Talk:Soka Gakkai International/Archive 14

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Start of revamp of the 'Split with the Priesthood' Section

I figured I'd better start a new page because I would like for us to come up with a better NPOV representation of the split with the priesthood.

The previous wording 'Split with the Priesthood' said these things:

The fundamental practice of Soka Gakkai and SGI members is derived from Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, a form of Nichiren Buddhism.

This is arguable. After the SGI/NST (Nichiren Shoshu Temple) split, the SGI adopted its own fundamental practice specifically from Nichiren Daishonin's words. Nichiren Daishonin never declared himself a member of Nichiren Shoshu. Our new SGI practices remove the NST derivations from Nichiren Daishonin's direct recommendations.

This next section is most likely true and verifiable by both the SGI and NST. I wouldn't personally object to having this reintroduced, I'll attempt to reintroduce it where it will logically fit on the new page (if I get to it first.)

However, due to a number of ongoing issues and disputes that existed between the current high priest and the leadership of Soka Gakkai, Nichiren Shoshu's high priest excommunicated Soka Gakkai and SGI, and later SGI President Daisaku Ikeda in 1992. At that time, Soka Gakkai was a lay organization closely affiliated with Nichiren Shoshu. The conflict from which this move stemmed had been growing throughout the late 1980s and especially during 1990, but its roots can be traced back to the very beginning of their relationship, in the 1930s. A turning point seems to have centered around the early 1970s when the Shōhondō ("Grand Main Hall"), a building in the Nichiren Shoshu Head Temple Taiseki-ji) compound, was being erected at the request of then-Soka Gakkai President Daisaku Ikeda, and with the financial support of Soka Gakkai and SGI membership.

This next section is completely NPOV, (the non-npov claimants in bold) therefore, removed; although I have no idea if the writers of the following are NST members.

The priesthood felt that Soka Gakkai had begun deviating from Nichiren Shoshu teachings and began to admonish its leaders to uphold the school's doctrines and practices in matters of faith. The priesthood believed that Soka Gakkai was trying to gain effective control over the priesthood, and rising friction and resentment on both sides came to a peak in the late 1970s. To some, the split seemed imminent. From the perspective of the priesthood and its supporters, it appeared that most of the Soka Gakkai membership was ready to side with the priesthood, and they attribute to this the Soka Gakkai leadership's eventual backing down and apologizing to the priesthood and a subsequent vow to never again deviate from Nichiren Shoshu teachings. This took place at a leaders meeting at Taiseki-ji on November 7, 1978. On April 24, 1979, Ikeda stepped down as Soka Gakkai president to take responsibility, and the high priest (66th High Priest Nittatsu) decided to give the organization a chance to redeem itself. From then on, Soka Gakkai officially upheld its promises, but it is said that in private, debate continued amongst members. There are said to have been frequent criticisms of the priesthood and followers of the priesthood were said to have been discouraged from associating with the temples. From the perspective of the priesthood, towards the end of 1990, Soka Gakkai's leadership again displayed open hostility towards the priesthood. This is said to have led to a heated exchange of documents demanding clarification of the other party's intentions.

These are probably the accurate dates, although I would have to check from both sides to be sure:

At the end of 1990, and effective from January 1, 1991, the priesthood stripped all top lay leaders, including Ikeda, of their leadership positions in the direct Nichiren Shoshu lay hierarchy;

But follows are more priesthood sided views:

the move seems to have been meant to be a warning that Nichiren Shoshu was serious.

The move seems to have meant something completely different to the SGI; therefore, this is a non NPOV.

More follows:

The priesthood frequently reminded Soka Gakkai leaders of their earlier promises and urged them to cease from challenging the role of the priesthood, but, according to Nichiren Shoshu reports, Soka Gakkai leaders continued to ratchet up their rhetoric, and the priesthood responded in kind.

A completely sided statement.

Each party blamed the other as initiator of the attacks. A final warning from the priesthood came in October 1991, but was rejected. It was followed by a public document on November 7 urging Soka Gakkai to voluntarily disband. Finally, on November 28, 1991, Nichiren Shoshu declared that it was dissociating itself from the Soka Gakkai and SGI organizations, effectively excommunicating the Soka Gakkai and SGI. Soka Gakkai Honorary Chairman and SGI President Ikeda was first personally excommunicated (removed from the Nichiren Shoshu believers roster) on August 11, 1992.

This section's language is riddled with non-neutral POV; better to leave it to the respective pro and anti SGI websites to hash out their POV rather than try to represent it here.

The ensuing years were marked by internal efforts to dissuade Soka Gakkai members from joining the temples, attempts to tempt Soka Gakkai members to join the temples, and counter-attempts to get those who did to leave. Numerous lawsuits have been filed by both parties charging everything from sexual improprieties to defamation of character

The above may be verifiable by both parties.

...and demanding everything from the return of previously made donations to apologies. As of November 2005, 172 lawsuits have closed and five are still in the courts.

Source?

In 1999, High Priest Nikken had the Shōhondō ("Grand Main Hall") demolished on the ground that it had been built and donated for what he termed ulterior motives instead of as an expression of faith, and he had it replaced with a building that the priesthood felt was more in line with its interpretation of its significance.

High Priest Nikken's view is a non-neutral POV.

This may be verifiable by both parties:

Other ferroconcrete temple buildings that had been partially or wholly built and donated by Soka Gakkai, foremost among them the Grand Reception Hall, were also replaced with ones of more traditional design. And a large number of sakura (cherry blossom) trees, also donated by Soka Gakkai members, were also cut down to make way for an open plaza.

The following comes from an earlier section on the page. It seems to touch on both POV's, although I'm perfectly fine with the POV's getting taken out completely.

SGI has been guided by Daisaku Ikeda since the death of Second President Josei Toda in 1958. A disciple of President Toda, Ikeda succeeded him in 1960 as Soka Gakkai president and became president of the larger Soka Gakkai International upon its creation in 1975. Ikeda is, however, a controversial figure in Japan. For example, when he challenged the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood on doctrinal grounds, his challenge was considered to be an act of heresy, particularly by a priesthood that viewed and asserted itself as the ultimate authority in Nichiren Shoshu doctrine. As a consequence, he stepped down as Soka Gakkai president in November 1979. According to Nichiren Shoshu followers, he did so to apologize for his organization's deviations from Nichiren Shoshu doctrine, by which, they claim, Soka Gakkai was bound at the time to observe by its rules of incorporation. Others suggest that it was the action of a man who did not want to be responsible for creating a rift among the practitioners. Regardless of the rationale, however, a division between the followers of Nichiren Shoshu, and those who aligned themselves with Ikeda's positions, did occur, and continues to be a source of controversy and disagreement amongst practitioners. Shortly after he stepped down, he became honorary chairman of Soka Gakkai in part as a response to Soka Gakkai members' dissatisfaction with his vacating of the presidency. As of December 2005 Ikeda remains honorary chairman of Soka Gakkai and president of SGI.

These are the things that have to be reworked for me to be happy with their neutrality. I'll do my best to reintegrate what is here and is neutral, but does anyone think it's best that the reader just follow the external links to get the two different versions?

Thank you for your time, Tjnebraska 18:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)


Er. I thought that Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism is what SGI members are practising?

Sorry, the message immediately above was from me. Angerona 15:35, 4 June 2007 (UTC)


Hi Angerona,

Nichiren Buddhism is what the SGI practices, Nichiren 'Shoshu' delineates a specific temple affiliation of priests and practitioners. I think this is what you were asking...what the difference is in "Nichiren Buddhism" vs. "Nichiren Shoshu", is this correct?

The SGI (an organization of lay practioners) and Nichiren Shoshu (the organization for priests) became afiliated in 1928 (when Makiguchi and Toda joined) and completely separated from each other in 1991. During that period, the Soka Gakkai adopted pretty much all of Nichiren Shoshu's doctrine and religious practices, while creating several of its own for the laity. Since the 1991 split, the SGI discarded a great deal of doctrine and redefined practices that were taught specifically by the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood (as opposed to what was drawn directly from Nichiren's writings) and Nichiren Shoshu also made changes in it's practices and doctine. The changes to doctrine that they have tried out support the complete authority of a high priest. The SGI rejects this and asserts that Nichiren (the 13th c. monk with whom Nichiren Buddhism originated) never supported the authority of a priest (over a practitioner). The SGI still supports some doctine taught by Nichiren Shoshu that is not taught by other Nichiren organizations, however.Tjnebraska 19:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cult NPOV

I'm new to this article, having just stumbled upon it. I see that the NPOV tag has been up since October at least. Is there any ongoing discussion about how to fix the article's NPOV issues? Because I can certainly see a significant one in the description of Soka Gakkai as a "cult".

I read in the archive where this was defended as the article referring to Soka Gakkai as having been accused of being a cult, but this is not borne out by the article's actual text. The actual text includes phrasing such as, "is the international cult organization" (declarative, not attributed) and "The cult..." (also declarative, not attributed).

May I ask what source we have that Soka Gakkai has been described as a cult organization? I don't see the links, but then maybe I missed them. Cheers, Kasreyn 23:12, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

ANSWER: France has denounced the Soka Gakkai as a Cult in several parliamentary reports on cults and cult-like movements. These reports were published in 1982, 1985 and 1999. Several web sites exist that talk about this, including several in the USA, I will only cite two: Factnet and Prevensectes
Neither of your sources are helpful to me. The factnet.org page on Soka Gakkai is a collection of broken links and 404 errors. The site at http://religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu functions, but it does NOT describe SGI as a cult, but rather an NRM. The other sites - cebunet and its successor sg-eye.com, members.rotfl.com, freedomofmind.com - all no longer function or do not have pages on SGI (404). The link on SGI's political involvement is now a redirect to SGI's official site.
This leaves the website toride.org, which not only fails to cite its sources, but strikes me as being of the tinfoil deflector beanie school of paranoia rather than a scholarly explanation. It is long on rant about SGI's plans for world domination, short on evidence.
Prevensectes.com is not useful to me because I do not speak French. Is there an English version of the site available, perhaps?
Do you have any other sources on the claim that SGI is a cult? Because my interest is now definitely piqued. Kasreyn 02:33, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Kasreyn, I think the best way to find out if SGI is a cult is to go to several meeting over a reasonable span of time. 'Encountering the Dharma' by Richard Seager gives a good academic look at SGI practices, I understand.

Take care and best regards, tjnebraska Tjnebraska 19:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


I think the question of cult status may not be the right question. Most religions began as cults so you will not be able to find any one definitive source that can claim that Soka Gakkai is a cult or not. It's better to focus discussion on facts about how the organization runs. Daisaku Ikeda, for instance, might be seen as a charismatic leader (could be sign of a cult). But then we have to take another look at the pope and Catholicism. I'm not a big fan of ideological fanaticism, but that's a blanket property of most organized religions (or cults). If you find a way around that to examine the Soka Gakkai's ideological fanaticism, then maybe the you could include that.DaijuDavid 02:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

France's definition of "cult" is very finely tuned and deserves serious attention. It lays out ten criteria, and each of these is in itself well defined. And a Japanese scholar called Asami Sadao, who has been involved in counseling people who want to leave the Unification Church—i.e., Moonies—has defined a further eight. In his Cult toshite no Sokagakkai=Ikeda Daisaku (カルトとしての創価学会=池田大作: "Sokagakkai, the Daisaku Ikeda cult"), investigative journalist Furukawa Toshiaki analyzes the applicability of these 18 criteria to Soka Gakkai, concluding that nine out of France's ten apply; I haven't finished reading his analysis of Asami's eight additional ones. I hope to report back here when I have, though.

In any case, the extent to which other organizations/religions display the same cult-like traits as Soka Gakkai (charismatic leader, ideological fanaticism, etc) in no way justifies them in Soka Gakkai's case; in fact, that they exist in other organizations underscores the need to examine their extent within Soka Gakkai, and to put Soka Gakkai under the microscope to determine to what extent Soka Gakkai encourages or discourages them in practice (i.e., not in print or in public settings, but in private, among insiders). HTH, Jim_Lockhart 15:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Note to Jim Lockhart

I wanted to let you know that I only wanted to remove opinionated, unsourced and un-neutral material. I thought Wikipedia supported this. I wasn't trying to remove things that were factual because they were "inconvenient to SGI/Ikeda". Opinions in those sections were greatly interspersed with fact and the whole section had to be rewritten. I'm glad you had time to rewrite and I'm fine with what you contributed. My inability to write an historically accurate version that replaced the opinionated versions were due to my not having time to do research, not because of something being 'inconvenient'. I didn't like your inferrence on the history page, it alludes to my action as being subversive when it wasn't. Please don't do that again.

Tjnebraska Tjnebraska 19:41, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


Jim, what is the source "Shimada" that you base your inclusion of the sentence about 'many leaders' viewing President Ikeda as greater than Nichiren? There are more leaders in the Org. that would find that belief completely erroneous and blasphemous. There are just as many sources that would find this belief to be wrong. I think you should consider leaving this opinionated material off the site. If you would like, I will get an official statement from SGI-USA leadership saying that the belief of these 'many leaders' is just false and wrong. It's better to leave opinionated, albeit sourced, junk off the Wiki website. If we get into a sourced opinion war, it would just be spam and it would be wrong.

Tjnebraska 19:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The source "Shimada" is listed among the the sources and references towards the end of the article. The material you have deleted is not opinion; it described historical fact. Nor is my version presented in an opinionated manner. Of course you can get a statement from SGI-USA leaders saying that "the belief of [those] 'many leaders' is just false and wrong"—Soka Gakkai had to renounce that belief in 1979. It's one of the things Ikeda took responsibility for when he resigned as SG president in 1979.

As far as I'm concerned, the whole article needs to be heavily rewritten because it is heavily skewed to present Soka Gakkai/SGI in a positive light. For example, there is no mention anymore (note that word: it's operative here) of all the scandals in Japan the Soka Gakkai has been behind, starting with the active repression of perceived negative publications starting back in the late 60s to huge financial irregularities in the late 80s and early 90s to relentless harassment of former members from the early 90s to the present.

I realize that SG/SGI is important to you and many others participating here, and I believe you (plural you) should contribute to this article with SGI's side of the story(/ies), but the repeated deleting of material inopportune to SGI (read the several pages of archived discussions here for the broader context) to be annoying. It is unfair to people who come to Wikipedia to learn about SG/SGI—for instance, because a family member is about to join—because it robs them of a concise yet maximally complete picture of the organization. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 01:14, 18 January 2007 (UTC)


Jim, I think it's okay to give an historically accurate factual presentation to wikiviewers; I'm not against that. I am against the inclusion of sourced facts that are misleading, when there are sourced facts that prove the opposite. For instance, your sourced fact relies on erroneous belief and activity from almost thirty years ago. The inclusion of outdated material is misleading since the SGI is relatively quick to correct wrong action and trends in the org. especially when compared to other religious organizations. I clarified your fact by Shimada by pointing out that those opinions were circulating prior to 1979 when President Ikeda stepped down as SG president. One thing I notice missing in the descriptions of why President Ikeda stepped down is that he wanted to put a end to the circulation of ridiculous inferrences that he was superior to Nichiren Daishonin. It's obvious to a person with a correct understanding of SGI Buddhism that Nichiren and Ikeda are two completely different historical figures with two completely different lives and backgrounds. It's impossible to declare President Ikeda as superior to the Daishonin when President Ikeda did not live in 13th century Japan and he did not define Buddhism for the Latter Day of the Law in a feudal society. His life wasn't threatened repeatedly (including the years of life-threatening exile), although Makiguchi and Toda's were. President Ikeda's demonstration of the validity of Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism lies in a completely different context than that of Nichiren. There is no point in thinking President Ikeda is superior to Nichiren. Nichiren's accomplishment and life cannot be superseded in light of Nichiren Buddhism and President Ikeda's accomplishments over the last fifty years never would have occurred if it weren't for Nichiren.

Again, if you are going to refer to occurrences that are almost thirty years old, please include that in your facts. Otherwise, your facts are misleading when they do not at all describe the SGI of today. Tjnebraska 19:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Tjnebraska. Thanks for taking the time to reread my changes. I find persuasive your argument for inserting "1979" where you did, as the reader would otherwise have to wait till he or she got through the next two sentences to get a time bearing. Good call; thanks! That said, I do not believe my description was or is misleading—just poorly presented as so the time frame.

As for the rest of your comment, I'm having difficulty following your logic and grasping its bearing on the article. You seem to be rationalizing away Soka Gakkai leaders' presentation of Ikeda as the True Buddha by saying that the whole idea is so ridiculous that it couldn't have happened. I agree that the idea is ridiculous, but the incident nevertheless did happen. Ikeda's apology and resignation, and Soka Gakkai's recanting of the notion that Ikeda was equal to, was the reincarnation of, or superceded the True Buddha (i.e., Nichiren) notwithstanding, all indications were that the concept was both condoned by Ikeda and spread through the organization systematically. Soka Gakkai admitted as much in a booklet it published and distributed to all members at the time (I wish I still had my copy!) as well as in issue no. 6056 (April 24, 1979) of its Seikyo Shimbun organ. Likewise with the notion that The Human Revolution was the "current-day" gosho. And if the Seikyo Shimbun and other Gakkai publications in Japan are anything to go by, the notion is still alive and well in the form of members' practice of referring to Ikeda as their "master for life" or their "life's master" —called jinsei no shi (人生の師). I note that in its English publications, SGI prefers "mentor" to "master," but I'm sure the content is the same, especially with the more zealous members.

This incident is significant because in Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, these actions are analogous to someone in Christianity claiming to be the second coming of Christ and that his writings were the Bible of today.

Of course, there are numerous other incidents—many totally unrelated to anything doctrinal—that could be enumerated as examples of why Ikeda in controversial, and they can be easilly substantiated from numerous sources.

Personally, I think this article—which is supposed to be about SGI—focuses too much on Ikeda and his "accomplishments," and that the article so quickly moves in praise-Ikeda gear, is itself very telling evidence that, in essence, Soka Gakkai/SGI is a huge fan club focused on Ikeda. The article would do well enough to describe how Soka Gakkai (in Japan) and SGI (everywhere else) are, in and of themselves, controversial and why. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 15:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)


Hi Jim, I'm glad we both agree on a presentation of time in conjunction with fact. I guess on point of my argument is to hold us to what we're doing currently in the SGI. Our organization is constantly evolving to keep up with what is the most productive for our respective cultures and most value creative. Some wrong that occurred in the Gakkai 30 years ago simply does not represent the Gakkai today--there are absolutely no evidences of that erroneous belief. The Gakkai isn't the same as it was 10 years ago. There are enormous changes we are taking in our approach to the Buddhist philosophy in our post-priesthood days.

I would definitely love to see evidence that President Ikeda accepted leaders inferring that his efforts and writings were superior to Nichiren's as being correct. Shimada may have given a scholarly interpretation of why President Ikeda stepped down, but unless we include direct quotes from President Ikeda, we can't remotely attempt to understand the significance of his resignation. I strongly believe President Ikeda stepped down in part to say loudly and clearly "These actions are not appropriate", NOT "I admit that I've been promoting or agreeing with these actions". Many leaders do many stupid (and human) things in the organization, but these actions are wrong and they are corrected. President Ikeda takes responsibility for things, but he isn't saying he condones the wrongs that were being committed.

I don't understand the significance of holding us to our (very old esp. in terms of how young our org. is) mistakes instead of our corrections. Part of my argument in including sourced facts is 1. at least give our corrections equal weight in representation and 2. realize the list of mistakes and corrections, pros and cons to the org. (with sources) would be probably a mile or more in length. Is this what we're supposed to do with Wikipedia? The users here that think the controversy ought to be a completely different wikitopic I think really have it right.

Yes, there is enormous focus on President Ikeda as the foremost interpreter of SGI Buddhism. Yes, he promotes the action of taking a lifelong mentor and encourages members to look at his accomplishments to consider him as a mentor. Yes, this is a controversial theme to many people. It is a topic that requires a great deal of conversation and dialogue for most people to understand. One thing I always like to point out to those that find it controversial is that not a single person that I know admires President Ikeda blindly. They admire him after he earned that member's or (non-member's) respect. I also tell people that I was born into the practice, but I did not take President Ikeda as my mentor until 3 years ago, when I was 31. I did not praise him or adore him prior to that. People on the outside of what they view as a cult of personality haven't received a direct effect of emulating President Ikeda's efforts or trying to learn from his example. This is absolutely okay, but it is wrong to think we do this because we blind or whatever.

There should be a way to bring up controversy of the SGI on the wikipage in a satisfactory manner for both SGI members and others, but it really would have to be very limited because the back and forth evidences would take up an enormous amount of space.

Also, I personally would consider your evidences to be more appropriate if you focused on controversies of maybe the last seven years--if you were current. But please look to how we correct things very swiftly. We should be commended for always striving to do what's correct. Every religious organization in the world should be following the model of quickly correcting what runs counter to the good of the population and common sense. Of course, at times we have to prove what common sense really is--common sense changes on a regular basis as well to keep up with socio-scientific discovery.

I would definitely be happy to speak with you more on any SGI related topic or anyone, because I think the 'controversies' are real. I'm interested in correcting what the organization does that is wrong. So are many, many other members.

President Ikeda isn't the only example of a modern human that puts forward an exceptional amount of energy to create bridges of understanding between differing ideologies and philosophies. To SGI members, President Ikeda is an exceptional human that demonstrates how far a person can go with Nichiren Buddhism, but the organization absolutely does not promote that he is better than Nichiren, or Shakyamuni, or is his reincarnation. If the SGI President took this stance, then that would be controversial indeed and worthy of scrutiny. Until then, if it's just a delusional leader or many saying so, then I'll point out the error in promoting those beliefs. Most leaders and members I know would.

Best to you, Jim. You don't seem like a frivolous person; I appreciate your contributions to the SGI article a great deal. Tjnebraska 06:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC) learningbuddha@yahoo.com


[edit] We've touched on this subject already

The Discussion pages should have some refs to Opus Dei , the analogous quasi-religious political sect in Italy. Soka Gakkai , as Opus Dei, is a fascist political grouping clad in religious garb.

71.202.44.80 05:54, 11 March 2007 (UTC)Tucho


Tucho, we've been over this topic considerably already in the talk archives. The material that you included is biased material and biased material is what we're trying to get rid of in this article and in Wikipedia in general. The sites that you have taken quotes from are not considered to be scholarly and unbiased sources, but several SGI members, that are Wikiusers are fine with having those sites listed anyway. Readers of the SGI article are free to go to these sources. The "Rick Ross Institute" has a huge disclaimer on what it calls a cult and isn't very reputable, or scholarly. The SGI is not free from human error and stupidity--I think we've covered this in these archives, but that doesn't mean the SGI doesn't have it's merits. The SGI always strives to correct the wrongs being committed by its membership. Please start a wikiarticle on "Opus Dei", if you would like, and feel free to include a link on Opus Dei on the SGI article under 'critical websites'. It's very important that you stick to reputable sources, however, otherwise, you can rest assured that you entries will always be edited and challenged until you get it right. If you visit SGI.ORG, you will find that we have won pretty much all libel cases that were unfairly brought against us. You can follow the sgi websites to get to the governmental sources that are not biased by the SGI. It is not credible for you to speak of the lawsuits brought against the SGI if you are not going to also post the outcomes of each of those ambiguous cases you mention. Use reputable sources, please! Also, sokaspirit.org references quite a few of the lawsuits brought against the SGI and the outcomes.
I understand the French government has declared the SGI a cult. I am fine with the reputably sourced material on that being posted, but rest assured, the French government will be changing its position on the SGI once it realizes that we are a humanistic organization that comes to the aid of our respective countries in times of need. The government just needs more opportunities to see us in action.
The book, 'A Public Betrayed: An Inside Look at Japanese Media Atrocities and Their Warnings to the West' (Hardcover) by Adam Gamble (Author) & Takesato Watanabe, gives warning about using the Japanese media, especially their magazines, as an honest and factual source for several stories concerning the SGI. Please find material that comes from the respective governments.
Take care,
Tjnebraska 22:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)


According to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:RS#Reliable_sources

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources

the following paragraph is in complete violation of Wikipedia. Internet sites are not considered scholarly or credible sources.

Soka Gakkai and Soka Gakkai International are perceived by critics[who?] to be a cult or of being a "cult-like group." Critical Internet sites are located below; these detail disproportionately numerous legal battles and charges that have been brought against the organization and its members. There are concerns that Soka Gakkai has placed an emphasis on recruitment, that it "demonizes perceived opponents", and "uses phobia indoctrination and peer pressure"[citation needed]. Some critics[who?] also assert that the organization places emphasis on "dependence on the organization" of SGI for one's spiritual advancement. The organizations, their representatives, and membership deny the accusations.

I put this in the SGI article to attempt to be fair, but until credible sources are utilized, then it's fair for this to be taken out as well.

Critics accuse the Soka Gakkai and Soka Gakkai International as being a cult or "cult-like group." Critics find that the Soka Gakkai has placed an emphasis on recruitment and that it demonized Nikken Abe, the former High Priest of the Nichiren Shoshu Temple. [citation needed]

I'm leaving it in because it can most likely be found from a credible source to be true. The rest of this paragraph is just garbage filled with violation of wikipedia in using unreputable internet sites as source. The only person that I know of that we have officially 'demonized' as an organization would be Nikken Abe. It can probably be easily found in reputable sources that he was viewed as "the Devil King of the SIxth Heaven" by the organization, but from what I understand, this label was only true while Nikken was in power. I for one, am an SGI member and I do not deny that I demonized Nikken Abe, while he was the High Priest of NST after excommunicating us, so, the last sentence of Tucho's contribution above is not true. You're on your own in finding credible sources for this stuff, although, if I come across older material from when Nikken was in charge of the NST that labels him as such, I'll be sure to pass it your way.

To Jim Lockhart in particular, please read "A Public Betrayed" because I believe you may have quoted from unreliable sources according to Gamble's premise in this book. The Japanese media, from which you source your quotes, is in many instances highly unreliable.Tjnebraska 19:03, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] What is your definition of "demonized"?

Hello, Jim.

It is unfortunately true that in the SGI, there is a tendency to demonize all other forms of Buddhism. I found this out when I started dating, and eventually married a man who practices Zen Buddhism. Several members attacked his practice, sometimes to his face, but more often, they would tell me how awful it was, suggesting that he wasn't acheiving his goals in life because he was practicing Zen.

Not only did these comments not serve to "save" him, as I suppose they were intended, but they made me feel as though I constantly had to defend him. Over time, I just got tired of going to SGI meetings, because I never knew where the next attack would come from, and the attacks made me weary.

Apparently there is some part of the Gosho that declares that all other forms of Buddhism are false. I have been told that this is why members of the SGI feel it is their duty to badmouth my husband for being a Zen practictioner. But, in the end, it has made me feel as though I must choose between the SGI and my marriage. And that is a not a choice that a self-proclaimed "tolerant" organization should ask a person to make.

Sincerely,

Marilyn Papiewski


Hi Jim,

Thank you for the note letting users know you're getting sources. What is your definition of "demonized" and are you planning on portraying the actions of the general membership, or do you plan to represent the actions of the higher levels of leadership in the organization including President Ikeda?

Some of the general membership and lower level leaders many times act on their own interpretation of doctrine and study material. Many members rebuke the wrong actions of bullying, peer pressure or force in the SGI. We know some members behave this way, and we work hard to correct it.

I don't hold the Pope or Catholicism responsible for the wrong actions of a Catholic; I would like it if all of SGI wasn't held responsible for the wrong actions of a fraction of our membership. (I also do not hold Islam responsible for the actions of Al-Queda, etc.) I hope you use recent source material, because we've worked hard to rebuke forceful behavior. I do think it may be good for members to see that we are viewed this way--it may help certain people that do rely on bullying at times to think twice about what they are doing.

Thank you for your consideration, Tjnebraska 18:12, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that the soka gakkai members that edit this page need to just accept that the organization is not real buddhism, it is about as buddhist as jehova's witnessing or scientology is Christian. As long as you try to censor the truth about Ikeda, and his other gohonzon money-fleecing cadre's actions, you will keep having to reedit out the real truth, which wikipedia tends to get to anyway. Save yourselves the trouble. Try studying ACTUAL buddhism and then taking a look at the page with an educated look.Wwilson 1 03:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
TJ: I haven’t replied to your query above yet because I’ve been preoccupied with a few other things (on Wikipedia, other articles) and because I want to give you a well–thought-out and substantiated reply; that will take a little time. In any case, my definition of demonization is, I believe, the usual dictionary one. The best “source” for this assertion is not what others have published, but Soka Gakkai’s own books and publications here in Japan, including the Sōka Shimpō and Seikyō Shimbun newspapers, which are both notorious for their sections and articles that rip Gakkai opponents and critics—especially former leaders and politicians who have left the organization—to shreds. They go far beyond refuting or rationally criticizing these people, and use language totally unbecoming to any public organization, let alone a religious one. Ikeda himself, in his speeches, uses expressions like “eliminate from this world,” “doom to hell for all eternity,” and “stamp out ... enemies.”

How much of this reaches members outside Japan, I cannot say because I don’t know. And thanks for your concern about my sources and any dependence on my part on ones lacking credibility. But I am well aware of how the Japanese media work and generally have a good idea of when and when not to trust them; I hope you are not trying to imply that Soka Gakkai’s own media are any more credible. More later, when I have time.

Wwilson: While I essentially agree with your sentiments, inflammatory comments such as this one are not constructive and tend to invite a barrage of comments to this page that are generally irrelevant to the article. That, too, is not in Wikipedia’s interests. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 04:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Jim: I appreciate that you believe those sort of inflammatory comments are not constructive when it comes to the over all goal of Wikipedia. Though I do find it troubling that you agree with Wwilson's sentiment. The actual daily practice of an SGI member is not one of avid fanaticism, but rather, daily reflection and a constantly constructive process of developing one's one own compassion for his or her own life as well as all those around them. This is what the SGI reinforces to its members, study and daily practice. So, I'm taken aback a bit when you 'essentially agree with' the sentiments such as 'it is about as Buddhist as Jehovah's witnessing or Scientology is Christian' for that is simply an ideological attack without basis or logical reason. Now, I understand that you used the word 'essentially' and Wwilson doesn't communicate how or why you feel the way you do, but by passively agreeing you invite a form of validation to his slanderous remarks. I appreciate that you do take the time, however, to carefully articulate your point. I only hope that in the future you're perhaps a bit more... careful (?) when you decide to agree. Best wishes to all! Severinswinehart 18:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi Jim, thank you for responding. I think I do trust that you know which articles from Japanese media are reputable. Please do read that book. Rhetoric is fierce in Japan because corruption is fierce. Some of this is shared with the SGI-USA, but mostly, these refutations are mostly part of the Soka Gakkai. Perhaps these things you are addressing are most apt for the Soka Gakkai wikiarticle, because it is particular to what is happening in Japanese culture and politics. I'm fine if you want to include these things here, though, because I believe they are true and I certainly have encountered relentlessly mean people (once in a blue moon) that I do want out of the organization, but this really is more of a Soka Gakkai issue. Each organization practices according to the respective cultural climate of its country. The U.S. media is in relatively good check--the court systems are penalized when corruption occurs and US culture in general doesn't condone political and financial corruption as in Japan. Yes, I do think the Soka Gakkai International's official media sites and publications are credible, and are more credible than Japanese weeklies and media. But again, I trust that you know which articles are reputable from those sources. I'm half Japanese and keep in touch with my Japanese relatives and friends (none back in Japan are SG members) and I see (and study) how the social climate of Japan is just really difficult in several arenas. From my discussions and study, and the experiences of my friends, "bullying" is a very common practice in Japanese culture and continues from childhood to old age. These kinds of cultural traits have then of course seeped their way into the organization in Japan (my uncle was a victim of this behavior, in conjunction with being lured into financial compromise by an SG leader) and these are the things that President Ikeda and the like unleash scathing criticism of. They should be fierce in putting down this kind of corrupt behavior that begins in Japanese culture and finds its way into our organization. These things really don't happen at this level in the U.S.

Wayne, obviously you've been compromised. President Ikeda doesn't even see the financial records of the Soka Gakkai organizations. I'm assuming you are getting you information from Nichiren Shoshu, or the Japanese media (or friends from Japan that are influenced by these things). If you are referring to old articles from Time or Forbes, we successfully refute everything. Forbes recanted on all of the points that the SG demanded they amend. Please look at SGI.ORG and follow links until you arrive at 'media rebuttals'. President Ikeda doesn't get a single dime, or yen for Gohonzon issues and offerings to receive the Gohonzon are extremely small and go directly to pay for costs in the organization.

You sound like an interesting person after looking into your user page. I love Leo Tolstoy's books and have been influenced by Jung. I also like writing--I've been talking to friends in the industry about how to submit screenplays. I'm sorry that you don't believe I practice Buddhism. I won't attempt to decide if you practice Christianity. I only hope that you are happy and well and enjoy meeting all kinds of people.Tjnebraska 16:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A link for 'praises'

Hello there, I was hoping to create a link to a page that cites praises of President Ikeda and the SGI. For now, I just put two on the main article because citation of the claim of praise for the SGI was requested. I hope instead to create a link for praises instead of quote them in the main article. I can probably figure out how to do this, but if anyone can direct me to instructions, please let me know.

Thank you, Tjnebraska 16:20, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

It would probably be better if someone neutral work on this article instead of writing one long commercial for the organization.

Considering Buddhism is properly known as the way of "The Thus Come One" it's easy to see how someone entangled in worldly affairs could mistake it for a commercial...

Reginald Cottle--69.20.233.99 13:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ichinen Sanzen

As I saw in other discussions, Ichinen Sanzen is believed to be a seperate group of believers. Ichinen Sanzen is actually the Japanese term for, "Three Thousand Realms In A Single Moment of Life." It is one of the beliefs that a person can experience the ten worlds in a single moment of life. It is a belief of the Nichiren Shoshu and Soka Gakkai doctrines. I am an SGI member and I know this.

[edit] This article needs a lot of work

Personally, I think that the Criticism of Soka Gakkai POV fork should be merged into the article, and the places where the undefined "critics" weasel-word is used must be changed to refer to sourced criticism (since one has to be specific about which critics are being referred to when attributing opinion). I also think the article needs a more coherent structure, as it is somewhat badly organised as relates to the presentation of material. In places the article is NPOV enough, but in other places it has rather a POV flavour (both for and against the SGI) giving the article a sort of "split personality". What needs to happen here is that the pro-SGI and anti-SGI POVs need to be placed side-by-side in the prose, and both criticisms and positive claims need to be rigorously sourced to where they come from. In some places, the POV material also needs to be eradicated.

I would be happy to make these changes but I am highly reticent to do so as I fear that I may be accused of POV pushing (since I am an SGI member). However, I would like to pre-empt this, and make it clear that I don't have any interest in "flying the flag" for the SGI here on Wikipedia; my only interest is that it is a well-written article. I am writing here as I would like to know whether people think my proposal above sounds satisfactory and, if so, whether it is OK for me to go ahead and implement it. On the other hand, if other editors here would not approve of an SGI member editing this article, I shall not bother, as I would simply be wasting my time if it will be immediately reverted. Thanks a lot. Yours, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 20:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] sgi article

i am an sgi member and practicing nichiren buddhist. the two don't necessarily go hand in hand. Yes its true that some sgi members may hold in negative view or even demonize those who would oppose their efforts, this may include past members. But who's view is this? In buddhism one must always refer to the law, not the person- and the law states that we perceive things according to our life condition. Neutrality is not possible when attached to any particular ambition. It is always ones karma which drives one out of sgi. But sgi members are only human and have karma also, as does a group or region or how about us all? ie. "Global Warming" is humanity's shared karma. Why does sgi have 15 million members in over 190 countries? Because with the situations of violence and warfare, terrorism,poverty, ignorance & indifference, homelessness and addiction, we can't afford to get caught up in our petty differences because these things threaten us all. those who are unwilling or unable to comprehend let alone uphold the tennents of 'many in body and one in mind', would undoubtededly hold an opposing view and if one would look closer one may see ...ego. Buddhism when viewed correctly, teaches us about the nature of all of these these things. but how does one know if they hold a correct view? Didnt Jesus say 'let the example of the people speak for itself'. we all posess the innate ability to choose and decide for ouselves. sometimes when we look in the mirror we are faced with obstacles that we'd rather not have to face, sometimes enough even to send the best of them running. choose wisely

````