Establishing the Ise Jingū System
From Sacred Shrine to a Hub of Money and Supplies
Yesterday’s article addressed the early Meiji-era transformation of Shinto during Japan’s modernization, aiming to show the significant lack of evidence behind the commonly held view that “State Shinto” (国家神道) was Japan’s national religion during World War II. An essential point to clarify here is that this so-called State Shinto was not a religion worshipped universally by all Japanese people, but rather represented a new stage of Shintoism under bureaucratic governmental control. The most prominent target of this reform was the Ise Jingū in Mie Prefecture, where ancient clans that had maintained hereditary rights were ousted and replaced by government-appointed bureaucrats. At that time, the authority of the “Outer Shrine” (外宮, Gekū), dedicated to Toyouke (豊受大神), the deity of agriculture and abundant harvests who had dominated Ise Jingū since medieval times, was diminished in favor of politically elevating the “Inner Shrine” (内宮, Naikū), dedicated to Amaterasu (天照大御神), the ancestral deity of the imperial family. Consequently, Shinto lost much of its traditional roots and underwent significant transformation driven by modern political influences.
Under this modern state apparatus, local shrines across Japan became strictly managed by the central government, rapidly losing their indigenous faith traditions cultivated over many generations. Led by bureaucrats unfamiliar with local customs or Shinto beliefs, this transition resulted in the widespread national deprivation of traditional faith practices. Although Ise Jingū was the primary target, once reforms there proved effective, the government systematically replicated similar methods to dismantle faith systems at major shrines nationwide. A crucial example is the May 1871 decree, mentioned previously, abolishing hereditary priesthoods, compelling all shrines into a centralized administrative hierarchy.
For instance, at Keta Taisha Shrine, the most important shrine in present-day Ishikawa Prefecture (formerly Noto Province), the Sakurai family, who had served as priests for over 60 generations, were dismissed and forced to leave their ancestral home. Similarly, at Suwa Taisha Shrine in modern Nagano Prefecture (formerly Shinano Province), the hereditary succession of the chief priest (Ōhōri, 大祝) was abolished. These reforms severely impacted shrine families, abruptly ending centuries-old hereditary positions. Nevertheless, the Meiji government mitigated resistance by allocating state funds to prestigious shrines, elevating their status, and incorporating them into the national ritual framework. Traditionally, priests had intimate knowledge of local customs and deeply rooted relationships with community worshippers. However, under the new system, bureaucrats with shallow, textbook-based knowledge were frequently appointed, causing many shrines to shift from centers of traditional local faith into quasi-governmental administrative institutions. This transition underpins the fundamental misunderstanding often labeled “State Shinto,” a concept that, in reality, did not exist as commonly perceived.
A particularly problematic aspect of this reform was the institutionalized system mandating shrines nationwide to make donations and offerings directly to Ise Jingū, the apex of the centralized governance system. To clarify what might be difficult to envision succinctly, Ise Jingū effectively functioned as a national collection and redistribution center, enriching only certain privileged groups through political maneuvers unrelated to genuine faith. This practice has caused numerous ongoing problems. In the Edo period, Ise Jingū utilized itinerant missionary figures known as Onshi (御師) to distribute shrine amulets nationwide. However, the Meiji government abolished this perceived inefficient system, introducing instead a centralized system managed directly by the Jingū Shichō (神宮司庁), a shrine department, responsible for producing and distributing official Ise Jingū talismans known as Jingū Taima (神宮大麻). By 1872, these talismans were already systematically distributed through prefectural networks into households nationwide, transforming Ise Jingū from a regional shrine into a centralized power hub receiving nationwide reverence, money, and offerings.
Critically, this policy facilitated wartime emperor worship in Japan. Before this, during the Edo period, the Tokugawa shogunate had maintained a largely decentralized system heavily dependent on autonomous domains and localized societies, where communities rarely worshipped deities unrelated to their local environment—such as Amaterasu of distant Ise. However, the new centralized system gradually normalized household veneration of Amaterasu, indirectly preparing the ground for imperial worship. While venerating Amaterasu does not automatically equate to emperor worship, the Meiji government actively connected these two concepts, employing multifaceted policies—particularly educational reforms—to cultivate national identity and systematically institutionalize emperor reverence. Essentially, by using the Inner Shrine of Ise as a façade, the government established a massive centralizing mechanism to consolidate wealth and facilitate societal control, dramatically altering Japanese culture.
Moreover, by expelling clans such as the Arakida (荒木田氏) and Watarai (度会氏) from Ise Jingū, the imperial rituals conducted there were removed from hereditary clan control, placed under direct national oversight, and used to lay the groundwork for emperor worship. Consequently, shrine rituals became bureaucratic and superficial. Although many still view these early Meiji shrine reforms as laying the foundation for what became known as “State Shinto,” significant problems surround this interpretation. It is commonly argued that the Meiji government positioned Shinto at the center of a policy to create a state religion, promulgating documents such as the Imperial Rescript on Education (教育勅語) to cultivate emperor worship—a monotheistic, idol-worshipping belief system often termed “Arahitogami Shinkō / Living God worship” (現人神信仰), accused of provoking wartime aggression and religious oppression. However, critics argue such interpretations are the result of careless use of the term “State Shinto,” lacking factual and logical coherence. One leading critic was Shinto thinker Ashizu Uzuhiko (葦津珍彦, 1909–1992).
After World War II, Ashizu argued that the conventional narrative severely distorted historical reality, maintaining there was neither evidence nor fact supporting universal Japanese worship of State Shinto—a claim consistent with his wartime experiences. Through numerous publications, Ashizu tirelessly sought to dispel misconceptions surrounding State Shinto, advocating for calm and accurate historical assessments. His central thesis introduced the concept of “State Shinto in the narrow sense”, emphasizing that even during wartime, when State Shinto was supposedly at its height, Japanese people continued practicing multiple faiths including Buddhism, Confucianism, Christianity, and local folk religions. Ashizu particularly criticized the mistaken equivalence of Shrine Shinto (神社神道) with State Shinto, arguing instead that complex interactions among Buddhism, Confucianism, Christianity, and folk religions jointly shaped modern imperial ideology. Thus, describing Japan’s entire religious policy under a single, nonexistent “State Shinto” concept is misleading yet continues to persist, hindering accurate historical understanding.
Certainly, early Meiji shrine reforms aimed to politically transform Shinto beyond religious frameworks into state rituals, later intersecting with debates on religious freedom and secularization policies. Following measures such as separating religious preaching from shrine duties and abolishing the Ministry of Religious Education (教部省), the relationship between state and Shinto was redefined, culminating in 1900 with the establishment of the Shrine Bureau (神社局) under the Home Ministry, creating a centralized, secular shrine administration. The resulting centralized shrine structure (often labeled as State Shinto) laid essential moral and ceremonial foundations in Japan. I call this phenomenon the “Ise Jingū System,” which astonishingly remains intact post-war, controlling approximately 95% of Japan’s shrines. Readers might wonder, “What about the remaining 5%?” Herein lies the fascinating history of fierce resistance against centralized Shinto, epitomized by Izumo Taisha (出雲大社) in Shimane Prefecture, the sole entity to stand defiantly against the Meiji government’s authoritarian measures.
To be continued.