The Japanese word for ‘religion’, shkyÿ, was also coined at the beginning
of the era as a translation of the Western term. This does not mean that
there were neither precursors of shkyÿgakunor concepts similar to ‘religion’
before Japan became fully exposed to Western culture. Examples of such
precursors are Kkai (774–835), Fucan Fabian (1583–1607), and Nakamoto
Tominaga (1715–1746). They are known as having launched the earliest
enterprises of comparative religion when other thinkers were occupied with
sectarian studies.^6
The founder of the Shingon Buddhist sect, Kkai, wrote Sangÿshiiki (A
Treatise on Three Teachings) in 797, in which he insightfully compared and
contrasted the teachings of Confucianism, Daoism and Buddhism, though from
a normative perspective of Buddhism. His work is evidence that the teachings
of what would later be called ‘religions’ were grouped together, long before
the import of the Western concept ‘religion’.^7
Fabian was a Japanese Jesuit who wrote Myÿtai Mondÿ(Dialogue between
two nuns) in 1605, reputed to be the first Japanese work of Christian apologetic
that refuted the teachings of Buddhism, Confucianism and Shintÿ. He later
apostatized and then authored the entirely anti-Christian Ha Deus(Deus
destroyed) in 1620 (1973).
While both Kkai and Fabian were thus apologetic, it was Tominaga who
developed not only a comparative but also a critical, that is, a detached or
objective, approach to religions. In Emerging from Meditation (1745/
1990), he disclosed the historically conditioned nature of Buddhist texts. His
approach therefore came close to the higher criticism of the Bible, without
Western influences.^8 His rationalist thinking derived from Confucian education,
which was being promoted by the Tokugawa government (1603–1868).
However, rather than being defensive of Confucianism, he compared it with
Buddhism, Daoism and Shintÿfrom a pluralistic viewpoint in Writings of an
Old Man. He eventually placed a higher ideal, makotono michi(the way of
living in sincerity), above the existing individual religions (Wakimoto 1983:
10–13; Suzuki 1979: 6–7; Tamaru 1994: 757).
By the time of Tominaga, it had become a common practice among Japanese
scholars to consider Shintÿ, Buddhism, Daoism, and Confucianism as parallel
with one another.^9 However, there was no single fixed word like the later
shkyÿ(religion) to place them in a single category. Sometimes people called
them kyÿ(teaching), in order to emphasize their doctrinal aspect; at other times
they used a word with more practical connotations, dÿ(dao, way) (Shimazono
2004).
This terminological ambiguity indicates that a generic category of religion
was not yet needed. Japanese scholars in those days did not ask the question
that was central to the Enlightenment and gave rise to modern religious studies
in the West: What is the essence of religion? Nor was there any further194
SATOKO FUJIWARA