Weber in Japan

8/12/2019 Weber in Japan

1/22


2/22

208 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 20 /2 -3

the sociology of religion in Japan and to reflect on the characteristicsof various stages of Webers influence in recent history.

A study of the his tory of the adoption of Webers work should also

clarify various tendencies in the study of religion in Japan. Webers work prov ided the ma jo r paradig m for relig ious studies in postwarJapan, and thus the attitude or approach taken by religious studiesscholars is reflected in how they distinguish or distance their ownposition from that of Webers. We could even say that the trends inthe a pprais al of Weber prov ide a litmus test for the identity ofJapanese scholars of religion.

We w ould like to pr opos e div idin g the J apa ne s e adopt ion of W ebe rs w or k in to three stages (see Kag eyama 1976 pp. 1 39- 60): thepre- World War II period; the period from the e nd of Wor ld War IIthrough the 1960s; and the period from 1970 to the present. Thestages are divided according to changes in the attitude toward

Webers work by Japanese scholars. We should also ex plain our reasons for choos ing the scholars that

will be discussed below. Almost none of the scholars chosen are specialists in the study of Webers work: most are religious studies scholars,and a few are historians. Otsuka Hisao is the only scholar discussed in

this article who could be described as a Weber specialist. We havechosen to focus on the reception of Webers work from the perspective of religious studies, and thus have chosen to look at the work andperspectives of specialists in this field.

The Firs t Period ~ Pre- World War I I

It goes without saying that the Japanese adaptation of Max Webers work in the fie ld of the sociology of relig ion is only one part of the wider acceptance and inf luence of his work in J apan. Scholars such asM a r u y a ma Masao (1965) and U c h id a Y oshiaki (199 0) have pro v ided abroader picture of Webers influence, and we will rely on their conclusions to give a brief outline of his r ece ption in J apa n pr ior to

Wor ld War II.Economists were the first scholars to take up the study of Weber.

During the 1920s Weber was studied mostly for his work on economichistory and commercial history. Sociologists began to discuss Webers

ideas toward the end of the decade in conjunction with their interestin sociological methodology and concepts such as ideal types and Wertfreiheit (value freedom). These studies eventually formed the


3/22

H a y a s h i a n d Y a m a na k a M a x We b e r 's T h e or ie s o f R e l i g i o n i n J a p a n 2 09

main curre nt of Weber studies in Japan. A t the same time scholars ineconomics began to drift away from Weber. It was also at this timethat sociologists such as Shinmei Masamichi and Odaka

Kunio w orke d to translate We bers major works o n method-ologrv into Japanese. Soon after in the mid- 1930s interest in Webers

work spread to many areas besides sociology, leading to a variety ofnew developments.

In addition to the Japanese research on Webers economic theoriesand sociological methodology, there now appeared numerous studiesthat focused on his comparative East/West studies and his analyses ofthe relationship between ethics and economic processes. TheJapanese studies on Webers comparison of East and West mainlyattempted to clarify social structures in the East from the standpointof historical materialism, and in these studies Weber was usuallyreferred to critically. The research of Hani Goro 1 ^ and A nzaiFumio are most representative of this trend.

T he other import ant body o f research that which focused on economic ethics and ethos the o r y w a s largely inspired by Weber s The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Leadine scholars in tms area

were Naito Kanj i Otsuka Hisao and Deg uchi Y uzo. We will take a closer look at the work ot Otsuka Hisao in the

next section, but here it should be pointed out that the interest inethos theory contributed to the tendency to see Webers theories onreligion not as objects for analysis but as matters to be undersood sub

jectively as models for self- improvement. T his is an important po in t tounder st and when analy zing the re ception o f W eber s w ork after

Wor ld War II. Dur ing the war this tendency to subjectify also servedto justify the sig nificance of the work of indiv idual researchers.Maruyama (1965 p. 170) points out tha t the rise o f this subjecti-

fica tion le d to We ber s being res pected as a re ligious seeker- typescholar.How, then, within the framework of Webers overall body of work

was his thoug ht in the area of the sociology of relig ion received? T hemost impo r ta nt trends emer g ed after the mid- 1930s, a time thatMaruyama sees as marking the start of a new era. The concern with

Webers economic ethics and theories of Eastern society was directlyrelated to interest in his ideas on the sociology of religion. In anycase, economic ethics and ethos theory were the central themes

developed by Otsuka, the leading Weberian in Japan in his day. The Protestant Ethic became the basis for the sociology of religion, and alsobecame the central concern of Weberian research m general.


4/22

2 1 0 Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 20 /2 -3

The Second PeriodPost- World War I I through the 1960s

Webers theories were actively promoted immedia te ly after Wor ld War

II building on the foundation laid by the many prewar Weberianstudies. With the transformation in the postwar theoretical and socialenv ironme nt~ s y mbolized by the collapse o f Ger man idealistic philosophy and Bildung (kydydshugi that formed the dominant

ways of thin k ing in J apan before the war Weber and K ar l Marxbecame the most fervently and widely read theorists among intellectuals in J apan. However, the muddle in wmch the Marxists fo undthemselves with the criticism and rejection of Stalinism led to a rapiddecline in the prestige of Marx ism. In its place, Weber5s ideas as a

new paradigm for social science theory climbed to new heights ofpopularity (see Uchida 1990 pp. 1 19- 202). T his was the g olde n ageof We bers influence in Japan.

OTSUKA HISA O

Otsuka Hisao was a professor in the Department of Economics at theUniversity of Tokyo who specialized in modern European economichistory, especially that of Eng land. It is imposs ible to understand theadaptatio n a nd influence of Weber in postwar J apa n w ithout dis-cussine Ot suka5s work. His inf luence has been vast, and i t is not anex ag g er ation to say that ms wor k and that o f his disciples, hasdef ined the postwar direc tion o f Weber s studies in J apan. Otsuka wasmore than a mere popularizer and interpreter of Webe r s work inJapan his name and that or Max Weber are virtually inseparable.

Otsuka is best known for his deep interest in Webers The Protestant Etnic. Ots uka w ent so far as to say that Webers theory of asceticalProtestantism as a deciding factor in the formation of the spirit ofcapitalism has a basic correctness that is close to perfection 1969p. 145). This uncritical appraisal has almost the ring of a confessionof faith, and reveals Ots uka5s nig h regard for tms work. T he emphasisin J apan on The Protestant Ethic among Webers vast body of writings isindicative of Ots uka5s influence on the r eception o f Weber after the

war. Indeed, the bas ic direction of pos tw ar W eber ian studies waslargely set by Otsukas emphasis on this work.

What, the n, did Otsuka pick up from The Protestant Ethic, and whatsort of interpretation of Weber did he offer? T he central concept that

Otsuka drew from this work is the ethos theory. According to Uchida,the extraction of the theoretical and methodological meaning ofethos theory by Otsuka was one of his most important contributions


5/22


to the adaptation of Weber in Japan, and formed a creative contribution even from an international perspective (Uchida 1990, p.202). Let us, then, consider the significance of Otsukas emphasis on

Webers ethos theory.First, it should be pointe d out that Otsuka5s w holehearted pr omo

tion of Webers ethos theory, occurr ing amidst the calls for democr atization and moder nizat ion in postwar J apan, were instr umental indirecting W eber studies toward the problem of what Otsuka calledhuman types (ningen ruikei which pr ov ide d one of theprinciple ideological supports for the modernization drive. Becauseof tms, the problem of human types also became one of the centraltopics of concern even among discussions of Webers theories. In ashort essay entitled The Creation of Modern Human Types (Kindai- teki ningen ruikei no s / published soon af terthe war (19 46) Otsuka discussed how Webers ethos theory could beconnected with a theory of human types that would s upport J apa nsmodernization. Otsuka argues that the most important matter forthe recons truction o f Japanese democracy is the creation o f a umod-ern, democratic hum an type, and that in order for the Japanese people to forsre this type, it is necessary to accurately and concretelycomprehend the modern human type. After introducing Weberscharacterization of the modern Western/Occidental ethos as anethic of internal d imity and the Asian ethos as an ethos of ex ternaldignity, Otsuka added, the human subjectsthe modern masses

who create and sustain the democrat ic social order, must in turn besupporte d by an ethos that has a profound awareness of the individu-a ls inn e r values, an d that respects hum an being s as hum a n being s .551 hus O t s u k a emphas ized the impor tance o f c rea t ing a mode rn

Western ethos for the reconstr uction of postwar Japanese society (see

1969 p . 175)One of the reasons that Otsuka maintained his position as the foremost authority and interpreter of We ber s The Protestant Ethic was tha the himself set a rather inflexible direction to how Webers thought

was received in Japan. Otsuka wrote numerous reviews and interpretations of The Protestant Ethic, and one of his frequent themes was that

Webers critics misunderstood or misread Webers work. He arguedthat criticisms oi Weber were always off the mark and did nothing todamaee the correctness of his theories. Such slashing away at Webers

critics left Otsukas analysis as the only correct reading of Weber.Ih is elevated Webers theories to the level oi infa llible t ruth thatcould not be readily understood by ordinary people, and charged


6/22


scholars with the task of an endless pursuit to correctly understandthese theories. O f course this att itude did no t leave room for a freediscussion of Webers thought, and a critical transmission of Webers

work could not be cult ivated. Otsuka was adamant in teaching theorthodox interpretation of Webers work, and acted the role of theguardian of Weber against any and all criticism. The resulting tendency in Weber studies was to stress correctness in interpreting his workand to avoid misreading his theories. This tended to reduce

Weber ian studies to tex tual exegesis and to block off any innov ativehermeneutics.

W ha t influe nce, then, did Otsuk a5s use of Webers The Protestant Ethic as an implement for the creation of a modern human type haveon the development of religious studies in Japan? Webers theory isthat a certain religious ideal played a decisive role in the formation ofmodern society. Implied by this way of thinking is that one particularreligion has the honor of playing this decisive role, and that all otherreligions play the negative role of hindering this formation. This spe-cial rel ig ion was Protestantism, a relig ion for w hich most Japanesefeel very little affinity. This appraisal fostered the following developments.

First, Protestantism was idealized as the source of modernizationfor its conquest of magic P ]"an d in many ways was g lor ifi ed to anextent greater even than among Western followers of Protestantism.It is difficult to say how much Otsukas own faith as a Protestantinfluenced him in this area, but it could hardly have been irrelevantto the development of his thought.

conversely, Japanese religions and other religions became objectsof negative criticism, as purveyors of magic and thus as hindrances tomodernization. To Otsuka, magic was clearly something that mustbe overcome, for the reason that magic is an integral part of the traditionalist ethos, the opposite of the modern human type that Otsukaso yearned to have created. In an essay on Liberation from Magic(Majutsu kara no Otsuka wrote:

As we have seen, the creation of a modern human type is, ifseen from another perspective, the final step in the process of

world history that is the liberation from masric. It is the completion of this process. In this way, it is undoubtedly clear that

the l ibera t ion f rom magic its total realizationis anabsolute necessity in realizing the process of the reconstruction of democracy in present- day Japan. (Otsuka 1969 p. 235)


7/22

H a y a s h i a n d Y a m a na k a M a x We b e r 's T h e or ie s o f R e l i g i o n i n J a p a n 213

For Otsuka, the value of Western modernization was crystal clear,and he had no doubt that J apan s hould attempt to catch up to the

West. He was deeply concerne d, however, w ith ex actly how J apa n

should do this. In his view, the liberation from magic was the mostimmediat e issue in J a pa ns mode rniz atio n. For Otsuka, the termincluded factors such as the emotional aspect of human relations andtradition that were considered to be in opposition to the modernethos, but actually it is clear that by majutsu ]1Otsuka was referringto Japanese folk religion.

It is also important to note that liberation from magic in nosense means liberation from religion. For Otsuka, magic and religion were definitely not synonymous, and he clearly distinguishesbetween them. In fact, Otsuka took pains to point out that only a reli-eion that is liberated from magic (i.e., Protestantism) can be called atrue religion, and he accused religions with magical elements ofbeing like magicians that keep people bound by spells. Webersproposition to rationalize religion was introduced by Otsuka as partof his discussion of modern human types, and presented as a ^oalthat should be personally practiced as part of the effort to realizemodernization.

OGUCHIIICHI

Oguchi Iichi was professor in the Religious Studies Department ofthe University of Tokyo, and was a pioneer in the study of NewReligions in Japan from the perspective of the sociology of religion.He and Otsuka were about the same age, and for a while shared thespotlight as opinion leaders with regard to religious questions.Ogucni was not a Weberian in the sense of focusing his work on

Weber alone . He was, however, active from prewar times in introduc

ing Webers work to Japan, and invoked Webers work in the sociology of relig ion to clarify the characteristics o f Japanes e re ligion. Inthese ways he is an important scholar who must be taken into account

when discussing the influe nce of Weber in Japan.Oguchi, like Otsuka, repeatedly proclaimed the necessity of the

overcoming of magic. However, his tone of argument was much moreoptimistic and straightforward than that of Otsuka. For example,Oguchi had this to say about the relationship of religion and societyas the basic problematic for the sociology of religion:

When the relig ious outlook of the people is ex tremely low-level, religions that have adjusted to that levelas we can see


8/22


9/22

H a y a s h i a n d Y a m a na k a M a x We b e r 's T h e or ie s o f R e l i g i o n i n J a p a n 2 1 5

society that gave birth to the worship of authority among the massesand led to the support of the emperor system. He labelled Asian society in general as an enchanted garden { jujutsu no sono P f

O g u c h i 1955 p. 147). I t i s ce r ta in , however, tha t Oguch i wasinfluenced by Webers theories as a helpful way to clarify the nonmodernity of re ligion and society in Japan.

The Third Period 1970 to the present

The latter part of the 19b0s and the early 1970s were an importantturning point in the reception of Weber in Japan. The characteristicof this third period is that the study of Weber, the main current ofsocial studies in postwar J apa n, beg an to lose its practical s ienificance,and with it the views of the Weber- influenced opinion leaders of mo dernization. Even in the field or the sociology of religion, healthy criticism of Weber began in the latter part of the 1960s. There were anumber of factors behind this change, including specific social conditions in Japan as well as changes in the tides of intellectual opinionon a wor ldwide sca le . In order to proper ly unders tand thesignificance of this third stage, one must look beyond the field of

Weberian studies and g ain a wide r per spective on chang es in theintellectual world as a whole. We would like to focus briefly on twopoints.

The first change to note is the increasing" importance in academiccircles of the anti- modernism that developed from the criticism of theevolutionary view of history centered in Western Europe. Tms movement began to have a vast influence across the entire field of thehuman and social sciences. T he depth psychology o f J ung , the structural anthropology of i^evi-Strauss, and the religious studies of Eliadebegan to have a strong influence in J apa n in the latter part o f the1960s. It is not a coincidence that these academic movements becameinfluential at about the same time that people in the West beean totake note of the harmful effects and dangers of modern culture. Theawareness of and reflection on these problems by Westerners actuallybegan in the first half of the twentieth century, but it was not until thesecond hal f that it took on a broad academic scope encompass ingthe grow ing interest in non- Western cultures br oug ht about by the

increasing influence of studies in this area. The growing importanceof anthropology, mythology, religious studies, depth psycholoev, symbolism, and structuralism presupposes this kind of chanee in the


10/22


intellectual climate, and marks a radical departure from the formerlydominant studies based on rationalism and modernism. In the newintellectual climate, myths, ritual, symbols, and worldviews are not dis

missed as irrational or meaningless. It was realized that these mattershave a fundamental meaning in the life and regeneration of peopleand cultures, and that they are worthy objects of study. For people

who ex per ienced this change in intel lectual climate, the relig ious theories of Weber that speak of eliminating mag ic through rationaliza-tion began to seem useless and outmoded.

The second change to be noted concerns the various developments in J apa n itself. T hroug h rapid economic dev elopment, theJapanese people realized a great improvement in their standard of living. Pe ople beg an to see the politico- eco nomic situa tion andJapanese culture in generalin a more positive light. Earlier discussions o f moder nization always conde mned J apa n to lag behind the

West as a backward or undev eloped society, but this view was unde rcut by the coutrys successful industr ialization and accompany ine economic prosperity. A n awareness erew amone those in the academic

w orld tha t the dif ference betw een J apane se society and Weste rnmodels of modernization was one of type, not of beine ahead orbe hin d. As J apa n became aware of itself as a mem ber of theadvanced industr ial nations, the Japanese be^an to reappraise matters that had been negatively dismissed as relics of a feudal past, suchas the traditional family (ie) system and group- centered social dynamics. This occurred at about the same time as the changes discussedabove (see A o k i 1990).

We have briefly outline d some of the changes tha t have occur redin the human and social sciences since the latter half of the 1960s.Needless to say, these changes had a tremendous influence on the

study of religion. The transformation in intellectual climate broughtnew methodologies and tools of analysis for understanding and rediscovering the value of matters such as myths, symbols, and rituals.Religious studies, along with subjects such as anthropology and thestudy of symbols, gained new popularity. In this context the rationalistic character of Webers sociology of religion became an object of criticism. Japanese folk religion, which had been scorned and slapped

with the negativ e label maeic by pr opone nt s of mode rnism likeOtsuka and Oguchi, was reaDpraised and reexamined by many schol

ars of Japanese religion, resulting in the publication of numerous worthy studies.

The scholars who we will discuss below are not Weber specialists,


11/22

but are all researchers of folk religion in Japan with an awareness of Webers sociolog ical theor ies . Yanag awa K eiichi has responded sensitively to the recent changes in intellectual climate and, while critical

of We ber s ideas, a tte mpted to establish a study o f relig ion thatemphasizes symbols and ritual. Robert Bellah, Yasumaru Yoshio,

Y amamoto Shichihe i, and Shimazono Susumu all take the view that,rather than J apan being be hind Japan's modernization has succeeded in taking a different form than that of the West. They have allarg ued, f rom their various perspectives, that Japanese folk re ligionhas successfully provided an ethic and ethos that supports modernization. They represent an understanding and reception of Webers theories that has taken a different form than that of modernism.

YANAGAWA KEIICHI

As me nt io ne d above, a paradigm shift in the recent intellectual climate prompted a reappraisal of such subjects as myths, symbols, andrituals, which had been lumped together as magic by Weberianstudies. Ih is reappraisal led to the collapse o f modernism- centered

Weberian res earch as repres ented by Otsuka. T he fol low ing quotefrom Yanagawa Keiichi is a pertinent critique of the problematic

points of Webers sociology of religion from the perspective of religious studies:

The people of the [postwar] period who discussed religiousproblems in relation to contemporary society were peoplestrongly influenced by Max Weber. Their theories, therefore,

were made in reference to the relig ion of modern WesternEurope, in particular the ascetical Protestant form of Christianity. The methodological doubt that has arisen recently isthat perhaps the historical phenomenon of European Protestantism was too readily accepted as a norm. On the other side,the portray al of Japanese religions as merely maedcal was, asa categorization of empirical research, far too simplistic.(Yanagawa 1968 pp. 134)

1 he main points of Yanagawa^ criticism or Weberian studies are that,firs t it relies too much upon ascetic Protestantism as the nor m formode rn re ligion, and second that Japanese religions were despisedand dismissed as magic. Yanagawa, as a follower of Parsons struc

tural and functional sociology, began, at a turning point in his career,to carry out fieldwork on matsuri (festivals) and rituals. This was theconcrete result of his criticism of modernistic religious studies. By



12/22


incor pora ting the work o f Levi- Strauss, Eliade, and V ictor T urner, Y anagaw a strove to cons tr uct a framew or k for analy zing Japanese

matsuri. Not only did Yanagawa react swiftly to the paradigm shift in

the intellectual climate of the late 1960s he perceived that impor tantchanges were occurring in the world of religious movements. Hecommented as follows on these changes:

Religious studies have attempted to analyze the role of religion in contemporary society, but have been puzzled by anumber of new phenomena that have emerged in the so- calledadvanced industrial nations since the late 1960s, phenomenathat cannot be ex plained on the basis of ex isting theories.Contrary to the assumption that society was steadily and surelymoving in the direction of secularization cum rejection ofreligion, there appear to be signs of a return to religion.However, religious organizations that attempted to becomemodern, rational, and relevant to contemporary society andthat responded to the expectations of religious scholars, continue to stagnate and decline. Instead the greatest growth isbeing seen in conservative, doctrinaire, return-to- the- originsfundamentalism; strongly authoritarian movements; secretassociations; non- Chris tian traditions such as exotic Oriental-appearing mysticism; and occult movements. (Yanagawa 1975P. 48)

Yanagawa has no t written much directly concerning Weber , but hehas concluded that, as the model for earlier theories in the sociologyof re lig ion it was insufficient to ex plain the phe nom e na of thereturn to religion that has occurred since the latter part of the1960s. Yanagawa pointed out that in the face of actual contemporaryrelig ious movements , concepts such as rationalizationthe elimina

tion of m ag ic and secular ization concepts that formed the cruxof Webers sociology o f re lig ion~ w er e useless as analytical tools. As asubstitute for Webers sociology of religion, Yanagawa sought to construct new theories that would explain the phenomena oi the returnto religion. In place of worldly asceticism (sezokunai kin'yoku

and the work ethicthe characteristics of modern religionYanagawa emphasized the religious importance of personalexperience and the senses, and the necessity for play and festival.

Yanagawa, who relied more on Dur khe im than on Weber , ex erted

quite an influence on the next generation of scholars of religionthrough his research on ritual and stress on actual experience. Whilemodernists could perceive matsuri and rituals only as magic,


13/22


Y anagawa att empted to decipher the rela tions hip betw een sy mbolsand social groups. In response to the heightened popular interest inmatsuri, ritual, s ymbols, my sticism Eas tern r elig ions, a nd cosmolog y,

there has been an increase in the study of these subjects in thehuman and social sciences in general. Yanagaw a5s research markedan end to the era of research on relig ion in J apa n fr om the perspective of W ebe r s sociology o f relig ion, a nd prov ided a mode l forexploring the potential of religious studies to rehabilitate magicthrough theories of symbols and ritual.

Y A S UMA RU Y O S H IO A N D Y A M A M O T O S H IC H IH E I

We have briefly me nt ione d some social- science research tha t soug ht

to present the modernizat ion of J apan in a positive way, but there hasbeen very little such research done from the perspective of the sociology of religion. Modernization in Japan has put priority on economicdevelopment, as reflected in the countrys rapid economic growth,and as such it is generally assumed that the Japanese model of modernization had no relation to religious ideals or concepts. This idea,as well as the view among Japanese Weberian scholars that 'Japan isbe hind the W estwas demolis hed by A merican sociolog ist Robe rtBellah 5s Tokugawa Religion: The Values of Pre- Industrial Japan (1 957) apioneering application of Webers ethics thesis to Japan. Tokugawa Religion exposed the onesidedness of the presentation of Webers

work by Otsuka and his followers. J apanese Weberian scholars hadnot realized that there was a relieious ethic in Japan that was a matchfor the Protestant ethic. Nor had they thought of applying the thesisof The Protestant Ethic to J apanes e mode rniz atio n, as Bellah did.B ella hs research had a gre at influence on Japanese scholarshipcoming at a time of economic erowth and increasing self- confidence

among the Japanese, it stimulated a positive reappraisal of Japansmoder nizat ion. T he common as sumption or J apa ns backwardness bythe modernists, represented by Otsuka and his followers, was gradually perceived by more and more Japanese as being outmoded. Perhapsfor these reasons, the translation of Bellahs Tokugawa Religion (Nihon kindaika to shukyd rinri 1962) became a best sellerin Japan.

A nothe r impor tant w or k on the study o f po pul a r thoug ht (minshu shiso was the book on Japanese modernization and popular

thought by Y asumaru Yoshio (1974). While pra is ing Bellahs work forprobing the relationship between modernization and traditionalJapanese ideas, Yasumaru criticizes him for not grasping the forma


14/22


tive process of popular thought. Yasumaru^ research was historicaland took the basic standpoint of historical materialism, but it is notout of order to consider his work as an example of the influence of

Weber . T he reason is tha t Yas umaru proposed that the force for promoting moder nization in J apan was not change in the e conomicstructure or political order, but rather self- reform among the common people. According to Yasumaru, the formative process of modern society was one that brought about a reformation of the attitudetoward life-style among the common people and set off an immenseexplosion of human energy. Yasumaru invokes Otsuka Hisaos phrase,the creation of human types in portraying modern powers of production in human terms. He admitted that basically I adopt the position of Weber and Otsukas theory of asceticism (Yasumaru 1974p. 56), and developed a theory of popular morality (tsuzoku dotokuron

in the f or m o f an as ceticism that is specific to the processoi J apa ns moder nization. O n the one hand Yas umaru was extremelycritical of the view of modernist scholars such as Otsuka and Maru

yama Masao that popula r thoug ht is ir rationa l back ward and feu-dal (1974, p. 40), and stressed the necessity of carefully understandingthe process of self- formation and self- training that is part o f popular

morality. The object of this theory of popular morality took a widevariety of forms:

Ishida Baigans ci shingaku Ninomiy a S ontok usH6tokusha Ohara Y ug a k u later

Kokugaku the various pooular religions like Kurozumi-ky o Konk6- ky6 Tenri- ky6 Fujid6and Maruyama- kyo figures like the mydkdnin saints of the Shinshu Pure Land Buddhist tradition; numerous elderly farmers like Nakamura Naozo variouslocal leaders, both known and unknown; the wealthy farmersand common people of the nineteenth century who participated in the rural uprisings and movements for peoplesrights; and what ethnologists call kord (elders) and seken-

Az worldly- wise people). (Y asumaru 1974 p . 11)

The popular morality represented by such movements and individuals included ideals such as diligence, frugality, and harmony.

Y asumaru showed throug h the study of his torica l mater ials tha t these

virtues forme d an inne r r eligious e thic for the c ommon pe ople andthat this ethic served to support m oder nizat ion in J a p a n .1 hisresearch by Yasumaru, while firmly established on the standpoint of


15/22


demonstrable historical studies, can be taken as an ex ample of theinfluence of Webers ethos theory via the work of Otsuka, insofar as ittook up the issue of the inner asceticism and transformation among

the c ommon people that conformed to the needs of Japanese m odernization. It is also worthy of attention as an important contributionof histor ical s tudies that take up a sociologyof- religion- type themesuch as modernization and religion.

A nothe r no te w or thy study is the book on the spir it o f Japane se ca pitalism (Nihon shihonshugi no seishin) published in 1979 by the prolificsocial critic Ya mamoto s hichihei. Y amamoto e x amined figures fr omthe early Tokugawa period (eighteenth century) such as the Zenmonk Suzuki Shosan and the founder of shingaku, IshidaBaigan, introducing such ideas of theirs as the importance of honestyand fr ugality and the propriety of profit- gaining f ro m business activities. 1 he almost religious ferv or with w hich the c om mo n people tookon their aaily tasks after the time of these two figures developed intoa habitual diligence that served as an important factor in the post-M e i ji , tw e n tie t h- c e n tur y m o d e r n i z a t i o n o f J a p a n . Y a m a m o t oshichihei rejected the Eurocentric idea that the modernization ofJapan was modelled on that of Europe, and argued instead that itdeveloped on a Japanese foundation and that J apan had achieved amodernization that was not inferior to that of the West.

Y ama motos theories undoubtedly ref lect the current ex per ienceof life in Japan after the period of rapid economic growth. It is interesting, however, that this a r g um e n t t ha t it was the premoder n religious ideas of the common people that served as the causes for promoting capitalism and industrialization in moder n J apa n did notarise from among Japanese Weberian scholars but from outside o fthis group. This may reflect the rivalry in Japan between those whoperceived J apans moderniza tion in terms of J apan being behind the

West, and those who saw it in terms of J apan be ing on an equal foot

ing-

SHIMAZONO SUSUMU

Let us now consider the work of Shimazono Susumu, a professor ofreligious studies at the University of Tokyo who has ruminated on thequestion of modernization in Japan and considered the issue of religion and ethics in modernization with a problematic informed by

Weber. Shimazono specializes in the study of the New Re lig ions inJapan, not in Weber. However, a look at his work is helpful for understanding how Webers work has been understood in the field of the


16/22


sociology of religion in Japan from the 1970s on.In an essay on moder nization and popular r eligion in J apan (Nihon

no kindaika to minshu shukyd in S hima zo no

1992 pp. 135- 52) Shimazono gives a high aporaisal or We bers position in the sense that Weber presumed a religiously informed ethicalreform among the people as the background to modernization inthe West. Up to this point Shimazonos interest overlaps that ofOtsuka and his followers. However, in contrast to Otsuka and others

who severely criticize Japanese society as backward on the basis of Webers theories , shima zono attempts a reex amination of this the oretical framework itself. He points out that the people who have discussed J apa ns mode rniza tion fr om the perspective of W ebers theo

ries have been so attached to the standpoint of modernism that theyhave believed that the J apanese people la ng uor in an enc hanted garde n5,Mand have lost sieht oi the ex istence o f the curr ent o f popularethical reform 1992 p. 137). It is not possible to discuss Shima zonos theories in deta il here,1 but suffice it to say thatShimazono proposes that modernization in J apan contains a currentof popular ethical refor m that is completely differe nt from that of the

West. T his is reminiscent of Y asumarus theory of popular morality ( tsuzoku dotoku), but also points to the ex istence o f a vitalistic con-cept (seimeishugiteki shiso among the New Relieions.2S himazono appraises this vitalistic conce pt fr om a completely different perspective than Weber or Yasumaru, giving a positive and sanguineanalysis of so- called masica l elements. In other words, S himazono,

while inspir ed by Y asumaru5s theory of popular morality , points outthat in considering popular ethical reform and maeical elements asbeine at completely opposite poles Y asumaru and Weber share thesame position 1992 p. 141). Thus shimazono criticizes Yasumaru^position and clearly distances nims elf fr om Weber.

Insofar as Yasumaru takes a negative view of magic, he has notfreed himself of the position or the modernists. By positively admitting the value and significance of magic in contrast to WeberShimazo no has revised Y as umaru5s theory a nd prov ided a positiveperspective on the significance of the ethics of the New Religions

w ithin the modernization of J a pa n .1 he magical religiosity of the NewReligions and their teachingsseen only as obstacles to Japans mod

1Editors' note: for details on Shimazono Susumu's theories, see Ian Reader's review article in this issue, pp. 229- 48.

2 For details on the concept of a vitalistic conception of salvation, see T s u s h i m a et al.1979 .


17/22


ernization by scholars like Otsuka and Oguchi and regarded as thingsto be negated and overcomehave been positively appraised byshimaz ono as factors a iding moder nization in J apan. It should beadded that Shimazono does not consider magic itself as the elementof popular ethical ref orm that supported J a pa ns moder nization;rather, he perceives something that can act as the foundation formode rn and post- modern society 1992 p. 149) within the vitalisticconcept that encompasses the magical religiosity of the NewReligions.

A t the basis or his appraisal of the New Religions vitalistic conceptof salvation, one can perceive a basic discomfor t with the one- sided

presentation of the relationship between religion and modernizationfound in Webers The Protestant Ethic. Shimazono compares his ownposition with that of Weber as follows:

In contrast to Weber, who saw the significance of Calvinismfor the West in its teaching of the inner loneliness of the single individual and the elimination of magic from the worldand in its consequent search for liberation from the naturalbonds between person and person and between people andthe world, I find the significance of the vitalistic conceptthat is central to the New Religions of J apan in its attempt torestore the natural bonds between person and person andbetween people and the world. (Shimazono 1992 p. 150)

As can be seen clearly in this quote, Shimazono is not looking forsomething in the vitalistic concept among the New Religions thatcorresponds to Protestantism. Rather, he has gone beyond the perspective presented by Weber in The Protestant Ethic to consider a separate configuration for religion as the support of modernization.T hrough his ex amination of the New Religions5 vitalistic concepthe has developed a second model for the relationship between religion and modern popular ethical reform (1992, p. 150). The debateconce rning S hima zo nos pos ition has jus t beg un, but the least thatcan be said is that it is based on a critical view of the modernisticacceptance o f W ebers theories and, based on the awareness thatJ apa n5s moder niza tion is diffe rent yet on an equal footing w ith modernization in the West, attempts to reappraise the element of magic

in r elig ion and society. In this sense S hima zonos position presents animportant new perception of Weber based on the academic currentsthat have appeared since 1970.


18/22


Conclusions

In looking back at the history of Webers reception in Japan, we have

seen that there have been significant changes in the distance from W ebe rs theor ie s tha t scholars hav e chosen to pla ce themselves .Serious attention to Webers thought began mostly after World WarII. T he trends in the adapta tion o f W ebe r s theories r eflect thespecific social and cultura l characteristics o f J apa n, w hich hadachieved modernization after a late initial start. However, as one ofthe first countries outside of Europe to successfully incorporat e capitalism, Japans foremost aim was to catch up to the advanced countries of Europe both organiza tionally /instit utionally and spiritual-

ly. Thus Webers theory that a specific religious ethos underlay theachievement of modernization by Western societies was a theory thatJapanese scholars of religious studies had to keep in mind. Weberstheories were accepted as more than mer e social- science theoriesthey were taken as a practical model for achieving modernization.

Otsuka Hisaos interpretation of Weber played a major role in setting this direction of Weberian studies in Japan. One of the reasonsthat Otsuka^ influence was so widespread was that he preached

W ebers thoug ht as a k ind of gospel for J apans Wes ternization. T his was also the main reason for the distinctive pheno meno n in which Weber took on an almos t sacrosanct status, as a pr ophe t of moder n-ization. This sanctification of Webers thought led, even in the academic field of religious studies, to an extreme idealization of WesternProtestant religion, setting the stage for the condemnation of magicas an element that had to be rejected. In these developments we canperceive a certain degeneration in the understanding of Webers theories in Japan. Webers perspective is that in the background of thedevelopment of modernization in the West there was a process ofrationalization that included the elimination of or liberation frommagic. In J apan, this idea developed into the mandate that, in orderfor J apan to achieve mode rniza tion it must promote the eliminationof magic. It was on the basis of this interpretation that Weber wastransformed into a prophet who taught the overcoming of magicalreligiosity.

T he shift in intellectual paradigm from the late 1960s and into the1970s however, largely transformed the position that naively affirmed

modernization and its concomitant values. It became increasinglyclear that the Western model of modernization is not the only possible one and that moderniz ation itself entails a host of problems. T he


19/22


Eurocentric assumption underlying modernistic Weberian studiesthat J ap an is beh ind the We st g ra dually fa ded away, and theapproach to Weber changed to that of taking a relativizing look at

W ebe rs theor ie s f rom the perspectiv e o f the actual s it ua tio n ofJapanese society in the past and the present. This change gave rise totwo positions with regard to Weber: one that dismissed Webers theories of religion as irrelevant, and another that was critical of, yetsought to adapt, Webers theories. In this article, Yanagawa Keiichirepresents the first approach, and Yasumaru Yoshio, YamamotoShichihei, and Shimazono Susumu represent the second approach.

The scholars who took the first approach perceived Weber as anoutdated rationalist and chose a complete break with his ideas. Thisantipathy toward Weber, however, is not something that appeared forthe first time with the new intellec tual paradig m. A similar attitudecould be found among those who were outside the circle of Weberianstudies. The fact is, in Japan the study of Weber was for a long timethe monopoly of Otsuka Hisao and his followers, who regarded

Weber as an honored master and permitt ed no real criticism. In thesecircumstances it is not surprising that a feeling of rejection wouldgradually grow among scholars; this feeling rose to the surface withthe changes in intellectual paradigm that started in the late 1960sand became the womb for true criticism of Weber. This was particularly true in the field of religious studies, where the resurgence inreligious interest in the 1970s confronted scholars with the fact thatmany of Webers prophecies were off the mar k opening the doorfor a rejection o f Weber s theories.

The second approach, that of a critical adaptation of Webers theories, maintained the Weber/Otsuka perspective of giving seriousconsideration to the idea of ethosthe spiritual side of human rela

tions~ w hile ov erturning the negative appraisal of Japanese folk religion shared by scholars such as Otsuka and Oguchi. Those who tookthis second approach rejected the position that viewed WebersProtestant ethos as the only possible model and dismissed Japanesereligiosity as feudal and magical. While respecting the framework of

Webers theory, they soug ht to conscientiously ex amine the practiceand historical development of ethical ideas among the Japanese people, and thus clarify the relationship between Japans own modernization and the religious ethos that supported and sustained it. The

Protestant Ethic was not taken as a universal historical model for therelationship between modernization and r elig ion.

Finally on the basis of the above br ief ex amination of the history


20/22


of Webers reception in Japan, we would like to make a couple ofcomments on the possible direc tion o f J apanese Weberian studies inthe future. First, is it not time for an e mpirica l re ex amination of

Webers theories in terms of the his tory of relig ions in the West? T hatis to say, the thesis that was developed by Weber in The Protestant Ethic

was firs t unders tood in J apa n as his torically applicable to Japanesesociety, but without sufficient corroborative studies. The idea thatcapitalism is linked to Protestantism is often stated as a historical fact,an att i tude conne cted to the above- mentioned acceptance of The Protestant Ethic as a near- sacred text. K anai S hinji, in his recent bookon Webers religious ethics, points out that in The Protestant Ethic

Weber hermeneutically clar ifies the affinity between Protestant ethicsand the spirit of capitalism, but that he does not show corroboratingevidence o f a histor ical cause- and- effect relationship between the two(1991 pp. 95- 115 ). Kanai claims that the perceiv ed relations hipbetween them is no more than a hermeneutical fabrication basedon an inordinate exaggeration of only one aspect of the historicalreality. K anai5s point is an impor tant one, because the world depictedin The Protestant Ethic is usually under s tood in J apa n to be an accurateportrayal of the historical reality of European Protestantism. Theunconscious acceptance of W ebe rs fr amew ork as self- evident led tomajor misunderstandings, such as thinking only in terms of a stereotypic schematization in which Puritanism acted as the bearer of rationalization and modernization.

A ctually there have been no t a few attempts to cr iticize Webersthesis from an empirical perspective (see M a c f a r l a n e 1987 pp. 195-200). In J apan, however, this approach rarely leads to a reex amination of the history of religion in the West, including the Protestantismthat forms the basis of Webers theory, but tends instead to be dis

missed as a misreading or misunderstanding of Weber, thus reducingit ag ain to a proble m of the exegesis of Weber s work. A nothe r po in t is the question of the understa nding of relig ion by

Weber himself . We have discussed the dis tortions in the Japaneseacceptance of Webers theories, but in addition it cannot be deniedthat, from the perspective of contemporary scholars of religion, thereare a number of problems with Webers ideas about religion. Weber,influenced by the cultural Protestantism of his time, accepted rationalization and the ethical progress of relig ion as self- evident presup

positions. The appraisal of Protestantism as the pinnacle of ethicaldevelopment is based on these assumptions. According to Weber,only a total and complete ethical practice born from an integrated


21/22

meaning system based on a religious ideal is capable of breaking awayfrom the enchanted garden and promoting rationalization. Wemust point out, however, that this analysis is lacking in that it ignores

aspects such as symbols and rituals. Contemporary religious studieshave shown that it is impossible to make a clear and definitive distinction between religion and magic, and it is also widely recognized thatsymbols and rituals are crucial structural elements in religious phenomena. It must thus be concluded that Webers understanding ofreligion contains a basic flaw. In any case, the recent changes inapproach to magical- religious phe nom ena by Japanese scholars ofreligion reveal a large gap between their theories of religion andthose of Webersand this indicates one aspect of the attitude towardrelig ious questions taken by scholars of r elig ion in J apa n today.

REFERENCES

A mano K eit aro1965 Nihon Makk usu Ueba shoshi I II.

Kansai Daimku Keizai Ronshu 14/6 16/1.1976 Makkusu Ueba bunke n m o k ur o k u

(Nihon- hen 1971- 1975). Chi no kokogaku sotokushu Makkusu Ueba to sono jid a i

8-9: 287-383. A ok i T amots u

1990 Nihon b u nk a ro n n o h e n . Tokyo: ChuoKoronsha.

Bel l a h , Robert N.1957 Tokugawa Religion. Boston: The Free Press.

1962 Nihon kindaika to shukyd rinri . Tokyo:Miraisha.Kageyama Hiros hi

1976 Sengo seishin to Ueba . Chi no kokogaku sotokushu Makkusu Ueba to sono jidai 8-9: 139-60.

Kanai Shinji1991 Ueba no shukyd riron . Tokyo: Tokyo Daigaku

Shuppankai.K urihara T oshie and Nomura Kazuo

1989 M akkusu Ueba shukyd-shaka igak u kankei bunken mokuroku . Tokyo: Bunka Shobo

Hakubunsha.



22/22


Macfarlane, Alan1987 The Origins of English Individualism. Oxford: Blackwell.

Maruyama Masao

1965 Se nzen ni oke ru N ihon no Ueba kenky u . In Makkusu Ueba kenkyu

Otsuka Hisao, ed. 151- 185. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.Oguchi Iichi

1953 Nihon shukyd no shakaiteki seikaku . Tokyo:ToKyo Daigaku ShuDpanKai.

1955 Shukyd-shakaigaku . Tokyo: T okyo Daigaku Shuppankai.

Otsuka Hisao

1969 Otsuka Hisao chosakushu v o l.8. Tokyo: Iwanamishoten.

1986 Otsuka Hisao chosakushu, v o l.12. Tokyo: Iwanami noten.Shimazono Susumu

1992 Gendai kyusai shukydron . Tokyo: Seikyusha.T s u s h i m a Michihito, N ish iya ma Shigeru, Sh ima z o n o Susumu, and

Sh ir a miz u Hiroko1979 T he vitatistic concept of salvation in Japanese New Religions.

Japanese Journal of Religious Studies 6/1- 2: 139-161.Uc hida Yoshiaki

1990 Ueba juyo to bunka no topologi .Tokyo: Riburopoto.

Y amamoto Shichihei1979 Nihon shihonshugi no seishin . Toky o:

Kobunsha. Y anag aw a Keiichi

1968 Nihon ni oke ru u huky o to kindaika- ron no mondai. In Nihon no kindaika no shomondai

2 Bunkakei Gakkai R e ng o ,eds., 132-36.

1975 Matsuri no shukyoeraku I . Kikan gendai shukyd 1-2: 48-61.

1979 Shiso no kotoba . 665: 90-91. Yas umaru Y oshio

1974 Nihon no kindaika to minshu rinri . Tokyo: Aoki Snoten.

Documents

Weber in Japan