows that he was well aware of the intellectual trends in the West and sought to actively participate in the debates surrounding the “civilization” of the nation and its people. As Mokurai’s cri-tique of Christianity shows, his foremost goal in the struggle for the protec-tion of the Dharma was to keep Christianity out of Japan. Having become aware that this was impossible, he sought to discredit Christianity by pointing out the irrationality of its teachings, while advocating (Shin) Buddhism as the most civilized of religions. Rationality was the keyword when it came to reli-

70. It is somewhat ironic that, at a time when Buddhism was often criticized for its ”empty learning” (kyogaku 虚学), the scholarship of these Buddhists, who combined their experiences with the knowledge they had acquired both in Japan and abroad, was in fact an example of jitsugaku 実学, the more practical or pragmatic type of knowledge that Fuku-zawa Yukichi promoted.

mick deneckere | 47

gions that were compatible with civilized nations, and Mokurai showed that Christianity failed in this respect. While many government officials and edu-cated citizens thought of Christianity as a model of what a civilized religion ought to be, Mokurai advised the “religion of the West” to amend its ways, to stop teaching people absurdities, and to focus on true virtue (實徳) instead (hs: 139). Both Mokurai and Shuntai were aware of the need for indepen-dent, objective scholarship in the field of religion for it to be considered “civ-ilized.” Shuntai’s insight about the need for a scientific method that analyzes religions objectively transcends other discussions on religion in Meiroku zasshi and Hōshi sōdan. Even though his awareness may have been rooted in a Buddhist agenda, his call for the development of religious studies is an example of the contribution Japanese Buddhism made to the intellectual movement of the early 1870s known as the Japanese Enlightenment.

In line with the arguments of figures like Nishi and Mori, both Mokurai and Shuntai argued in favor of non-interference of politics in the inward practice of religion, thus pushing an important aspect of religion into the private sphere.71 This was a means to protect Buddhism from further anti-Buddhist policies but also to keep Christianity away from public life. Their main concern in pushing religion into the private sphere was thus not to positively promote religious freedom. Recent scholarship confirms that Buddhist reformers “tried to rebuild Buddhism in line with the new govern-ment, by ‘modernizing’ themselves through foreign study, and by encourag-ing the religion to take on new social roles.” Buddhism was thus brought “into line with secularists’ ideas of the proper sort of religion for modern Japan” (Hardacre 2011, 7). Such analysis is based on Talal Asad’s view of secularity as an elite project.72 It holds that the process of secularization that was initiated by a (secular) elite stimulated Buddhism to reform and modernize.73 As I have tried to show, Mokurai and Shuntai’s experiences

71. Although not discussed here, the need for separation of the two spheres was the main point of Mokurai’s Critique of the Three Doctrinal Standards.

72. Partha Chatterjee summarizes Talal Asad’s views as follows: “In all countries and in every historical period, secularization has been a coercive process in which the legal pow-ers of the state, the disciplinary powers of family and school, and the persuasive powers of government and media have been used to produce the secular citizen who agrees to keep religion in the private domain” (Hardacre 2011, 2).

73. Helen Hardacre notes: “Buddhist reform campaigns clearly illustrate the way in which elites’ secularizing agendas stimulated the creation of new religious forms conform-


and writings show that Buddhism did not merely modernize in answer to the Meiji elite’s secularizing agenda, but that Buddhist thinkers themselves were part of the elite that sought to push religion into the private sphere. Secularity and religion are indeed mutually constituted phenomena in Meiji Japan, though in the sense that secularity was also advocated from within the sphere of religion. In the case of Japan, there is thus a need to further reflect on whom “the elite” actually involved.74

While in the eyes of many Meiji bureaucrats, anything “Buddhist” was incompatible with “civilization,” in reality Japanese Buddhism was closely involved in the Civilization and Enlightenment Movement of the 1870s. At a time when Buddhism was facing myriad challenges, its apologists made use of the rhetoric of “civilization” to demonstrate its relevance to the state’s projects. Their active participation in the Enlightenment movement thus resulted in a new way of relating Buddhism to Japan and the world at large. By promoting Buddhism as the most civilized of religions, using rational argument, the individuals mentioned in this chapter sought to demonstrate Buddhism’s ability to keep up with the changing times and to underscore that it was relevant—indeed, essential—for the creation of a modern, “civ-ilized” Japan. The inclusion of thinkers of religious backgrounds into the narrow circle of Japan’s Enlightenment thinkers thus goes beyond the ques-tion of modernity shaping religion in Japan and opens up the question of religion shaping Japan’s modernity.

Abbreviations

bbkl Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon, Bautz 1993.hs Hōshi sōdan, Meiji Bukkyō shisō shiryō shūsei henshū iinkai 1983.smz Shimaji Mokurai Zenshū, Futaba and Fukushima 1973.

ing to those agendas. Secularity and religion thus may be regarded as mutually constituted phenomena in Meiji Japan” (2011, 8).

74. While the Buddhist world may not have been part of the elite in power, it found a way to form an efficient opposition to the government at a time when a parliamentary democracy was not yet established, through lobbying, memorials, and the publication of journals. From within “the opposition,” Buddhists like Mokurai managed to steer policy-making in a direction that was favorable to the Buddhist agenda. In that respect they can be considered as much part of “the elite” as those in power.

mick deneckere | 49

References

Bautz, Friedrich W., ed., Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon. Herz-berg: Bautz, 1993, Band 5: 122–24.

Blacker, Carmen, The Japanese Enlightenment: A study of the writings of Fuku-zawa Yukichi. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969 (1964).

Braisted, William R., Meiroku Zasshi: Journal of the Japanese enlightenment. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1976.

Breen, John, “‘Earnest Desires’: The Iwakura Embassy and Japanese religious pol-icy.” Japan Forum 10/2 (1998): 151–65.

Cobbing, Andrew, The Japanese Discovery of Victorian Britain: Early Travel Encounters in the Far West. Richmond, Surrey: Japan Library, 1998.

Conrad, Sebastian, “Enlightenment in Global History: A historiographical cri-tique.” American Historical Review 117 (4) (2012): 999–1027.

Craig, Albert M., Civilization and Enlightenment: The Early Thought of Fukuzawa Yukichi. Cambridge, ma, and London, England: Harvard University Press, 2009.

Davis, Winston B., “Buddhism and the Modernization of Japan.” History of Reli-gions 28/4 (1989): 304–39.

_____, Japanese Religion and Society: Paradigms of Structure and Change. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992.

Dobbins, James C., Letters of the Nun Eshinni: Images of Pure Land Buddhism in Medieval Japan. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2004.

DuBois, Thomas D., Religion and the Making of Modern East Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

Fraleigh, Matthew, New Chronicles of Yanagibashi and Diary of a Journey to the West: Narushima Ryūoku Reports From Home and Abroad, translated with a critical introduction and afterword by Matthew Fraleigh, Ithaca, N.Y.: East Asia Program, Cornell University, 2010.

Fujii, James A., Text and the City: Essays on Japanese Modernity (Maeda Ai), edited with an introduction by James A. Fujii, Durham: Duke Univer-sity Press, 2004.

Futaba Kenkō 二葉憲香 and Fukushima Kanryū 福嶋寛隆, eds., Shimaji Mokurai Zenshū 島地黙雷全集, 5 v. + 1 suppl., Kyoto: Honganji Shuppan Kyōkai; Nihon Bukkyō Fukyūkai (hatsubai), 1973.

Hardacre, Helen, “The Formation of Secularity in Japan.” Paper presented at Secularism beyond the West, Onati, Spain (2011): 1–19, http://dash.har-vard.edu/handle/1/8843159 (accessed 6 March 2013).

Healy, Graham and Tsuzuki Chushichi, eds., The Iwakura Embassy: A true account of the Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary’s journey


of observation through the United States of America and Europe, com-piled by Kume Kunitake. Chiba, Japan: The Japan Documents, 2002.

Horiguchi Ryōichi 堀口良一, Reon do ronī no Nihon Bukkyō ni taisuru kanshin (I): Shimaji Mokurai to no deai wo chūshin ni shite レオン・ド・ロニーの日本仏教に対する関心（I）―島地黙雷との出会いを中心にして― Seiji keizai shi-gaku 342 (1994): 48–78.

_____, “Léon de Rosny et les premières missions bouddhiques Japonaises en Occident.” Cipango 4 (1995): 121–39.

_____, Chōshū shusshinsha no han kirisutokyō ron: Kido Kōin, Aoki Shūzō, Shimaji Mokurai no baai 長州出身者の反キリスト教論―木戸孝允・青木周蔵・島地黙雷の場合. Tezukayama daigaku kyōyō gakubu kiyō 46 (1996): 18–43.

Isomae Jun’ichi 磯前順一, Kindai Nihon no shūkyō gensetsu to sono keifu: shūkyō, kokka, shintō, 近代日本の宗教言説とその系譜―宗教・国家・神道. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2003.

Josephson, Jason Ānanda, The Invention of Religion in Japan. Chicago and Lon-don: The University of Chicago Press, 2012.

Kashiwahara Yūsen 柏原祐泉, ed., Ishinki no shinshū 維新期の真宗. Kyoto: Dōmeisha, 1975.

Ketelaar, James E., “Strategic Occidentalism: Meiji Buddhists at the World’s Parliament of Religions.” Buddhist-Christian Studies 11 (1991): 37–56.

_____, Of Heretics and martyrs in Meiji Japan: Buddhism and its persecution. Princeton, nj: Princeton University Press, 1993 (1990).

Koyama Satoko, 小山聡子, Shimaji Mokurai: Indo taiken to fukyō katsudō 島地黙雷―インド体験と布教活動. In Kindai Nihon no Bukkyōsha: Ajia taiken to shisō no hen’yō 近代日本の仏教者—アジア体験と思想の変容, ed. Ogawara Masamichi 小川原正道, 3–24. Tokyo: Keiō Gijuku Daigaku Shuppankai, 2010.

Meiji Bukkyō shisō shiryō shūsei henshū iinkai 明治仏教思想資料集成編集委員会, ed., Hōshi sōdan. Meiji Bukkyō shisō shiryōshūsei, bekkan 明治仏教思想資料集成・別巻. Kyoto: Dōhōsha Shuppan, 1983.

Sheehan, Jonathan, “Enlightenment, Religion, and the Enigma of Secularization: A review essay.” American Historical Review 108/4 (2003): 1061–80.

Suzuki Norihisa, “Nobuta Kishimoto and the Beginnings of the Scientific Study of Religion in Modern Japan,” translated by Tony Namkung, Contempo-rary Religions in Japan 11/3–4 (1970): 155–80.

Thelle, Notto R., Buddhism and Christianity in Japan: From conflict to dialogue, 1854–1899. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1987.

Tomita Hitoshi 富田仁, ed., Umi o koeta nihon jinmei jiten 海を越えた日本人名事典. Tokyo: Nichigai Asoshiētsu, Kinokuniya Shoten, 2005.

mick deneckere | 51

Tozawa Yukio 戸沢行夫, Meirokusha no hitobito 明六社の人びと. Tokyo: Tsukiji Shokan, 1991.

Tsunemitsu Kōnen 常光浩然, Meiji no Bukkyōsha 明治の仏教者, Vol.1 (上), Tokyo: Shunjūsha, 1968.

Zumoto M. and Takakusu J., “Bunyiu Nanjio: His Life and Work.” Pacific World Third Series, 6 (2004 [1928]): 119–37.

Modern Buddhism - Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture...2014/02/02 · Enlightenment thinkers...

Documents

Transcript of Modern Buddhism - Nanzan Institute for Religion and Culture...2014/02/02 · Enlightenment thinkers...