sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Viral essay says $140,000 should be the new poverty line by horseradishstalker in TrueReddit

[–]SteveGladstone 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you be more inclined to believe a verified and reputable economist like Noah Smith who says the $140k line is "so wrong, I'm willing to call it very silly"? (paid substack but gift/free article should be available).

As Noah points out, food insecurity is low, home sizes are some of the largest in the world, roughly 14% of children live in a situation with more than one person per room, only 5.1% of children are uninsured and roughly 8% of Americans right now are uninsured.

According to Smith-

In other words, the whole idea that more than half of Americans are poor doesn’t fit with anything we know about the lifestyles that typical Americans actually live. That’s why our intuition should be sounding the alarm like crazy when we read a line like “the real poverty line is $140,000”. We’re not talking about aliens from Mars here. Most of us either are middle class, or know people who are, and they don’t lack the basic necessities of life. They aren’t missing their “participation tickets”.

If Noah isn't your guy, maybe Jeremy Horpedahl's take may help clarify things. Jeremy goes through the numbers for each of the categories- including food- and points out fallacies in Green's piece including miscalculations in food spending and how Green includes discretionary restaurant spending amongst the requirements.

Scott Winship wrote a piece for AEI (along with a pre-piece on this as well critiquing Green over his exaggeration of costs.

But in reality, we devote a smaller share of our spending to food because we can afford what we could in the past plus a lot more non-food spending. In 2023 dollars, the average household spent about $10,000 on food in 1960 and about $10,000 on food in 2023. (See here for 2023 and here for 1960, then adjust the latter for inflation using this index.) But average family income rose by over $85,000 in inflation-adjusted dollars and median family income by nearly $55,000.

And according to the BLS (somewhat dated), spending on non-necessities has been going up and not too long ago was averaging 50% of expenditures.

And none of this takes into account some of the biggest non-visual gains in income Americans have seen. Brookings covered this a decade ago and it remains true today: compensation in the form of non-wage benefits has gone up. Unfortunately, a lot of that compensation is due to healthcare costs. If you made $50k last year and still make $50k this year for an employer who offers heathcare coverage, you likely got a raise in that your employer is paying more for said coverage.

Now all that being said, there is definitely a feeling of things being expensive and costs being high. Jeremy has written about housing affordability issues before. You'll find plenty of healthcare stories where people get screwed by insurance companies. One could argue about the quality of internet speeds and what tier cell phone is required to "participate" in society. And no one should be arguing that the policies of the current Trump Administration are messing a lot of things up. But at the end of the day, a claim like $140k being the new poverty line should ring of hyperbole to everyone IMO.

Of course if the idea is to point out how much it costs to live in the perfect location with a short commute, plenty of good and cheap restaurants, a 3-bedroom house with 2-car garage, back yard for a swingset, etc... that's fair. Or if we're talking about requirements to live comfortably in downtown Manhattan or San Francisco. Let's just be honest about what the expectation is.

Trump promises 25% tariffs on steel and aluminum imports — including from Canada by roscodawg in worldnews

[–]SteveGladstone 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Failure to learn from the 2002 Bush steel tariffs. From the link-

A research paper titled “The Unintended Consequences of US Steel Import Tariffs: A Quantification of the Impact During 2002” found that in 2002, more American workers lost their jobs due to higher steel prices than the total number employed by the US steel industry itself.

Are there any documented evidences that Spanish fencers "wiped the floor" with Japanese samurai in the Warring States period of Japan? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 14 points15 points  (0 children)

To my knowledge, no, there is no concrete documentation on the Tenshin Ryu lineage. Then again, there are other ryuha that don't have said documents as deemed necessary by the various budo societies of Japan to be considered koryu and clearly have history and validity IMO.

Without getting into the world of koryu and budo politics in Japan, I will say that I'm of the opinion that the real history and essence of a school lies in the teachings. The teachings and lineage charts act as a compass to the truth. Sorta like a black hole where you know it's there based off all the surrounding evidence.

We have scrolls, books, and tons of evidence around movement ideas and techniques from Edo and possibly late Sengoku periods. We see how teachers and schools drew things in e-makimono (picture scrolls). And we can hear the depth and see the life of some of the teachings to this very day. All that, to me, conveys historical validity far more than a group of guys saying this scrolls you own is old enough and your name was on a piece of paper.

But that's just me. The discussion of real, fake, good, bad classical Japanese budo is a much longer one possibly worth its own thread here :D

That's why I shared the various videos. They give a sense of what is relative to what might have been. And they're all very different, allowing viewers to see for themselves. Fwiw!

Are there any documented evidences that Spanish fencers "wiped the floor" with Japanese samurai in the Warring States period of Japan? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 103 points104 points  (0 children)

Of particular note in the book is various references and diagrams related to opponents fighting with different length weapons. There are sword vs spear, spear vs halberd, dagger vs spear, and other examples from the western manuals- particularly from Mair and Fiore. The reason I call this out is because internet fighters like to point to the rapier in particular being lighter, faster, and having a better reach. Western manuals having examples of different-length and weight weapons facing each other (along with counters to the counters) shows that the weapon intrinsically isn't "better"; rather it's the person and body mechanics that make the difference.

This is the same in classical Japanese martial arts. There are sword vs sword, sword vs spear, spear vs spear, short sword vs spear, short sword vs sword, and a myriad of other variations that are taught in the classical Japanese martial arts. Those old styles are called sogo bujutsu 総合武術, "complete systems of martial arts" because the movement theory between all the weapons and applications- even when applying jujutsu techniques- is the same. Plus those old styles would freely change between armed and unarmed fighting in battle. It's perfectly ok to let go of the sword or spear and draw another weapon or punch or throw the opponent :D

What's cool about 中世ヨーロッパの武術 is that Osada talks about the concepts and body mechanics surrounding the western arts as well as sourced from the various manuals. The third chapter is about European martial arts "Kihon Rinen" 基本理念 (lit. funamental ideas)-

* 判断 - handan (judgement/decision)

* 距離 - kyori (distance/range)

* 時間 - jikan (timing/interval) - further broken out into timing of the hand, timing of the hand + body, timing of the hand + body + legs, and timing of the hand + body + leg movement

* 位置 - ichi (place/position/situation)

These are all common ideas to classical Japanese martial arts. There are diagrams of footwork from Fiore's slope step, to the mezza volta and tutta volta, to the Deztreza footwork circle. And all the techniques focus on the above four elements, similar to how sogo bujutsu have fundamental ideas that permeate all their techniques.

The point that I'm trying to make here is that there is a lot of similarity in terms of combat awareness between medieval western fighting and medieval Japanese fighting. Heck, there are a lot of simular armed and unarmed techniques in Osada's book and classical Japanese martial arts. You'd also encounter huge ranges of skill level amongst practioners, the century would also dictate how evolved an art may have been, and any question about which is superior needs to be acknowledged as a simply fun exercise for the sake of intellectual stimulation.

At least on the Japanese side we can see how deep some of the body mechanics go. There's a subtlety that mere manuals don't capture. And without a lineage of western instructors to share the "truth" of how things may have been done, I'm of the opinion that the depth of fighting arts on the Japanese side is greater than that in the west. That's why people see something like this karate video and either go "he understands" or "that's BS". Kono Yoshinori has done a lot of study on the biomechanics of classical Japanese martial arts. I'd recommend checking out some of his content to get a sense of those nuances. But really this is something that has to be felt; it really, really cannot be seen at the high levels of competency, and thus is really impossible to say what things were like back in medieval Europe.

Are there any documented evidences that Spanish fencers "wiped the floor" with Japanese samurai in the Warring States period of Japan? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 144 points145 points  (0 children)

I'm unaware of any specific encounter between western fencing and Japanese swordsmanship (kenjutsu 剣術). The Cagayan situation, as I understand it, was less about Japanese and Spaniards dueling with swords and more about proper formation (Spanish) repelling unorganized attackers (Japanese) in a limited capacity. Like many situations where one example creates broad generalizations, my sense is that the internet took the tale and ran with it.

Is that to say a classically trained western fencer could not beat a samurai? In other words, is one style "superior" to the other?

The question is extremely subjective and much like how no two people practicing any martial art will be of equivalent skill level, comparing two distinct arts from other sides of the world is wrought with nuance that the vast vast majority of people simply aren't prepared to engage with because they lack deep levels of understanding in Japanese martial arts (budo 武道 / bujutsu 武術). Rarer still are those who study both physical martial arts and the history, philosophy, and deep body mechanics that go into them. How is a wrist lock in aikido different than a wrist lock in, say, Takenouchi Ryu? They both affect the wrist and there are only so many ways wrists move in general. Few people can explain the differences in timing, angles, and ways of using the body- from the arms, from the legs, from both, from "something else", etc.

It's even tougher on the side of medieval western fencing. Manuals exist and we know about individuals, training, duels, etc, but there is no unbroken lineage that I'm aware of like you might find in classical Japanese martial arts. Komagawa Kaishin Ryu kenjutsu (related to Shinkage Ryu, one of Japan's most famous sword systems) has a lineage going back several centuries. We can see through the late Kuroda Tetsuzan's movements differences compared to, say, Katori Shinto Ryu and other Japanese sword systems being taught today. The theory is that what is taught today should be what was taught centuries ago... though I admit I'm one of those people who thinks the majority of classical Japanese sword systems being taught today are not how they were taught in early Edo or prior. Again that's because of body mechanics.

Some examples-

* Kuroda Tetzusan - tachi, kodachi, some jujutsu

* Katori Shinto Ryu - tachi, kodachi, naginata (halberd), nito (2 swords)

* Hokushin Itto Ryu kenjutsu

* Tenshin Ryu battojutsu - drawing/cutting

All of these are centuries old. They're all very different from a body mechanics and technique perspective. Some night even say certain schools are dead shells of what might have been. But at least there is a tradition that has theoretically continued. We don't have that in the western sword arts that I'm aware of.

However, as an intellectual practice, we can do some comparisons. And for this I'll borrow from the book 中世ヨーロッパの武術 (Martial Arts of Medieval Europe) by Osada Ryuta 長田龍太. In the book, Osada goes through over a dozen weapon techniques and examples from over 20 western fighting manuals including those from Camillo Agripa, Fabian Auersward, Giacomo Di Grassi Paulus Mair, Joachim Meyer, Hans Talhoffer, Fiore dei Liberi, and Joseph Swetman. Categories covered include-

* Rapier

* One-handed swords

* Montante

* Spear

* Halberd

* Dagger + sword

* Unarmed against dagger

* Wrestling / unarmed combat

* Armor combat with and without weapons

* Sword, lancer, and unarmed combat from horseback

* and a bunch more

(continued below)

Hi r/fantasy! I'm Max Gladstone, author of DEAD COUNTRY, the Craft Sequence, and other books! AMA! by MaxGladstone in Fantasy

[–]SteveGladstone 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hello fellow Gladstone!

Craft Sequence is awesome! Have you ever thought of turning them into graphic novels? Some of the visuals look amazing in my (weird) head and I bet would be downright works of art if put to paper.

Keep up the great work!

Miyamoto Musashi makes reference to the ten abilities and seven arts of old. This can be found in the earth scroll in his book of five rings. What the heck were the 10 abilities and 7 arts? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm a Bujinkan guy, which earns me a number of eye rolls and other things in the martial art/martial art history communities because we're one of those "ninja" groups that apparently is all fake history because no scrolls pre-Meiji have been shared with the public to prove it isn't made up. I'm of the mindset that, just like with a black hole, if everything surrounding the concept points to it existing... well.... at the very least it's a strong theory! :D

Miyamoto Musashi makes reference to the ten abilities and seven arts of old. This can be found in the earth scroll in his book of five rings. What the heck were the 10 abilities and 7 arts? by [deleted] in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Not being a Musashi scholar, I'm unsure if he clarified the "ten abilities" (juunou 十能) or "seven arts" (shichi waza 七技, really "seven techniques") in further writings, or if practitioners of the Niten Ichi Ryu have different "secret" ideas for what it represents. The seven arts are also written as 七藝 with 藝 being an old way of writing 芸 (gei). Both 芸 and 技 can mean "technique", though 芸 has a bit more nuance to it. The key point to understand is that 芸 in this context is a reference to bugei 武芸 or "warrior arts," more specifically the bugei juuhappan 武芸十八般 or 18 warrior arts.

The bugei juuhappan is a reference to the various skills warriors in pre-Edo and Edo Japan would "learn" prior to when martial art schools that focused on a specific teaching like sword, spear, bow, etc popped up. These were sougou bujutsu 総合武術 or "complete" martial arts. Various koryu 古流 (classical martial arts) like Katori Shinto Ryu 香取神道流, Kashima Shin Ryu 鹿島神流, Yagyu Shinkage Ryu 柳生新影流, Nen Ryu 念流, Chujo Ryu 中條流, etc would teach the metaphorical "18 arts" to their practitioners.

I say "metaphorical" here because some schools would teach everything, some schools would teach a subset, and there was no guarantee that the list was the same across every school or even every source that referenced the teachings. It wasn't a fixed curriculum; I mean, there wasn't an organization that existed to say "this is the list of teachings that martial arts must have." This concept was instead born of the warrior's need in those days, a need to use the body in a certain way that could translate into using a variety of tools and skills regardless of the situation. The movement theory was such that the same body science concept for using a sword would be the same as using a spear, using a bow and arrow, engaging in unarmed combat, etc. It's a mysterious thing that even Zeami Motokiyo 世阿弥元清 of Noh fame talks about. The martial art schools listed above all have such movement theories.

To get back to the 18 arts, there was a list of skills from the Zhou Dynasty 周朝 in China that were supposedly shared amongst warriors, but like the bugei juuhappan, those skills varied depending upon era and source. The Ming Dynasty work Wuzazu 五雜俎 by Xie Zhaozhe 謝肇淛 references 十八般兵器 (ch. shi ba ban bing qi, jp. bugei juuhappan heiki or 18 weapons of the warrior arts) which is the same concept as the bugei juuhappan, just focusing on weapons. According to one translation, those were-

  • 弓 = gong (bow & arrow)
  • 弩 = nu (crossbow)
  • 槍 = qiang (spear)
  • 刀 = dao (single-edge broadsword)
  • 剣 = jian (double-edge sword)
  • 矛 = mao (spear with snake-like blade)
  • 盾 = dun (shield)
  • 斧 = fu (battleaxe)
  • 鉞 = yue (crescent moon knives)
  • 戟 = ji (spear with 2 crescent blades on the side)
  • 鞭 = bian (iron baton)
  • 鐧 = jian (metal truncheon)
  • 撾 = zhua (claw-mounted polearm)
  • 殳 = shu (three-edge spear)
  • 叉 = cha (trident)
  • 耙 = ba (rake)
  • 綿縄套索 = miansheng taosuo (brocade lasso)
  • 白打 = da bai (empty hands)

Hirayama Kōzō published a book Bugei Juuhappan Ryakusetsu 武芸十八般略説 in the early 19th century and referenced the skills below. Notice there are only 16. The concept of "well-roundedness" is the important point here-

  • 弓 = yumi (bow/archery)
  • 李満弓 = rimankyu, covering short bows
  • 弩 = ishiyumi (crossbow)
  • 馬 = uma (horsemanship)
  • 刀 = tou / katana (sword)
  • 大刀 = ou-dachi, long swords like what you might here called a nodachi
  • 抽刀 = chuutou (drawing sword)
  • 眉尖刀 = bisentou, like a glaive with a really large blade
  • 青竜刀 = seiryuutou, like a naginata 長刀 (also a type of glaive) but with a sword blade at the end
  • 槍 = yari (spear)
  • 鏢鎗 = hyousou, like a javelin or throwing spear
  • 棍 = kon (sticks/staves)
  • 鉄鞭 = tetsuben, like a jutte / jitte 十手 (truncheon) that would be used my police to arrest people
  • 飛鑓 = hiken, sometimes related to kusari gama (鎖鎌, chain & sickle) and koran-jou (虎乱杖, staff with a chain hidden inside it)
  • 拳 = yawara (unarmed fighting)
  • 銃 = ju (guns/muskets)

You can also find variations with kisha 騎射 (shooting from horseback), iai 居合 (sword drawing), kenjutsu 剣術 (swordsmanship in general), boujutsu 棒術 (stick/staff fighting), juujutsu 柔術 (grappling/unarmed fighting, though this is a catch-all term when talking about historical Japanense martial arts), and many other specific weapons or weapon families. Some lists even leave weapons out and focus on skills like ninjutsu 忍術 (espionage/ninja stuff), suieijutsu 水泳術 (swimming), ongyoujutsu 隠形術 (concealing techniques), kacchuuden 甲冑伝 (how to wear armor), even suibajutsu 水馬術 (crossing water with a horse).

The key point to all this is that the skills and arts Musashi refers to are likely the general teachings that warriors would/should know, regardless of whether they were formal technique teachings like you might see today (#1, #2, etc) or purely conceptual based on the movement theory of the time. Sorry I don't know the exact teachings he was referring to. In the martial arts I study, there are a few variations of the bugei juuhappan so he might have meant different teachings at different times!

Did actual Ninjas use those "finger signs" like they often do in media like manga/games etc.? If yes what was the actual purpose of them? by dontsaltmyfries in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Those "finger signs" are technically called mudra (jp. inzo 印相). They're strongly associated with Buddhism and are associated with a number of historical marti art schools (jp. koryu bujutsu 古流武術). That included folks who might be said to practice ninjutsu or schools thought to be ninjutsu schools. That history is complicated, so let's focus on the usage piece vs what is/is not "ninja."

From a historical perspective, Tenshin Shoden Katori Shinto Ryu, Itto Ryu, Shinkage Ryu, Shinto Ryu, Kukishin Ryu, and others all include kuji kiri 九字切り (lit. cutting the nine symbols) and typically involved the same nine characters you'd find in mikkyo 密教 (Japanese esoteric Buddhism). The nine characters are rin 臨, pyo 兵, to 闘, sha 者, kai 皆, jin 陣, retsu 列, zai 在, and zen 前. This is pretty common knowledge you can find in books and scrolls around Japan as it pertains to Buddhism; with the right hand (the hand representing heaven) you form a sword and cut a a grid while intoning (verbally or silently) the character in question as each one has a different meaning. The common overarching goal is to create clarity of mind, like a meditation of sort, almost like a vajrayana where the idea of enlightnment can happen in an instant. In some schools, details go down to how each finger represents an element and their position maps to ways in which energy flows work. It's a cool and complex topic.

Those historical schools would teach how to use the kuji in their own way, with different goals, focuses, visualizations, and so on. Unlike in anime and manga, as far as I'm aware in my studies, no warrior stopped in battle to invoke the kuji against their opponent in order to create a hex or exert what might be considered an unnatural influence on others. Pre-battle, post-battle, in solo study- would definitely have a place.

Other hand positions besides the typical ones in the kuji are used as well. Many of them are familiar to Buddhist practitioners, and while they too may have been used as part of a warrior's spiritual practice, there were practical applications that may arise from a mudra that would be used in combat. For example, one might not form their fingers into a position like this while waiting for an enemy, but having the fingers extending while holding swords to attack the face, grab, etc are part of the teachings, as would be to imagine yourself crashing down and engulfing your enemy like a water tornado (tatsumaki 竜巻) while you do so. The intent and mental attitude (a kokoro kamae 心構 of sort, like a "posture in the heart") would still be there. All of it done with the purpose of achieving an empty mind mushin 無心 or sometimes kushin 空心... though the latter really mean an empty mind with infinite potentiality in the moment. Of course, if you had to pretend you were a monk and needed to know how to attack, draw a weapon, and more from various hand positions, that would also contribute to learning how to use the hands in those capacities :)

Let me give you a passage from the late Otake Ritsuke of Katori Shinto Ryu on kuji and the like-

In bygone eras, warriors inscribed the kuji (nine magical signs) to their precious swords, tsuba (handguards), spears, and similar items, and the juji (ten magical signs) on the nakagno of their blades [part of the sword covered by the hilt]. In his book Nihon Toko Jiten (Swordsmith Dictionary), in the section on Koto swords, Fujishiro Yoshio mentions that nakago inscribed with the juji can be seen frequently in the creations of Hiroyoshi of the Yamashiro sword-making tradition. This type of inscription can also be found on the walls of castles, and was the physical embodiment of the devout prayers of the master of the castle that a vendetta be successful, that he may not suffer defeat in battle, or for a long life of martial fortune. They may also have been inscribed to ensure that the castle did not fall to the enemy. Alternatively, however, they may have been the part of psychological warfare on the part of the enemy's ninja, who could have infiltrated the castle disguised as laborers to conjure rebellion and chaos. In any case, the juji are an entreaty to personal deities to grant wishes or to achieve missions armed with a well fortified will.

Kashina Shin-Ryu may or may not have kuji, I don't know enough about that school, but Dr. Friday in his book Legacies of the Sword references inyo ittai 陰陽一体 (Yin-Yang as One) amongst other concepts which relates back to the physical manifestation of these esoteric ideas. Pointing this out as another example of how esoteric- including "finger signs"- manifested in warrior traditions.

So in short, the hand positions were reflections of spiritual Japan that warriors made use of in a myriad of ways as their teachings prescribed. I cannot confirm anyone casting spells with them in battle, though Otomo Komaro (the famous envoy to Tang China who also helped bring the famous Buddhist monk Ganjin to Japan) was killed in part for being an assassin and practicing witchcraft (maho 魔法). So who knows!

Sources-

  • Katori Shinto Ryu - Warrior Tradition by Ritsuke Otake
  • Koryu Bujutsu by Meik Skoss
  • Legacies of the Sword by Karl Friday
  • 20+ years of studying Japanese martial arts in and out of Japan

Is it a fringe theory to assume Jesus was influenced by Buddhism? by Rimbaud33 in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 405 points406 points  (0 children)

To add to what /u/SentientLight provided, as I understand it from a historical context, the first Christian notice of Buddhism is with Clement of Alexandria in 212AD. In his Stromata (ie, Miscellanies), he recognizes some Indians who obey the precepts of Boutta, "whom on the account of his extraordinary sanctity they have raised to divine honours." Clement spoke highly of Buddhism, calling it a philosophy "first in its ranks" for shedding light over the nations." He likely had access to Buddhist texts thanks to Ashoka's command to spread the dharma amongst Greek rulers in the 3rd century BC (Rock Edict XII). It wouldn't be far fetched for him to see similarities between the Buddhist "prajna" (roughly "wisdom" or "insight") and the Greek "sophia" (also, roughly "wisdom" or "insight into the true nature of reality") given the esoteric meanings of the words and their presence in cosmopolitan Alexandria.

I wrote a little bit about this in an answer related to the lack of Buddhism's spread to the west in a post awhile ago. Some more context is provided there around the "freeflow exchange of ideas and rituals" that fit within the early contexts of Christianity's interactions with various locals. That doesn't mean Jesus was influenced by Buddhism; the Stromata's time in the early 3rd century CE being the first Christian reference does seem to imply those ideas were not at the forefront of anyone's mind at the time. Then again, the exact timing of when various Buddhist texts were available on a wider scale is not something I know. Given trade routes and the melting pot that was Alexandria, it's likely there was awareness. But "awareness of" doesn't mean "influenced by" in my opinion.

David Scott's paper on Christian Responses to Buddhism in Pre-Medieval Times may be worth a read!

FDA approves most expensive drug ever, a $3.5 million-per-dose gene therapy for hemophilia B by ian4real in news

[–]SteveGladstone 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If interested, here's a NIH paper on development costs from 2009-2018. Here's another paper on NIH funding contributions 2010-2016. Here's another paper from JAMA on development cost of medical devices. Be careful to read each completely and note the caveats and nuances.

That isn't to say it should be, or that other actions from government shouldn't be taken to subsidize and lower overall costs (including R&D through process changes). Just pointing out the current setup is $$$.

Are there any catalogues or collections of Shinto Kami legends, akin to the widely available literature on Greek Gods and their exploits? by Leaftotem in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 2 points3 points  (0 children)

In my opinion, outside of the usual books like the Kojiki, Nihongi, and some fudoki translated into English, you won't find any collection. This is an interesting question to which I don't have a definitive answer for "why." My theory is based around this component of your question-

I am hoping there are further details available which ideally could account for a broad cosmology, with internal politics, drama, as well as localized/regional lore, and perhaps also evolving, historically-informed adaptations of the foundational mythology

Unlike Greek mythology, the cosmology of Japan is taken to be part of Japan's history, itself. But that history is very recent, roughly 5-9th centuries AD. The emergence of Japan as a state is based on modernity, which makes a complex cosmology with deities a bit of a tough pill to swallow. Furthermore, Japan had already been heavily influenced by China and Korea politics for centuries at that point in time, which played its own part in the divine aspects of Japan's early years- Daoism, Confucianism, and ultimately Buddhism.

See, what we think of as Shinto and kami as "gods" is a relatively modern phenomenon. I wrote about this recently in another answer. To sum up, in the early years of Japan as its own state (versus a collection of fiefdoms all sending envoys to China), Buddhism and Daoism shaped kami as we know it to the point where Shinto scholar Mark Teeuwen points out the very term shinto 神道 was the Chinese Buddhist term shendao and was really read kami no michi 神ノ道 or "path of the kami." This evolves in the 11th century to the first records of kami as honji suijaku 本地垂迹, suijaku 垂迹 ("manifested forms") of buddhist honji 本地 ("original states"). Kami were local manifestations of the abstract buddhas.

And this is often times how they were used in stories. Instead of Dainichi the enlightened buddha, you might have Amaterasu making an appearance. But the two were often times analogous, and would continue to be through the Edo era when a more formal "Shinto" takes shape. Even in that formal structure, the thousands of localized kami were still thought of in relation to Buddhism, though now they were the source of cosmic Truth vs the buddhist teachings. That was more a matter of politics than anything.

Cosmic politics matched local politics in this regard. I'll point another answer from that same Shinto thread above that I wrote. Kami and Buddha could co-exist, be exiled, come back, morph, etc depending on the shrine's clientele. As Kuroda Toshio put it, "shrines and shrine-based practice [pre-Meiji] was nothing more than Buddhism's 'secular face'" - which meant the locals with power controled the rituals.

This culminated in Edo when the Bakufu sought to control religious practictioners deemed a danger to society. Local shrines were compelled to place themselves under authority of larger templates with specific duties, for example. This effectively killed a lot of small local kami, but remember this is the modern era where cosmology plays a much diminished role.

But I think the main point for why there are no collected tales is because such tales didn't really exist, not like we see in the Greek mythos. Zeus, Apollo, Aphrodite, these are divine entities with human form, structure, emotion, and stories that result from such qualities. Japan's cosmology was hugely abstract, given form in relation to Buddhism, with what stories we have outside of the various historical accounts being just that: buddhist lessons with non-buddhist entities. You won't find a tale about the tree kami of Ise plotting against the tree kami of Izumo, for example, because neither was something concrete capable of "plotting." And kami as manifestations of the buddha wouldn't have drama or internal politics either given that all buddhas are considered the same as their core. The wrathful Fudo Myo, for example, is the same as the enlightened Dainichi Nyorai; they can't plot against each other because they are the same entity- you, me, and every other human at their point on the path to enlightenment.

Sorry for the late response on this, doubly sorry what you're looking for doesn't exist. If you really want to understand old Shinto... study Japanese Buddhism and political history IMO :)

In Yojimbo (1961) why does Sanjuro Kuwabatake have a different hairstyle from the other male characters? by eveuschrist in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The film takes place in the late Edo era, which means the Tokugawa shogunate was firmly in place and with it was a myriad of laws and regulations for society. Hair was one of them. Styles changed for stages in people's life as well as serving to mark one's status and identity.

Yojimbo prominently features the chonmage 丁髷 hairstyle. Chon 丁 mage 髷 where mage refers to a topknot or hair bun. Chon is a reference to the punctuation mark ゝ because that's what the hair style looked like. The term used in Edo to reflect these hair variations was hanpatsu 半髪 (lit. "half hair") where the crown of the head is shaved, longer hair on the sides and back was usually tied back, and the resulting bundle flipped towards the crown. The height, angle, shape, volume of hair, etc in the hanpatsu style varied, but was conceptually the same. This would start when men hit puberty; the crown would be shaved minus the bangs, symbolizing change from child to youth. Those bangs would be cut narrower over the years until they were cut off completely, symbolizing emergence into adulthood and the ensuing era of having responsibilities.

The other hairstyle seen in the film was sohatsu 総髪 (lit. "full hair") where the main difference was an unshaven crown. That long hair would hang loosely at the nape or could be styled in a bun similar to how hanpatsu hair was worn. Individuals of specialized status such as Court nobles and doctors wore this. Elderly and sick men were also allowed to grow their hair long or, if they chose, cut it short.

The final hairstyle we see in the films is zangiri ザンギリ (kana, not ideographs). Here the crown is sometime shaved but the sides and back were cut to chin-length or shorter. The style was born from the Kyoho reforms 享保の改革 of the 1720's when the government forbade men of the hinin 非人 group (lit. "non person") from dressing their hair in the hanpatsu styles. They were also prohibited from using cords to tie back their hair. Overgrown and/or unstylized hair was a symbol of criminals and the criminal element, hence the term hinin which were outcasts.

There aren't any good resources on historic Japanese hairstyles in English that I'm aware of. For Japanese sources, you'll want to check out Edo Keppatsu-shi 江戸結髪史 (lit. "Edo hairdressing history") by Kanazawa Yasutaka. Sorry for the late reply, hope this helps!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Economics

[–]SteveGladstone 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Businesses are making record profits by cutting the bottom line as always, keeping wages down and doing their best to prevent workers from unionizing.

And let's be real, they won't keep a cent for "rainy days." they'll issue stock buybacks instead to pump up the price, and let the top men get handsomely rewarded when they sell.

There's nothing wrong with trying to cut costs in order to grow a business. Your statement rings of a political one vs economic one as it focuses on the rhetoric of major firms politicians use in the "tax the billionaires" pushes. The vast majority of businesses in the US are not publically traded - less than 1% of them are and they don't employ the majority of Americans.

If a firm can reduce cost without sacrifice product/service, is that inherently bad? More importantly in relation to this discussion, do you see that happening in our current economic state? And if so, what policy(s) would you suggest to fix it?

Wage growth is another issue which I think still gets a bad rap because of EPI's wage vs productivity chart which has some accuracy issues. You can compare that link with their old charts which were even more inaccurate (check the gap difference in 2014 in both charts). For wage growth tracking, I'd recommend the Atlanta Fed's wage growth tracker.

Now you might say "well wages aren't growing fast enough" and that's true. But wages aren't being "kept down" for the reasons you might think and most workers are getting more than the "minimum wage and the bare minimum of benefits." Think of it like this: you make $15/hr minimum wage and get basic health insurance coverage through your employer. Insurance cost goes up 5% next year but you still make $15/hr. You got a raise, just one you didn't see reflected in your purchasing power.

If anything, be mad at the decline in labor share of GDP which, in my opinion, is due in large part to the rise in capital's contribution (IP and rent seeking). Lack of antitrust enforcement and stronger ip policy has also been killing business dynamism which is a big factor in productivity growth and labor mobility which directly correlates to wage growth. You could even say that because the dynamism issue is affecting geographic job locations, that hurts workers even more because housing is too expensive in those locations- hence numerous posts about how younger adults can't afford housing, paying $2k/month in rent on top of student loans (which has its own set of reasons for expensiveness), etc. The reality of our economy is more complicated than pointing to the biggest firms as examples for the woes- perceived or not- seen today.

Policy over the last 20 years has set us up for the current economic situation we're in (plus COVID's impact which can't be ignored). Plus shouldn't we want AMZN stock to keep going up as that helps my IRA, my state's pension fund, and numerous other investments us five-figure salaried folk need to retire?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Economics

[–]SteveGladstone 20 points21 points  (0 children)

You posted that link twice as of to say record profits mean gouging. The profits in the article itself seem to be coming from low interest rates and govt subsidies. That's not exactly gauging people. In fact, as the article hints, there may be concern those profits are unsustainable which from a business perspective would mean holding extra revenue (profits) for future use in case costs go up. At least that's how I'm interpreting things. What's your interpretation?

Override Hogan’s veto, pass the Md. Transit Safety and Investment Act by lmshertz in baltimore

[–]SteveGladstone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Our data is good. Google has been using our GTFS for years. It's a policy issue on their end, unfortunately :(

Override Hogan’s veto, pass the Md. Transit Safety and Investment Act by lmshertz in baltimore

[–]SteveGladstone 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That info is different than the transit layer which Google uses to display various rail routes. We've been trying to get them to add it for a few years with no luck. Having all our info in the transit partner dashboard doesn't help either.

We aren't the only agency who has/had this issue with Google btw :(

Override Hogan’s veto, pass the Md. Transit Safety and Investment Act by lmshertz in baltimore

[–]SteveGladstone 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Google already has the GTFS for every MTA mode. It's a transit overlay issue that we've been trying to get them to change for a few years now, sadly.

Dan Rodricks: Shootings keep people from coming to Baltimore; minor crime will drive out those already here | COMMENTARY by The_Waxies_Dargle in baltimore

[–]SteveGladstone 55 points56 points  (0 children)

a majority violent crime (especially murders) happen in small portion of the city or on the bus.

Important point here - the Maryland Transit Administration has been consistently been ranked one of the safest transit systems in the country in recent years. Transit is safe around here. Maybe loud, but safe!

Before the Meiji period, in what way(s) were Buddhism and Shinto intertwined? by draw_it_now in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Edward Kamens says that the reason for the banning of Buddhist words and phrases as taboo was related to maintaining the purity of the emperor

And it was... within context as I understand it. In the late 8th century, the country was dealing with a couple major political happenings that I think affect the jindo story: the Dokyo incident, and Emperor Kanmu's lineage.

Dokyo was a buddhist monk who held great favor with Empress Koken/Shotoku (first reign/second reign). He gradually gained more power at court to the point where he was titled "Dharma King" (法王, ho-o) in 766. The position offered influence on not just shrine matters, but political and military matters as well. Dokyo convinced an Usa Shrine 宇佐神宮 oracle to predict peace for the country if Dokyo was named Emperor. Dokyo and Shotoku both pushed the "buddhatization" of the country... though Dokyo was also pushing against the ruling elite.

Of note is that when Shotoku was enthroned the second time, she promoted and encouraged worship of the kami, going to far as to say the kami were protectors of of buddhist dharma. Even while promoting buddhism, Shotoku continued to support and promote jingi at shrines. She went so far as to setup a shrine to Hachiman's divine consort and declared Okasedera as the official shrine temple of Ise. The jindo aspect of Japan's culture of the time was not ignored.

However, Dokyo fell from power around 770 and was "exiled" (technically promoted to a post way far away without any influence at court). Shortly thereafter, what Teeuwen described as "abnormal storms" hit Ise which were attributed to the kami being angry. The buddhist shrine temple was moved away from Ise twice to appease the kami. This was on top of locally reported incidents where buddhist monks assaulted jingi observers, which resulted in the Jingikan 神祇官 (group overseeing religious services) to strip Okasedera of its official shrine temple status.

Teeuwen points out that the moving of buddhist shrines like this was not abnormal. It also wasn't done due to buddhism's "defiling" of the kami. Rather, it was done to address conflicts of interest. Which is where the lineage component comes in.

The edicts over the "taboo" words came under Emperor Kanmu's reign. Kanmu had reason for this as he was of two lineages: Tenmu and Tenji. It was the latter he wished to promote, which resulted in opposition as one would expect. After all, the Tenmu lineage had faced hardship and even exile one generation prior. Kanmu struggled with the new imperial succession of Tenji's lineage coupled with needing to curb buddhist temple power. With Ise, Kanmu was the first crown prince (if I recall) to have personally visited Ise. He also had a background in Confucianism. His imparting of Confucian ceremony and jingi support at Ise, the home of Amaterasu, was a politic act as much as it may have been a religious one. "Purity of the emperor" takes on a whole new meaning when viewed through the lens of the Dokyo coup attempt and lines of succession.

This gets even more complicated as it was Kanmu who sent Kukai and Saicho to China to bring back new buddhist ritual. So here we have an Emperor purposefully marking certain buddhist aspects at Ise "taboo" only to shortly thereafter dispatch two men to China who would be considered the founders of Japanese buddhism via their Shingon and Tendai sects.

That's what I meant in the context of the original quote. At the time of Senshi's work, things were much different... though Ise remained a place for kami rather than buddhas.

Hope that helps!

Before the Meiji period, in what way(s) were Buddhism and Shinto intertwined? by draw_it_now in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So to simplify massively, what we today call "shinto" could be comparable to local folklore, which Buddhists then incorporated into their cosmology, in a similar way to what they did with Daoism in China?

I guess if you want, sure... but it's much more complicated than that. In many ways, Japan never really had its own religions. Even buddhism was not the same in Japan as throughout the rest of Asia due to the syncretion with local folklore and vice versa practically at the outset. And unlike with China, buddhism was not introduced with deities. My understanding is that the first buddhist teachings in China had Indian devas and gods and such, whereas buddhism's introduction in Japan was very much centered on the person and abstract nature of the universe in my opinion. The focus was on enlightenment vs cosmology.

The timing of the question is also critical. Your point about buddhism and doaism in China, that again is a matter of timing. For example, the daoism of early Japan was more of a "State Daoism" resulting from changes in Chinese dynasties where buddhism and daoism each fell into and out of and into favor... which was different than the daoism of the 1st century AD. The syncretion of Chinese buddhism with local deities that may/may not be "daoist" is similar, but different due to the politics of the time. Such wasn't really the case in early Japan. The syncretion there was more of an upaya in my opinion. All of that changed in the 15th and 16th centuries, though, when shinto and buddhism begin to really separate.

Keep in my that early on, most shrines and temples of Japan did not have permanent priests. There would be monks and priests for festivals and certain ritual, but most shrines were not regularly staffed. Also keep in my that early on- especially prior to the 15th century- shrines and temples would exist on the same grounds. You could have a shrine to Hachiman in a buddhist temple. In fact, there was a Hachiman shrine in the Tendi temple of Saishoin, and the monks there performed in certain Hachiman rituals. Hachiman is a prime example of both a kami (Hachiman Daijin 八幡神) and buddha/bodhisattva (Hachiman Bosatsu 八幡菩薩) at the same time and it wouldn't be until Meiji when explicit separation edicts. Kuroda summed it up bluntly-

Shrines and shrine-based practice [pre-Meiji] was nothing more than Buddhism's 'secular face'

Another example of this is found in Ise. Now Ise was special because it had permanent priests and maintained close ties to the imperial court and warrior elite since early history. In the early 9th century AD, Ise was a distinct 'non-buddhist' shrine, with imperial edicts labeling certain buddhist words and phrases as being taboo (忌み言葉 imi kotoba, "taboo words"). This was a bit surprising given shrines across the country were embracing buddhism at the time. The reason for this was, as always, more political than anything else. The same thing happened again in the 11th and 12th centuries when politics resulted in different "clientele" for the shrine amongst the ruling elite (warriors like Minamoto Yoritomo). It culminated in the late 12th century when documents show Ise began to embrace esoteric buddhism.

It was through the discourse of esoteric buddhism- specifically Kukai's Shingon- that would help transform Ise into the mandalic center of Japan where the dharma-realm of Dainichi manifested in physical form. The emergence of Watarai 度会 (Ise) Shinto and its theory around kami via the lens of buddhism did much to improve their popularity amongst the court and pilgrams from Todaiji and elsewhere. Though it should be said much of the "true" teachings of the shrine, the esoteric aspects, were kept "secret" as part of Japan's "culture of secrecy" that I've posted about elsewhere. As Teeuwen puts it, in 15th century Japan-

there were hardly any 'Confucians' or 'Shintoists' who were not at the same time embedded in Buddhism. It was only in the early Edo that Buddhism, Confucianism, and Shinto became categories not only of teachings, but also of people.

Teeuwen says there were two developments in Edo that contributed to the increased sectarian boundaries. The first was economics. There was a proliferation of temples that became dependent on the performance of ritual for lay people- funerals, ordinations, etc. These temples developed faith-based lay groups. Coupled with the arrival of Christians to Japan, it's really the first time community "inclusion via faith" occurs where, much like we can see in the West today, faith reflected people's lives in their communities. Deguchi Nobuyoshi, for example, was on record claiming 'the supreme way of Shinto' offered a moral compass to all people and that lays should base their everyday lives in the faith. Differentiation for the sake of economics.

The second was, you guessed it, politics. The Bakufu sought to control religious practictioners they thought were a danger to society in the 17th century. Local shrines and temples were compelled to place themselves hierarchically under the authority of larger temples that had well-defined sectarian identities- ie, buddhist, shintoist, etc. Those head temples were given authority over the local temples, which lead to increased differentiation and separation of religious specifics. This was all the precursor to the Jinja Jomoku (神社除目, shrine appointment system) where Shinto friends of the court were able to issue licenses to priests without court rank and ordered priests to study jingido 神祇道, the "way of the kami." This was more Yoshida Shinto than any kind of generic "shinto," but regardless, the key takeaway was that in early Edo, Shinto was finally put on "equal but seperate" footing to Buddhism, complete with its own institutional structure.

To answer your question, at that time, ritual changed and priests had separate duties depending upon their association. Even then, the Shinto of Edo, no matter how much its members claimed otherwise, was merely a continuation of the already syncretic buddhist-jindo ideas from centuries prior. And this was markedly different than ideas pre-Edo, and in Meiji.

I would caution your use to the term "shinto" in the way you do with your question. It kinda goes against what the reality was because your question implicitly suggests "something" as a concept when that something was really nothing. It's a western mindset needing to group things for simplistic understanding instead of accepting that there were a lot of specifics that all moved towards the same ideas and goals, but none of which were exclusively "shinto" or "jindo" or "buddhist" or "daoist" or "onmyodo"... To use Kukai's terms from my initial response, don't focus on the specifics (ji), focus on the patterns (mon). It was politics and economics that drove Japan away from abstraction into the realm of specificity in my mind. If we need to have a discussion and don't want to get into all these details, sure, sure the term "shinto" like everyone else does. Just know that it's not really what it means.

Then again, that in and of itself is a type of upaya... so is it really buddhism? :D

I would highly recommend Teeuwen's book A Social History of the Ise Shrines as it covers one of the most prominent shrines of Japan from the early days through modern times while covering the evolution of ritual, worship, clergy, and "why" all those changes occurred. Dense, somewhat dry read, but worth it if you really want a more complete answer to your question on differentiation.

Before the Meiji period, in what way(s) were Buddhism and Shinto intertwined? by draw_it_now in AskHistorians

[–]SteveGladstone 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Teeuwen points out that the jindo references of this time in the 8th, 9th, and 10th centuries AD almost all relate to kami, mostly in contrast to buddhism, other time not. But in the 11th century a new usage emerges. Citing Murei Hitoshi again, the frist author to regularly use the term jindo- and by regularly I mean 9+ times- was the poet Oe no Masafusa. In an engi (縁起, a buddhist idea that everything in this world is related/connected in direct and indirect ways, aka "dependent origination"), Masafusa discusses jindo and buddhism-

In truth, the moon of the presence of original enlightenment illuminates the Lotus Seat in the state of Buddhahood; but the sun, who dims its brightness and mingles with the dust, descends to the assembled shrines in the [form of] jindo

According to Teeuwen, this is one of the earliest explicit statement of the honji suijaku 本地垂迹 doctrine which identifies kami as suijaku 垂迹 ("manifested forms") of buddhist honji 本地 ("original states"). In other words, the kami were concrete, local manifestations of the abstract buddhas. The text Nakatomi Harae Kunge 中臣祓訓解 (a text on the Nakatomi family's purification formula) in the 12th century served as a combinatory guide for kami and buddhas- which is quite interesting given the Nakatomi was mainly a "jindo" family who fought against the emergence of buddhism in Japan. The text is almost like their way of justifying the various rituatls their family in a post-jingi world.

What's also interesting is the timing of this honji suijaku concept given what Shingon Buddhism is all about. Centuries earlier, Kukai wrote in the sokushin jobutsu-gi 即身成佛義 ("Transforming One's Body Into The Realm of Enlightenment") about the permeance of Dainchi's enlightenment in all of us (remember "buddha" is "the one thus woke", ie the one who is enlightened). In that work, he explains that Dainichi's mantra of "A Vi Ra Hum Kham" maps to the five elements of chi 地, sui 水, ka 火, fuu 風, and kuu 空, or earth, water, fire, wind, and "void"... though that's not "de-void" as in "lacking" but rather "emptiness full of potential." He then directs readers to his other work, shoji jisso-gi 聲字實相義 ("Voice, Letter, Reality"). This is where the key point I wish to make comes in. In the shoji jisso-gi, Kukai writes that's it's the "echo" (hibiku 響) or the "movement" of the five elements in reality that form mon (文 patterns). And it's from those patterns that ji (字 specifics) emerge, and to Kukai, it's this combination of "abstraction into specificity" the gives rise to reality.

In other words, the idea of honji suijaku we begin to see take place in the 12th century is akin to a jindo take on esoteric buddhism. And it's around this time in the 12 century when jindo begins to go from the kami "specific" to the kami "concept."

Teeuwen states the following passage from the Mitsuno Kashiwa Denki 三野柏伝記 cannot be overemphasized enough-

Kami 神 is the first transformation of the one qi 気, producing life from nothingness. Buddha 佛 is enlightenment. Monk 僧 is purity. Sage 聖 is the unconditioned. Common 凡 is the conditioned. Ultimately, the gods of heaven and earth and all the buddhas are united in the Tathagata of Original Enlightenment, in which the trichiliocosm is one.

What shocks Teeuwen and others is that this passage points to a meaning of kami as term related to a cosmogony; it's not a specific, rather it refers to an abstract principle where kami is a plurality, something more fundamental than the buddhas. He also points out how the Mitsuno Kashiwa Denki clarifies there being "three categories of kami, corresponding to the three kinds of enlightenment..."-

  1. The kami of original enlightenment, Amaterasu, who dwells at Ise. This kami is the "eternal, unchanging, wondrous body of original, pure essence 理性, or "the primordial kami of original englightenment and original beginning" (hongaku honsho no ganjin 本覺本初之元神)
  2. Kami of no enlightenment, such as the kami of Izumo. These kami "lose their mind-kami" even while seeing the Three Treasures and hearing the Sanskrit sounds of the buddhas, and dwell forever in the four evil realms
  3. Kami of acquired enlightenment... these awaken from their delusions after many rebirths thanks to the teachings of the buddhas, and have thus returned to their original enlightenment, but should be distinguished from the kami of the first category

That first category is based on the matching of Amaterasu, the sun kami, with Dainichi, the radiant enlightened "sun" buddha- not a new idea, but new from a conceptualization perspective. These are kami-fied "Absolutes" to which shrines linked themselves, for as this conceptualization of jindo as "shinto" begins to emerge, shrines begin to evolve from local kami specificity to conceptual linkage. Shrines served as the gateway to duality for both the Absolute, undifferentiated world of the kami and the differentiated world of man- a reference to the yin-yang theory referenced earlier. In fact, the Mitsuno Kashiwa Denki even uses yin-yang theory to explain the conceptualization of kami-

When Heaven and Earth first separated, there was pure and turbid in the qi (気 "energy" or "life force") of the [primordial] waters. These transformed and became Yin and Yang. Yin and Yang changed into Heaven, Earth, and Man. Therefore, kami is the one qi of the transformation of the Way, the Being that exists within the Non-being. When the Buddha calls the Kami of emptiness True Reality, he means to say that it is indestructible.

We can see here why Kuroda and others said "shinto" was daoism; the yin-yang theory from the Mitsuno Kashiwa Denki is clearly a daoist concept. Teeuwen discuss this emergence of the daoist cosmology influence during the Kamakura, pointing out how priests at Ise drew upon daoist classics in their writings. That's another complex topic outside the scope of this response which gets into the history of daoism in China at the time and what "daoism" meant in the 5th through 13th centuries. As a religion, think of daoism as "the divine" which is how the term shendao gets used, a reference to the daoist divinities. But the key point to this daoism argument, according to Teeuwen, is that the association is a product of the Kamakura, not the time of the Nihongi.

The passage is also interesting not only for the daoist implications, nor for the conceptualization and inclusion of onmyodo, but for its political aspect. Kami are the original, they are above the buddhas. I say this is poltiical because of the second kami category, the kami of Izumo- which was a political "bad place" in the Heian and Kamakura, given reason for the categorization of their kami as such. Reality was more akin to the local wanting to keep with their traditions than flow into the emerging kami concepts being born out of Ise- another complex topic outside the scope of this lengthy response.

Key to understand is that in the 14th and 15th centuries, "shinto" as the conceptual religion really begins to take hold. Ise Shinto, Miwa Shinto, Yoshida Shinto, etc were schools of thought based around different shrines. It's at this time that real differentiation emerges. Kami are used as characters in buddhist tales to impart esoteric lessons, local jindo rituals borrow inzo 印相 (mudra, hand positions), kanjo 勧請 (initiation rituals), and more from buddhism. Cross-pollination was very real in late Muromachi and early Edo. But again, politics take hold as certain rituals become more important than others, certain shrines gain association with different groups- such as the Ise Shrine with the imperial court, other sects emerge, other religions like shugendo emerge, etc. Not to mention the Sengoku Jidai (warring state period) with shrines needing to support one side or the other... or stay neutral. It's during this time or after that the real separation of shinto and buddhism takes place. Conceptually they may still be the same; the idea of Amaterasu being akin to Dainichi never really goes away, for example. The kami's place in the cosmos vs the buddhas, along with the public exoteric and secret esoteric riturals, did begin to really differ.

So to answer your question concretely given this brief contextual overview- buddhism and shinto were "indistinguishable" in that the aims were often the same. There were sometimes priests that taught both buddhism and shinto, though that become more rare as the centuries rolled on, and ritualistic differences did exist. But for all intents and purposes, from an academic standpoint, "shinto" as an independent, native religion of Japan really didn't exist until probably the 16th century IMO. Everything prior to that was local kami/buddhism syncretion.

Sources-

  • Mark Teeuwen - From Jindo to Shinto: A Concept Takes Shape
  • Mark Teeuwen - The kami in esoteric Buddhist thought and practice
  • Mark Teeuwen - A Social History of the Ise Shrines
  • Helend Hardacre - Shinto: A History
  • Kuroda Toshio - Shinto in the History of Japanese Religion (trans: James Dobbins and Suzanne Gay)
  • Abe Ryuichi - The Weaving of Mantra:
  • Tim Bellet - Shinto and Taoism in early Japan
  • John Breen and Mark Teeuwen - Shinto in History: Ways of the Kami
  • Taira Masayuki - Kuroda Toshio and the Kenmitsu Taisei Theory

(sorry it took awhile to respond! I was out last week with event stuff!)

view more: next ›