This post will explore the religious foundations of China and Japan and how their indigenous religions were changed due to the introduction of other teachings. I have chosen to focus on these two countries as they both follow the same pattern of changing religious ethos to suit their needs. China and Japan are two very unique countries, as they were both heavily influenced by Buddhism, which was relied on by governments as a form of social, political, and religious control. As a result, the previous teaching, such as Shinto and Daoism, was compromised.
China, has a long and diverse history that had three main religions and schools of thought influencing its history greatly, these were; Buddhism, Confucianism, and Daoism. To understand China’s religious landscape, the teachings cannot be isolated as there is a significant overlap. According to Thomas David DuBois in his Book Religion and the modern making of East Asia “three teachings,” as they are called, are inseparable parts of a single system of beliefs, morals, and rituals that pervades Chinese life.[1]” This is true because when looking at Chinese history from an intellectual view, there have been times when one teaching was heavily favored over the others. However, there were still significant themes of the remaining two present. Japan, on the other hand, had a very distinct national religion called Shinto, Shinto was the basis of Japanese everyday life and revolved around Kami. Kami is the worshipping of deities that witnessed the birth of Japan. Shinto has a long and complex history in Japan due to the influence of Buddhism and the loss of the Emperor’s role as political head to merely a symbolic figurehead during Sakoku and the shogunate’s preference of Buddhism. While both countries are mostly different from each other, they share similarities and differences. China was the central influence in East Asia due to its dynasties and geographical location. Also, China was situated near trade routes such as the silk roads. As a result, there was an intermingling of different teachings that bled into Chinese life. This allowed Chinese traditions and religions to be changed. While on the other hand Japan is an archipelago and most of its outside influence was passed mainly through Korea. The intermingling of Japan’s original Shinto religion with other teachings is more prominent than that of China. It is interesting to note that when Japan rose as China’s successor of being the dominant power in East Asia, instead of making use of other teachings, they fell back to their natural Shinto religion and nationalized it. Just by looking at an overview of both countries’ religious landscape, it is clear China had a complex landscape due to its geographical location and the variety of teachings available. In Contrast, Japan had a more mainstream landscape where the influence of other teachings was more gradual and distinct from their traditional religion; therefore, the religious landscape of Japan is less complex than that of China.
Shinto and Daoism were unique to Japan and China, respectively; it is these two religions that suffered the most when Confucianism and Buddhism made an appearance and altered the landscape of the two countries. Daoism was the basis of the Chinese way of life and contributed to it significantly. However, the spread of Buddhism affected the Daoist foothold in China greatly; this is due to their similar shared values. According to Tang Yijie, Hegel in his Lectures on the History of Philosophy, states “at the same time, Daoism is indigenous to China; it owes much of its development to the spread of Buddhism[2].” Here Hegel is arguing that while Daoism is indigenous to China, its foundation and growth is due to Buddhism. This is where overlapping becomes prominent, and it then becomes difficult to ascertain the differences between the two in a broad conceptual way. While there are various branches of Buddhism, that separate the two, intermingling has already occurred which means that the religious landscape is no longer able to distinguish Daoist values and Buddhist values there is now a hybrid form of the two. When comparing this to Japan, Shinto is the equivalent to Daoism as it is the basis of the Japanese way of life. However, the intermingling of other teachings such as Buddhism and Confucianism, are more easily detected and separated. This was made clear when Emperor Meiji chooses to promote a more traditional Shinto and separate it from Confucianism and Buddhism. However, during the isolation of Japan, Buddhism was heavily used by the Shogunate, in DuBois Chapter about Japan in the sixteenth century he states “Buddhism was integral to the state itself. Like Confucian morality in China, Buddhism became an important foundation of the evolving imperial institution. Other ideas, such as divine ancestry and ritual purity, were not forgotten, but integrated into a cosmology of kingship that placed Buddhism on an equal level,[3].” This once again shows how an indigenous religion is disposed of in favor of a new religion; DuBois’s mention that Shinto values were not entirely forgotten is the point that draws attention. Unlike Daoism in China, Shinto still managed to retain a degree of influence within the Japanese political and religious system. It clear that religion in Japan and China very much evolved and changed with the introduction of new teachings. The similarities that can be drawn between Daoism and Shinto are that they were very much put aside in favor of new teachings and their importance was severely decreased. On the other hand, the differences are far more prominent, unlike Daoism, Shinto managed to retain some degree of influence during the period of isolation and was brought back during the Meiji era. In contrast, Daoism’s impact was strongly affected by its close link to Buddhism, which meant it never reached the same resurgence that Shinto did.
In Conclusion, it is essential to note that the original religions of Japan and China that supported their mythic background was severely affected by the new teachings. However, it is Shinto’s individuality and dissimilarity to Buddhism and Confucianism that allowed it to remain unchanged and reappear very much intact during the Meiji era.
[1] Thomas David DuBois, The Making of Modern East Asia, (Cambridge University: 2012), p. 15.
[2] Tang Yijie, I-chieh T’ang, Confucianism, Buddhism, Daoism, Christianity, and Chinese Culture, (Peking, 1991), p.77.
[3] Dubois, The Making of Modern East Asia ,p 58,