Talk:Soka Gakkai International/Archive 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive 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.

Nichiren Buddhism, Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, and SG/SGI

J1: Also, a note on references to Nichiren Buddhism: SG/SGI practice a (some would say twisted) form of Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, so writing just Nichiren Buddhism can be slightly misleading. Though I'm sure Nichiren Shoshu certainly no longer wants itself associated with SG (and SG certainly doesn't want to be associated with NS, but for obviously different reasons), I think it's important to maintain the distinction.

R: True. SGI practices Nichiren Buddhism. Nichiren Shoshu practices Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism. And you know, I know you are wed to your point of view - but would you please resist the urge? What good does it say to say "some woud say a "twisted form?" " When others could just as easily say "NS practices a "twisted form"" as well. Where does that get us? - R
J2: SGI's practice originated in Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, and spreading Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism was the stated purpose of Soka Gakkai until it changed its kisoku and kaisoku in—when was it, 2002? SG/SGI has its own form of Nichiren Buddhism now, perhaps; but only after it deviated from the Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism it was founded to spread. (Sources: the pre-change Soka Gakkai Bylaws; also, a series of books called Toda Josei Zenshu [The complete works of Josei Toda]. English sources include Fundamentals of Buddhism by Yasuji Kirimura, NSIC, rev. ed. 1984.)
R: THanks for the cites. I will see if I can get ahold of them.
J2 (con'd):One of SG's deviations is its overemphasis on the mentor-disciple (they used to call it "master-disciple") relationship between members and Daisaku Ikeda, which is a twisting of shitei sōtai, a concept about the relationship between teachers (priests) and their followers.
The whole problem is actually a fairly complicated and goes far beyond just this, but my point is that no one will get a clear, overall picture without delving into more than just what SGI wants them to know. They owe it to themselves to go further.
Have fun—–and, like, peace, man, y'know? <g> Gotta run (but not for cover), Jim_Lockhart 16:57, 18 November 2005 (UTC) (J2 entries)
R:Don't opinions differ as to whether or not it was founded to spread Nichiren Shoshu or not? But either way, what it is now is what it is now, and that should be valid. It is no longer a part of Nichiren Shoshu, NS doesn't want it back, and frankly, it looks like it has been a great benefit for SGI and its practioners....and it certainly looks like SGI isn't looking back. Perhaps the birth was painful - but now its on its own,no?
J4: Opinions don't (or shouldn't) differ as to whether it was founded to spread Nichiren Shoshu, because at the time of Soka Gakkai's incorporation in 1952, that was its stated purpose. Josei Toda told the Head Temple that he wanted to independently incorporate Soka Gakkai so as to better "protect the Head Temple (sōhonzan gego [総本山外護])" and to "faciliate propagation" and, as a condition for the Head Temple's allowing Soka Gakkai to incorporate independently, he promised to uphold the following three principles:
R: Soka Gakkai was founded as the Soka Kyokai Gakkai in 1930. After the war, Toda dropped the Kyokai aspect, and Soka Gakkai came into being under Josei Toda, for the purpose of spreading Nichiren's message - and they began working with the temple. It was not founded to serve Nichiren Shoshu, it was founded to support the laiety. Historically, Toda and Makiguchi held to Nichiren Daishonin's teachings above all else, embracing from the beginning the firm and oft repeated position that each human being was equally endowed with the potential for buddhahood (based on the Lotus Sutra) meaning that there was no difference between a layman and a priest. Because of this, there were several points in time in which they and the priesthood of Nichiren Shoshu came into conflict. For example, when Makiguchi and Toda opposed the miltaristic regime, not only because it sought to oppress the people, but also because of it's imposition of Shinto as a state religion. How does the temple explain its period of cooperation with the military regime at that time? How does it explain the division between it and Soka Gakkai at that time?
J4 (con'd):"Observe" means, of course, "not deviate from," and "Head Temple" is synonymous with Nichiren Shoshu. These three principles were also written into SG's bylaws (rules of incorporation), so maybe you can get hold of a copy of them.
R: So, in other words, because Makiguchi, Toda, and Ikeda dared to question the authorities in Nichiren Shoshu, because they did not submit to the "Head Temple" and they "deviated from" the path that the Head Temple wanted them to take, this was there crime?
J4 (con'd):Yes, neither wants the other anymore; and neither should be trying to rewrite history to suit itself. Such is the way of divorces. <sigh>
[Please note that this paragraph is not answering "yes" to R's question in the immediately preceding paragraph.]Jersey_Jim 15:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC)


R: Yes, divorce is horrible. But it isn't necessarily always the way that both parties go about trying to rewrite history...sometimes, one party trys their best to be civil, and work things out civilly, but its just not possible to...sometimes parties grow apart. Sometimes, the break up is actually a good thing -- a needed thing --a freeing thing; and because of it, the parties can move on and make a better life for themselves. But sometimes, only one party is able to do that; while the other party holds the grudge forever, and never really gets over it...Hmmm... -R --68.45.57.193 06:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
R: Oh, and one other thing. The "parents" may not be able to live together anymore, but that doesn't mean they don't care for the "children" (so to speak). In other words, Nichiren Shoshu and SG/SGI have split up -- but how well have the members been cared for in each situation? The members in SGI feel cared for and supported -- and/but they miss their friends who are with Nichiren Shoshu. It will be pretty impossible to convince them of this, of course, but it is true. I don't know how welcome an SGI member would be in a temple (since you said they'd have to "sneak in" I guess they not very, actually) but I am pretty sure if a temple member showed up at an SGI Center, s/he'd be cared for and welcomed - even if they didn't want to join SGI. -R --68.45.57.193 06:43, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
J4 (con'd):'Nuff for today. Jim_Lockhart 16:37, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
J5: This is getting really involved. I'm quite aware of the history of Soka Gakkai, its beginnings as Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, Messrs. Makiguchi's and Toda's imprisonments, and so on. The bit about Nichiren Shoshu cooperating with the military authorities is an SG(I) story and simply isn't true. 62nd High Priest Nikkyo even died in a fire started by the military people who had conscripted the Kyakuden to house laborers. I was not aware of any split between SG/SGI and NS in 1943–45, although I know there were differences of opinion about how to deal with the military.
And Messrs. Makiguchi and Toda may have been opposed to State Shinto, but they were not (as SG(I) claims) unconditionally against the war, as existing documents they left behind prove. I know you'll be (quite rightly) asking for citations on this, but I'd have to go hunting for them, and that (frankly) is beyond the scope of what I'm willing to do here: My intention was not to get bogged down in a circular parlor debate. Also, Messers. Makiguchi and Toda, though they had disagreements with the priesthood, were never antagonistic towards the priests, and they always respected the priesthood's authority on matters of faith and doctrine (and the priests, as far as I know them, never seek to impose any authority beyond that anyhow); further, Messers. Makiguchi and Toda never deviated from Nichiren Shoshu teachings and practice.
Excuse me if I've neglected to answer some of your questions, but I want to get off to bed. Anyhow, these details aside, I suggest we get back on track and figure out how to make this article work. Whattaya think? Jersey_Jim 15:35, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
(Ruby, one request: when you respond, could you please put your new comments after all those you're responding to, instead of inserting them between paragraphs of others' comments? I gets a bit confusing. See Wikipedia:Talk pages, or more specifically Wikipedia:Talk pages#Formatting, if you're not sure what I mean. Thanks, Jersey_Jim 15:51, 21 November 2005 (UTC))
Sorry - didn't know. Will do.
Quickly (as I've said good night twice already, if you followed my posts for the evening). First, it IS true that the priesthood accepted/compromised with the institution of Shinto and with the government. Not speaking of 62nd HP, but will ref. later. Second, I don't know whether or not they supported the war itself, but it is clearly established that Makiguchi and Toda were against militarism, and a militaristic education system -- this does not mean that they might not ever support a war. However, after the war, Toda was absoluteley opposed to war, and that is well documented. Third, I know they worked with/respected the priesehood (that point is also made/discussed earlier/elsewhere in reference to your view that that SG/SGI was making itself out to be a "victim of authority"). As did Ikeda. But just as Makiguchi and Toda also spoke up and questioned the priesthood at times, so did Ikeda. In this case, Ikeda questioned some of the rules that the priesthood was trying to instill. Frankly, if they had tried it when Toda was around, I doubt they would have gotten far. Toda was respectful, but he was also powerful and populr, and he would have been a much more difficult opponent than Ikeda. It looks from my perspective, like the priesthood didn't expect Ikeda to be much of a challenge, and when he was, they didn't care for it - or him. Hence the drama.
As for working on the article, yes, I think that is absolutely the priority and goal -- but I don't see how we can really avoid going through some of this stuff, mucky as it is. But I think its good to have this in an open forum like this, as ugly as it is, but foregt about all those who don't know what the hell we're talking about -- there are a lot of people out there on both sides of this who probably can benefit from this dialog, and probably can/should be contributing to it. At any rate, I think we are almost there, and I don't mind slogging through a little bit longer if you don't.
As for my part tonight, sorry, lets both deal with cites later. Sorry for my typos, too. Will fix later. I gotta get to sleep!!! - R signing off--70.111.27.59 08:29, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Different interpretations of WND

R:I guess one would have to accept that it was a part of something to accept that it had deviated from it. What I really would like to know is if the Writings of Nichiren Daishonin and the Lotus Sutra are different for Nichiren Shoshu? Because if they are the same, I understand why SGI went the way it did - there is no place for the kind of heirarchical temple priesthood type institution in the kind of world that SHakyamuni and Nichiren were describing. I frankly find it difficult to understand how anyone could both believe the WND and also believe in a priesthood. It seems like cognitive dissonance to me...

Gotta run, so have fun Jim_Lockhart 07:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC) (J1 entries)


Closing exchanges

G: Jim, I understand that I am just typing from my thoughts on the subject. But I was in the organization for 6 years. I am trying to validate that SGI isn't a nice organization from my personal viewpoint. I am also trying to gather fellow former members viewpoints on the organization as a whole. The words "indoctrinate" and "religiously intolerant" are loaded words but then again, they can be proven by the organization's activities.Gammadion 00:19, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Then prove them. - R
Gammadion, I know where you're coming from. Unfortunately, the kind of proof Ruby wants will take a lot of digging to come by. Obviously personal experience isn't enough, as it shouldn't be in this setting. Best, Jim_Lockhart 16:57, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

R: I hear both of you, really, I do, and I understand that you have had bad experiences, and I don't mean to trivialize them, or anything. I just really do think that it would be better for all concerned in the long run if you could approach it from a different standpoint. I mean, maybe it was something different once, or maybe it is/was SG...but everything I've seen read experienced and researched (and trust me, it took me a good 6 or 7 years of questioning everything before I would even try it!!) everything has shown me that SGI is a real deal and a good thing. It will take a lot to change my mind. And I invite you to - I have no interest in blind faith, afterall. Quite the contrary. I mean, why not write a book or something? Do the work and get it out there?...?

Anyway. I really do wish you well, and I really am sorry if you and your family have sufferred. I hope you can and/or have found peace and comfort. Good night. And Peace. - Ruby --70.21.220.149 07:42, 19 November 2005 (UTC)


Discussion continues at Talk:Soka Gakkai International/Archive09.