Conclusions: Some Problems of Classification
In the foregoing the focus has been on indigenous Japanese new movements and it has been implicit throughout that any attempt to classify these religions will encounter immense problems.
It is extremely difficult, for example, to construct a typology of Japanese new religions on the basis of their content since many of them have drawn on a variety of religious beliefs and practices, and this in turn creates problems for those who might attempt a classification by relating them directly to either of the two major Japanese religious traditions, Shintoism and Buddhism. For example, Tenshokotaijingukyo, the Teaching of the Almighty God of the Universe, founded by Kitamura Sayo (1900-67), not only has a Shinto name and uses many Shinto terms and expressions but has also adopted a number of Buddhist and Christian beliefs and practices.Moreover, the historian will want to ask whether it makes any sense at all to apply the term ‘new’ to many of the religions that have been discussed here. These religions have been referred to as ‘Children of the Emperor system’ and classified according to the Meiji (1868-1912), Taisho (1912-26) and Showa (from 1926) periods, withan additional historical period, the post-Second World War era, incorporated into this chronological framework. The post-Second World War period has witnessed what amounts to a veritable growth industry in new religions, many of which have a distinctively different character and orientation from the older, pre-Second World War and nineteenth-century movements, and fulfil somewhat different functions.
It is important, none the less, not to lose sight of the fact that although much has changed in the ‘new religions’ field during the past century and more many of the new movements form part of an ongoing historical process. In other words, we should not expect to find outbreaks of entirely ‘new’ new religions that are peculiar to and only intelligible in the context of one or other of these historical periods.
If this is borne in mind then the emergence of Japanese new religions can be linked with political and economic developments during the Meiji, Taisho and Showa eras, that is from 1868 onwards. They were also, in part, a reaction to the rigid formalism and increasing irrelevance particularly during the nineteenth century and the first quarter of this century of the two mainstreamjapanese religions, Shintoism and Buddhism, and a response to rapid post-Second World War industrial development, urbanisation and modernisation. And working within this historical framework the social historian of religion may well discover that what is ‘new’ is not to be found in the content of these movements but in the fact of their emergence as socio-religious organisations whose primary function has been the reworking and revitalisation of traditional religious beliefs and rituals in order to make them directly relevant to daily life in a society in transition.Given the difficulties of classification on the basis of content, derivation, structure and historical context, perhaps the most satisfactory approach to the problem is that devised by the sociologist Bryan Wilson, who has constructed a typology of new religions based on their response to the world. According to Wilson, Japanese new religions, while they manifest a pronounced thaumaturgical dimension, especially in their early years, as they develop come to approximate more to the ‘manipulation- ist’ type of sect than to the ‘thaumaturgical’ type. By this Wilson means that their main concern becomes the provision of a modern, relevant faith for a society whose traditional belief systems are not easily accommodated to the new conditions created by the rapid process of industrialisation and urbanisation.
However, the fact that there is nothing necessarily fixed or determined about the doctrines, rituals, symbols and orientation of some of these new religions must in itself mean that even the most useful of typologies is in need of frequent refinement if it is to be of wide and general application.
Sekaikyuseikyo, the Church of World Messianity, founded by Mokichi Okada (1882-1955) is but one of a number of examples ofajapanese new religion whose teachings, ritual and public official image has changed significantly since its emergence in 1935. This movement which began as a healing cult, and healing is still one of its central concerns, has called itself by several different names, indicating a shift at this public level from a Buddhist to Christian orientation, while at the same time making far greater use than was previously the case of Shinto ritual and of art as the medium for transmitting its message. Evidently such twists and turns and changes of emphases and orientation can greatly reduce the fife-span and impose strict limits on the usefulness of any typology.However, when considered within the chronological framework outlined above it would seem to be the case that most if not all of the modem Japanese new religions display the principal characteristic of revitalisation or renewal movements: they rework and reshape traditional beliefs, rituals and symbols in such a way as to make them relevant to the cultural, social and spiritual needs and aspirations of the present.
Further Reading
Blacker, C. The Catalpa Bow. A Study of Shamanistic Practices in Japan (George Allen & Unwin, London, 1975)
Byron Earhart, H. The New Religions of Japan. A Bibliography of Western Language Materials, 2nd edn (University of Michigan Center for Japanese Studies, Ann Arbor, 1983)
Kitagawa, J.M. Religion in Japanese History (Columbia University Press, New York, 1966)
Thomsen, H. The New Religions of Japan (Charles E. Tuttle Company, Vermont, 1963). (For a critique of this book and Western approaches to new refigions in general see RJ. Zwi Werblowsky’s review article in the Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion (JSSR), V, no. 2 (Spring 1966))
Wilson, B.R. Religious Sects. A Sociological Study (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 1970)