User talk:JALockhart/My page for collaborators on SGI issues

Additional information about me
I joined Nichiren Shoshu of America in 1972 and was active there until 1976, when I moved to Germany. In Germany, I belonged to Nichiren Shoshu Deutschland. In 1981 I came to Japan to attend Soka University, where I took the Japanese course for one year and then went to the university proper (Sociology) from 1982. My original intention was to study Buddhism and Japanese culture, and to learn to differentiate between what was Buddhism and what was Japanese cultural interference; and I wanted to be a translator in the tradition of Kumarajiva (still got a way to go there!).

I eventually left the university in 1984 or 85 (don't remember which), but I did that because I'd gotten married and decided that work was more important, and because I'd decided—after the teacher I was studying under passed away—that the education I was getting there was not congruent with my goals.

My time at Soka University was particularly instructive about the workings of Soka Gakkai and the mentality of young Japanese Soka Gakkai members as well as the leaders. I had occasion to see and even meet (exchange greetings with) Daisaku Ikeda several times. Despite what I saw there and heard at meetings, I remained—at the urging of several Nichiren Shoshu priests—a Soka Gakkai member, at least until 1991, when I decided I'd seen and had enough.

Regardless of what I think of Soka Gakkai as an organization and its leadership, I have no real bones to pick with individual members as long as they reciprocate. I know that most Soka Gakkai members are sincere and believe that they are doing good, and I know that most of them are also good people. But I also believe they are misled and that some of them put common sense and even the law aside when it comes to defending their organization and President Ikeda, and I believe their admiration for President Ikeda is in many ways unwholesome. Comments and exchanges are welcome.

And, yes, I am still a Nichiren Shoshu believer and belong to a temple. I do not, however, engage in active efforts to "re-shakubuku" Gakkai members. I think it's a waste of breath and time, and people have to come to their own conclusions. Jersey_Jim 16:27, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thoughts on the master-and-disciple/mentor topic (working)
For one thing, it is not static: other than the Buddha (Nichiren Daishonin) himself, there is no one eternal master, let alone one to whom all look with unconditional loyalty (as a matter of fact, loyalty isn't even a factor). Who is master (the person relating the Buddha's teachings) and who is disciple (the person who is hearing the Buddha's teachings) is relative—i.e., based on the situation at any given time. That is why, in Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, it is referred to as shitei sōtai (師弟相対: the master–disciple, or "teacher–being taught," relationship) and not, as previously in SGI, shitei funi (師弟不二: the oneness of master and disciple).

Interpreting the gosho, functions of the priesthood
(initial reaction to Ruby's post on the Nichiren Shoshu talk page; still incomplete)

The Soka Spirit site is very well done, and I think its content pretty much speaks for itself. I don't think the Nichiren Shoshu sites originating in Japan are done nearly as well, and some of the translation is not the best. As far as the quotation from the Myohoji site goes, I believe you're misinterpreting it as well as the gosho passages. Please remember that there are other gosho passages the balance out those you've cited above, those that admonish us along the lines of telling us to seek out priests who know this Sutra and learn from them (Niike Gosho, I believe—I'm on the road right now and don't have access to any references). Gosho passages should not be taken in isolation, but together with the full context in which they were written (hence the annotations provided in even The Major Writings).

I also think your perception of the priests "standing between us and our enlightenment" is misplaced. One of the priests' jobs ("functions" is perhaps a better word) is to pass the teachings ("the Law") from one generation to the next without adulteration (this is especially true of the high priest) so that we can attain enlightenment through it. In this function, the high priest is acting on behalf of Nichiren Daishonin and represents the World of Buddhahood (as in the Ten Worlds), which is why we respect him when he is functioning in this capacity. Another of the priests' functions is to guide us to the Gohonzon and help us interact with it as Nichiren Daishonin taught. It is through our interacting with the Gohonzon, a process called kyochi myogo, that we bring forth the Buddha nature—the Law or Dharma—within and develop our Buddhahood. This, essentially, is what is meant by taking faith through (not in) the priesthood, and this is what is meant by their acting as intermediaries. 08:13, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

High priest as a vessel
法水瀉瓶 (hossui shabyō), 内証 naishō and 外用 geyū, etc.

Sensei and its use by Gakkai members (working)
Fwiw, I'm quite experienced with the Japanese language and how sensei is used, as well as the particulars of how sensei is used among Japanese SGI members. The English rendering master is, I believe, slightly misleading; not because it is too strong, but rather because it is too weak. Ikeda is neither a medical doctor nor a university professor, nor is he in any other position that motivate people to address him as sensei in any of the senses you cite. I also doubt that SGI members call him sensei to be sarcastic, which is one of the other uses of the word; non-SGI members in Japanese society, however, do use it sarcastically in reference to him that way (in writing, they spell it in katakana rather than kanji to emphasize this point—kind of like putting something in scare quotes in English) precisely because Japanese SGI members use sensei in reference (or, perhaps, deference) to him to express their unconditional adulation.

I imagine things in this area in the Americas and Europe have change quite a bit because of the realization that appellations like master and such do not fly well in western cultures. But Soka Gakkai's switch from master to mentor and attributing its previous use of master to Nichiren Shoshu baggage is disingenuous at best and a deceptive at worst, for two reasons: first, Nichiren Shoshu uses master in a traditional sense—the master who guides disciples and followers in the proper exercise of faith—and as such is limited in scope to faith only; this is much different from what SGI implies it to mean. And second, mentor is far too-weak a term for the degree of commitment SGI hopes its members will have towards Ikeda (although, admittedly, it does not force the matter). SGI members, particularly Japanese members, are generally ready to do anything for Ikeda, even to the point of committing crimes (and there have been numerous instances of harassment, wiretapping, abuse of official status, and even theft of personal information or leaking of confidential corporate information committed by Gakkai members in the name of "protecting Ikeda-sensei" or the Gakkai, hence the immense distrust of the organization in Japanese society).

For the record, I find the Nichiren Shoshu's usage of master annoying and ill-advised as well, since what they mean is 師 shi, which has different connotations and has no negative associations. Unfortunately, I am not in a position to make the final decisions on translation choices. Best regards, Jersey_Jim 07:04, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Meaning of "hell" (and falling into it) in Buddhist contexts
Hell as a condition of life, not a place where people spend eternity. Concepts of "reverse relationship" (逆縁: gyakuen) and the "poison-drum relationship" (毒鼓の縁: dokku no en). When someone "falls in hell" because of their opposition to or slander of the Correct Teachings, they have made a connection to the Correct Teachings and are therefore also always ultimately saved by (i.e., attain enlightenment through) the Correct Teachings. In Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism, no one is ever damned to hell for eternity, no matter what "sin" they've committed; so to interpret warnings of hell to mean enternal damnation is to misunderstand the fundamental priciples of (1) cause and effect, and (2) "reverse relationships".
 * Meaning of 順逆(じゅんがく) 共(とも) に <rb>救</rb><rp>(</rp><rt>すく</rt><rp>)</rp> わん.
 * Meaning of <rb>毎自作是念</rb><rp>(</rp><rt>mai ji sa ze nen</rt><rp>)</rp>  <rb>以何令衆生</rb><rp>(</rp><rt>i ga ryo shujo</rt><rp>)</rp>  <rb>得入無上道</rb><rp>(</rp><rt>toku nyu mujo do</rt><rp>)</rp>  <rb>速成就仏身</rb><rp>(</rp><rt>soku joju busshin</rt><rp>)</rp> (the last section of the 16th chapter recited in gongyo)

Ikeda personality cult
I think it's bad enough that an organization would assert that its supreme leader is a living Buddha, especially while he was still alive; but this incident is all the more important because of the position of the "True Buddha" concept in Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism (and, at that time at least, Soka Gakkai): it was a core tenet to both. I agree that there is no point in asserting the Ikeda is equal to or supercedes Nichiren, because the notion should be ludicrous; but it was done within Soka Gakkai between 1972 and 1979; and even after Soka Gakkai renounced the idea (blaming it on "errant" and "overzealous" leaders), it just went underground within the organization for a while and, if the Seikyo Shimbun and other Gakkai publications in Japan are anything to go by, is still alive and well in the form of members' practice of referring to Ikeda as their "master for life" of 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. And what other organization do you know of that names hundreds of its own buildings after a living person, followed by "commemorative"? There are thousands of "Ikeda Commemorative Halls" around Japan.

Comment Important Disclosure - I'm not an SGI member or even a Buddhist, but my wife and all my in-laws are. And my wife and I have had some less-than-pleasant discussions about the person I sardonically call "Dai-kun." However, if someone is going to be declared a "living Buddha," doesn't that necessitate them being alive? Jrhoadley 19:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Good point, although I think most people think of a Buddha as someone in the past or someone's position after they've passed away. Good luck dealing with your family on this, though the best strategy would probably be to avoid it altogether unless you find it interfering with your family's ability to function. That, anyhow, is what I did for year until my wife finally came to her own conclusions about Dai-kun. Best regards, Jim_Lockhart 23:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the advice. Actually my wife has pretty much given up and now accepts that I'm just being "baka" and ignores me. And I don't share my views with my other in-laws. I've reached a conclusion that sounds similar to what you have.  I agree that Soka Gakkai is a "cult of personality" focused around Ikeda Daisaku.  But I also think its generally harmless, other than taking resources from members. In this regard, it is indistiguishable from most "mainstream religions." Cheers,Jrhoadley 16:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Introduction of Sorts
Feel free to delete or re-categorize this section, just wasn't sure of the appropriate way to make a first contact. I am an American in Japan, and a fairly new member to SGI (getting that info out up front). I have just started to get into SGI related Wikipedia articles.

The first few posts I saw of yours (in a discussion page) I was certain that you were somehow anti-SGI (I was probably right). However, as I continued to read, I saw that you stand staunchly on the values of presenting the facts and citing your sources.

I am new to SGI, and am still learning, but I can see that we see many things form different points of view. We had involvement in the organization at different times, and for different reasons.

I think that as I find places where I can contribute yours will probably be a good example to follow. I expect that at times we will totally agree, and at others we will totally disagree, but I can see that you are fair as well. I have seen more places where you fought against unfounded slanders against SGI, while at the same time encouraging people with both good and bad comments to site their sources. Emry (talk) 07:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)