Talk:Soka Gakkai International/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

On Religious Freedom and SGI

Simply put, SGI believes that people have the right to believe what they choose to believe. The fact that they think their belief system is powerful and one that can lead everyone to a happier existance, and the world to peace, does not mean that they think it should be imposed on anyone. In fact just the opposite - they believe people should be free to follow their own belief systems. They also believe people should be free to discuss their belief systems with each other. And they believe people should be free to choose their own belief systems. Perhaps the following references might help:

Around the World; SGI: Challenges Ahead an interview with Dr. Karel Dobbelaere, author of the book, "Soka Gakkai: From Lay Movement to Religion", and Professor Emeritus of the Catholic University of Leuven and the University of Antwerp, Belgium in which he describes SGI's Nichiren Buddhism as follows:

"what is specific to the Soka Gakkai is that, as a religious movement,...its members are transmodern; they embrace post-material values--the environment, human rights and self-fulfillment; they look to the future with optimism but turn to the wisdom of an old religion, the Buddhism of Nichiren, for inspiration on how to proceed."

Also, from the World Tribune 2/15/02 (scroll down to "Views and Insights") "In a "Buddhism in a New Light," article SGI-USA Vice Study Department Leader Shin Yatomi relates: "To enjoy the positive freedom of religion each of us must work to overcome our inner powerlessness and awaken to our true conscience. For without inner strength, we become vulnerable to external powers and their manipulation of our conscience. We would let others decide matters of faith for us, instead of deciding on our own. "

There is also this, in Daisaku Ikeda's own words from a poem called "The Ever-Changing Flow of Life -- A Song of Eternity, Happiness, True Self and Purity, And the Transience of All Phenomena," :

"A religion

By the people

And for the people

Is one that will endure for all time.

This after all

Was the original starting point

Of religion...."

I think what is hard to grasp is that what Shakyamuni, Nichiren, SGI's Makiguchi, Toda, and Ikeda are proposing is something really quite revolutionary - a completely different kind of religion, one that is truly about absolute freedom -- with the absolute respect of each individual's intellectual and spiritual life as the only supreme law. There is no war, only the ongoing battle of ideas. There are no weapons - only words. Discourse, dialog, and the unique spirit of each individual to choose his or her own way of living. Nichiren Buddhism as practiced by SGI says "we think we have a way of living that you might like; it will help you to fulfill your greatest potential, and that will help create a more peaceful world for everyone -- just listen, try for yourself and choose." - R --138.89.142.180 01:49, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

In contrast to some schools of Buddhism, their wish of attaining enlightenment is not geared toward escaping from or breaking the cycle of birth and death with its attendant sufferings. Rather, they are concerned with the here and now, with helping people and with improving life on Earth."

If you believe the Lotus Sutra, that is also what Shakyamuni Buddha was trying to get across in his final teaching, the last teaching he gave befire his death. But unfortunately, the schools that had already become established based on his earlier teachings, and those that arose in later years, like Zen, for example, apparently disagreed, or did not appreciate this particular teaching. Which is fine. But I imagine it must have been - and must be - difficult to reconcile within oneself, and within an established institution, that the teaching, the institution, the life you have lived, is at odds with the original teacher's final message. It must be difficult to be a Buddhist in a different school, if the Buddha you hold high as your teacher has told you that everything you have been doing and believeing is not the end of the road, and perhaps, is the wrong road...One way to handle that discomfort owuld be to discredit the teaching and those who follow it, somehow....But that's tricky thinking... I mean, can you imagine the Dalai Lama turning around one day and saying, "YOu know, I think I was wrong. I must be true to my teacher, the orignial Shakyumuni Buddhas teachings. I am not a reincarnation, I am just another guy trying to do godd in the world. but I was mistaken. Let's all go home now, cause quess what! we can all be enlightened in this lifetime!" Hence, there is trouble in River City...-R --68.45.57.193 04:42, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Also, there is a different relationship to the cycle of birth and death. Enlightenment is not a "being" its a "doing" Accessing our innate wisdon, or Buddha nature, or our enlightened state of being, is atool we can use to create a more meaningful birth and death, and a happier existence in this life, and the next.. Enlightenment is not a finite goal, rather it is an infinte resource available to us at any time, which with practice we can call upon to inform our lives and help us to make the sufferrings of birth and deaeth sources of joy.

The SGI Charter and Nichiren Buddhism 1 religion conflict is evidently publicly visible but no one has ever brought up the point in the main article.Next I will be doing some changes to the main article by bringing in the whole SGI Charter for wiki readers instead of having a link and a partial portion. Next is the ichinen sanzen portion, I need people who can verify if it's stand alone organisation apart from Hokkeko, otherwise, I would suggest that we drop a link from it to the Hokkeko main article, as they are both lay organisations to Nichiren Shoshu.Thank you and Regards.Gammadion 17:59, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

What do you mean by "evidently publicly visible" What population are you referring to when you say "public?"

From The New Human Revolution, Vol 1, pg. 42, Ikeda, writes: "Some religions exist for the people, others exist only for the sake of religion. Religions for the sake of religion descends into dogmatism, ultimately binding and enlslaving people in the name of faith. As a result, people are deprived of their spiritual freedon, and common sense and humanity are denied, deepening the rift between religion and society.... Nichiren Daishonin's Buddhism is a religion that exists for the people, aiming to bring about a flowering of humanity in each person."

--151.198.99.71 22:39, 10 October 2005 (UTC)Don't mind me butting in, I was from SGI before. Their tactics in recruiting and brainwashing is way out of my mind. They mention that they respect religious freedom in their charter but they go about criticizing other religions as erroneous. I wonder how it can be presented in the article with neutrality?Thanks if anyone can put this point up.Gammadion 15:21, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Forgive me, but if that's the "worst" criticism you can come up with, it's pretty weak. Implicit in the message of nearly ANY religion is a belief that the particular religion you are talking about is the correct one, and therefore all other religions must be erroneous.

To criticize SGI (or any religion) for saying that other religions are erroneous is to completely miss the point of having different religions in the first place. That is not something that should be added to the article, unless you want to add a note to EVERY article about EVERY religion saying "this religion claims to be the correct one and says that other religions are erroneous."

There are a few religions that pay lip service to the notion that they do not consider other religions to be erroneous, but again, if that were truly the case then why do they even have their own religion instead of joining another?

Finally, I am glad that you (Gammadion) did not put your complaints into the main article. Without any backing evidence, they are inappropriate.

--Enumclaw 20:53, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

You know, I keep looking at this thing, and it is really bad. I mean there is one or two sentences in the intro about what SGI is and says it is, and then the whole rest of it is about what is supposedly wrong with it. You don't see the same type of thing elsewhere. Its disrespectful. No matter what critics may say, the record for this organization is really quite remarkable. The disdain conveyed in this discussion is really out of proportion. Is there any level headed neutral editor out there daring enough to speak up? I would, but I am pretty sure I'd be attacked as being biased in the other direction. Did anyone hear Studs Terkel on Air America Radio today? He talked about people who "lean to the center," and how its become a nation in which everyone is so bent towards the center, that when a person comes by who is just standing upright, he's considered to be radical! It reminds me of this discussion... - KPMP--151.198.99.71 20:13, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Apologies again for putting up the wrong idea in my message, I don't dump bad critisms in a main article.BTW, it wasn't meant to be an attack, just a common sense comment on dumb P.R. by SGI. In the first place, according to SGI Nichiren Buddhism doctrine, all other religions out there are wrong and can be proven by debate and disasters will appear as stated in Rissho Ankoku Ron if a country does not believe in the true faith(Nichiren Buddhism)are often quoted in recruiting members from the public. Then when everyone reads the SGI charter about respecting religious freedom, the contradiction is apparent yet nothing is mentioned about the contradiction in the main article. The conumdrum is that I can't seem to word my point out in a more neutral view about the contradiction hence I am asking for help. http://www.sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/Nichiren/Gosho/RisshoAnkokuRon.htm Gammadion 17:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

I hear what you are saying - but I think there is a similar problem in taking the Bible (and other works) out of context. Although there is a tremendous difference between a document that is said to be the word of God, and one that is merely the writings of some pretty wise and basically regular men, I think you would agree that it would be a mistake to take the Bible literally. In the case of Nichiren, in my understanding of him, he was applying the teachings of Shakyakuni Buddha to the events of his day. A messenger, if you will. It must be remembered that The Rissho Ankoku Ron was written in the 13th century in Japan - the conditions, scientific knoweldge etc., were very different. At that time, standing up for humanism required considerable determination, to say the least.The catastrophes etc., were not Nichiren's invention, but rather his reading of what Shakyamuni foretold in the Lotus Sutra. To stand up for a form of Buddhism that made no distinctions between men and women, rich or poor, layman and priesthood, was very heavy stuff. In addition, even Nichiren writes that there is a time and place - and a voice - for every teaching, and this he takes directly from the original Buddha's Lotus Sutra. In the time and place in which he lived, the teaching was what it was, and he was what he was. This age demands something different.

It is, in my opinion, also somewhat erroneous (though this is what other Buddhist sects and scholars stress) to suggest that he was trying to "do in" other forms of religion. His message was that all forms of Buddhism should go back to the basics, and examine the foundation on which they stood - that is, the teachings of Shakyamuni. His demand was that the priesthood of the day go back and study and question for themselves, whether they were, in practicing Buddhism as they were, were in accord with his vision and his teachings. He was calling them out, basically. His argument was more a call to reason, to look at the evidence (such as it was, and as it appeared to them in Medieval Japan) and test it against the doctrine on which they based their - and their followers - spiritual lives.

As I understand him, Nichiren wasn't really about destroying other religions so much as he was he was about freeing the people from the tyranny and misuse of religious institutions and from the control of corrupt individuals in positions of religious authority. In that, he was also following the Lotus Sutra, which made it clear that there was no need for religious institutions to stand between a human being and his enlightenment. That is also precisely what SGI's Makiguchi, Toda were, and today's Ikeda are, promoting. That is what each of them has lived for. Makiguchi and TOda were imprisoned for standing up for religious freedom in Japan during WWII.

Finally, and this I hope is not offensive, and it is not meant to be slanderous, but one must consider, that if you want to examine conflict between message and message. or between message and actions, one can easily turn an eye to Christianity and Islam for that. Now there's conflict. Yet the obivous conflicts that come from the erroneous thoughts deeds and actions of individuals, small groups, and leaders within, and espousing, these religions, somehow escape mention in the first paragraph of an essay on the religions themselves. Of course, that doesn't mean they shouldn't - just that if we are going to highlight the conflict of one in that way, we should probably hold all to the same scrutiny...

At any rate, I am sorry I have nothing to cite at the moment - I'll get it for you. But in the meantime, I think you might be able to resolve your conflict by simply reviewing the www.SGI.org and www.SGI-USA.ORG sites and some of their affiliates, again. Search them for religious freedom and you will find a wealth of papers, reports, speeches etc on this. And if you examine, you will see that the people -- and more importantly, the "leadership" -- really do walk the talk and talk the walk. - Ruby--138.89.139.84 23:33, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Not much help is it? As I said, as long as the Soka associations in various countries uphold Rissho Ankoku Ron and the various 1 religion goshos as true to the tenets of the Nichiren Buddhism, it must be reported as so. The various goshos may be written in Medieval Japan, but nevertheless it is still viewed by adherents as true to the religion. If fear tactics, like the recent Tsunami in Aceh, earthquakes and bombings, are used to recruit members from the public by quoting Rissho Ankoku Ron, SGI is not any different from any end of the world cult. Such cults espouse fear on one hand and peace on the other. By the way, searching SGI.org and SGI-USA.org isn't going to help one little bit as SGI and President Ikeda has done more than its fair share of "Peace, Culture and Education" endorsements in the above websites which is just a facade in terms of religious freedom. Thanks again and best regards.Gammadion 06:23, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

What are you talking about?? Are you suggesting that SGI is behind the Tsunami, etc.?!? Can you quote something to support your claims? It seems that you are very fearful - but I still don't see what you are afraid of - an organization that has done so much "peace culture and education endorsements" is frightening to you? --151.198.99.71 19:42, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I think there is confusion about the ways in which religions have historically spread, (through war and violnce, control, domination, submission, oppression, etc) with the true meaning, intention, and message of this writing. Nichiren's ideas about the spread of a religion is something quite different. As I understand it, the Rissho Ankoku Ron (also called "On Establishing the Correct Teaching for the Peace of the Land") though dense reading in its detail, is in essence saying that the world will find peace when it finds the truth of the Lotus Sutra -- and that the truth of the Lotus Sutra most simply stated is that all beings are equal and all are equally capable of "enlightenment," (also known as "absolute happiness" or "absolute freedom"), and therefore all beings are equally worthy of respect ( see Lectures on Rissho Ankok Ron, Ikeda, see Lotus Sutra, SGI commentary)

What this means is that when human kind truly learns to live in a way that is completely in accord with this truth, then there will be peace. How do we do that, though? Well, that is the question - and it is the point of the practice of Nichiren Buddhism -- all the other study, the practice of developing compassion, the understanding of the laws of karma, etc., etc.

But what is most important, is this: Notice, first, that the Rissho Ankoku Ron is a dialog. Second, that it does not say anything about imposing this religious practice upon others by force, and it does not suggest that people are not free to follow their own paths - in fact, it assumes that there will be other paths, and that people will follow them. It does think that they are on the wrong path, but it respects their freedom to take that path. It does not say that they should be violently overthrown from following their beliefs. Just that if they keep doing so, they can expect to keep getting the same results.

In his life example, he does not violently bring anyone to the practice. Rather, he says just that we should always talk to people -- sometimes very strongly, other times less so, sometimes in heated doctrinal debates (as was his task), and other times in simple exchange of information, ideas, and experiences (which is what Ikeda does, and what each practicioner of SGI's Nichiren Buddhism does) -- but clearly, always, we should be talking about the truth -- that is the truth of the Lotus Sutra. That we should not lose heart. And that slowly, people will come to understand this truth, learn how to live this truth - and then, there will be peace. -- R --68.45.57.193 02:58, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion continues at Komeito issues