oftheherd1
Senior Master
Chris is correct in this aspect. It doesn't matter what you or I think it is a religious Shinto ritual.
What was the bow called before the Japanese established Shintoism as their animistic 'national' religion?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Chris is correct in this aspect. It doesn't matter what you or I think it is a religious Shinto ritual.
The ritual is religious. The practice of it need not be.
I am curious to know how you would respond if someone told you that they would pray to Allah for you, that he lift the blinders from your eyes so you will see that Islam is the only true path, and all others are false and lead to hell. They are only trying to help you, to save you from your own wrong decisions.
What was the bow called before the Japanese established Shintoism as their animistic 'national' religion?
That's an interesting question and I think I get what you mean. It's muddy, though, because you're describing actions which, independent of any religious connotation, would likely be reprehensible to most people. In other words, it's hard to get to the root of your question because the objection to the actions involved are much more universal than culture or religion.That is an interesting concept. In one sense it might be comfortable to believe it.
However, can I really separate the two so easily? Suppose I wanted to study some aspect of someone's religion, and one of the precepts of the aspect I wanted to study was that I was required to dance without clothing, before a large idol, and then afterwards engage in perverted acts with large animals.
Could I as a Christian, whose religion would strictly forbid doing that, do that, saying it was OK because I wasn't practicing the religion?
Shinto is first written about in the 8th century, state Shinto does not come into existence until the late 1800s
That's an interesting question and I think I get what you mean. It's muddy, though, because you're describing actions which, independent of any religious connotation, would likely be reprehensible to most people. In other words, it's hard to get to the root of your question because the objection to the actions involved are much more universal than culture or religion.
There are a couple of interesting questions here, though. The first is, if something is religious to one person, does that mean it is inherently religious? If I worship by going to a church every sunday, does that mean everyone who goes to church is necessarily religious? The answer could be yes, but as a practical matter, that's not always true. But, I don't think anyone would argue that whether you are religious or not, going to church is a religious act. But going to church is inherently a manifestation of Christian worship. It's like the bowing ritual Chris describes.
Is training in Karate or Aikido or Jujutsu a manifestation of Shinto worship? It appears that Chris is suggesting that Shintoism infuses everything, so that training Karate or Aikido or what have you, is inherently religious. Yes, I get that the bowing ritual is a Shinto ritual. No one disputes that. but the larger question is, can you learn Aikido and NOT practice Shintoism? Is it possible to decouple the practice of a Japanese martial art and the worship of a Japanese religion? Or does it become, as Chris suggests, an empty shell?
Is training in Karate or Aikido or Jujutsu a manifestation of Shinto worship? It appears that Chris is suggesting that Shintoism infuses everything, so that training Karate or Aikido or what have you, is inherently religious.
I think it was formalized about 800 years ago, but not 'state Shinto' if I remember correctly.
That was sort of my point. The Chinese have been doing it for a very long time, as well as the Koreans. No doubt many countries influenced willingly or unwillingly have been doing bows as part of their culture, and sometimes as part of some of their religions, for a very long time. There may have been times when culture influenced a religion, and times when religion was able to control culture. But the bow is not unique to Shinto, and I always thought it more of cultural practice that got incorporated into some religions.
If you feel you can participate in the ritual without actually doing the worshiping, then you could. However, it would probably feel wrong to you. That's a personal judgment you'd have to make for yourself.That is an interesting concept. In one sense it might be comfortable to believe it.
However, can I really separate the two so easily? Suppose I wanted to study some aspect of someone's religion, and one of the precepts of the aspect I wanted to study was that I was required to dance without clothing, before a large idol, and then afterwards engage in perverted acts with large animals.
Could I as a Christian, whose religion would strictly forbid doing that, do that, saying it was OK because I wasn't practicing the religion?
I understand that point. However, a religious item (including the kamidana) doesn't automatically retain its religious aspect when someone uses it. The Buddha I have on my desk downstairs is a reminder of some philosophical concepts. I have a couple of angels for my Christmas tree because they are pretty. I celebrate Christmas as a cultural time. Religious practice is only religious while it maintains a religious context for the individuals involved. If I reference the Christian texts, there's no prohibition (as most Christians interpret it) against having pictures, statues, etc. If one worships those, however, they become idols. Otherwise, they remain art.I have no horse in this race but I believe the point Chris is trying to make is he is not just talking about a bow, he is talking about a bow to a Kamiza which is the location of a small Shinto shrine called a kamidana, which is a miniature household altars provided to enshrine a Shinto kami.
I'm a CMA guy so it does not much matter to me, but that is how I have been reading this as it applies to Japanese Martial Arts who bow to a Kamiza
Religious rituals are only religious so long as someone intends them to be. Otherwise, every religion would have to be on constant guard that they didn't do any ritual the same as some other religion and accidentally practice that religion.
The Intent of an adherent or follower of a system of beliefs does not cause the ritual to be religious.
The same is true for a non-follower performing the identical action in the same setting, sans religious Intent.
It the fact/truth that it a religious rite is "A Priori".
So, you would hold that all current religious practices were religious from their first moment of use, and are always religious even when those doing them are unaware of the religion? What about practices that predate a given religion. Are they retroactively religious?The Intent of an adherent or follower of a system of beliefs does not cause the ritual to be religious.
The same is true for a non-follower performing the identical action in the same setting, sans religious Intent.
It the fact/truth that it a religious rite is "A Priori".
Totally agree that this seems to be one of the points Chris is trying to make, and it's a fair point. I am not sure that's the only point Chris is trying to make.I have no horse in this race but I believe the point Chris is trying to make is he is not just talking about a bow, he is talking about a bow to a Kamiza which is the location of a small Shinto shrine called a kamidana, which is a miniature household altars provided to enshrine a Shinto kami.
I'm a CMA guy so it does not much matter to me, but that is how I have been reading this as it applies to Japanese Martial Arts who bow to a Kamiza
Yes! I wish I could agree with this post twice and like it, too. As usual, you articulate clearly what I'm trying unsuccessfully to say myself.If you feel you can participate in the ritual without actually doing the worshiping, then you could. However, it would probably feel wrong to you. That's a personal judgment you'd have to make for yourself.
Here's my view. I'm areligious (I don't participate in any religion, nor subscribe to any group beliefs). I can make the sign of the cross without it being religious to me. It feels like an empty act - no real significance to me - but it doesn't mean I'm practicing Catholicism (where I grew up) if I do it. In fact, it's a matter of habit for me when I'm at a Catholic mass (with friends, at a wedding/funeral, etc.). I just do it. There's no meaning behind it for me. Now, in that case, I'm participating in the Catholic ritual in the context of a mass, so that's arguably still religious, though I'm not actually participating in the religion (unless one were to hold that mindless acts are somehow the religion, rather than the mindful purpose behind the acts). If, however, I make the sign of the cross absent the religious context (which I actually do - when a politician says something really stupid), it has no real religious significance. It's like the "bless you" someone mentioned earlier in the thread. I don't actually mean "may God bring blessings upon you so your soul won't leave your body" (the original intention of the act). I am just being polite, in a way that is appropriate for the culture.
The same is true when I bow. I bow to the training space when I enter and leave, as a show of respect for what I and my students do there. I bow to students and instructors (depending upon my role) at the beginning of classes. When in a dojo where they bow to the shrine, I bow to the shrine. I do it because it's what I've always done. In none of those contexts - in my experience - is there any religious intent. The origin of the ritual was religious, and it still is in some contexts, but not in any of the contexts I've been in.
This, admittedly, is a bit different for me than some people. Religion carries no religious significance to me, so the religious rituals are just rituals, and nothing sacred. I respect them because they are important to others. For those with religious views, they may find it unsettling to participate in rituals with foundations in other religions.
I think the issue here is that this becomes a philosophical discussion. It's largely a matter of viewpoint, so there will be no definitive answer (my issue with Chris' definitive stance). Religious rituals are only religious so long as someone intends them to be. Otherwise, every religion would have to be on constant guard that they didn't do any ritual the same as some other religion and accidentally practice that religion.
I understand that point. However, a religious item (including the kamidana) doesn't automatically retain its religious aspect when someone uses it. The Buddha I have on my desk downstairs is a reminder of some philosophical concepts. I have a couple of angels for my Christmas tree because they are pretty. I celebrate Christmas as a cultural time. Religious practice is only religious while it maintains a religious context for the individuals involved. If I reference the Christian texts, there's no prohibition (as most Christians interpret it) against having pictures, statues, etc. If one worships those, however, they become idols. Otherwise, they remain art.
I have no horse in this race but I believe the point Chris is trying to make is he is not just talking about a bow, he is talking about a bow to a Kamiza which is the location of a small Shinto shrine called a kamidana, which is a miniature household altars provided to enshrine a Shinto kami.
I'm a CMA guy so it does not much matter to me, but that is how I have been reading this as it applies to Japanese Martial Arts who bow to a Kamiza
A subtle point too... is that Karate wasnt Japanese, it was Ryukyu or Okinawan.
In essence it was not influenced by Shinto rituals until it was exported to mainland Japan.
So, you would hold that all current religious practices were religious from their first moment of use, and are always religious even when those doing them are unaware of the religion? What about practices that predate a given religion. Are they retroactively religious?