Talk:Soka Gakkai

--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)

---

What is the political party related to Soka Gakkai? Zengakuren?

Would it help to say that Soka Gakkai has a role in Japan similar to that of Opus Dei among Catholics?

-- Error 01:22, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I added a link to the New Komeito party. It seems like it should have been there already... --Carl 04:11, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You know, isn't it about time to drop the Komeito reference -- unless you want to also give the same weight and reference to so many other organizations that SGI *IS* affiliated with - such as the Boston Center for Peace, the Toda Institute for Global Peace Policy and Research, etc. I did a Google News search and an EBSCO news search, and *everytime* the two names come up together, there is also a disclaimer that says the two groups are NOT connected. And on each of their websites it says the same thing. So give it up already! KPMP --151.198.99.71 22:39, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

The article fails to say *why* Soka Gakkai and its leader are controversial... excess of precaution?

Soka Gakkai has been identified in the Japanese and U.S. press as militant and aggressive in their recruiting tactics. The New Komeito or "Clean Government Party" is highly controversial because Daisaku Ikeda and other SGI leaders have said that their aim is for the party to rule Japan and institute Buddhism as the state religion. I think this article should provide links to opposing views of SGI, or at least admit that opposing views exist.--Goettel 01:17, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

http://freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/s/soka/

Where does it say that SGI is "militant and aggressive in their recruiting tactics?" Where have you seen these claims made? "Daisaku Ikeda and other SGI leaders have said that their aim is for the party to rule Japan and institute Buddhism as the state religion." ? It seems fairly irresponsible, not to mention unfair, perhaps libelous to make such statements about a person or organization without proof. And by the way who is Steve Hassan? The above site has a disclaimer that says:

 Copyright © 2001-2005 Freedom of Mind Resource Center, Inc. 

  Freedomofmind.com fully supports religious freedom and the
  United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The fact 
   that a person’s name or group appears on our website does not  
  necessariyl mean they are a destructive mind control cult. 
 They appear because we have received inquiries and have 
  established a file on the group.
  The Freedom of Mind Resource Center Inc. was established by
  cult expert Steve Hassan. 

Shouldn't we be using better sources? This is just some guy with his own little "business" and a website. What makes you think he is reliable?

---

It appear that annonymous "62.141.83.33" is a member of Aleph (Aum Shinrikyou). Check his edit history. --FWBOarticle 06:06, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

I have recently been studying Nichiren Buddhism through the teachings of SGI. A good friend of mine is an SGI member.

All in all, I think this article is relatively fair-handed. I have had some problems with the almost-hero-worship that SGI displays towards Mr Ikeda, and my friend and I have discussed it openly and honestly.

As far as recruiting goes, my own experience has been that they are most definitely NOT pushy, abusive, or even irritating; rather, they are just like any other religious group that has an evangelical side. They're excited about their religion and beliefs, they honestly think that those beliefs are the best for people, and they enjoy sharing them with people who are curious.

SGI does have some various controversies around it, but some are mainly driven by conflict between the Nichiren Shoshu religious group and SGI. Some are more political in nature in terms of internal Japanese politics, and finally you have some that are the "cult" accusations and so forth.

Ultimately, each of these may have some measure of truth, and some measure of falsehood. The article on SGI treats things reasonably fair. About all it really lacks is more in-depth information on some of these things, and I am sure people will add to it in the future. (With luck they will not use Wiki as a forum for a big edit/flame war.) Enumclaw

Purpose of Komeito

Can you produce a quote where Daisaku Ikeda or someone from the (New) Komeito leadership says that their purpose is to institute Daishonin's buddhism as a state religion? Otherwise that's just another conspiracy theory.

Komeito was formed to prevent Japan from sliding back to the same mad totalitaristic government that made WWII to happen and to protect freedom of religion. Maybe you know, but wartime Japanese government imprisoned 13 Soka Gakkai leaders, including Soka Gakkai founder (who died there in malnutrition) and his follower Josei Toda, just because they didn't acknowledge state Shinto. This is all well documented in various speeches by Toda or Ikeda (recently in The New Human Revolution—Volume 14: Fierce Winds).

---

Made an edit- I deleted the definition of "shakubuku". I can live with the criticism of SGI; even though I am a (proud) member of the group, I believe that the page is factual in the first paragraph of the "criticism" section. However, I do not believe the definition "bend and conquer" is correct for the word "shakubuku". For a reference (and yes, I know it's an SGI-linked group that put up the reference page) see http://www.gakkaionline.net/Imagery/Shakubuku.html.

I think that the reference is very open and explicitly explains not only the actual definition of the word, but also where those who use the incorrect definition go wrong.

Finally, in today's SGI world (at least in my corner of it!) "shakubuku" has a meaning more along the lines of to talk about, spread, and propogate the faith- but not through beating people down, but rather by being a friend and explaining it. I just don't know anyone who's out there intentionally saying to other SGI members "I'm going to break XXX down and convert them".

So the "definition" of shakubuku had to go.

--Enumclaw 08:34, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Glad to hear it! It bugged me too. I think it is important to put shakubuku in perspective -- at the time Nichiren was doing his thing, he was basically preaching a humanist religion to a militaristic nation where the religion and government were completely corrupt. The Buddhist practices of the day were steeped in tradition and history, I mean, at that time, women could not expect to ever be enlightened, until they reincarnated as men! ANd here was Nichiren saying not only that all men were capable of enlightenment, but so were women! And that they didn't even need a priest to pray for them to acheive it, and nor did they have to wait until the lived a thousand ifetimes! The priests of that age were not about to hear anything that suggested they might be going about it the wrong way. So, he had to be hard hitting, based in the doctrine, and he had to address them at their own level with their own doctrine. So Shakabuku at that time was pretty intense, and very different.

Today, the world is much different - the ideas expressed in Nichiren Buddhism are hardly outlandish or threatening - peace, equality of all humankind, self-determination, compassion, interconnectedness of all beings, etc. These are things we pretty much agree on -- its just HOW do we make it happen that we disagree about...and so when we "shakabuku" today, its really just about sharing another approach that can help us to make the world the kind of place we'd all like it to be...KPMP --151.198.99.71 22:31, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

---

Criticism

Is there any need to repeat the same information that appears on Daisaku Ikeda?? this way it looks like mr. Ikeda is the cherry on top of SGI's cake. And again the useless list of awards. It's not neutral and this article is getting a biased, propaganda like definition of SGI. Specially in the last couple of days, the Criticism went from a criticism to biblical apology, please please please I know it's hard to be objective and that this is your faith but you can't post something on criticism that repeats what is written on Doctrine!!! It does not make any sense. An wikipedia article is not a vehicle for any faith, even if it's "true" buddhism. There are links that point to the official SGI sites so if someone likes or is into this buddhism he can get the pure form doctrine from there, wikipedia can't be a place to disseminate any Dogma because it's for the sake of information, and neutral information, not biased!

I disagree - this is a discussion area, and sometimes, you can't be neutral unless you have discussed whatever the thing is -- in this case, its the"dogma" as you put it, behind this organization. Part of the inability for people to remain neutral is because they do not really understand the topic. That is the point of discussion, I thought. SO why don't we let the people who know what they are talking about and have opinions, hash out their differences so they can come up with mutually acceptable review? Remember, what you ar ecalling dogma is not static -- at least not in this religion.-KPMP

It isn't static? How can a dogma not be static? I'm confused here. My criticism is/was about clarity in the article, all the awards and books and propaganda doesn't inform properly. Not the detractors and also not the supporters of SGI-Nichiren Buddhism, it's just noise.

Yes I agree with you, let's discuss, but let's find a common platform to do so, and a one clear of rubbish. --P- 23:18, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps I've misunderstood you. I was speaking to this point: "Criticism went from a criticism to biblical apology, please please please I know it's hard to be objective and that this is your faith but you can't post something on criticism that repeats what is written on Doctrine!!! " I thought you were referring to the Discussion Area of this page - where we re right now. I think this Discussion area IS the appropriate arena for addressing whatever needs to be addressed in order for people to come to a mutually satisfying review. Now, I think you must have meant in the actual article itself -- is that right?

My point about "dogma" is that it is not the same as in, say, a church, where there are rules precepts guidelines etc applied, which everyone must follow. This particular religion IS unusual because it does not have that kind of a static set of rules. I was at a meeting about Buddhism and Birht and Death, where the discussion was about Buddhists position on abortion, euthanasia and the like - and there was NO ONE ANSWER. This religion, unlike others, does NOT provide a fixed doctrine, other than to say you must work this out for yourself.Now, if that is not what you meant by "dogma" then, forgive me, I'm just not getting it. Try me again...But then again, I think this mix up is another example of why it is useful to have this space to discuss these things, and why I think at least in the case of this religion, it is unavoidable that we discuss such matters...Otherwise, we're writign about a topic without an appreciation for what we are writing about...I hope you get my distinction...

---

On Dogma and Ok, this Nichiren religion has a low intensity to neutral on moral tabus like «abortion, euthanasia and the like» that hasn't anynithing to do with dogma or a dogmatic doctrine. A short example of dogma is the impossibility of a catholic to question the origin of god in contradiciton to the implicit given that it's their supreme entity and has always been here so the birth of god could be considered dogma. Want to see an Nichiren Buddhism dogma? Just ask yourself or in a reunion if you can attain enlightenement without chanting Nam-Myo-Rengue-Kyo, the answer I'll be no. Why? Because that is what the Daishonin expounded, and if you do not believe that, well, no Buddhahood on this lifetime. Isn't there any other way?NO? Another dogma, debating the semantics, better yet, the mystical value of the mantra Nam-Myo-Rengue-Kyo ie. why are the words spoken in that particular language, has that language a mystical cause and effect? If so what are the proofs of this and how can we determine if they are not random events? Do other languages have a similar proprietry? Is it the sound? If the gohonzon is a mirror of my life why has it to be written in a language I don't understand? shouldn't it be writen in a universal way being it a representation of a so called universal mystical law? Does this mean that this language has mystical propreties? If so how can this be proved? You can't make this questions because you'll end up questioning the faith itself like I have, and believe me this is a very short version of my discussion points with no answer from SGI members apart from some «heart» arguments... yes and faith supposedly comes from the "heart". While I do enjoy a level of metaphor I can only take so much in all of my kalpas. I've been through all of this before. I have doubts about everything and it's very hard to argue with a person that claims something to be true without a method only relying on belief, faith or worst gullability. And it's all the same to me really, a Catholic is not different from a Buddhist because the problem isn't what you believe in, it's the believing itself and trying hard that your choice be the perfect scale for what your eyes see in an exercise of self inflicted miopia. Can't bend the world? Bend the thought. If, and if only, a Catholic praying really hard and being really comited to the prayer and having only good thoughts do you think the mystical whatever he generates is diferent from a buddhist just because of a diferent text book or a diferent ritual? We mustn't forget that wemade all of this games, the language and the high spirited notion of valuewe embed on words. Can someone, please explain what Faith is? [don't answer I beg you] --P- 04:51, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Listen, no one is trying to tell you you have to accept or believe anything. But for those who do, these are worthwhile discussions and debates. As for Nichiren dogma, in fact, it is possible to attain Buddhahood without chanting Nam Myoho Renge Kyo. There are many people -- Martin Luther King, Jesus, Mahatma Ghandi, for example, who have obviously manifested their Buddha nature. SGI points to these and many more as examples all the time. I really think a lot of your perspective is due to misinformation about what the religion is really about. But like I said, if you don't like it, or believe in it, that's your perogative. But don't crap on people who do.

As for the language, I imagine your concern with that comes from the old Catholic fear about speaking in tongues and all of that stuff (at least that is usually the case when I have heard this point raised - forgive me if I am wrong in your case). Honestly, there are translations available if you want them at SGI and many other places, if it is that important to you. But again, I think your concern stems from a misunderstanding -- no noe asserts that these words hold some magical quality. It isn't like you say them and them its like Open Says Me! everything magiaclly changes. Chanting is a discipline, a form of meditation, wherein through the excercise of chanting, you are awakened to your own deepest wisdom - your Buddha Nature, if you will. This phrase is what is used during this type of meditation. What you are asking is like saying Why does Walt Whitman's Leaves of Grass have to be in English? WHy in just those particular words? or some such thing. It is what it is! The question is, why can't you just let it be what it is?

I could go on and give you a lond(er) winded answer, etc., etc., but it doesn't really matter. The name of somthing is its name. That's it. You don't call "Bob" "Joe" just because you don't understand or like the name Bob. YOu don't call "America" "Swaziland" because they are not the same thing. Names have meaning and the word itself carries the meaning of the thing. There really is no mystery in that.

As for "proof,", well, once again, I have to say I think you were miseducated. In fact, of all the religions I have come across - and there have been a few - this is the ONLY one that doesn't expect you to just goout on blind faith. Its try it and see. Prove it to yourself. Period. Obviously, it seems to work for a lot of people. Maybe its just not for you. And that's fine. Enjoy your life. Butlet the rest of the world enjoy theirs as they see fit, as well.- KPMP --151.198.99.71 20:06, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Also the definition of Shakubuku wasn't very far from what I felt with the people of SGI I met. But I won't touch that.

quote: «..rather by being a friend and explaining it..» hummm yes...thank you very much... after the 14th time it get's close to torture.

I just feel there should be a greater quality in this article, from people that aren't biased SGI followers or detractors like myself.

That would be nice...

also... there are to many links in the SGI page... it gives a very disruptive image when compared with other pages. Thsi is the SGI page so there is no real need for a link like the one that get you to some activity that is sponsered by SGI is there?

--Primeirocrime 09:07, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for trimming the links. There were far too many. -Willmcw 00:21, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I disagree. In fact, if we use the article on the Church of Scientology, it would be appropriate to include small sections of the article to describing at least some of the major organizations that have been founded by SGI and/or Dr. Ikeda. There is an inconsistancy in your rational here that I don't understand. -R

I also notice that there is no consistancy in the decision to include links to sites critical of a given religion or religious institution. THere are no such links on the Catholic CHurch and the Dalai Lama sites, for instance, but there are on this one and on Scientology. There are definately many such sites out there. How, why, who decides these things? It seems to reflect the bias of the individuals writing the article, not any attempt to be truly neutral. THere should at least be consistancy across the board...Either include critical links everywhere, or don't include them. =R--68.45.57.193 00:58, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

I don't recall having given a rationale at Church of Scientology. Certainly it is worthwhile to have a representative sampling of websites which add information. But Wikipedia is not a web directory. There's no need for along list of websites, particularly if one of the links goes to a portal which has those others links. If we are going to list organizations then we should do it in the body of the article, rather than in the "external links" section. Also, Wikipedia is not consistent. -Willmcw 01:02, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

R--[[User:68.45.57.193 mentions «There are no such links on the Catholic Church and the Dalai Lama sites» Did you check the history on those pages? When I first came here there where no links either.

Wikipedia isn't perfect but hey, did you check Madre Teresa of Calcuta? [1] - some people also think she is saint.