In Zen at War Brian Victoria attacks the post-war revisionist version of the role of Religion in modern Japan by examining the relationship between Zen and War in the modern period, with particular reference to Zen’s endorsement of Japanese warfare and the Japanese Imperial project. Although at times problematic, its role in exposing the intellectual dishonesty of Japanese Buddhists and their collusion with the Japanese War effort is significant, as Victoria remarks ‘the book you are about to read is simply not a book about religious history but also one that has made history’[1]. However, there are a number of issues within Victoria’s work that could lead to a misunderstanding of the extent to which Zen was responsible for Japanese atrocities during the war. As Victoria overtly focuses on the Buddhist religious justifications for the Japanese imperial vision he runs the risk of inducing readers into believing that the explanations for the political atrocities of the Japanese can be found purely within their religious doctrines. He also risks inducing readers into believing that only Buddhism should be held responsible for its involvement in the Japanese war effort. Although Victoria mentions shinto and confucianism within his works he does not explore this fully.
In reality state Shinto, played an equally damning role in the Japanese war effort and imperial project through its prominence within the Kominka movement, repressing traditional religions within Taiwan and Korea by replacing shrines and temples[2]. The Kominka movement and Shinto thus permeated colonies through the importance of youth groups in which youths were expected to perform the Misogi[3]. The State Shinto saw the religion utilised as ‘a major force for mobilizing imperial loyalties on behalf of nation building’[4]. Although State Shinto was technically ended with the end of World war II its importance in the Imperial project of Japan should not be understated.
Victoria’s interpretative strategy thus runs the risk that readers will ignore the normality of Imperialist violence within the development of the Japanese Modern state irrespective of the involvement of Buddhism and the involvement of other religions including Shinto. Although Victoria’s work could largely be considered a polemical attack on Buddhist denial rather than one with a work with historical intentions; there is still a possibility that readers will not consider the broader participation of religions in the imperial project alongside Buddhism.
[1] Brian Victoria, Zen at War, (2nd Edition) (Oxford, 2006), pxi.
[2] Jo-Ying Chu, ‘Japan’s colonial policies – from national assimilation to the Kominka Movement: a comparative study of primary education in Taiwan and Korea (1937–1945)’ in International Jounral of Historical Education, Vol, 53, 2017, 4.
[3] Sayaka, Chatani, ‘Between “Rural Youth” and Empire: Social and Emotional Dynamics of Youth Mobilization in the Countryside of Colonial Taiwan under Japan’s Total War’ in The American Historical Review, Volume 122, Issue 2, 1 April 2017, p381.
[4] Wilbur M. Fridell, “A Fresh Look at State Shintō”, Journal of the American Academy of Religion 44.3 (1976), p548.