Zen and the Nichiren Schools Attack the Soka Gakkai to Cover Their Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-_
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-
Confirming Makiguchi's Pacifism & Exposing Putative Scholar Brian
Victoria's Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research, for Jon Petry
Jon Petry initially states,
| Chas is truly a special case. In fact I tend to think
| at times he is doing this effort on his own while at
| others I think this is all part of some silly SGI
| program to keep any real discussion on this board shut
| down. After all ARBN did a lot of damage to the SGI
| story line early on when people fist started using the
| internet. People found out quickly that there were
| other schools of Nichiren Buddhism than the SGI. They
| found out there were other versions of history than the
| one pushed by SGI. They found out that the SGI was much
| smaller than they were told it was. They were exposed
| to a serious critique of the SGI for the first time.
| And they asked questions of their senior leaders,
| questions that their senior leaders could not answer.
|
| The truth can be inconvenient at times and the SGI
| leadership has been squirming for a number of years as
| the number of people questioning it has grown, people
| who cannot merely be dismissed as mentally deranged as
| the SGI has attempted to label them in the past. Worse
| yet events in their history have been exposed to the
| glare of public exposure and they do not like that.
|
| For example:
|
| SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who
| stood up to the Japanese government during WWII and was
| pacifist.
|
| SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist
| prior to WWII. However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda
| were not pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
| There are speeches in existence in which they affirm
| their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
| However they did remonstrate against the imposition of
| the Imperial Talisman as an object of reverence as well
| as in their interpretation of Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged
| the Japanese Government to suppress all other Buddhist
| sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren
| Buddhism. They were imprisoned for the crime of lesse
| majesty, for their disrespect of the Imperial Talisman
| not because they were pacifists. This claim by the SGI
| does add insult to the injury endured by thousands of
| Buddhists in Japan who did demonstrate against the war
| and who were abandoned by the leaderships of their
| respective sects. Many of those people were imprisoned
| and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
| into exile.
|
| SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its
| principles and never compromised them.
|
| SGI Fact 1: The examples of the SGI violating its own
| principles are in fact too numerous to detail. But one
| which is relevant to Chas' regular rants is the claim
| that they have held fast to Nikko's admonitions while
| the NST has not. In particular they chastise the NST
| for sending priests for education at Rissho University
| which is run by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently they
| have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
| university, some with the approval of their own
| governing body in Japan. Of even greater amusement
| however are two other events. Shortly after the split
| between the SGI and the NST in the early 1990's the SGI
| approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
| affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu
| and pay for all overseas missionary work, of course with
| them running it. The Nichiren Shu, having seen what the
| SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly
| declined the offer. The second incident occurred when
| the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu and offered a
| million US dollars for a Nichiren authored Mandala. This
| offer was also rejected.
|
| SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
|
| SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service
| about democracy has been adamant about stamping out any
| attempts by its membership to adopt democratic
| principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
| SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their
| pleasure with no accountability to the rank and file.
| In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in
| the Nichiren Shu, the lay organizations did have elected
| leaders, the SGI through proxies such as the Rubys and
| other made posts belittling that fact. Similarly the
| SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
| towards actual financial accountability, keeping its
| finances a closely held secret. Members have no
| knowledge of what happens to their money once it is
| donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is to
| spent. This is vastly different from say NONA, the
| Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which
| regularly provides information to its members as to what
| funds have been taken in and how they have been spent,
| including a say at the local level as to how they should
| be spent.
|
| These are but a few of the issues that have been exposed
| here on ARBN over the years and caused the SGI no small
| amount of trouble. They are inconvenient truths that
| Chas and others like him would just as soon see burried,
| never to see the light of day. So Chas avoids them
| through his spam.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Chas. replies,
From Jon Petry,
| Chas is truly a special case. [snip]
Everyone is a special case. Your opinion of who I am and why I speak
are your opinions, as are yours of the impact of ARBN. Slandering the
Sangha is not a good cause. There are other schools of Buddhism,
distortions of Nichiren and Buddhism in general, yet only Nikko
Shonin's Fuji School correctly practices the Law at the heart of the
Lotus Sutra instead of incessantly slandering it. On this point I
offer you three quotes from the Gosho Zenshu, one from Sensei and one
from Nikko Shonin (I capitalize the relevant lines for clarity):
Quote #1 - From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p.
77-78, Chapter Seven - The Parable of the Phantom City, Point Seven,
on the passage "Now you must press forward diligently / so that
together you may [all] reach the place where the treasure is.",
. The Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings says: The
. word "all" refers to the Ten Worlds. The word "together"
. refers to the words [of the Buddha in chapter two, Expedient
. Means] "hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without
. any distinction between us." The word "reach" means to
. arrive at the level of the highest effect, the state of
. Buddhahood. "The place where the treasure is," the treasure
. land, is the holy mountain, Eagle Peak.
.
. Nichiren and his followers, those who chant Nam-myoho-renge
. -kyo, one and all will "together reach the place where the
. treasure is." This one word "together" means that, as long
. as they are together with Nichiren, they will reach the
. treasure land. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT TOGETHER WITH HIM, THEY
. WILL FALL INTO THE GREAT CITADEL OF THE AVICHI HELL.
[By the way, the first paragraph clarifies the issue of Buddhist
Democracy, without specifying the form, which I will discuss later on.
(Thank you once again, Nichiren Daishonin.)]
Quote #2 - From "The Minobu Transfer Document", WND II, p. 993,
. I NICHIREN, ENTRUST ALL OF THE TEACHINGS I HAVE PROPAGATED
. THROUGHOUT MY LIFE TO NIKKO, ACHARYA BYAKUREN. He should be
. the great guide and teacher in the spread of the essential
. teaching.
.
. When the head of the nation accepts this Law, the ordination
. platform, or sanctuary, of Hommon-ji temple should be
. established at Mount Fuji.
.
. We must wait for the proper time for this. This is what is
. meant by the specified ordination. My followers should abide
. by this document.
.
. Nichiren
.
. The order of the transmission of the Law: from Nichiren to
. Nikko. The ninth month in the fifth year of Koan [1282],
. cyclical sign mizunoe-uma
Quote #3 - From "The Ikegami Transfer Document", WND II, p. 996,
. I transmit the fifty years of teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha
. to Nikko, Acharya Byakuren. He should be the superintendent
. of Minobu-san Kuon-ji temple. ANYONE, EITHER LAY BELIEVER OR
. CLERIC, WHO GOES AGAINST THIS, IS A PERSON WHO ACTS AGAINST
. THE CORRECT TEACHING.
.
. At Ikegami in Musashi Province
. Nichiren
.
. The thirteenth day of the tenth month in the fifth year of
. Koan [1282], cyclical sign mizunoe-uma
In Living Buddhism (April 1998), President Ikeda wrote an article on
Nikko Shonin's 26 Admonitions.
<http://sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/SokaGakkai/Study/26Adm/>
Quote #4 - Sensei writes:
. These articles of warning were originally intended for
. priests. Nonetheless, we in the SGI, awakened [to our
. mission] as Bodhisattvas of the Earth, have strictly put
. these admonitions into practice.
.
. President Toda composed and dedicated the following poem to
. youth:
.
. You, young people,
. ENGRAVING IN YOUR HEARTS
. THE TWENTY-SIX PRECEPTS,
. dedicate your lives
. to the path of the Mystic Law.
.
. The "twenty-six precepts" in this poem refers to Nikko
. Shonin's twenty-six warning articles. President Toda urged
. young people to struggle for kosen-rufu, just as the second
. high priest admonished, with the spirit of not begrudging
. their lives.
Quote #5 - President Ikeda completely lists Nikko Shonin's 26
Admonitions, (from which I include the parts relevant to my arguments)
. I will here set forth some articles for the sake of later
. students of Buddhism. This is solely because I treasure the
. [Daishonin's] golden words regarding kosen- rufu.
.
. [... The 26 Admonitions go here...]
.
. I have set forth these 26 articles for the sake of the
. eternal salvation and protection of humankind. THOSE WHO
. VIOLATE EVEN ONE OF THESE ARTICLES CANNOT BE CALLED
. DISCIPLES OF NIKKO.
.
. thirteenth day of the first month of the third year of the
. Genko era (1333).
. Nikko(Seal)
.
. Note: The Fuji school is the line of Nikko Shonin's
. followers. The "late master" is Nichiren Daishonin.
People will continue to believe and hold forth on the idea that there
is even a glimmer of daylight between, or even the tiniest bit of
difference between these wonderful persons, as far as what Buddhism
is. There is not. They all agree with Nichiren Daishonin.
The function of dividing, of pitting one against the other is the
devilish function. The view of Buddhism as being different in any way
from what these men say is in and of itself, the purest delusion and
the fundamental ignorance or darkness.
I'm just as sure as I can be, that your next argument is to declare
everything I quoted as a forgery (the standard Five Senior Priest's
treachery), and to that I quote Nikko Shonin's 3rd Admonition:
. 3. There will [in the future] appear persons who slander our
. school, saying that the Gosho are forged writings. You must
. not associate with such evil priests.
I cannot participate in such a discussion. The rest of your charges
are unsubstantiated, as usual. We will address what substantiation
might consist of, below.
More from Jon Petry,
| ... the SGI leadership has been squirming [snip]
More unsubstantiated and frankly, not substantiable subjective
allegations. Characterizations such as these presented as evidence are
like asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" It is called the
Fallacy of Interrogation, where an unsupported assumption is inserted
in a question, or a challenge argument, in this case. [See
http://members.aol.com/standardcharter/logic.html]
================================================================
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up
| to the Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
Notice how, without presenting any proof, a statement is pre-
identified as a myth. This is also, the Fallacy of Interrogation.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior
| to WWII. However its founders, Makiguchi and Toda were not
| pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
Notice how you (Jon Petry) state an untruth about the SGI, and then
immediately reverse yourself.
How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a founder of a
group that did not exist until after the war? This logical fallacy has
no name and is frankly pathetic. You don't even believe your own
rhetorical excesses.
As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis], Soka
Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI [international
emphasis], they really are all the same provisional organization, born
in 1930 and going through stages of growth, much like a person does.
Like little Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the arbiter of
what names should go with what things. Are you really suggesting that
our organization should run their candidate names for the sangha by
you for approval? Get real.
More from Jon Petry,
| There are speeches in existence in which they affirm their
| loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
Substantiation would consist of stating "Who, What, When and Where".
What did the specified person say in what publication or speech, at
which location, and when? Waving an unsubstantiated allegation is like
Joe McCarthy waving around his envelope with the names of Communists
in the State Department that he never got around to disclosing (filled
with blank paper).
"Who, What, When, and Where", Jon Petry. Then you are easily refuted
when you make your errors.
I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian Victoria's
articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked, as he takes
statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen priest on a rampage
against the Lotus Sutra and its votaries.) Victoria is neither
researcher nor scholar, in any sense that I would respect. [I have
planned to write a toxic zen story about him, once I get some other
more crucial things out of the way.]
There are three articles (and counting) debunking the roshi's
inaccuracies:
1. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton
in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
Here's two sample paragraphs from page 1,
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage from
. Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The Geography of
. Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that Russia was
. engaged in a policy of expansionism in the search for year
. -round harbors. Victoria asserts that this world view was
. identical to that of the government of Japan, a view used to
. justify the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), then the
. annexation of the Korean peninsula (1910) and the founding
. of the puppet state of Manchukuo (1932). Victoria's
. assertion, and his implicit criticism of Makiguchi,
. simplistically links analysis of the global situation with
. the policies taken in response to that. Makiguchi was merely
. voicing what was then the accepted understanding of the
. geopolitical motives for Russia's expansionist policies, a
. view held not only by the Japanese government, but shared by
. the British, with whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese
. Alliance. Certainly I know of no scholar of political
. geography who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one
. that Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not only
. Makiguchi but everyone who studies political geography
. guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
.
. Elsewhere in Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi points out that the
. countries of Western Europe had a great deal of trouble
. operating their colonies, and expresses doubts about the
. value of acquiring colonies, particularly from the point of
. view of the financial burden that they would entail. If
. Victoria had read Jinsei Chirigaku carefully, he would not
. identify the thoughts of Makiguchi with the expansionist
. doctrine of the time.
A putative scholar, indeed. Scholars who make sweeping allegations
need to have a similar sweep in their thorough coverage of the
material, otherwise their conclusions are far too easily upended,
along with any respect for their scholasticism.
Brian Victoria cherry-picks the evidence to support his attacks on
Makiguchi's pacifism in the same manner that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/
Wolfowitz cherry picked the WMD intelligence for their erroneous
arguments for the justification to invade Iraq without provocation.
They simply slavered to get their hands on Saddam, and Victoria simply
slavered to trash Makiguchi ... for some reason [this will be shown
forensically in a circumstantial case for libel].
Miyata's third point is especially damning, although he does not jump
on Brian Victoria with the hobnail boots that I use. [Miyata appears
to be a nice person.] Victoria is clearly completely ignorant of the
circumstances of political discourse at the time, which provides the
context for Makiguchi's view of the Emperor as a constitutional
monarch, versus the military's view of him as absolute and all-
justifying god-emperor. That dispute, which ended in 1935, is not even
noticed by Victoria in his skin-deep analysis of Makiguchi's writings
before 1935.
This demonstrates an utter ignorance of a field which is not his own,
Japanese political history. This is a similar error to Shockley the
Nobel Prize-winning Solid State Physicist burying his career and
reputation eternally, by his "scientific" approach to racial science,
and the bad application of statistics to intelligence testing, that
was so thoroughly debunked in "The Mismeasure of Man" by the late
great Biologist Stephen Jay Gould. [That last is one great book.]
Finally, there is the faulty translation of the line "praying" to the
Emperor, which in context should be beseeching the Emperor, because he
is talking about petitioning the authorities for redress. Now we must
question every line translated by Victoria, as well. Is there anything
left to trust him on? Apparently not.
2. Two Views of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s Attitude toward Japanese
Militarism and Education, by Dayle M. Bethel.
<http://www.iop.or.jp/0313/bethel.pdf>
Bethel finds similar broad errors in Victoria's work, which show that
he simply neglected to read Makiguchi's writings thoroughly, even the
ones that he quotes from!!! This may be simply a lack of mastery of
Japanese, which makes a non-native reader lazy about thoroughly
reading the works of someone. However we may understand the reasons
for the loathing of thorough coverage by those with an agenda, that
Wolfowitzian lack of thoroughness provides a rich ground for exactly
the kind of profound injustice that Brian Victoria has committed
against Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.
Bethel goes to the lengths to prove his point by his extensive
Appendices that constitute half of the paper's content, and which
contain a broad spectrum of Makiguchi's pacifism in his writings and
pound home the charge of cherry-picking with a torrent of counter-
evidence. Bethel pounds him like a stake into the ground, but nicely,
of course. These are nice people.
3. A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese Buddhist History, reviewed by Daniel A. Metraux.
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org/5/metraux04.htm>
This paper is more of an appeal to simple reason, that Victoria's
assertions against Makiguchi are just so totally outweighed by vast
evidence against his allegations, that they are totally unsupportable.
More from Jon Petry,
| However they did remonstrate against the imposition of the
| Imperial Talisman as an object of reverence as well as in
| their interpretation of Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the
| Japanese Government to suppress all other Buddhist sects
| and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
This is a distorted description of what Nichiren asks people to
observe, and to do. In brief,
1. The Lotus Sutra is Shakyamuni's highest teaching and in the Nirvana
Sutra, Shakyamuni makes his final demand that the followers of the
Buddha honestly discard the provisional teachings (T'ien-T'ai
identifies these as the pre-Lotus Sutra perfect teachings, Tripitaka
teachings or Hinayana, connecting teachings and specific teachings).
"Buddhism" based on the provisional teachings is not really Buddhism,
according to the Buddha. See below.
<http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=815>
2. Once the highest practice of the Law at the heart of the Lotus
Sutra was expounded by Nichiren in the Gosho, lesser Lotus Sutra
practices join the provisional teachings as the enemies of the Lotus
Sutra.
3. From quote #1, either you are in the Treasure Land with Nichiren
Daishonin, or in Avichi Hell. I defer to your enlightened decision as
to your choice of path, of course.
4. Nichiren Daishonin wants you to follow Nikko Shonin exactly (from
quotes #2 and #3).
5. Nikko Shonin wants you not to ignore even one of his 26 Admonitions
(from quote #5).
6. Josei Toda wants the followers of Nikko (the SGI) to engrave the 26
Admonitions in our hearts in quote #4 (we are not a precepts practice,
because Nichiren states that "Precepts are traitorous" in the "14
Slanders" Gosho, so that is why we engrave them in our hearts, and not
obey them as a set of rules).
7. Every single one of these documents was carefully handed to me by
President Ikeda, without whom I would never have heard about Nam-Myoho-
Renge-Kyo. (Thank you, Sensei.)
8. There are no accidents in this chain of events and documents.
Accept it or not, Jon Petry !!!
Followers of Nichiren "wipe out" slanderous temples by converting
their believers to the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren's practice according
to the Gosho. [From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p.
77]
As the government forced the followers of the Fuji School into
practicing Shinto, if those unfortunate victims complained that the
authorities should be selecting a correct Buddhism, instead of the
pitiful corruption and sham of a religion that is Shinto, who's to
blame them? Of course, when the government is selecting your religion
for you, they will never, ever get it right (hence the first amendment
to the U.S. Constitution).
More from Jon Petry,
| They were imprisoned for the crime of lesse majesty, for
| their disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they
| were pacifists.
There was no law against pacifism, because the Japanese government of
the time could not conceive of it. So the absence of that specific
pacifism charge against them is insufficient evidence of non-pacifism.
Openly stating that the Shinto Talisman was not a valid religious
object was the same thing as stating that the Emperor was not a god.
Either action was clear treason against the god-Emperor and his holy
war, and hence it was in-your-face-arrest-me pacifism, of the most
noble kind.
This is because these acts removed the religious justification for the
conflict itself, and also removed the blanket Shinto-Zen holy
authorization for war criminality and holocaust action ("The hand that
holds the sword is the Buddha's hand" - D.T. Suzuki). This is all
summarily explained in Miyata's paper.
More from Jon Petry,
| This claim by the SGI does add insult to the injury
| endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan who did
| demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
| leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those
| people were imprisoned and executed. Others such as
| Nichidatsu Fujii were sent into exile.
Yeah. The point is that individuals of those Buddhist organizations
were fooled into believing that the leaders would stand up against the
military government. When the time came, all of those Buddhist leaders
and their organizations folded, or were arrested and gave in to
pressure from the police. This left their members to suffer the worst
form of persecution combined with the humiliation of abandonment by
their leaders. Shame !!!
Of the leaders of the various Buddhist movements that stood against
the war, only Josei Toda resisted to the end of the war, after
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi had resisted until his death. Among all the
Buddhist organizations, only the SGI in the person of Josei Toda,
resisted and survived to the end, never giving in to the persecution
even in the tiniest way. Makiguchi, as he was led to the detention
center clinic where he soon died, refused to even take the arm of the
guard who offered to help him. THAT is real and determined, enduring
resistance.
Oddly, Brian Victoria seems to have missed this salient point, or to
be incapable of mentioning it ... for some reason? Let me deal with
that now, and unlike the others, I am not in any way a nice person.
In his book "Zen at War" first published in 1997, he has a 6th chapter
on the resistance to the Zen-state war machine. This chapter is in two
sections, organized resistance and the resistance of individuals. In
the organized resistance section he talks about the initial resistance
of very few groups, all of which were crushed. The last resistance
group (he states erroneously) was the Youth League for Revitalizing
Buddhism (Shinko Bukkyo Seinen Domei) led by a man named Seno. On page
73, Victoria describes Seno's arrest for treason against the emperor
system and capitalism (fascists hate communists),
| Seno ... In 1942, however, he was given an early release
| from prison due to ill health. By that time, of course, all
| traces of the League had been eradicated. So, too, had all
| traces of the Buddhist resistance to Japan's war efforts
| (8).
Buried at the end of the book in Note 8 on page 201, is Brian
Victoria's ridiculous explanation of why he neglects to mention the
Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, which would upset his point that Buddhists did not
stand up to Imperial State Zen. His actions are partly explained by
the fact that chapter 6 would have to be re-written, since the central
thesis would be wrong. Victoria is a Zen Roshi, and of course the
culpability of Zen in the war is more easily borne if no one acted to
stop them and the complicity was then universally shared by all
Japanese Buddhists. [Then everyone is corrupted and evil, so nobody
can point fingers at Zen.]
He states in Note 8, that the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai was unworthy to be
mentioned because the arrest of their leaders was for not accepting
the Shinto Talisman, and they were simply being intolerant of other
religions. Once again, his ignorance of context, and his skin deep
coverage of the material while cherry-picking the evidence leads him
to the wrong conclusion. If he knew anything about Nichiren Buddhism,
he would know that neither Makiguchi nor Toda would ever physically
bow to an alter once it was defiled by a corrupt object from a
slanderous Buddhism, like the Shinto Talisman.
You cannot defeat an evil, if you continually bow to it.
In fact, that was the purpose of the Shinto Talisman, to force the
people of Japan to bow to the principle that the Emperor was a god,
and that the war was therefore a holy crusade and the holocaust
actions and war crimes committed were therefore not slanders of the
Buddhist Law. Upending all of that at the root, by Makiguchi and
Toda's fearless resistance, was the greater treason against the
Emperor and the war. Both Seno's group and Makiguchi's groups were
Buddhists. Both were pacifists, in spite of the wrongful assertions of
Victoria's sadly lacking scholarship. Both demonstrated organized
resistance to the military regime. Finally, Seno dropped out in 1942,
while Makiguchi and Toda persisted to the bitter end, upending
Victoria's chapter 6 premise. This injustice against the votaries of
the Lotus Sutra by a Zen Roshi was no accident.
Forensically, we can see the order of Brian Victoria's offenses
against the truth.
1. First he makes his thesis in chapter 6, page 73, of his book "Zen
At War" in 1997, that no Buddhist organization stood against the war
after 1942, even though Makiguchi and Toda were arrested on July 6th,
1943 after repeatedly speaking out against the divinity of the Emperor
in discussion meeting after discussion meeting in the Soka Kyoiku
Gakkai during 1941-1942, knowingly in front of secret police
informants. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi died in the Tokyo Detention Center
on November 18th, 1944. Josei Toda was released from detention
unrepentant, shortly before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and
the end of the war.
Even if you did not believe that Makiguchi was a pacifist, you would
have to describe the stubborn actions of the Soku Kyoiku Gakkai as
"organized resistance" to the Shinto-Zen state and therefore the
Imperial Way Buddhism war effort, and to the divine emperor system
during the war. Which would have made Victoria's chapter 6 at least a
negligent oversight. Victoria himself, presents the view that the
subjugation of all the temples under Imperial Way Buddhism was part of
the war effort in the second half of his book, which makes resistance
to Imperial Way Buddhism effectively war resistance. His own views IN
THE SAME BOOK would make this "oversight" an irrational
compartmentalizing of the prima facia evidence, causing the
destruction of his arguments across half of his book.
2. Adding the buried Note 8, on page 201, as an afterthought to cover
his buck-naked ass, while neglecting to reform his thesis in chapter
6, is clear and unmistakable intellectual dishonesty.
3. In the fall of 2001, Victoria writes his cherry-picking attack
paper, "The Putative Pacifism of Soka Gakkai Founder Makiguchi
Tsunesaburo" (Japanese Studies; Dec2001, Vol. 21 Issue 3, page 275).
In the view of 1 and 2 above, the effort to write this paper is
unmistakably exposed as a guilty murderer's attack on the reputation
of his murder victim in the court of public opinion, to avoid
prosecution for the original crime: Victoria's initial scholarly
laziness and incompetence of judgement in an area of expertise outside
his own, and the subsequent coverup of his foolishness in a notation
at the end of the book. Furthermore, he also duplicated his cherry-
picking attack article in the Journal of Global Buddhism <http://
www.globalbuddhism.org>, also published in the fall of 2001. Once was
not enough.
4. Finally, Victoria stubbornly regurgitates his identical spew in the
2006 second edition of "Zen At War" on the same page 73, although Note
8 is now relegated even further back to page 239. Now it is clearly
not just a negligent oversight that became a discardable data point
(more like the majority of the data thrown out whole-hog) that in turn
disturbed a cherished theorem ... it becomes a serial murder of the
truth. So, a great man's reputation is tarred to cover up his critic's
lack of meticulous and comprehensive study of the great man's work and
the simple historiography of his time.
Diggin' a deep, deep hole, dudes (Jon and Brian). An abyss. Avichi
hell for countless kalpas. Repent now !!!
================================================================
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles
| and never compromised them.
Once again, the Fallacy of Interrogation. See the discussion above.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 1: The examples of the SGI violating its own
| principles are in fact too numerous to detail.
Both the quality and quantity of your substantiation are insufficient.
No human organization is perfect, but we must not let the perfect be
the enemy of the good. Nichiren Shoshu and the transfer-boxless
exploits of Nikkenists who through outright fraud stole the Fuji
School from the followers of Nikko Shonin ... well, that's not merely
imperfect. That is a wholesale ripoff of a religion with the collusion
of the Japanese government. The Japanese government and the courts
need to set things right, now that the transfer box has been shown not
to be in the possession of the fraudulent High Priest-of-the-moment.
More from Jon Petry,
| But one which is relevant to Chas' regular rants is the
| claim that they have held fast to Nikko's admonitions while
| the NST has not.
This is the typical confusion. Priests are not lay-persons, even
though in NST they have blurred the distinction as far as personal
behavior is concerned, while retaining and grandly enhancing the
higher caste-distinctions between priests and laity.
Both Nichiren Daishonin and Nikko Shonin knew the difference between
priests and lay-persons. Their clear and unmitigated disregard for the
integrity, personal and otherwise, of the vast majority of priests
during their time is on the record. They wanted to avoid, as far as
they could, the cancer of an evil and perpetual dynasty of priests
taking root in the Fuji School. They were also clearly not served well
by Fuji School priests after Nichimoku Shonin, with the singular
exception of Nichikan Shonin.
As an example of the discernment of Nikko's views expressed in the 26
Admonitions between priests and lay persons, let's look at Admonition
#25,
. 25. My disciples should conduct themselves as holy priests,
. patterning their behavior after that of the late master.
. However, even if a high priest or a priest striving for
. practice and understanding should temporarily deviate from
. [the principle of] sexual abstinence, he may still be
. allowed to remain in the priesthood [as a common priest
. without rank].
Since gazing at my lovely kindergarten teacher at the age of 5, I have
not had a moment even approaching the thought of any sexual abstinence
for myself. So I would never have entertained the delusion that I
belonged in a priesthood requiring abstinence. This is merely being
honest about oneself and not misrepresenting for corrupt reasons.
As a lay follower of Nikko Shonin, clearly and unmistakably, the only
way that I can follow the 25th Admonition is to NOT follow any priest
who is not celibate, or any high priest who tolerates lapses of
celibacy in the priesthood. This is because any one of these lapses is
also a cessation of their being a follower of Nikko Shonin, and the
initiation of their becoming a fraudulent priest of the Fuji School.
Although it is not necessary to follow what happens when Fuji School
priests abandon Nikko Shonin (the fact of that abandonment alone, is
evidence enough against them), let's see what happens when faith is
abandoned.
Sex, marriage and having families are the underlying problems with
Nichiren Shoshu (and other) priesthood clans and their clan wars for
control. If the family relationships of celibate priests were extended
to the lay-members as children, rather than the filial family
relationships of non-celibate priests to inheriting descendents, none
of the troubles of the Fuji School in the last century would have
occurred.
On April 25, 1872 the Meiji government lifted the Tokugawa ban on
priests marrying.
From "The Untold History of the Fuji School", Ch. 10, p. 92-93:
<http://sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/10_UHFS_Chapter_10.pdf>
. Once the restrictions were lifted by the new regime, priests
. gladly started to marry. This is a clear indication that the
. Buddhist community had lost the integrity to decide on
. matters of Buddhist tradition. Instead, priests regarded the
. government as the legitimate authority over their
. traditions. Put simply, the years of strict government
. control had made the Buddhist clergy entirely dependent on
. political authority. Some contend that the Meiji government
. issued the decree to enfeeble the morale of the Buddhist
. community and thereby elevate Shinto, which was viewed as
. the chief means of extolling imperial authority.
.
. Nichiden criticized priests of other Buddhist schools for
. their elation over the government decree, regarding it as an
. expression of imperial mercy. He stated that despite the
. trend in the Buddhist community, the priesthood of the Fuji
. School should uphold the precepts of the Daishonin and Nikko
. Shonin and remain celibate. But eventually the priesthood at
. Taiseki-ji succumbed to the trend.
.
. The priesthood’s renouncement of celibacy had a significant
. effect on the development of the Fuji School. It gave rise
. to nepotism and the hereditary succession of priesthood
. positions and temple properties within the school. Factions
. of related priests formed, vying for control. Instead of
. regarding the spread of the Daishonin’s Buddhism as their
. goal, many priests became increasingly bound by family ties
. and personal interests.
Having decided to follow Meiji while spurning Nikko Shonin and his
25th admonition, the 54th High Priest Nichi’in (from 1869-1874) was
soon (through cause and effect) faced with an unfortunate circumstance
(5 months later), from his newly adopted Meiji master,
From “Confirming Our Path of Faith – Temple Issue Handbook” (green
booklet), p. 36:
<http://sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/Confirming_Our_Path.pdf>
. [Nichi’in] Requests the government to allow the sect to
. remain independent of other Nichiren schools. However, the
. government orders all Nichiren schools to merge despite
. their differing doctrines to make it easier for the
. government to control them.
Once forced into the broad and all-encompassing (1) Nichiren School in
September 1872, the long and tawdry road was chosen for Taisekiji:
[(2) May 1874: placed under the Shoretsu School of all temples that
think the essential teaching is superior, as a sub-branch of the broad
Nikko branch.
(3) February 1876: placed under a separate Nikko Branch (later
renamed Hon’Mon) of the broad Nichiren School, under the 55th HP
Nippu.
(4) September 1900: Taisekiji is “allowed” to become its own branch,
the Fuji branch of the Nichiren School, under 56th HP Nichio, the
first married HP.
(5) June 1912: Taisekiji is “allowed” to become its own school:
Nichiren Shoshu.]
So, causes follow effects, which always spring from causes. But like I
said, the mere evidence of abandoning the principles initially, was
enough for me to consider them as corrupt without the playing out of
that corruption.
After priests could marry in the Fuji School and still retain their
position in the hierarchy as priests pretending to have the appearance
of Nikko Shonin and Nichiren Daishonin, without the substance ...
Nichiren Shoshu was doomed.
However, the abstinence of lay members, even those who are obsessed
with sex, is not in the focus of interest for Nikko Shonin in this
document. Lay abstinence traditions like the Shakers, are a self-
limiting proposition. The Fuji School has a self-limiting priesthood
abstinence tradition, thanks to Nikko Shonin and his 25th Admonition.
For Admonitions 18 and 19, the difference between laity and priesthood
is obvious and indisputable.
. 19. Black robes should not be worn [by priests].
.
. 20. Jikitotsu should not be worn [by priests].
So, priests and lay-persons are different. And Fuji School priests are
as different from Nichiren Shoshu priests as day is from night.
More from Jon Petry,
| In particular they chastise the NST for sending priests for
| education at Rissho University which is run by the Nichiren
| Shu. Apparently they have forgotten that SGI members have
| also attended that university, some with the approval of
| their own governing body in Japan.
SGI lay-persons who ignore the warnings of Nikko Shonin's 26
admonitions will suffer and then dig their way out of the hole,
through practice (and that includes their leaders who bid them to
ignore Nikko Shonin). Nikko said nothing about changing the status of
lay-persons who fall short. He was quite explicit about how he treated
priests who fell short, he kicked their ass out the door. For a
TEMPORARY deviation from abstinence, and that doesn't mean marriage or
weekly trips to the red light district, he said to demote them to
common priests. Either married or philandering priests are clearly not
acceptable to Nikko Shonin, and he doesn't seem to care which is
which.
This is the pattern. Priests are not treated the same as lay-persons,
because their corruption leads to the current evil state of affairs,
with a contest for control of the transfer box, and fraud in the
succession of the position of the high priest.
The second admonition, and second only to practice according to the
gosho, means that metriculating at Nichiren Shu's Rissho University is
a violation,
. 2. The doctrines of the five senior priests differ in every
. regard from the teachings of the late master.
The training for priests at Rissho University is vastly different from
the education for lay-persons. If you go to their website (which I
would not recommend to my worst enemy), you will find they teach the
caligraphy and design of Gohonzon, along with all the forms of
Japanese Buddhism. Gohonzon pop out of their instructor websites, here
and there, like the nadir or absolute zero of pornography. (Bring your
barf-bag.)
There is a class where they teach that the Dai-Gohonzon is a fake,
Nikko and Nichimoku are liars, and all the transfer documents are
forgeries.
Does anyone with even a tiny discerning intellect think for a second
that Nikko Shonin would approve of having his priests trained there?
After a cursory inspection, I figure that Fuji School priests and
candidates attending Rissho University are violating at least the
following admonitions of Nikko Shonin (I have capitalized the relevant
phrases),
1. The doctrines of the Fuji school MUST NOT DIFFER in the least from
the teachings of the late master.
2. The doctrines of the five senior priests DIFFER IN EVERY REGARD
from the teachings of the late master.
3.There will [in the future] appear persons who slander our school,
SAYING THAT THE GOSHO ARE FORGED writings. You must not associate with
such evil priests.
4. Those who produce forged writings and say that they are Gosho, or
who practice with the view that the ESSENTIAL AND THEORETICAL
TEACHINGS [of the Lotus Sutra] ARE THE SAME, are parasites in the
lion's body.
5. You should refrain from indulging in poetry or non- Buddhist works,
or from engaging in idleness and chatter WITHOUT [having the aim of]
REBUKING SLANDER.
6. Lay believers should be strictly prohibited from visiting
[heretical] temples and shrines. Moreover, PRIESTS SHOULD NOT VISIT
SLANDEROUS TEMPLES OR SHRINES, which are inhabited by demons, even if
only to have a look around. To do so would be a pitiful violation [of
the Daishonin's Buddhism.] This is not my own personal view; it wholly
derives from the sutras [of Shakyamuni] and the writings [of Nichiren
Daishonin].
9. Until they are well versed in the difference between the
provisional and true teachings, followers of later generations should
visit THIS TEMPLE, setting aside the debt of gratitude they owe to
their parents and teachers, and undertake various studies in order to
free themselves [from the sufferings of birth and death] and attain
the Way.
10.Unless you have a thorough understanding of and firm faith in the
teachings [of Nichiren Daishonin], you SHOULD NOT STUDY T'IEN-T'AI'S
DOCTRINES.
11. Followers of this school should ENGRAVE THE TEACHINGS OF THE GOSHO
IN THEIR LIVES and thereby inherit the ultimate principles expounded
by the master. THEN, if they have any leisure time, they should
inquire into the doctrine of the T'IEN-T'AI SCHOOL.
17. DO NOT FOLLOW even the high priest IF HE GOES AGAINST THE BUDDHA'S
LAW and propounds his own views.
18. Even if a view is set forth unanimously by a conference [of
believers], the high priest should repudiate it IF IT GOES AGAINST THE
BUDDHA'S LAW.
19. BLACK ROBES SHOULD NOT BE WORN [by priests].
20. JIKITOTSU SHOULD NOT BE WORN [by priests].
21. You SHOULD NOT SIT TOGETHER WITH SLANDERERS OF THE LAW [at
religious ceremonies] for fear of suffering the same punishment as
they.
22. You MUST NOT ACCEPT OFFERINGS FROM SLANDERERS OF THE LAW.
25. My disciples should CONDUCT THEMSELVES AS HOLY PRIESTS, PATTERNING
THEIR BEHAVIOR AFTER THAT OF THE LATE MASTER. However, even if a high
priest or a priest striving for practice and understanding should
temporarily deviate from [the principle of] sexual abstinence, he may
still be allowed to remain in the priesthood [as a common priest
without rank].
So it is far, far worse for Fuji School priests to get their training
at Rissho University from the Five Senior Priests, than the slander of
an SGI youth division getting a degree from Nichiren Shu that is most
likely not in the Theology department. Both the content is different
and that special mission as a priest for Kosen Rufu is infinitely more
corrupted by that contact.
Proof of this is the following personal experience from Nikken Abe,
who makes an unmistakable admission of past guilt in the training of
priests at Rissho by Nichiren Shoshu. He makes the former errors
obvious by starting his own training school called Fuji Gakurin ...
rather late in the day,
. (Excerpts from
. http://www.geocities.com/smimoza/vol275.html, the "Fake
. [High Priest]" Newsletter:)
.
| "My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu
| has been polluted with Minobu's wicked
| teachings," Nikken confessed at the opening
| ceremony for the Fuji Gakurin School (Dai-
| Nichiren, May 2000 edition).
.
. Fuji Gakurin is the school that Nikken started to
. belatedly replace Rissho University as the source of
. priest trainees for Nichiren Shoshu. Apparently, he only
. took this action after people started talking about the
. 26 Admonitions publicly (Living Buddhism article by
. Daisaku Ikeda in 1998). The sad fact is, that Nichiren
. Shoshu has violated all 26, most by the letter of the
. admonition, but all 26 by their intent.
.
. In relatively short order after being rebuked in 1998,
. Nikken officially opened the Fuji Gakurin School on
. April 10th, 2000. Many attended and heard his
. statements: Nichijun Fujimoto, Nichiyu Yoshida, Nitto
. (Juken) Ohmura, Nichijo (Gikan) Hayase, Nissho (Shinei)
. Yagi, Chief of the Overseas Department Kotoku Obayashi,
. Chief of the Public Relations Department Kogaku Akimoto
. and Vice Chief of the Study Department Kosho Mizushima.
("Fuji Gakurin" must mean "afterthought" in the Nikkenese dialect.)
Nissho (Shinei) Yagi had to be at the opening of Fuji Gakurin, because
he is the President of the School, as we will see later ...
. Nikken went on to state that "he had been contaminated
. by Minobu's teachings"...
.
| "I once attended the University run by
| Nichiren-shu. The hardest thing for me in my
| campus life was that the teacher said many
| false things about the teachings and history
| of Nichiren Daishonin. I had always thought
| that I should refute these false ideas.
| However, I cannot say that that was my true
| intention, because I was only a student."
|.
| "When we constantly hear false things, we will
| be caught up in false ways of thinking, or I
| can say, we will be trapped in it. As I recall
| my early days, false ideas did exist in my
| view of Nichiren Buddhism, especially
| regarding the legitimate teachings of
| Nichiren-shoshu. At that time, I was not able
| to straighten out my thoughts sufficiently
| from the viewpoint of faith, action, study....
| If I were young now, I could study with you,
| young fellows, in these classes, taught by
| these engaged teachers."
.
. But his distorted views from Rissho were not left there
. at the University.
.
. We are reminded of Nikken's words on October 8th, 1985,
. when he attended the completion ceremony of Komyoji
. Temple, Hachioji City, Tokyo. Kotoku Hirayama, the chief
. priest of the temple, asked Nikken, "What is the biggest
. obstacle you had in your practice?" Nikken answered, "It
. is that I could not truly believe in the Gohonzon. I
. cannot believe truly now. I have to really try."
.
. Also, we are reminded of Nikken's statement that
. "Daigohonzon is a fake" from the Kawabe memo. This
. statement seems to be influenced by the author of "view
. of wood honzon is false", Minobu priest Bentetsu
. Yasunaga, who is an associate professor at Minobu's
. Rissho University and chief priest of Zenshoji Temple.
.
. In recent years, the exchange of Minobu
. priests and Nikken sect priests has become
. more frequent. Monks of the Nikken sect make
. pilgrimages to temples of Minobu sect with
. Hokkeko members, or they invite Minobu monks
. to Taisekiji. General chief of the Hokkeko
. federation, Kisoji Yanagisawa, made a
. pilgrimage to Kuonji Temple, the general head
. temple of the Minobu sect. We [the Fake
. Newsletter] have mentioned this issue before,
. and even "Emyo," one of organ papers of Nikken
. sect, could not argue against this. Taisekiji
. priests Kaido Seki, Jikei Maekawa, Kosho
. Mizushima, Sonfuku Ochiai, Gishu Funabashi,
. all made visits to Minobu's temples
. themselves. They later made excuses during
. lectures at their temples or in their temple
. newsletters, saying, "We went and saw the
. temple but did not chant."...etc.
These arguments and experiences from the afflicted should be enough
for anyone, but of course, reason never prevails with some.
More from Jon Petry,
| Of even greater amusement however are two other events.
| Shortly after the split between the SGI and the NST in the
| early 1990's the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an
| offer. They would affiliate as a lay organization within
| the Nichiren Shu and pay for all overseas missionary work,
| of course with them running it. The Nichiren Shu, having
| seen what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and
| firmly declined the offer. The second incident occurred when
| the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu and offered a million US
| dollars for a Nichiren authored Mandala. This offer was also
| rejected.
Your amusement at the distress of the SGI caused by the criminal fraud
of Nikken and crew in hijacking the high priest position of Nichiren
Shoshu ... is telling. Gloating over anyone's suffering is the
property of the devilish function. How much worse is it to gloat over
the suffering of the sangha of the votaries of the Lotus Sutra who are
followers of Nikko Shonin, when that suffering is clearly caused by an
injustice involving criminality of priests and the complicity of high
crimes of officials of the Japanese government? Certainly, this kind
of gloating is not a good cause for someone to make.
Finally, your "incidents" are presented without substantiation, Jon
Petry.
Presenting the "Who, What, When and Where" for these "incidents" would
provide a basis for fact-checking and refuting your erroneous
allegations. As they are constituted above, they are little more than
slurs and innuendo with no factual basis whatsoever. I think the "Who"
will be the key starting point.
================================================================
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
Once again, the Fallacy of Interrogation. See the discussion above.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about
| democracy has been adamant about stamping out any attempts
| by its membership to adopt democratic principles in its own
| governance. Leaders within the SGI are appointed by the
| higher ups and serve at their pleasure with no
| accountability to the rank and file. In fact when SGI
| members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren Shu,
| the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI
| through proxies such as the Rubys and other made posts
| belittling that fact.
It's amazing to me that people always confuse Democracy with the
direct election of leaders, which may or may not be Democratic. For
instance, if everyone is not allowed to register or to have access to
voting once having been registered, it is not a Democracy. The direct
election of leaders is a specific implementation of political will, as
is the representative election of leaders or the parliamentary system
(party rules). You can have a direct election with only one party, is
that Democracy?
Buddhist Democracy is actually manifested by a discussion meeting in
the SGI. This is because in front of the Gohonzon, we are as the
Buddha states in the Expedient Means chapter 2 of the Lotus Sutra,
"Hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without any distinction
between us." However leaders are chosen, and no way really works
perfectly, cannot undermine the view of the Lotus Sutra, which will
always prevail.
Think of it this way, the worst leader of the Sangha in history was
Nikken Abe, and yet he did us the greatest favor in history by
excommunicating us from the monstrosity of Nichiren Shoshu as it
spiraled downwards into hellishness. No matter how you dislike your
SGI leader, can they be worse, or do better for us, than Nikken did?
[In the extreme case, logic is easily founded or confounded.]
The delusion in Nichiren Shu is that their elected leaders actually
run something, since they are like cattle to the priesthood, who rule
like the Brahmin caste of priests in every other Japanese Buddhist
School. Lamentably so.
More from Jon Petry,
| Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file
| movement towards actual financial accountability, keeping
| its finances a closely held secret. Members have no
| knowledge of what happens to their money once it is donated
| nor are they allowed a say in how it is to spent. This is
| vastly different from say NONA, the Nichiren Shu lay
| organization in the USA, which regularly provides
| information to its members as to what funds have been taken
| in and how they have been spent, including a say at the
| local level as to how they should be spent.
What follows is "In My Humble Opinion", or IMHO. In other words I
don't have a legitimate stand that is objectively supported by
defensible Logic and Reason.
Most members in the SGI-USA who have been around for a while, know
that we are not as of yet solvent (or at least that was true at the
turn of the century, and I don't think it has changed). It is the
Japanese members who largely pay our way, for which my gratitude is
unbounded, and for which reason it is important to really step up on
yearly Zaimu.
I don't think more visibility improves the picture of how our money is
spent, when it's not all our money initially. Once we actually do
support our own movement fully, more accountability might be in order.
Note that the people who scream for accountability and transparency
are not necessarily those who give more in the way of offerings, they
are more like those who tend to be political and feel neglected or out
of power, and need to grasp power through auditing the books. This is
not very productive.
The truth is that nowadays nonprofits have certain reporting
requirements to the government (since Jim Bakker, et al), and once
those are met, everything else is optional. IMHO, of course. I have
spent enough time working for fortune five hundred companies to know
that nobody gets finance right as they grow bigger. Nobody.
================================================================
Finally from Jon Petry,
| These are but a few of the issues that have been exposed
| here on ARBN over the years and caused the SGI no small
| amount of trouble. They are inconvenient truths that Chas
| and others like him would just as soon see burried, never to
| see the light of day. So Chas avoids them through his spam.
Apparently wrong on all counts, since I have inconvenienced myself to
ravage your every untruth.
-Chas.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Jon Petry rebuts the Chas. reply,
> Makiguchi's Pacifism Confirmed, and Putative Scholar Brian Victoria's
> Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research Exposed, for Jon Petry -
> >From Jon Petry,
> | Chas is truly a special case. [snip the rest]
> Everyone is a special case. Your opinion of who I am and why I speak
> are your opinions, as are yours of the impact of ARBN. Slandering the
> Sangha is not a good cause.
And yet Chas in his own little way has worked hard to slander people
who have done him no harm. Spewing [his word] forth Soka Gakkai
agitprop left and right, making wild accusations unconfirmed by any
reliable source of information. However when Chas' motives for doing
so are questioned he screams like a stuck pig and runs back to his
handlers like a good little droid to come up with further slander and
half truths. This has been the hall mark of Soka Gakkai agitprop
since the 1950's.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up
> | to the Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
> Notice how, without presenting any proof, a statement is pre-
> identified as a myth. This is also, the Fallacy of Interrogation.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior
> | to WWII. However its founders, Makiguchi and Toda were not
> | pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
> Notice how you (Jon Petry) state an untruth about the SGI, and then
> immediately reverse yourself.
I didn't and you were kind enough to conform it for me. Soka Kyoiku
Gakkai was an organization whose stated goals were educational reform
whilte the Soka gakkai as it presently exists has strayed far from the
original goal and now presents itself as a religious organization.
> How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a founder of a
> group that did not exist until after the war? This logical fallacy has
> no name and is frankly pathetic. You don't even believe your own
> rhetorical excesses.
Sophistry is not a substitute for legitimate argument.
> As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis], Soka
> Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI [international
> emphasis], they really are all the same provisional organization, born
> in 1930 and going through stages of growth, much like a person does.
> Like little Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
see what I mean.
> Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the arbiter of
> what names should go with what things. Are you really suggesting that
> our organization should run their candidate names for the sangha by
> you for approval? Get real.
more sophistry and some personal attack thrown in for good measure.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | There are speeches in existence in which they affirm their
> | loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
snip of more sophistry and personal attack
> I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian Victoria's
> articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked, as he takes
> statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen priest on a rampage
> against the Lotus Sutra and its votaries.) Victoria is neither
> researcher nor scholar, in any sense that I would respect. [I have
> planned to write a toxic zen story about him, once I get some other
> more crucial things out of the way.]
I will have more to say about this post later but i did want to
comment on this little tidbit. Chas who has no academic credentials I
am aware of, as if he has such he has not shared them with the group,
has chosen to belittle and slander Dr. Victoria who is a scholar and a
respected one at that. Dr. Victoria has written various articles in
peer reviewed journals as well as books on Buddhism including some
highly critical of the role played by Buddhist organization in Japan
prior to and during World War Two. This includes information highly
critical of his own sect of Zen Buddhism which is the primary subject
of one book. Dr. Victoria has presented papers at conferences on the
subject, including the American Academy of Religions some 10+ years
ago in which he participated in panel discussions on Japanese Buddhism
with Dr. Stone and Dr. Habito among others. I was present at one such
panel discussion on pacifism and Japanese Buddhists in which he
discussed his findings and had a question from the audience from a Ms.
Virginia Strauss [?] who was then the head of the Boston based SGI run
group. She asked about the supposed pacifism of the Soka Gakkai and
Dr. Victoria explained his understanding of the situation. Ms.
Strauss suggested that she would be happy to present him with some
information he was unaware of and he told her he would welcome such an
effort. However instead of this, we have seen an attack by tame SGI
pseudo-scholars in non-peer reviewed publications twisting his words
and excoriating the man.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Chas. rebuts Jon Petry's rebuttal,
| And yet Chas in his own little way has worked hard to
| slander people who have done him no harm. [Snip]
Your characterizations are ludicrous and over-the-top. And how would
you know what harm has been done to whom? You spend a lot of time in
this email screaming in the mirror (projecting your anxieties over
your own out-of-control behavior). Take your own advice.
Look. I'm sure that it dismays you that your icon has made grievous
mistakes and is going to take a fall because of them. Furthermore,
some of this has been brought on by your own raising of the issue
endlessly, which caused me to deal with it, which I will pursue
straight through to the end, without fail.
It's like this: Shitei Funi, mentor and disciple are two (in
appearance) but not two (in essence), are from the same source. This
is why they stand together or fall together. Your attachment to Brian
Victoria and his mistakes, is going to figure prominently in the
speedy revelation of those errors.
____ Uncovering A Fraud ____________________________
There are famous frauds in the literature, such as those in science
(like Piltdown Man and the recent Korean Stem Cell line fiasco) which
involve falsifying evidence to support a desired result, producing a
distorted view of the historical or developmental sequence. In the
physical sciences and in paleontology, anthropology, archeology and
historiography, there are myriad examples of fraud, which always
include 2 elements: anachronism (something is misplaced, out of time
sequence) and falsification (from bad translation to outright forgery
of experimental evidence, historical documents or artifacts).
The most famous fraud of the middle ages was a forged document known
as the Donation of Constantine, which falsely ratified the gift of the
Western Roman Empire (Europe) from Emperor Constantine to Pope
Sylvester and the Catholic Church. According to the document, after
the intentional partitioning, Constantine kept the Eastern Empire
(Byzantium, including Asia Minor: Greece, Palestine, Egypt, etc.) for
himself to rule out of Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul, Turkey).
From "Western Civilization: A Brief History" 5th Ed., by Martin Perry,
p. 178,
. The humanist emphasis on historical scholarship yielded a
. method of critical inquiry that could help to undermine
. traditional loyalties and institutions. Medieval thinkers
. generally did not relate a text to its times but accepted it
. uncritically as an authoritative work of wisdom. In
. contrast, Renaissance humanists approached ancient
. civilization with a critical attitude; they studied texts in
. a historical context and examined them for authenticity and
. accuracy. The work of Lorenzo Valla (c. 1407-1457) provides
. the clearest example of this trend. Educated as a
. classicist, Valla trained the guns of critical scholarship
. on the papacy in his most famous work, Declamation
. Concerning the False Decretals of Constantine. The papal
. claim to temporal authority rested on a document that
. purported to verify the socalled Donation of Constantine,
. through which the Emperor Constantine, when he moved the
. capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople in the fourth
. century, had given the pope dominion over the entire Western
. Empire. But Valla proved that the document was based on an
. eighth-century forgery because the language at certain
. points was unknown in Constantine's time and did not come
. into use until much later.
Valla noted that this purported document of the 4th century used
language that could not have existed until the 8th century, when he
presumed it was created as a forgery. The 8th century was a time when
church disputes with monarchs, such as Charlemagne, over control of
the Holy Roman Empire were an issue.
This kind of anachronism is called a prochronism and presents an
impossibility that would require time travel, such as the digital
wristwatches that you see on the arms of revolutionary war soldiers in
movies. The other kind, a parachronism, is possible but remarkable,
like seeing a vintage 1920's car on the street driving around.
The Donation of Constantine was a prochronism, and an impossibility.
Remarkably, the Vatican banned Valla's "False Decretals"(1440), and it
was not until the beginning of the 17th century that the Vatican
finally agreed that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery, since
it had become useless in disputes with monarchs at that point.
From the Introduction to "Lorenzo Valla, Discourse on the Forgery of
the Alleged Donation of Constantine", English translation by
Christopher B. Coleman (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1922).
<http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallaintro.html>:
. The Donation of Constantine (Constitutum Constantini),
. written probably not long after the middle of the eighth
. century, became widely known through its incorporation in
. the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals (about 847-853). Parts of it
. were included in most of the medieval collections of canon
. law; Anselm's, Deusdedit's, and Gratian's great work (the
. Decretum, or Concordia discordantium canonum). It purports
. to reproduce a legal document in which the Emperor
. Constantine the Great, reciting his baptism and the cure of
. his leprosy at the hands of Sylvester, Bishop of Rome 314
. -336, confirmed the privilege of that pontiff as head of all
. the clergy and supreme over the other four patriarchates;
. conferred upon him extensive imperial property in various
. parts of the world, especially the imperial Lateran palace,
. and the imperial diadem and tiara, and other imperial
. insignia; granted the Roman clergy the rank of the highest
. Roman orders and their privileges; gave Sylvester and his
. successors freedom in consecrating men for certain orders of
. the clergy; it tells how he, Constantine, recognized the
. superior dignity of the Pope by holding the bridle of his
. horse; grants Sylvester Rome, all of Italy, and the western
. provinces, to remain forever under the control of the Roman
. See; and states his own determination to retire to Byzantium
. in order that the presence of an earthly emperor may not
. embarrass ecclesiastical authority. This remarkable document
. was almost universally accepted as genuine from the ninth to
. the fifteenth century.
.
. The question of the position of the bishop of Rome in the
. Christian Church lacks but a few generations of being as old
. as Christianity itself. His relation to secular governments
. became an acute problem as soon as the imperial government
. broke down in Italy, and has remained so to the present
. moment. For centuries the Papacy was the strongest
. institution in western Europe. While its control at any one
. time rested principally on the power it actually possessed
. and on the ability of its representatives, legal theories
. and historical documents played a not inconsiderable part in
. its rise and decline. Of these documents the Donation of
. Constantine was perhaps the most spectacular, even though it
. was not the most important. It was cited by no less than ten
. Popes of whom we know, to mention no lesser writers, in
. contentions for the recognition of papal control, and
. contributed not a little to the prestige of the Papacy. On
. the other hand, when its spuriousness became known, the
. reaction against it, as in Luther's case, contributed
. powerfully to the revolt from Rome. Its century-long
. influence entitles it to a respect difficult for any one who
. now reads it to feel. And Valla's discussion of it contains
. many interesting reflections on the secular power of the
. Papacy, perhaps the most interesting expression in this
. connection of fifteenth century Italian humanism.
.
. Among the achievements of modern historical criticism
. Valla's work was a conspicuous pioneer. Its quality and its
. importance have often been exaggerated, and as often
. underestimated. It is some satisfaction to make it more
. generally available in the original text and translation, so
. that the reader may judge for himself. A critical appraisal
. would have to take into account that Nicholas Cusanus some
. seven years earlier in his De concordantia catholica covered
. part of the same ground even better than Valla did, and
. anticipated some of his arguments. But Valla's treatise is
. more exhaustive) is in more finished and effective literary
. form, and in effect established for the world generally the
. proof of the falsity of the Donation. Moreover, for the
. first time, he used effectively the method of studying the
. usage of words in the variations of their meaning and
. application, and other devices of internal criticism which
. are the tools of historical criticism to-day. So, while
. Valla's little book may seem slight beside later
. masterpieces of investigation and beside systematic
. treatises in larger fields, it is none the less a landmark
. in the rise of a new science. I speak from personal
. experience in adding that it is still useful in college
. classes in promoting respect for, and development in,
. critical scholarship.
.
. As to Valla himself the words of Erasmus will bear
. repetition; "Valla, a man who with so much energy, zeal and
. labor, refuted the stupidities of the barbarians, saved
. half-buried letters from extinction, restored Italy to her
. ancient splendor of eloquence, and forced even the learned
. to express themselves henceforth with more
. circumspection."[2] The Italian Renaissance is much extolled
. among us, - and so little known. A short time ago diligent
. search revealed no copy of Valla's works in the United
. States, and many of the larger libraries had none of his
. separate writings. The same is doubtless true in the case of
. other great names in the Renaissance. Meanwhile, there are
. those whose profession it is to teach European history and
. who are utterly unacquainted with medieval and later Latin.
.
. The best life of Valla is that by Girolamo Mancini.[3] There
. is no satisfactory account of him in English.
.
. Valla wrote his Discourse on the Forgery of the alleged
. Donation of Constantine (Declamatio de falso credita et
. ementita donatione Constantini, also referred to as
. Libellus, and Oratio) in 1440, when he was secretary to
. Alfonso, king of Aragon, Sicily, and Naples. It may well be
. considered as part of the campaign which that king was
. conducting against Pope Eugenius IV in furtherance of his
. claims to Italian territories.
Christopher Coleman goes on to summarize the vast assortment of
prochronisms that Valla noted in his banned disproof. It hardly seems
likely that those placing his work on the list of prohibited books
misunderstood the work, or the injustice that they were perpetrating
one more time.
Note that it was a "Humanist" that uncovered this fraud and whose work
was suppressed by the Holy See, the religious authorities of his time.
Note also that this fraud led to Luther and the Protestant
Reformation.
It is no less important in this case that a fraud be unmasked. The
anachronistic view that Makiguchi's earlier loyal support of the
government (in the pre-1935 context of the an existing dispute between
the constitutional monarchists of the Diet and the emperor-is-a-god
factions of the Military) indicated a support of Imperial Way Buddhism
and the war effort at a later time is what is called a prochronism,
and that is an impossibility.
Those who nobly supported the constitutional monarchy until they were
crushed by Imperial State Zen are the noble heroes here and now,
because that pacifist constitutional monarchy currently exists in
Japan. I put forth the causal view that it exists now (in spite of
Junichiro Koizumi's moves towards militarism), primarily because of
the undying organized resistance of Makiguchi and Toda, the only
Buddhists who fought to the bitter end without fail. They won in the
end, because they were not defeated, and their view of government
literally prevailed as a result.
... How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a
... founder of a group that did not exist until after the war?
... This logical fallacy has no name and is frankly pathetic.
... You don't even believe your own rhetorical excesses.
| Sophistry is not a substitute for legitimate argument.
Sophistry [Oxford] is the use or practice of specious reasoning as an
art or dialectic exercise. I am neither artist nor exercising. My
reasoning is sincere.
When you say Makiguchi had nothing to do with the Soka Gakkai or the
SGI, and then in the same breath include both he and Toda as founders
of the selfsame organization, this is more than a malaprop, it is
evidence of cognitive dissonance with your first statement. Your
dismissal of that observation IS sophistry, however, because it cannot
be sincere.
... As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis],
... Soka Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI
... [international emphasis], they really are all the same
... provisional organization, born in 1930 and going through
... stages of growth, much like a person does. Like little
... Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
| see what I mean.
I see that you apparently refuse to allow our organization to grow and
expand and pursue our mission of Kosen Rufu. And you arrogantly and
irrationally place yourself in the position of naming authority, like
some kind of dictator. I categorically reject your attempt at
controlling that issue. Give up on it. No one in their right mind
would submit to your authority. Get real and stop taking the rejection
of your supreme rule as a personal affront.
... Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the
... arbiter of what names should go with what things. Are you
... really suggesting that our organization should run their
... candidate names for the sangha by you for approval? Get
... real.
| more sophistry and some personal attack thrown in for good
| measure.
Like I said, placing limits on your absolute power and your control
over all things is not an insult ... even though you may, in your own
mind, perceive of this as an attack on your authority. It is a
rejection of the control of the devilish function, whose minion you
apparently are, and whose complaints you reflect as the advocate for
that function of evil.
| snip of more sophistry and personal attack
Once again, your view is Tenshi-ma's, and I reject those complaints
categorically. Rejecting the control and authority of the devilish
function over the threefold world is the mission of a bodhisattva.
... I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian
... Victoria's articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked,
... as he takes statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen
... priest on a rampage against the Lotus Sutra and its
... votaries.) Victoria is neither researcher nor scholar, in
... any sense that I would respect. [I have planned to write a
... toxic zen story about him, once I get some other more
... crucial things out of the way.]
| I will have more to say about this post later but i did want
| to comment on this little tidbit. Chas who has no academic
| credentials I am aware of, as if he has such he has not
| shared them with the group, has chosen to belittle and
| slander Dr. Victoria who is a scholar and a respected one at
| that. Dr. Victoria has written various articles in peer
| reviewed journals as well as books on Buddhism including
| some highly critical of the role played by Buddhist
| organization in Japan prior to and during World War Two.
| This includes information highly critical of his own sect of
| Zen Buddhism which is the primary subject of one book. Dr.
| Victoria has presented papers at conferences on the subject,
| including the American Academy of Religions some 10+ years
| ago in which he participated in panel discussions on
| Japanese Buddhism with Dr. Stone and Dr. Habito among
| others. I was present at one such panel discussion on
| pacifism and Japanese Buddhists in which he discussed his
| findings and had a question from the audience from a Ms.
| Virginia Strauss [?] who was then the head of the Boston
| based SGI run group. She asked about the supposed pacifism
| of the Soka Gakkai and Dr. Victoria explained his
| understanding of the situation. Ms. Strauss suggested that
| she would be happy to present him with some information he
| was unaware of and he told her he would welcome such an
| effort. However instead of this, we have seen an attack by
| tame SGI pseudo-scholars in non-peer reviewed publications
| twisting his words and excoriating the man.
[ Was the phenomenon of screaming in the mirror ever morely poignantly
presented than in that last sentence fragment? ]
From what you say, Brian Victoria knew as he was publishing the first
edition of "Zen At War" that there were problems with his thesis in
chapter six (no organized resistance against Imperial State Zen after
1942). He knew that the problems were isolated to the existence of
Makiguchi and Toda, as heads of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai organization,
who after their arrest, resisted to the end and in Toda's case,
survived. He knew that his paper-thin explanation in Note 8 that they
were arrested for refusing the Shinto Talisman and not for pacifism,
would not hold. And this was because of his very own thesis in the
second half of his book that the strategy of the militarists to force
total support of the war upon the people through Imperial Way Buddhism
under the Shinto Talisman ... indicated his sheer intellectual
dishonesty through extremely compartmentalized thinking. It required
cognitive dissonance between the two halves of the book.
Instead of expending the effort to straighten out his work late in the
publication cycle, Victoria decided to straighten out the facts by
cherry picking the research and distorting it, while ignoring the
preponderance of the data regarding the career of Makiguchi, in
finding that indeed and lo, Makiguchi was not really a pacifist. This
is a fraud, clear and simple.
Worse, it is besmirching the reputation of a great man (greater than
you apparently know) for the simple purpose of Victoria's own arrogant
convenience. It is the classical Greek crime of hubris.
From "Like a Worm i' the Bud? A Heterology of Classical Greek
Slavery", by Paul Cartledge, in
Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 40, No. 2. (Oct., 1993), p 174, <http://
links.jstor.org/sici?
sici=0017-3835%28199310%292%3A40%3A2%3C163%3ALAWITB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M>:
. Hubris has entered our own language and dictionaries with a
. peculiarly theological association: 'overweening pride
. towards the gods' (C.O.D.). But as S.R.E. Fisher has
. demonstrated time and again, hubris meant fundamentally
. transgressive violence, and in particular the sort of
. violence that transgressed the sharp boundary drawn in
. Athenian ideology between free and slave, or citizen and
. non-citizen. As Fisher has also pointed out, in ancient
. discussions of the aims and effects of social actions inside
. Greek communities, central importance was attributed to the
. concepts of status, of honour and shame. So here with the
. public action against hubris: for what this charge in effect
. alleged was that the defendant had committed the public
. crime of treating a citizen (who was by definition 'free'
. - psychologically, legally, and politically) as if he were a
. slave. As such, the graphi hubreos was 'the title of the
. most serious crime in the area of offences against the
. person'.
To be quick and to the point, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi is not your slave,
Brian Victoria. Make or preserve your career or reputation (or selfish
convenience) on the back of some other unfortunate victim.
Let's talk about peer review. Peer review on academic journals is
mostly skin deep, and only a test of the appearance of the work. One's
reliable history is the major factor in acceptance for publication.
So, for scientific journals, no one re-runs your experiments before
your data and conclusions are published, because there isn't time or
frankly, enough energy. If someone subjects your data set to a
statistical test which might reveal a skew due to dropping off some
part of the data set, or other foolish fabrication, that's over and
above the call of typical reviewer duty.
What does occur when a fraud is detected afterwards, is an article
retraction by the journal to "correct the literature".
There is a fine discussion of this in the NPR Science Friday program
about peer review in journals during the breaking case of the Korean
Stem Cell fraud in 2005. (At the time of the show, the full truth was
not yet known.) It is located here:
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5058361>
By the way, the non-peer-reviewed online journal (Global Buddhism)
that Koichi Miyata published in is the very same non-peer-reviewed
online journal that Brian Victoria did his evil in, initially.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
As far as my anonymity and my credentials are concerned, they are also
anonymous. No comment.
But you are right, as I review the literature through the JSTOR
library system, a literature search on "Makiguchi Victoria" only
produces Victoria's erroneous article. This is anathema.
____ Call For Articles _____________________________
<Sound Effect http://ava7.com/sounds/animals/lion-3.wav>
Henceforth, I am openly calling for articles in peer-reviewed
publications (optimally showing up in JSTOR), regarding this matter.
(There are benefits, career and otherwise, to academics both youthful
and aged, who expose a fraud as profound and over-reaching as this
one.)
All aspects of Victoria's fraud should be investigated and publicly
refuted.
New translations of his putative "translation" work in all of his
articles and books should be compared with his work and his now-
questionable conclusions, which should be examined very closely.
Clearly there is great ignorance, at least in the English-reading-
West, of the political debate surrounding the Meiji Constitution
between the Tatsukichi Minobe faction in the Diet (Constitutional
Monarchists) and the Militarists (Absolute Monarchists), before 1935.
I believe this needs exposition in depth with a special treatment of
the errors of Victoria. Ignorance is the breeding ground for distorted
views that lead to conclusions and bad publications in the literature,
requiring retractions by journals. This sorry state of affairs should
be remedied.
The optimal result would be a multi-volume modern history of religious
influences on Japanese political and social life. From the Shogunate's
end to Meiji and the struggles between the Diet and the Militarists
who prevailed in 1935, the march to world war, defeat and destruction,
MacArthur, return to constitutional monarchy and the changes since
then. Cover the same ground that Victoria covers on Imperial Way
Buddhism, Imperial State Zen, but without the distortions providing
cover for his Zen beliefs by gratuitously understating the resistance
of others to the war effort.
____ Healing a Wound _______________________________
It took most of a millenium to finally unmask the falsehood that was
the Donation of Constantine. During that time, darkness ruled European
life under a false legacy of the possession of nations by arrogant
religious authorities.
Were no one to intervene in this, it could take that long or longer to
remove the stain of a powerful academic like Victoria from the
reputation of any man, even one so wonderful as Mr. Makiguchi. This
evil cannot be allowed to persist.
In a public meeting between President Ikeda and Nobel Peace Prize
Laureate Betty Williams, on November 6th, 2006: "Buddhism teaches that
anger can have both positive and negative aspects. I appreciate the
true value of your actions in that context - anger at great evil is
great good. Cowardice is never right."
Tatsukichi Minobe's pre-1935 view, which predominated in the Diet of a
time before the Rape of Nanking, of a constitutional monarchy ruled by
the people's representatives survives today, precisely because of
Makiguchi's sacrifice and Toda's determination to never yield.
The path not taken at first, was the true path taken by these heroic
men, standing alone.
That is the causal view of the political transformation of Japan,
according to the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin. It only takes one
person to transform a nation and to change history.
-Chas.
_________________________________________
Reading From "The Entity of the Mystic Law", Writings of Nichiren
Daishonin, p. 418-419:
Another good explanation is given in the sixth volume of Miao-lo's
Annotations on "The Profound Meaning of the Lotus Sutra," in the
passage that reads: "While the three thousand realms remain latent [in
ordinary beings], they are all designated by the term 'ignorance.' But
when the three thousand realms all manifest themselves as the result
[of Buddhahood], then they are all designated by the term 'eternal
happiness.' However, because the three thousand realms themselves
remain unchanged, ignorance is essentially one with enlightenment.
Since the three thousand realms all remain constant, they possess both
entity and function." This commentary makes the matter perfectly clear.
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Prochronists Brian Victoria, Jon Petry and now Robert Kisala Risk
Becoming Liars Through the Repetition of Debunked Falsehoods
Jon Petry continues to misunderstand the history of Japan, in
particular, the events of 1935 and the "Organ Theory Affair" regarding
the occurrences in the Diet surrounding Minobe Tatsukichi. There were
two major factions, the Constitutional Monarchists who were liberal
and progressive, and the Absolute Monarchists supported by the
militarists who wanted total control over the government, the people
and society, and to quell any voices that might disagree with their
plans.
Minobe's Organ Theory made the case that the Emperor was an organ of
the government and not an absolute ruler. This caused an uproar which
ended with the militarists having total authority to do as they
wished: and their wish was total Pacific war. Secretly, the Princes
and the Emperor were backing the Absolute Monarchists, but the
Constitutionalists never knew this.
So in their writings and in attempting to pull the country back into
the center over a long struggle ending disastrously in 1935, the
Constitutional Monarchists would write expressing loyalty to the
Emperor pleading for a middle way to escape the spiral down into
madness that was coming. The fact that there was no hope for their
cause, does not impugn their efforts to attempt to hold off the
darkness that was descending. That piece of intellectual dishonesty is
utterly disgusting on the part of Brian Victoria, Robert Kisala and
Jon Petry. They should be shunned by academia as prochronists
perpetuating a fraud.
With that history in mind, let's examine Jon Petry's confusion
regarding the misleading writings and intellectual dishonesty of Brian
Victoria and Robert Kisala.
From a recent posting of Jon Petry:
| Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton in the Closet? By Brian
| Daizen Victoria, Senior Lecturer Centre for Asian
| Studies, University of Adelaide
|.
| In both EBW and David Chappell's Buddhist Peacework
| (BP), Tsunesaburo Makiguchi is presented as another
| foundational exemplar of Engaged Buddhism. Makiguchi's
| Buddhist faith, it is claimed, impelled him not only to
| advocate a humane and peaceful world but to sacrifice
| his very life in resisting Japanese militarism.
|.
| In an article in EBW entitled "The Angulimala Lineage:
| Buddhist Prison Ministries," Virginia Cohn Parkum and J.
| Anthony Stultz describe Makiguchi (and his disciple,
| Josei Toda) as having "experienced incarceration in
| Japan during World War II for resisting the war effort
| and refusing to follow state Shinto worship" (p. 360). A
| second article in the same book, "Racial Diversity in
| the Soka Gakkai" by David Chappell, states that "when
| Makiguchi refused to support government thinking during
| the war, he was arrested in 1943 and died in prison on
| November 18, 1944 at the age of seventy-three" (p. 216).
|.
| Though somewhat more ambivalent, Peter Harvey adds his
| voice to the chorus in An Introduction to Buddhist
| Ethics (IBE) where he writes, "In the Second World War,
| most Buddhist schools agreed to support the nation in
| its efforts. Seemingly the one exception was the Soka
| Gakkai, which refused to take part in this unified
| front" (p. 270). Nevertheless, none of these voices can
| compare with that of Daisaku Ikeda, president of Soka
| Gakkai International, who has the strongest words of
| praise for Makiguchi. In an essay included in BP
| entitled "The SGI's Peace Movement," Ikeda writes:
All of those issues are relevant to the discussion of Makiguchi and
his views in wartime, and Jon Petry will go on to distort those
issues.
However, bringing up the following material from 1903 is really a red
herring.
Makiguchi's 1903 writings were from a time long before he came into
contact with Nichiren's Buddhism, when he was basically under earlier
influences of the religion of his family, and are simply not relevant
to the point that Victoria, Kisala and Petry are trying to make: that
he might not have been imprisoned for resisting the War, or even that
he might not have been a pacifist AT THAT MUCH LATER TIME.
One can argue over his pacifistic tendencies in 1903, which
undoubtedly were in conflict at that time with his nationalism, but
that does not in any way pertain to the occurrences in the middle and
late 1930s and the early 1940s. These are truly specious as well as
unjustified and distorted assertions.
Petry continues:
| Early in the twentieth century (1903), President
| Makiguchi published The Geography of Human Life (Jinsei
| Chirigaku), which strongly advocated a shift to
| humanitarian competition at a time when imperialism and
| colonialism were still the prevailing modes of
| international relations. He analyzed competition among
| nations as consisting of the phases of: military
| competition, political competition, economic
| competition, and humanitarian competition. He stressed
| that humanity's aim should be humanitarian competition
| (p. 136).
|.
| Robert Kisala, however, once again presents us with an
| alternative view. He begins by noting that the central
| focus of Makiguchi's first book, Jinsei Chirigaku, was
| on "drawing connections between geography and everyday
| life and advocating the study of geography through field
| trips and other hands-on experiences" (p. 75). As for
| Makiguchi's alleged war resistance, Kisala explains that
| the crux of the matter was Makiguchi's refusal to
| venerate a talisman of Amaterasu, the Sun Goddess,
| issued by the central Shinto shrine at Ise. It was this
| refusal, he claims, not war resistance, which led
| Makiguchi and some twenty other leaders of what was then
| known as Soka Kyoiku Gakkai (Academic Society for Value-
| Creating Education) to be arrested on charges of lese
| majestè and the violation of the Peace Preservation Law
| on July 6, 1943.
This skin-deep analysis, more appropriate to a high school paper,
completely ignores the contextual fact that Shinto was the religion
that identified the Emperor as a kami (god) superior to the hoteke
(the buddhas). That meant the Emperor was the country itself: the
government, the military and the war effort ... and that resisting
Shinto was resisting the Emperor's war. Resisting the state religion
of Imperial Way Buddhism (according to Brian Victoria's very own book)
was resisting Imperial State Zen at war in the Pacific.
This evil Shinto view had evolved according to the honji suijaku
theory (13th century Tendai slanders of Dengyo) and the later
foundations of the Sanno Ichijitsu cult of worshipping Ieyasu as a god
(laid down by Tenkai, another Tendai slanderer of Dengyo, who inserted
lies into his mentor's mouth stating that the gods were greater than
the buddhas, and that the greatest god of all was Ieyasu), all of
which was inherited by the Meiji Restoration to build a new Emperor
Cult, which came to fruition in 1935.
[See my other posting regarding the Toynbee analysis of the Fuji
School for vastly greater detail on this evil.]
Petry continues:
| Kisala concludes his study of Makiguchi by pointing out
| that while "Soka Gakkai literature often claims that
| this persecution was the result of an anti-military
| stance taken by Makiguchi. . . my reading of the
| situation indicates that Makiguchi's opposition was more
| narrowly focused on the religious policy of the
| government" (p. 90).
The utter ignorance of this statement is pathetic. There was no
separation at all between the Emperor and the War effort, in the
religious view of Shinto. Shinto equals War. It has no other purpose
than the absolute power of a monarch leading to War. It was invented
and reinvented by the Tendai at the behest of the Zen bakufu (military
government) over several centuries expressly for the purpose of
governing through distortion of Buddhism. [The fact that it is a
distortion that suits Jon Petry and his Five Senior Priest cronies at
Minobu, is no accident.]
Now, Kisala and Petry go back to the irrelevant evidence of
Makiguchi's writings nearly thirty years before his conversion to
Nichiren Buddhism, with some crazy idea that it informs us of his
views and actions in the middle of the struggle leading to the events
of 1935 and the later events of the early 1940s.
Simply and obviously irrelevant, a red herring is a red herring no
matter how many times you repeat the fallacy: it remains fallacious
reasoning. Indeed, repetition of an obvious fallacy is the propaganda
technique numero uno of the fascists themselves, the big lie that
becomes more acceptable when it is repeated endlessly (Josef
Goebbels).
Petry continues:
| This writer's research on Makiguchi shows that not only
| is Kisala's conclusion correct but that he revealed only
| a small part of the story. That is to say, while
| Makiguchi may, as Ikeda claims, have looked forward to
| the coming of a future world based on "humanitarian
| competition," that world did not yet exist. In Jinsei
| Chirigaku, Makiguchi described the actual world he
| inhabited as follows:
|.
| "It is my view that the sole cause of the present danger
| to world peace is Russia's promotion of its own
| viability. That is to say, in the present age of
| economic struggle for existence, Russia seeks to exploit
| weaknesses among the international powers in order to
| acquire what it must have: access to the oceans. Thus it
| is in the process of expanding in three directions, from
| the Dardanelle Straits in Eastern Europe to the Persian
| Gulf in western Asia and the Yellow Sea in the Far
| East." (Makiguchi 1903:950-951).
|
| In identifying Russia as being solely responsible for
| endangering world peace, Makiguchi adopted a stance
| identical with that of the Japanese government of his
| day. Japan used this alleged threat to justify its
| surprise attack on Russia the following year,
| ostensively to protect Korea's independence and prevent
| further Russian encroachments on Chinese territory, most
| especially Manchuria. The reality, however, was that
| following its victory over Russia in 1905, Japan moved
| to take control of Korea for itself, turning it into a
| full-fledged colony in 1910. As for Manchuria, Japan
| steadily increased its control of this area of China
| until it established the puppet state of Manchukuo in
| February 1932.
The entirety of Jon's and Kisala's irrelevant argument, here, has been
completely debunked already, SEVERAL TIMES IN SEVERAL PLACES.
I refer you to the first time that Koichi Miyata debunked Brian
Victoria's canard (the fourth time that Victoria vomited forth this
filth, polluting the public marketplace of ideas):
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage
. from Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The
. Geography of Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that
. Russia was engaged in a policy of expansionism in the
. search for year-round harbors. Victoria asserts that
. this world view was identical to that of the government
. of Japan, a view used to justify the Russo-Japanese War
. (1904-1905), then the annexation of the Korean peninsula
. (1910) and the founding of the puppet state of Manchukuo
. (1932). Victoria's assertion, and his implicit criticism
. of Makiguchi, simplistically links analysis of the
. global situation with the policies taken in response to
. that. Makiguchi was merely voicing what was then the
. accepted understanding of the geopolitical motives for
. Russia's expansionist policies, a view held not only by
. the Japanese government, but shared by the British, with
. whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
. Certainly I know of no scholar of political geography
. who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one that
. Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not
. only Makiguchi but everyone who studies political
. geography guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism:
.
. From "A Skeleton in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
. <http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
So, this was the actually the view of all of the allies of Britain at
the turn of the 20th century, and not some Japanese imperialistic
view.
Stop repeating this nonsense, Jon Petry and Robert Kisala, you are
obviously lying in your deliberate repetition of debunked falsehoods
(like Propaganda Minister Goebbels and Brian Victoria).
Leaving aside the wretchedness of your methods and lack of connection
with any rational semblence of truth, this line of discussion
continues to be a red herring, by delving again into Makiguchi's
decades past ideas, way before Makiguchi's conversion to Nichiren
Buddhism.
I can understand this from a non-believer like Kisala, but Jon Petry
considers himself a believer, does he not?
Are not people allowed to change and grow as they age, or are we all
simply static entities?
King Ashoka went from being a cruel conqueror to being a peaceful
Buddhist, is that only OK for him to change his life, because he is
ancient history?
I mean, (if it's OK with your Lordship) is it satisfactory to you if
we practice human revolution, even we mortals who are less than your
perfection?
Petry continues:
| Significantly, neither Ikeda nor Kisala mention a second
| seminal book Makiguchi first published in November 1912.
| Entitled Kyodoka Kenky (Study of Folk Culture), this
| volume was an extension of the ideas contained in Jinsei
| Chirigaku, with special emphasis on their relevance to
| the life and structures of local communities. Makiguchi
| wanted rural educators (rather than the central
| government's bureaucrats) to take the lead in developing
| educational initiatives attuned to local communities.
| But toward what end? The book's concluding chapter
| explained Makiguchi's ultimate goal for education as
| follows:
|.
| "Regardless of social class, everyone should be
| conscious of the nation's destiny, harmonizing their
| lives with that destiny and, at all times, prepared to
| share that destiny. It is for this reason that the work
| of national education is to prepare ourselves to do
| exactly this, omitting nothing in the process. . . .
| However, in order to do this, and prior to placing
| ourselves in service to the state, we should first
| contribute to the local area that has nurtured us and
| with which we share common interests." (Makiguchi
| 1933:460-461).
|.
| It should be noted that Makiguchi wrote the above
| specifically for an enlarged 1933 edition of this book
| (see Makiguchi 1933:6). Despite championing rural
| education under local control, by 1933 both he and his
| publisher, none other than Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, shared a
| vision of education that was as "state-centered" as any
| of his contemporaries.
|.
Once again, this nonsense of yours has been debunked by Koichi Miyata
in the same article. Since you appear incapable of clicking and
reading this article, I have included it in total at the end of this
writing. Here is the passage debunking your (above) hypothesis:
. Secondly, Victoria quotes an extract from Makiguchi's
. book Kyodoka Kenkyu (A Study of Folk Culture), in which
. Makiguchi notes that the state plays an important role
. in the lives of citizens. From this, Victoria draws the
. conclusion that as the Japan moved closer to war,
. Makiguchi adopted the view that education should be "in
. service to the state". (Victoria states that Makiguchi
. added this section for the 1933 revised edition of the
. book. This is incorrect, as it appears in the first
. edition published in 1912.) Since the publication of
. Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi had consistently emphasized
. the formation of identity on three levels-that of a
. person's local community, the national and global
. levels. Within this context, and against a backdrop of
. global competition for empire, he placed particular
. importance on national independence. This is hardly
. unreasonable. Japan was one of only a handful of
. countries in Asia that had maintained independence amid
. encroachment by the Western powers, and Makiguchi was
. well aware of the miserable circumstances of colonized
. peoples. What we may find problematic-in terms of the
. current view that controlling peoples is intrinsically
. wrong-is that Makiguchi did not say enough after Japan
. itself acquired colonies, omitting to comment on the
. issue of independence for these colonized peoples, and
. only suggesting that imperialism was not the optimal
. policy choice because of the financial burden involved.
. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to my essay "Tsunesaburo
. Makiguchi's Theory of the State" in TJOS, in which I
. discuss Makiguchi's view that imperialistic-military and
. economic-competition should be supplanted by a
. cooperative sense of community, what he called
. "humanitarian competition."
Miyata's article "Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's Theory of the State" is
located at: http://www.tmakiguchi.org/assets/images/miyataforIOPspecialissue.pdf
I wonder if you are capable of clicking and reading this article, or
will you continue to repeat that debunked piece of propaganda, too?
Next time, I will include that article as well, if you continue to
prevaricate, by floating this canard.
By the way, note the date 1933. Even according to your prochronistic
reasoning, Jinsei Chirigaku was enlarged and published just at the
point, 2 years before the crisis and catastrophe of the Constitutional
Monarchists in 1935, when the Constitutionalists were desperately
trying to pull the government back to the middle, while it was sliding
away from them to the far right and utter chaos.
The Constitutionalist case would not be furthered by separation from
the the ruling government, or by separating from the nobility that
they were trying to influence, in vain as it would turn out.
So they made their plea from the center. In support of the Emperor. As
Tony Blair has noted, all progressive governments that survive must
rule from the center. Always from the broad center of the people. The
fact that it did not work this time is not the fault of their
rhetorical support of the Emperor, while trying to influence the
royals.
Petry continues:
| Only a few years later, millions of young Japanese would
| be called on to sacrifice their lives, and those of
| their victims, in the process of "placing [them]selves
| in service to the state." Thus, Makiguchi's quarrel with
| the central government's bureaucrats over the control of
| local education was not about whether or not service to
| the state should be promoted, but simply how best to
| attain that goal.
That few years, after 1935 and a sharp break with the last glimmer of
hope in 1933 when Makiguchi wrote, does not impugn the pre-Absolute
Monarchy attempts of the Constitutional Monarchists in 1933 to
preserve a progressive government in Japan. Those failed efforts were
noble, and had they succeeded, could have prevented much death and
destruction. THIS, TOO IS PACIFISM !!!
And during the last of the war years, Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda were
imprisoned, and they were the only ones who never gave in to the end,
to Mr. Makiguchi's death, and Mr. Toda's unyielding and undefeated
release from prison. The honor of Japan's Buddhists resided only with
these two in the end. Certainly not with Zen and not with Minobu and
their subjugated temples.
And, oh, by the way, Jon Petry. Your show is slipping.
Your evil Minobu sect (Nichiren Shu and the other subjugated temples)
were not hiding away somewhere. They were unabashed cheerleaders for
the war effort and the attack on Pearl Harbor, even worse than the
evil Fuji School Priesthood.
They bowed to the Shinto talisman, that slanderous object of worship,
which stands in opposition to the Lotus Sutra and the Gohonzon, and
which was the direct cause of war, chaos and holocaust.
They bowed to the Shinto talisman and cheered as defeat after glorious
defeat occurred, with the mass suicide of division after division,
running out of the caves burning from the flamethrower's napalm.
Minobu cheered as the kamikaze flew and they cheered as the Yamamoto
went down with all hands without inflicting any damage whatsoever on
the Allies.
So noble.
Your Minobu priests cheered as Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned.
And damn them to hell for it and all the rest of their distorting
garbage Buddhism.
Petry continues:
| If, as the preceding quote demonstrates, Makiguchi
| believed the ultimate goal of education was to serve the
| state, what was the emperor's role in fostering this?
| Was Makiguchi in any way opposed or critical of either
| the emperor or the imperial system?
|.
| Though critical of patriotism based on "superficial
| reasons," Makiguchi wrote, "His Majesty, the Emperor, on
| whom is centered the exercise of Imperial authority,
| does so through his military and civilian officials. The
| reason he exercises this authority is definitely not for
| his own benefit. Rather, as leader and head of the
| entire nation, he graciously exerts himself on behalf of
| all the people. It is for this reason that in our
| country, the state and the emperor, as head of state,
| should be thought of as completely one and indivisible.
| We must make our children thoroughly understand that
| loyal service to their sovereign is synonymous with love
| of country. . . I believe it is only in so doing that we
| can clarify the true meaning of the phrase "loyalty to
| one's sovereign and love of country" [Châkun Aikoku]
| (Makiguchi 1933:411- 412).
This repeated nonsense of yours HAS ALSO already been repeatedly
debunked, which ALSO throws into question, ONCE AGAIN, your putative
intellectual honesty, Jon Petry. Here is Koichi Miyata's argument from
"A Skeleton In The Closet?"
. Thirdly there is the problem of the emperor system.
. Quoting a section from Kyodoka Kenkyu in which Makiguchi
. argues that loyalty to the emperor is synonymous with
. love of one's country, Victoria implies that Makiguchi's
. view was identical to that of the military government.
. This, however, is a far too loosely framed argument that
. ignores the interpretative issues associated with the
. 1889 Meiji Constitution. The preamble to the Meiji
. Constitution recognizes the supreme authority of the
. emperor, while Article 3 declares the sacred nature of
. the emperor, and Article 4 his sovereign rights over the
. state -- making the state and the emperor system
. inseparable. If we stress the supreme authority of the
. emperor, the emperor is then cast in the role of
. absolute monarch. If we consider instead the role of the
. Constitution as a brake on the supreme authority of the
. emperor, he becomes a constitutional monarch. The former
. view is represented by the imperial fascism supported by
. the military regime, while the latter corresponds to
. Tatsukichi Minobe's theory of the emperor as an organ of
. the state. From the era of Taisho democracy through to
. the suppression of Minobe's theory in 1935, this view
. held sway among constitutional scholars and members of
. the Diet. The idea that loyalty = patriotism is common
. to both views, and by aligning Makiguchi with the
. imperial fascism of the military simply on the basis of
. his comments here, Victoria again appears determined to
. ignore the written record of Makiguchi's thoughts. From
. his earliest writings, Makiguchi viewed the emperor as a
. constitutional monarch, and was critical of moves to
. make the emperor's powers absolute.
Once again, Prochronists like Victoria, Kisala and Petry, will always
judge a person's writings before the emergence of Fascism, in a post-
Fascist light, to make whatever conclusion they desire seem correct.
In this way they persecute the noble efforts of those who tried to
forestall catastrophe, by twisting the truth and demonizing their
nobility.
The State Fascism triumphant in 1935 was not the same as the
Constitutional Monarchists struggling to survive as part of the Diet
in 1933. Got that?
It is truly shameful, how Victoria, Kisala and Petry can exploit that
subtle difference in timing, making fools of the public. But that is
indeed what they do. And they call themselves academics. And people
continue to publish their garbage writings.
More from Jon Petry:
| In urging his fellow educators to make the nation's
| children "thoroughly understand that loyal service to
| their sovereign is synonymous with love of country" we
| once again find Makiguchi situated squarely in the
| mainstream of the nationalistic fervor that increasingly
| came to characterize the 1930s. No matter how
| Makiguchi's position toward the emperor may have changed
| later on, in 1933 Makiguchi advocated the widely held
| proposition that love of country was synonymous with
| loyal service to the emperor. It was exactly this
| educational ideology that provided the foundation for
| the Japanese military's demand of absolute and
| unquestioning obedience from its soldiers, claiming that
| "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
| emperor."
This time as well, Petry is repeating a section of Victoria's work
that has been thoroughly debunked over and over by Koichi Miyata in "A
Skeleton In The Closet?":
. Victoria mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers
. that "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
Does Petry simply refuse to read the debunking of his incorrect
positions? Can he not see what is apparent to one and all, that his
autistic lying, like a network device that is an open emitter, only
serves to undermine his validity on every point he makes? Endlessly
reformulating an erroneous statement into a new posting does not make
it true, in spite of Goebbels' guidance to propagandists.
And trashing Makiguchi and Toda without regard to the truth of their
heroism, does not make the devilish priests at Minobu and the other
Nichiren temples into saints. The were, are and will remain war-
mongering slanderers of Buddhism.
More from Jon Petry:
| Makiguchi also touched on Japan's colonization of Korea,
| claiming that Korea, prior to being formally annexed by
| Japan in August 1910, had been in such a state of
| anarchy that it was unable either to defend itself or
| protect its citizens. Not only that, the Chinese people
| presently found themselves in exactly the same situation
| (see Makiguchi 1933:413).
Once again, one does not succeed in influencing the powerful back into
the center, by picking unnecessary fights about past history that
cannot be changed now. Or by encouraging disloyalty against the leader
of the nation, whom you are trying to influence.
This (1933) was the time when fate still held in the balance, when the
course had not been decided (apparently), and when there was still
hope. Should they have given in prematurely?
That appears to be what Kisala and Petry think.
They would rather be viewed in a better light by history, than fight
in an effort to change the outcome. How determinist of them, what
fatalism that is, and such intellectual detachment is merely a
disguise for clucking defeatism.
It is precisely the hopeless causes that require the strongest fight
and the greatest courage. Get your ass off the sidelines and into the
fight, Jon Petry. You and your Tendai-influenced kin need to discard
the notion of "original enlightenment", which is really the devilish
function's most excellent disguise. You cannot attain the way by
having an opinion of Buddhism that differs from Nichiren Daishonin.
You are either with him, or you are in Avichi Hell:
From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p. 77-78, Chapter
Seven - The Parable of the Phantom City, Point Seven, on the passage
"Now you must press forward diligently / so that together you may
[all] reach the place where the treasure is.",
. The Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings says: The
. word "all" refers to the Ten Worlds. The word "together"
. refers to the words [of the Buddha in chapter two, Expedient
. Means] "hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without
. any distinction between us." The word "reach" means to
. arrive at the level of the highest effect, the state of
. Buddhahood. "The place where the treasure is," the treasure
. land, is the holy mountain, Eagle Peak.
.
. Nichiren and his followers, those who chant Nam-myoho-renge
. -kyo, one and all will "together reach the place where the
. treasure is." This one word "together" means that, as long
. as they are together with Nichiren, they will reach the
. treasure land. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT TOGETHER WITH HIM, THEY
. WILL FALL INTO THE GREAT CITADEL OF THE AVICHI HELL.
When Nichiren placed all of Buddhism in the hands of Nikko Shonin,
your ancestral mentors (the Five Senior Priests) ignored the final
words of their dying mentor.
Now you are in Avichi Hell as a result.
While you still live, Jon Petry, you can still escape this hellish
condition by following Nichiren's final admonition. (Yes, even after
all of this evil ranting filth.)
By that, I don't mean joining your fellow Avichi denizens, the
Transfer Box-less followers of Nikken in Nichiren Shoshu. I mean
coming to the SGI. That is the only exit strategy that is sufficient
to make an escape from your present predicament.
More from Jon Petry:
| The clear implication of the latter claim was that
| China, like Korea before it, would greatly benefit from
| Japanese control. This was of course a sentiment shared
| by the Japanese government, as seen, for example, in the
| Amau Statement of April 1934 issued by its Foreign
| Office. China, the statement declared, was not to avail
| itself of the assistance of any country other than
| Japan.
That detailed implication of Makiguchi's that you describe is
actually, clearly and simply, a detailed inference on your part.
Your inference does not equate to Makiguchi's implication.
Makiguchi did not make that prediction: "will greatly benefit from".
Stop putting your thoughts and words into Makiguchi's mouth. If he
didn't say what you really wished that he had, then there is a reason
for it.
Cease your distortions, bad translations and quotes out of context.
More from Jon Petry:
| This said, it is equally clear that Makiguchi's chief
| concern in writing favorably about Japan's expansion
| onto the Asian continent was, as ever, directed toward
| the manner in which Japan's children were to be
| educated. Makiguchi saw, in a discussion of Korea's
| recent past and China's present, a golden opportunity to
| demonstrate to Japanese children just how fortunate they
| were to be living in Japan. Makiguchi continued:
|.
| "It is when we look at these concrete examples [of Korea
| and China] that thoughts about our own country emerge. .
| . . The result is that we cannot help but feel grateful
| and want to repay the debt of gratitude we owe [the
| state]. The practical application of the study of folk
| culture is to provide the fundamental basis for an
| understanding of the state by having [our children] look
| at situations like these that are right before their
| very eyes. I feel very deeply that we must vigorously
| seek to create persons of character who will in the
| future lead a state-centered life, having first acquired
| the germ of the idea of serving the state at the town
| and village levels." (Makiguchi 1933:413).
First off, I have not seen this translation, which is in direct
contradiction to Makiguchi's views, and since all your other
translation errors have been extremely self-serving to your purpose of
trashing Makiguchi, I do not trust this little bit regarding "state-
centered", either.
Since you have ignored Koichi Miyata's references to Makiguchi's other
works delineating his views clearly, I will refer you to President
Ikeda's speech at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in 1996, which appeared
again recently in the World Tribune (10/30/09):
. Two years later, on Nov. 18, 1930, together with his
. disciple and fellow teacher, Josei Toda, Mr. Makiguchi published
the first
. volume of 'The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy,' and
. it is from this day that we date the establishment of
. our organization.
.
. 'Soka' is Japanese for "value creation." From Mr.
. Makiguchi's viewpoint, the most fundamental and central
. value is that of life itself. Taking into account John
. Dewey's pragmatism, Mr. Makiguchi stated that "the only
. value in the true sense is that of life itself. All
. other values arise solely within the context of
. interaction with life." The fundamental criterion for
. value, in Mr. Makiguchi's view, is whether something
. adds to or detracts from, advances or hinders, the human
. condition.
Since Mr Makiguchi's central thesis is LIFE-CENTERED, as the name of
our organization states clearly (and not state-centered), I think we
can dispose of your putative translation into the same waste-bin as
the other putative translations leading to the rest of the distorting
rhetoric of Victoria, Kisala and Petry.
I repeat once again regarding your continuing fallacious reasoning as
well: Prochronists like Victoria, Kisala and Petry, will always judge
a person's writings before the emergence of Fascism (1933), in a post-
Fascist light (1935 and later), to make whatever conclusion they
desire seem correct. In this way they persecute the noble efforts of
those who tried to forestall catastrophe, by twisting the truth and
demonizing their nobility.
To them, social criticism was the only correct line of attack, since
the Constitutionalists SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that the cause was lost, in
the view of Prochronism. The view of Prochronists is always, that you
should have known the future, that you are to be judged in your
actions in the past, by the unfortunate turn of future events against
your cause and efforts, even when you were simply trying to avert that
future disaster.
Hence, trying to avert disaster by political and rhetorical means is
viewed by the Prochronists as complicity with the perpetration of the
disaster. The only Prochronist-righteous course is to stand on the
sidelines with a carefully positioned (and historically preserved)
letter of protest, without taking any risk by participating in the
fray.
No Philsopher of any note encourages this inactive ethical stance,
they all, to a man (Kant, Descartes, Mill, Hegel, etc.) demand that we
take action to avert disaster, or be branded as cowardly.
This is pure sophistry with an evil purpose, specifically to find
fault where there is none.
More from Jon Petry:
| Makiguchi demonstrates yet again that his ultimate
| concern was implanting in Japan's children a willingness
| to serve the state. Makiguchi simply believed he knew
| how to do this in a more effective way than the central
| government's bureaucrats who showed such little concern
| or understanding of local conditions. While it is true
| that Makiguchi was arrested in July 1943 for refusing to
| worship a talisman of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu issued
| by the Ise shrine, this had nothing to do with being
| disloyal to the emperor.
Pure unadulterated Petry-thought with absolutely no foundation in
fact.
This completely ignores the facts that in Shinto, the Emperor is the
god above the buddhas, whose body is the state, whose word is divine
law, and whose war is a religious practice. Resisting Shinto is
resisting the Emperor's divine war. Imperial Way Buddhism (Shinto) IS
Imperial State Zen and the Zen War on humanity. They are not separate,
not even in the tiniest way.
You cannot defeat an evil by bowing to it.
The absolute monarch must not be obeyed in slandering Buddhism, the
Shinto Talisman and everything it represented (Imperial Way Buddhism,
Imperial State Zen, and the public acknowledgement of divinity of the
Emperor, which is inseperable from supporting his divine Pacific War)
even though required by law, must all be rejected.
The people must not bow down to Shinto, or the world falls into hell,
never to emerge.
More from Jon Petry:
| As he informed his police
| interrogators, "I think it is, for we Japanese, the Way
| of the Subject to be loyal. This is what I have realized
| from my study of the truth of the Lotus Sutra" (Akashi &
| Matsâra, eds. 1975:172). Further, as contradictory as it
| may seem, Makiguchi's refusal to worship a talisman of
| the Sun Goddess did not even signify a lack of respect
| for this alleged progenitress of the Imperial family.
| Makiguchi made this clear when he told the police,
|.
| "The Sun Goddess is the venerable ancestress of our
| Imperial Family, her divine virtue having been
| transmitted to each successive emperor who ascended the
| throne up to and including the present emperor. Thus has
| her virtue been transformed into the August Virtue of
| His Majesty which, shining down on the people, brings
| them happiness. It is for this reason that Article III
| of the Constitution states: "The person of the Emperor
| is sacred and inviolable."
|.
| "Just as we [association members] recognize the
| fundamental unity of filial piety and loyalty, so it is
| our conviction that it is proper to reverently venerate
| His Majesty based on the monistic view that "His
| Majesty, the Emperor is One and Indivisible" [Tenno
| Ichigen-ron], thus making it unnecessary to pay homage
| at the Grand Shrine at Ise. . . . In light of this, who
| is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor himself,
| to whom we should reverently pray?" (Akashi & Matsâra,
| eds. 1975:174-175).
Buddhism is reason. Here, you see the excellent example of Makiguchi's
brilliant shakubuku technique, exercised towards his persecutors. His
mind is like a rapier in the hands of a master fencer.
Makiguchi APPEARS to be simply repeating what was a traditional view
of the Japanese. It was even written into the Constitution that the
Emperor was thus.
ACTUALLY, he is attacking the Shinto system with Reason, by setting
the ends against the middle. You cannot perceive this if you do not
have faith in the mentor: it is necessary to ask yourself, "Why is
Sensei doing this?" That question will never occur to the mind of a
non-disciple.
He tells them, FROM THEIR OWN WORDS, how their views are
contradictory. Not needing to pray at the Ise shrine because of "the
monistic view that 'His Majesty, the Emperor is One and
Indivisible' [Tenno Ichigen-ron]", means that placing the Shinto
talisman in one's altar is therefore redundant, as well.
SIMULTANEOUSLY, he was trying to draw the distinction, even at this
late date, that his disloyalty to state Shinto and the order to accept
the talisman was not the same as disloyalty to the Emperor, because
the Emperor ("one and indivisible") and state Shinto were not the same
entity.
Makiguchi's statement is like a razor, which cuts between loyalty to
State Shinto, which he REFUSES to bow to, and loyalty to the person of
the Emperor ("who is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"), who as leader of the
nation he MUST bow to.
There is a history to using the words and teachings of issendai
against their evil goals. Dengyo (whom Nichiren Daishonin described
himself as a disciple of) went to China to visit Miao-lo's disciple,
where he copied the unmodified versions of the Lotus Sutra and the
True Word Sutras, which he then fetched back to Japan.
Why did Dengyo carry back with him the True Word Sutras, which the
Lord of Teachings, Shakyamuni himself asked his followers to "honestly
discard" while only retaining the Lotus Sutra as his "remnant" -
Nichiren?
Dengyo violated a precept, so that he could defeat the Six Schools at
Nara in the year 792 ["They are the Dharma Analysis Treasury (Kusha),
Establishment of Truth ( Jojitsu), Three Treatises (Sanron), Precepts
(Ritsu), Dharma Characteristics (Hosso), and Flower Garland (Kegon)
schools." <http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=2078>] in a
historic debate in front of the Emperor, resulting in Dengyo's Tendai
School of Buddhism becoming the national religion of Japan.
He accomplished this great feat by showing that the Six Schools (which
were not really independent, some temples taught all six) had modified
their versions of the True Word Sutras to incorporate large sections
of the Lotus Sutra. Exposing their flagrant appropriation, forgery and
plagiarism, Dengyo was victorious.
By the way, Nichiren Daishonin gleefully recounts his mentor's victory
in "The Selection of the Time", WND-1, pp. 548-549, <http://
www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=548&m=0&q=>.
In that VERY SAME Gosho, Nichiren masterfully uses Dengyo's technique,
by quoting the provisional sutras to defeat the schools that embrace
them. That makes the "Selection of the Time" Gosho, itself, an
embodiment of the principal of the Oneness of Mentor and Disciple.
Neat, huh? Dengyo, Nichiren and Makiguchi: cut from the same cloth.
And this is also why Nichiren Buddhism is not a precepts practice.
Here is Koichi Miyata's refutation of Victoria's bad translation in
Petry's passage above (which has been repeatedly ignored by Victoria,
Kisala and Petry):
. Victoria also quotes from a report produced by the
. special police on their interrogation of Makiguchi as
. proof that Makiguchi acknowledged the divine status of
. the emperor. Again, this assertion arises from a
. distortion of the relevant passage. Victoria quotes a
. reference by Makiguchi to "praying" to the emperor. He
. could hardly, however, have been more distorting in
. selecting the passage he quoted, deliberately excluding
. the following extract, which I have underlined:
.
... "The august virtue of His Majesty the Emperor is
... manifested in the security and happiness of the
... people, through the organs of his civil and
... military officials. Should these be deficient in
... some way, the people can petition him through
... the Diet or other bodies. In light of this, who
... is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
... himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"
... ("Pray" is Victoria's translation; "beseech" is
... probably more accurate in this context.)
.
. It is obvious that "beseech/pray" and "petition" have
. the same meaning in this context. The manner in which
. Victoria has misused Makiguchi's choice of a term
. normally used in a religious context, but with a special
. meaning in this context, to claim that Makiguchi
. supported emperor worship, is not what one would expect
. from a serious scholar endeavoring to document his
. claim. Surely in examining the interrogation report
. Victoria must have encountered the following statements
. by Makiguchi:
.
... "His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary man, who
... went to the Peers' School as Crown Prince, and
... studied how to be an emperor. The Emperor too
... makes mistakes. They say that in the early years
... of the Meiji era Tesshu Yamaoka admonished the
... Meiji Emperor and pointed out his mistakes on
... many occasions." [Tokko Geppo (Monthly bulletin
... of Special Higher Police), August 1943 issue, p.
... 152]
.
. These comments indicate clearly that Makiguchi rejected
. completely the deification of the emperor. Victoria
. mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers that
. "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
Does Jon Petry listen? He hasn't in the past, but we continue to hope.
More from Jon Petry:
| In fact, nowhere in Makiguchi's writings, either before
| or during the war, either in prison or out, do we find
| any statements critical of Japan's wartime policies. On
| the contrary, not only did Makiguchi justify Japan's
| colonial takeover of Korea (and earlier war with
| Russia), but he devoted his entire life as an educator
| to devising more effective ways of instilling "service
| to the state" in Japanese children. He further advocated
| that these same children "thoroughly understand that
| loyal service to their sovereign is synonymous with love
| of country." Even after imprisonment, he affirmed that
| loyalty to the emperor was but a natural part of the
| "Way of the Subject" based on his understanding of the
| Lotus Sutra. And, as we have seen, as far as the emperor
| was concerned, Makiguchi asked, "Who is there, apart
| from His Majesty, the Emperor himself, to whom we should
| reverently pray?"
Every single one of these serial distortions, which are serial
defamations of a truly noble person trying to avert disaster (and save
the many millions who died in that disaster), each and every one is
debunked above, and has been repeatedly debunked in the past.
Finally, the last from Jon Petry:
| For apologists to now claim that, his imprisonment and
| death notwithstanding, Makiguchi resisted or opposed
| Japan's war effort is an attempt to turn night into day.
As I said before, Jon Petry, your show is slipping.
This attempt by Zen (Victoria) and slanderous Nichiren Schools (Petry)
to trash Makiguchi and Toda, who were the only honorable Buddhists who
stood their ground against the Shinto War against Buddhism and
humanity to the end of the war, is an obvious ploy.
Victoria had problems with his thesis in chapter six of his book (CH
6: "No Organized Resistance Against Imperial State Zen After 1942").
The problem was that after he wrote it, he found that Makiguchi and
Toda made a liar out of him, or worse, a lazy academic. So he
proceeded to repeatedly attempt to tar these noble men with these
lies, so as to make himself a truthful and a diligent academic, at
least in retrospect. Of course this is a pathetic and vain attempt, no
matter what the outcome, because he did not do his dirtywork within
the confines of his thesis, which is therefore, trash. Then, Victoria,
as an academic, is no more than a producer of trash.
This is the way of Zen, as the Tokugawa bakufu hired Tendai and Zen
scribes to create new Shinto fantasies of themselves as kami (gods),
who were greater than the Hoteke (Buddhas). Writing something down
does not ascribe truth to the writing, nor nobility to the author. A
lie is a lie, however often it is repeated. And even when the truth is
silenced (fortunately, not the case this time).
Similarly, whenever heroes like Makiguchi and Toda rise up nobly, the
mass of weaklings who cower in the face of adversity must later tear
them down, to cover up their own shameful cowardice at the time.
It is no accident that they are led by a Roshi of the Zen School
(Victoria) that perpetrated this horror on humanity. And it is no
accident that his water is (once again) carried by a follower of the
Nichiren Schools and temples (Petry), that gratefully accepted the
Shinto Talisman and worshipped that object of Shinto devotion to the
Zen war against Buddhism and the human race.
No one in the Nichiren Schools refused to bow to Shinto, which is a
mask over the face of Zen War. No one went to prison and stayed there
after 1942 (Victoria's own thesis), with the exception of those
Victoria overlooked: Makiguchi and Toda of the Soka Gakkai, who were
the only ones bearing the honor of Buddhism in the midst of this
holocaust. No other Buddhists had the determination and valor
necessary to stay the course against Imperial State Zen to the bitter
end (Makiguchi's death and Toda's release after the war was lost).
Indeed, Nichiren Shoshu and the other schools gleefully supported the
war, cheering every victory, screaming for more blood, and
highlighting the glorious sacrifice of young Japanese in this 'noble'
cause. This is all on record, for every school. Here is a list of
infamy, of Nichiren Schools that accepted the Shinto Talisman and
supported the war (some are now split off from temples, which at that
time, were infamous):
... Nichiren Schools
...
... Nichiren Shu (Kuon-ji at Minobu)
... Nichiren Shoshu (Taiseki-ji at Fujinomiya)
... Honmon Butsuryu Shu ja
... Kempon Hokke Shu (Myoman-ji)
... Hokkeshu, Honmon Ryu
... Hokkeshu, Jinmon Ryu
... Hokkeshu, Shinmon Ryu
... Honmon Hokke Shu (Myoren-ji)
... Nichiren Honshu (Yobo-ji)
... Nichiren Shu Fuju-fuse-ha (Myokaku-ji)
... Nichiren Hokke Shu
... Hokke Nichiren Shu
... Hompa Nichiren Shu
... Honke Nichiren Shu (Hyogo)
... Fuju-fuse Nichiren Komon Shu
... Honke Nichiren Shu (Kyoto)
... Shobo Hokke Shu
... Honmon Kyoo Shu
... Nichiren Komon Shu
... Reiyukai (Spiritual-Friendship-Association)
... Rissho Kosei Kai
... Nipponzan Myohoji
... Kokuchukai
... Shoshinkai
... Fuji Taisekiji Kenshokai
... Honmon Shoshu
They all bowed to the great evil that is Shinto, wielded as a weapon
by Imperial State Zen. They all bowed to the destruction of Buddhism
and the human race that would have been the outcome of Shinto War.
Only Makiguchi and Toda stood up against and refused to bow to this
evil to the end.
Trashing these heroes will not raise up the lot of you by even a
millimeter in stature. Your heritage will remain that of cowardly and
treasonous Buddhists, who betrayed the Buddha, the Law and the human
race.
Live with it.
-Chas.
_________________________________________________
Jon Petry, since you seem incapable of going and looking at this paper
of Miyata's I include the entire text here, so that you could not
possibly miss it:
. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism:
. A Skeleton in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
.
. <http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
.
. Abstract
. In "Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton in the Closet?"
. (Vol. 2) Brian Daizen Victoria claims, among
. other things, that Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-
. 1944), founder of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai
. (forebear of the Soka Gakkai and Soka Gakkai
. International), was an active supporter of the
. Japanese wars of aggression. In this response,
. Koichi Miyata argues that Victoria's claims rest
. on the highly selective use of quotes, and
. ignore key interpretative issues associated with
. Japanese imperial fascism and its underlying
. belief structures. Miyata discusses the
. significance of Makiguchi's arrest and
. imprisonment under a law specifically aimed at
. opponents of the war efforts, in his analysis of
. critical lapses in Victoria's article.
.
. Having read the recent essay by Brian Daizen Victoria, I
. found its contents so problematic that, as someone who
. has studied the ideas of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-
. 1944) for many years, I feel compelled to respond.
.
. While many studies and essays on Tsunesaburo Makiguchi
. exist in Japanese, researchers unable to read Japanese
. have had limited access to Makiguchi's ideas and
. actions. To help fill this gap, last year I edited a
. small collection of English-language essays for the 2000
. special edition of The Journal of Oriental Studies
. (TJOS) which was devoted to the "Ideas and Influence of
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi." In this response, I will refer
. to this research as I attempt to shed some light on the
. thoughts and actions of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.
.
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage
. from Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The
. Geography of Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that
. Russia was engaged in a policy of expansionism in the
. search for year-round harbors. Victoria asserts that
. this world view was identical to that of the government
. of Japan, a view used to justify the Russo-Japanese War
. (1904-1905), then the annexation of the Korean peninsula
. (1910) and the founding of the puppet state of Manchukuo
. (1932). Victoria's assertion, and his implicit criticism
. of Makiguchi, simplistically links analysis of the
. global situation with the policies taken in response to
. that. Makiguchi was merely voicing what was then the
. accepted understanding of the geopolitical motives for
. Russia's expansionist policies, a view held not only by
. the Japanese government, but shared by the British, with
. whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
. Certainly I know of no scholar of political geography
. who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one that
. Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not
. only Makiguchi but everyone who studies political
. geography guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
.
. Elsewhere in Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi points out that
. the countries of Western Europe had a great deal of
. trouble operating their colonies, and expresses doubts
. about the value of acquiring colonies, particularly from
. the point of view of the financial burden that they
. would entail. If Victoria had read Jinsei Chirigaku
. carefully, he would not identify the thoughts of
. Makiguchi with the expansionist doctrine of the time.
.
. Secondly, Victoria quotes an extract from Makiguchi's
. book Kyodoka Kenkyu (A Study of Folk Culture), in which
. Makiguchi notes that the state plays an important role
. in the lives of citizens. From this, Victoria draws the
. conclusion that as the Japan moved closer to war,
. Makiguchi adopted the view that education should be "in
. service to the state". (Victoria states that Makiguchi
. added this section for the 1933 revised edition of the
. book. This is incorrect, as it appears in the first
. edition published in 1912.) Since the publication of
. Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi had consistently emphasized
. the formation of identity on three levels-that of a
. person's local community, the national and global
. levels. Within this context, and against a backdrop of
. global competition for empire, he placed particular
. importance on national independence. This is hardly
. unreasonable. Japan was one of only a handful of
. countries in Asia that had maintained independence amid
. encroachment by the Western powers, and Makiguchi was
. well aware of the miserable circumstances of colonized
. peoples. What we may find problematic-in terms of the
. current view that controlling peoples is intrinsically
. wrong-is that Makiguchi did not say enough after Japan
. itself acquired colonies, omitting to comment on the
. issue of independence for these colonized peoples, and
. only suggesting that imperialism was not the optimal
. policy choice because of the financial burden involved.
. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to my essay "Tsunesaburo
. Makiguchi's Theory of the State" in TJOS, in which I
. discuss Makiguchi's view that imperialistic-military and
. economic-competition should be supplanted by a
. cooperative sense of community, what he called
. "humanitarian competition."
.
. Further, in deciding that Makiguchi viewed education as
. a means of serving the state, Victoria completely
. ignores Makiguchi's argument in his 1930 Soka Kyoikugaku
. Taikei (The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy) that the
. goal of education must in fact be the happiness of the
. child. In the March 1942 issue of Kachi Sozo (Value
. Creation), the short-lived periodical of the Soka Kyoiku
. Gakkai, Makiguchi criticizes the ideologically central
. concept of messhi hoko -- sacrificing the interests of
. the individual to those of the state. He noted that this
. was mere rhetoric to ordinary Japanese, impossible to
. put into practice. Rather, he stressed, it is natural to
. strive for the realization of one's own and others'
. happiness. In May 1942, he was ordered to halt
. publication of Kachi Sozo. While Makiguchi did view the
. state as having an important role to play, this is
. entirely different from holding the ultra nationalist
. view of education that people should be educated to
. ensure their uncritical acceptance of the policies of
. the state. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to "Value-Creating
. Pedagogy and Japanese Education in the Modern Era," in
. TJOS, by Kazunori Kumagai in which he compares
. Makiguchi's educational philosophy with the statist
. educational system.
.
. Thirdly there is the problem of the emperor system.
. Quoting a section from Kyodoka Kenkyu in which Makiguchi
. argues that loyalty to the emperor is synonymous with
. love of one's country, Victoria implies that Makiguchi's
. view was identical to that of the military government.
. This, however, is a far too loosely framed argument that
. ignores the interpretative issues associated with the
. 1889 Meiji Constitution. The preamble to the Meiji
. Constitution recognizes the supreme authority of the
. emperor, while Article 3 declares the sacred nature of
. the emperor, and Article 4 his sovereign rights over the
. state -- making the state and the emperor system
. inseparable. If we stress the supreme authority of the
. emperor, the emperor is then cast in the role of
. absolute monarch. If we consider instead the role of the
. Constitution as a brake on the supreme authority of the
. emperor, he becomes a constitutional monarch. The former
. view is represented by the imperial fascism supported by
. the military regime, while the latter corresponds to
. Tatsukichi Minobe's theory of the emperor as an organ of
. the state. From the era of Taisho democracy through to
. the suppression of Minobe's theory in 1935, this view
. held sway among constitutional scholars and members of
. the Diet. The idea that loyalty = patriotism is common
. to both views, and by aligning Makiguchi with the
. imperial fascism of the military simply on the basis of
. his comments here, Victoria again appears determined to
. ignore the written record of Makiguchi's thoughts. From
. his earliest writings, Makiguchi viewed the emperor as a
. constitutional monarch, and was critical of moves to
. make the emperor's powers absolute.
.
. Victoria also quotes from a report produced by the
. special police on their interrogation of Makiguchi as
. proof that Makiguchi acknowledged the divine status of
. the emperor. Again, this assertion arises from a
. distortion of the relevant passage. Victoria quotes a
. reference by Makiguchi to "praying" to the emperor. He
. could hardly, however, have been more distorting in
. selecting the passage he quoted, deliberately excluding
. the following extract, which I have underlined:
.
... "The august virtue of His Majesty the Emperor is
... manifested in the security and happiness of the
... people, through the organs of his civil and
... military officials. Should these be deficient in
... some way, the people can petition him through
... the Diet or other bodies. In light of this, who
... is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
... himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"
... ("Pray" is Victoria's translation; "beseech" is
... probably more accurate in this context.)
.
. It is obvious that "beseech/pray" and "petition" have
. the same meaning in this context. The manner in which
. Victoria has misused Makiguchi's choice of a term
. normally used in a religious context, but with a special
. meaning in this context, to claim that Makiguchi
. supported emperor worship, is not what one would expect
. from a serious scholar endeavoring to document his
. claim. Surely in examining the interrogation report
. Victoria must have encountered the following statements
. by Makiguchi:
.
... "His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary man, who
... went to the Peers' School as Crown Prince, and
... studied how to be an emperor. The Emperor too
... makes mistakes. They say that in the early years
... of the Meiji era Tesshu Yamaoka admonished the
... Meiji Emperor and pointed out his mistakes on
... many occasions." [Tokko Geppo (Monthly bulletin
... of Special Higher Police), August 1943 issue, p.
... 152]
.
. These comments indicate clearly that Makiguchi rejected
. completely the deification of the emperor. Victoria
. mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers that
. "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
.
. My fourth point concerns the significance of Makiguchi's
. persecution by the military government for criticizing
. its policy on religion. This is also relevant to the
. arguments of Robert Kisala, which Victoria cites in
. developing his own argument. We must remember that when
. Makiguchi was persecuted by the authorities for
. instructing members of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai to burn
. talismans provided by the Ise shrine, regarded as home
. of the ancestral deity of the imperial family, it was
. not under any law dealing with religious matters, but
. the Peace Preservation Law. Neither Victoria nor Kisala
. appear to understand the significance of this. The Peace
. Preservation Law was demanded by the Privy Council in
. exchange for approving the Universal Manhood Suffrage
. Law in 1925 to ensure that the newly enfranchised
. populace did not begin criticizing the emperor system.
. It was originally designed for the suppression of anti-
. Establishment groups such as socialists, communists and
. anarchists. Having all but eliminated anti-Establishment
. activity of an overtly political nature with a massive
. crackdown on the Communist Party in the early years of
. the Showa era (1926-1989), the military government next
. targeted liberals and religious movements as impediments
. to implementation of their war policies. By completely
. obliterating Tatsukichi Minobe's liberal view of the
. emperor as organ of the state in 1935, the militarists
. established the absolute authority of the emperor,
. brooking no opposition whatsoever their policies, now
. fully shielded by imperial authority.
.
. Next they turned to the religious movements. Religions
. having as their object of worship gods, or the Buddha,
. which their teachings accord a position in the cosmic
. order far superior to that of the emperor, religious
. groups tended to have less regard for his authority. The
. year 1936 saw a crackdown on Ohmotokyo, a new Shinto
. movement that preached the restoration of peace and
. order to the world under a mythical god. To enable more
. systematic repression of religious movements, the
. military government revised the Peace Preservation Law
. in 1939 to provide for punishment of religious groups
. found to be committing blasphemy against the Ise shrine.
. This shows the military government viewed religious
. movements that rejected the authority of the emperor as
. the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation
. behind its war policies. It was against this political
. and social backdrop that Makiguchi came to criticize the
. religious policy of the military regime. His arrest
. under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the regime
. judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the
. war. Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist
. ideology of imperial fascism for its religious policies,
. and because this opposition constituted an impediment to
. conduct of the war by the military regime, there is no
. doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-war
. activities. I refer Dr. Victoria to my Introduction to
. TSOJ in which I examine the historical background and
. significance of Makiguchi's wartime persecution.
.
. I have responded to the views of Brian Victoria on four
. fronts. I can only imagine that in order to prove
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi cooperated with the war effort,
. Victoria has shaped his arguments to fit his pre-
. established conclusion, willfully quoting only those
. passages of Makiguchi's writings that would seem to
. support it. I cannot imagine he studied all ten volumes
. of Makiguchi's writings in Japanese to reach this
. conclusion. While there is ample room for the frank
. exchange of academic views, including highly critical
. ones, it is important that a tendentious agenda, clothed
. in the guise of academic research, not stand
. unchallenged.
______________________________________________________
juanjo
Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren" <o3p2q1r...@aol.com>
wrote:
> Zen and the Nichiren Schools Attack the Soka Gakkai to Cover Their
> Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-
>
inability to address actual facts. Instead he relies on regurgitated
agit-prop from his organization, the Soka Gakkai. He also
deliberately mis-attributes authorship of material in that he quotes
material as my own when in fact it is in not. It is material I have
quoted from. Most troubling is that neither Chas nor the voluminous
material he quotes from actually addresses the material presented but
rather attempts ot overwhelm the reader with massive volumes of
material which speaks all around the subject or misquotes and
misinterporets the material presented. This is the classic straw man
argumnet in which on ignores the actual points presented and instead
invents another false issue and "rebuts" it instead.
Rather than actually address the simple fact that his own sensei as
well as two of the Soka Gakkai's own tame "scholars" disagree with
Chas, he chooses to post the same nonsense again and again. This
shows actual proof of the cowardly spirit that infuses his so called
"buddhist" practice which is nothing more than a personality cult
centered around an old, dying Japanese man known for shameless self
promotion and his actions in beating up Buddhist priests in his youth.
Dr. Victoria's comments are his own and as to when he knew what he
knew, I have no idea. However, the Soka Gakkai has worked long and
hard to rewrite history and erase reality. Chas has twisted all
matter of claptrap together to make a case where none exists. Most
of his "writing" is taken verbatim from SGI spin by its tame
"scholars". The reality is that there is no indication whatsoever
that Makiguchi was a pacifist and there is
sufficient evidence that he was not. While Chas, as his handlers,
place great emphasis on statement made pre-1935, they ignore both
history and the records of the time period. The most damning part of
that portion they ignore is Makiguchi's own statements post-1935 as
well as the records of the Imperial Government including the very
charges made against Makaguchi, i.e. slandering the Imperial
Talisman. Chas of course has no idea what any of the actual facts are
as he neither reads nor understands Japanese. He has never seen a
single document nor done any research in the matter. All he is doing
here is repeating the spin created by his organization. Dr. Victoria
is an actual scholar. He does read and speak Japanese. He does
publish in peer reviewed journals and does not take money from any
group to write apologia for them. But let's not quibble about Dr.
Victoria's credentials.
Let's first consider what is written in a 2008 edition of Tricycle
Magazine in a supposed "interview" with Daiseku Ikeda. I say
“supposed interview” as it is simply a cobbled together series of
questions posed via e-mail and responded to by the Soka Gakkai, hardly
what I would call a real interview. However Ikeda is quoted as saying
in the article:
"During World War II, however, they found themselves facing
persecutions when they resisted the currents of Japanese militarist
fascism and criticized the state’s use of Shinto to spiritually unite
the Japanese people behind the war effort. They were arrested and
imprisoned as a result."
In addition the article, which was approved by the SGI leadership and
presumably Ikeda himself states:
"Makiguchi was arrested under the Peace Preservation Act in 1943 by
the Japanese government for refusing to consolidate with other
Buddhist sects under the banner of State Shinto, effectively
challenging the authority of the military government. He died in
prison a year later."
Note that Ikeda does not mention anything about Makiguchi opposing the
actual war. In fact he cannot make such a claim because there are
comments on the record by Makiguchi supporting the war but stating
that the war effort is doomed to failure if the Imperial Government
did not discard provisional teachings such as Zen and Shingon and
embrace Nichiren Buddhism. It was Makiguchi's Rissho Ankoku-ron
moment and I am certain he saw it as exactly as that. So Chas' own
sensei is saying that Chas is a liar.
If that is not enough then let us consider another scholar, a favorite
of the Soka Gakkai in fact:
"Thus, Makiguchi and Toda defied the government and went to prison
not
necessarily for anti-war beliefs, which the Soka Gakkai preaches
today, but because it was against their deeply felt religious
principles to adopt Shinto practices or to merge with another
religious sect, even if it had Nichiren connections. While Makiguchi
may have indeed made the pro-Emperor statements that Victoria alleges,
his overall thinking and demeanor was certainly not pro-militarist.
The evidence simply does not support Victoria's argument." A
Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern Japanese
Buddhist History by Daniel A. Metraux
So Professor Metraux disputes Professor Victoria's position that
Makiguchi was in fact pro-militarist as of course does the Soka
Gakkai's scholar, Koichi Miyata. Prof. Metraux does agree with the
position put forward by Prof. Victoria, namely that Makiguchi and Toda
went to prison for what they were charged with - lesse majesty.
Professor Metraux also admits that Makiguchi made the pro-Emperor
statements that Professor Victoria quotes although he disagrees on the
import of those statements. So Professor Metraux is also calling Chas
a liar.
Now I have suggested a position somewhat simpler and quite obvious to
anyone who actually pays attention to what is being said and what is
not being said by either Prof. Metraux or the Soka Gakkai's scholar,
Koichi Miyata. The assertion is made that Prof Victoria is taking
statements out of context to make Makiguchi into a supporter of the
military government and its view of the emperor. That may or may not
be, I cannot say as I was not there and have not had the opportunity
to review the original materials they refer to in making their
assertions. However this is not the argument I made.
Let's review shall we?
SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up to the
Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior to WWII.
However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda were not pacifists, in fact
they were far from it. There are speeches in existence in which they
affirm their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war. However,
they did remonstrate against the imposition of the Imperial Talisman
as an object of reverence, as well as, in their interpretation of
Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the Japanese Government to suppress all other
Buddhist sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
They were imprisoned for the crime of lese majeste, for their
disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they were pacifists.
President Ikeda admits this as does Professor Metraux, in an article
he was paid to write by the Soka Gakkai.
The “Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists” claim made by the SGI
adds insult to the injury endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan
who did demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those people were
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
affirmed their loyalty to the Emperor and there are no statements made
by either of them which show any actual opposition to the war effort.
However they did oppose the prosecution of the war effort based upon
Imperial Shinto. Based upon their interpretation of the Rissho
Ankoku-
ron, any effort by the Japanese Government to prosecute that war was
doomed to failure unless the Japanese nation was immediately converted
to Nichiren Buddhism and all heretical sects suppressed. Indeed if
one carefully reads the comments made by Koichi Miyata in his
critique
of Prof. Victoria he affirms this position:
"To enable more systematic repression of religious movements, the
military government revised the Peace Preservation Law in 1939 to
provide for punishment of religious groups found to be committing
blasphemy against the Ise shrine. This shows the military government
viewed religious movements that rejected the authority of the emperor
as the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation behind its
war policies. It was against this political and social backdrop that
Makiguchi came to criticize the religious policy of the military
regime. His arrest under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the
regime judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the war.
Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist ideology of imperial
fascism for its religious policies, and because this opposition
constituted an impediment to conduct of the war by the military
regime, there is no doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-
war activities."
Now Miyata is guilty of sloppy logic here. I have no doubt that the
Imperial Government wished to stifle any opposition to its
expansionist, militaristic policies, including any opposition from the
religious institutions of Japan. The record is clear that the
Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views to its
policies. This includes acting against pacifists of which there were
some, both religious and otherwise. It also includes those who would
not go along with the system that the government was instituting,
namely of blind obedience to the government policies. Makiguchi did
indeed threaten this blind obedience because he asserted that the
state policy regarding the supremacy of the Imperial Talisman over the
Buddha was wrong. And equally important, that the prosecution of the
war would fail unless the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. Miyata's comments
support my position quite well. The Japanese Government was quite
pathological when it came to their requirement that all the people of
Japan must be in absolute support of the government’s policy. Any nail
head sticking up was most certainly going to be hammered down.
Makiguchi was such a nail head. Makiguchi wanted the Imperial
Government to suppress all other forms of Buddhism and accept Nichiren
Buddhism as the only form of state accepted Buddhism. His position
was that if they failed to do so the war effort was doomed to
failure. This was a position that the Imperial Japanese Government
was unwilling to tolerate and hence his imprisonment along with that
of Toda.
Chaz in his hurry to smear Prof. Victoria has leapt to conclusions and
not bothered to read what was written. This is typical of Chaz and
actually in his defense, it really is not his fault. He is simply
regurgitating the nonsense he has been given as speaking points by the
Soka Gakkai leadership he works for. However the level of
incompetence among the Soka Gakkai leadership is such that they
attempt to “disprove” Professor Victoria’s statements by having their
own paid “scholars” issue rebuttals which are not rebuttals of the
main issue raised by Dr. Victoria, namely that Makiguchi was a
pacifist and opposed the Japanese war effort on that basis.
juanjo
> Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 2-
>
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
juanjo
>
> read more »
and let us not forget this addition so kindly provided by Mark
concerning Mr. Makiguchi:
"'Sacrifice your own skin to slash the opponent's flesh. Surrender
your
own flesh to saw off the opponent's bone.' With their faithful
implementation of this well-known Japanese fencing (kendo) strategy
into actual practice during the war, the Japanese military is able to
achieve her glorious, ever-victorious invincibility in the Sino-Japan
conflict and in the Pacific war, and thus, easing the minds of the
Japa-
nese people. This [strategy of sacrifice] should be held as an ideal
lifestyle for those remaining on the home front and should be applied
in every aspect of our daily life."
From:"The Instruction Manual Summarizing the Experiments and
Testimonials of
Life based on the Philosophy of Value of the Supreme Goodness,"
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
in a covering attack on the SGI.
All the Nichiren Schools are complicit in the Shinto war (including
yours, Jon Petry), only the SGI's Makiguchi and Toda stuck it out to
the end in prison to resist the Shinto War on Buddhism and humanity,
and continuously lying about it and trying to pull down the only men
who stood up against evil ... will never change your complicity with
it, and your abject subjugation to that evil at that time. You bowed
to evil, and you cannot change that by attacking those who refused to.
Deal with it.
-Chas.
C
Why don't you go sing Forever Sensei with your eyes glazed over and go
buy another phony award for your cultmeister while you read his
ghostwritten Human Revolution. While you're at it, hot shot, why don't
you ask your senior cult leaders why Toda's Human Revolution and
Makiguchi's Philosophy of Value are no longer being printed or even
referenced?
Got the balls, asshole?
C
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
reason that Josei Toda's Human Revolution is no longer in print and
the same goes for why President Ikeda's Human Revolution had to be
severely edited and re-published.
They spent a lot of time in those books showing appreciation to an
utterly corrupt priesthood that betrayed Buddhism, the Sangha and the
human race. And that appreciation had to be removed.
In particular, Nittatsu Shonin was a traitor to the human race for
neglecting to give Nikken the boot for calling the Daigohonzon a fake.
This act of treason set us up for the Self-Appointed High Priest
<http://NSTemple.net>.
Nittatsu and Nikken, mentor and disciple, are throwbacks to the age of
Sakyo Nikkyo and the "Infallibility of the High Priest". That bankrupt
principle out of the pit of hell that is statue-worshipping Yobo-ji is
described in <http://www.sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/the-untold-
history-of-the-fuji-school-6/at_download/file>
Finally, the background for all of this is described in my work
discussing the Shinto Shinmon that Nichiren Shoshu flaunts front and
center, proudly bowing to Sanno Ichijitsu Shinto:
Shinto Tsuru Shinmon - A Toynbee Analysis of the Fuji School
(Incomplete) -
Questions: What is the crane symbol for Nichiren Shoshu?
Where did it come from?
Who originally gave it to the Fuji School?
And more importantly, under what authority was it bestowed?
All these questions have been answered by a thorough analysis and a
mountain of evidence.
Here's a section from Appendix 8 of the analysis document:
_____________________________________________________________
Here’s what we can deduce (based on a mountain of evidence, primarily
from the UHFS, Ooms’ Tokugawa Ideology, Hall’s Government and Local
Power in Japan (500 to 1700), the Gosho and Ongi Kuden, and the World
Tribune, and a tiny bit of poking around on the internet):
...
.(17)My major argument here, is that continued
. possession of a Tokugawa shinmon has the following
. implications for the Fuji School:
.
. a. The crane shinmon is the Sankin Kotai
. identification for the Fuji School.
.
. b. That implies that the Fuji School complied with
. the Tenkai-Tokugawa Sanno Ichijitsu Shinto tozan
. program.
.
. c. The Fuji School did not refuse to participate in
. Shinto tozan ceremonies at Mt. Nikko, because there
. is no record of the persecution and the banishment
. that came with refusal, like there is with the
. Fujufuse (who were icchantika/issendai, no doubt).
.
. d. The Fuji School High Priests from Yobo-ji did
. their Sankin Kotai, which implied that they also
. passed through Edo and did their tozan to the shrine
. at Nikkozan like everyone else, because there is no
. record of persecution, banishment and attempts at
. eradication, like there is with the Fujufuse. (The
. Fuji School would not have been eradicated; of this
. I have no doubt. The lion’s cubs are protected, if
. they are not cowardly.)
.
. e. Perhaps not with Nissei 17th, but undoubtedly
. later on with the six successive High Priests from
. Yobo-ji: when they went on tozan to bow and pray for
. Ieyasu’s ashes at the altar in the Sanno Ichijitsu
. Shinto shrine, they were wearing their crane shinmon
. for the Fuji School on their High Priest’s robes, or
. at least on the banner they flew on their small
. procession of retainers. It was a regulation and
. running afoul of the regulations was dangerous.
.
. f. Hence, in the Shinto umbrella temple hierarchy
. (Honmatsu-ji), Mt. Minobu was the master of the Fuji
. School. That entire context is captured in the
. easily recognized shinmon for the Fuji School, and
. that organizational position, as a minor temple
. under a Shinto hierarchy, which was controlled by
. our Honmatsu-ji masters at Minobuzan, is represented
. by that symbol.
.
. g. Retaining the crane shinmon accretion almost 400
. years after this great evil was done to the Fuji
. School, is keeping a permanent physical relic of our
. captivity, of our subjugation under Tenkai’s
. distortions and the lies forced into the mouth of
. Dengyo, the bullying of the Suzuki Shosan
. demagoguery, the murderous oppression of bakufu Zen,
. the mind-numbing regulatory hell delivered by the
. Gozan Rinzai Zen scribes, the bewildering
. embarrassment of being forced under the authority of
. Mt. Minobu and the Nichiren Shu gang of Five Senior
. Priests … and a relic of our breaking with the
. oneness of mentor and disciple. Now … just exactly
. why would that be good?
_____________________________________________________________
The incomplete analysis (131 pages) is contained in a bookmarked Adobe
PDF file (turn on the bookmarks pane for ease of navigation through
the nine appendices), stored as a Google Doc. The title is:
Shinto Tsuru Shinmon - A Toynbee Analysis of the Fuji School
(Incomplete)
There are three versions of the file:
1. With underlines, bolding and highlights for ease of quick reading:
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1xmnHkI0Z-dYjM0ZDg5NTMtZDNkNy00MDIxLWE1MjMtNTBiZDIwODBhNzIw&hl=en
2. With underlines only (if the highlighting bothers you):
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1xmnHkI0Z-dNDc2ODU1ZGYtOGVmZS00MGI5LWE5ZmItOTllMmM5ZjVmNGM4&hl=en
3. Plain text (if you like it pristine):
http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B1xmnHkI0Z-dOGI0M2U1YzUtN2ZmMC00OGIyLWI3ZjctMmYzMjhmMTk3ZmVm&hl=en
Google docs can't search these files, but you can download them and
search them in Adobe Reader.
Enjoy !
-Chas.
_________________________________________________
C
> I am not sure about Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's work, but I know the
> reason that Josei Toda's Human Revolution is no longer in print and
> the same goes for why President Ikeda's Human Revolution had to be
> severely edited and re-published.
Yeah, it isn't clear whether SGI was lying then or lying now. I go for
now as is exemplified by the ill informed drivel you post here.
Now shouldn't you be chanting to take Ikeda into your heart or humming a
bar of Forever Sensei or taking suitcases of cash to universities to buy
Ikeda another phony degree?
Fact that you can't live with: Ikeda is a phony con man who has written
*nothing* and has convinced naive fools like you to excommunicate
yourself and cut yourself off from the True Law which you have replaced
with a little fat con man.
Snip drivel.
C
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
Question for you, which no one from Nichiren Shoshu will ever discuss
"off-the-leash" ...
Where's the transfer box for Taisekiji, which is bequeathed from High
Priest to High Priest?
Nichinyo doesn't have it, because Nikken could never produce it in
court and didn't have it, because Nittatsu didn't give it to him,
because Nikken was never appointed his successor and the Nikken School
is is a fraudulent travesty of justice.
When are these frauds going to jail for perpetrating this crime?
I'll wager that none of these issues will you, or can you answer, and
that you will avoid this discussion like the plague that Nichiren
Shoshu is on humanity.
-Chas.
C
doors opened' 4-8-97 wrote:
>
> Question for you, which no one from Nichiren Shoshu will ever discuss
> "off-the-leash" ...
>
> Where's the transfer box for Taisekiji, which is bequeathed from High
> Priest to High Priest?
I have no idea and couldn't care less.
I did take suitcases of cash to universities to buy "honorary" degrees
for your object of worship, Ikeda. Does that count? I have on tape the
official guidance out of Ted Osaki's mouth that those who don't take
Ikeda into their hearts are damned to an eternal hell.
What happened to the Daishonin's exhortation to follow the Law, not the
Person?
Snip drivel.
C
juanjo
Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
wrote:
The one thing Chas can never deal with is the simple fact that the
cover story the Soka Gakkai has been telling for years about Makiguchi
being a pacifist is false and easily shown as such. As he points out
all the Nichiren Sects as well as other Buddhist sects were compliant
with the Japanese government's effort's during WWII. There were some
courageous lay and clergy who opposed the war effort and who paid
dearly for that opposition. However Makiguchi and Toda were not among
them.
Even Ikeda acknowledges this fact in his public writings. But Chas
cannot do so because he is so wrapped up in the myth he has been told
that he cannot escape his cult influenced obsession with demonizing
other Buddhists and extolling the virtues of the Soka Gakkai.
Tragic really but indicative of the type of people who are attracted
to and remain in the Soka Gakkai.
Kurt
<bd4d1d75-c677-4b4b...@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,
juanjo <jonp...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Chas, sadly, has his own demons to deal with.
Just the same weird broken record posts for years, now. Poor guy.
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
juanjo
> In article
> <bd4d1d75-c677-4b4b-9348-8468e62d0...@u16g2000pru.googlegroups.com>,
It is "actual proof" of what long term practice with the Soka Gakkai
does to weak minded people like Chas or some others who post here from
time to time, like Orchid Tiger lily or whatever moniker she is using
now.
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
which proves that Nichiren Shoshu are fraudulently occupying Taisekiji
and need to get the hell out.
-Chas.
C
doors opened' 4-8-97 wrote:
You don't know if it's absent or not. All you have is what Soka Spit
spoon feeds you.
> which proves that Nichiren Shoshu are fraudulently occupying Taisekiji
> and need to get the hell out.
Fortunately what you think is proof doesn't matter one iota to anyone
but you and your ill informed fellow SGI Ikeda Cult members.
>
> -Chas.
You refuse to discuss this:
I did take suitcases of cash to universities to buy "honorary" degrees
for your object of worship, Ikeda. Does that count? I have on tape the
official guidance out of Ted Osaki's mouth that those who don't take
Ikeda into their hearts are damned to an eternal hell.
What happened to the Daishonin's exhortation to follow the Law, not the
Person?
C
juanjo
The true tragedy of Chas' repeated attempts to raise issues regarding
the alleged pacifism of the founders of the Soka Gakkai during World
War II is his inability to address actual facts. Instead he relies on
regurgitated agit-prop from his organization, the Soka Gakkai. He
also deliberately mis-attributes authorship of material in that he
quotes material as my own when in fact it is not. It is material I
have quoted from. Most troubling is that neither Chas nor the
voluminous material he quotes from actually address the material
presented but rather attempt to overwhelm the reader with massive
volumes of material which speaks all around the subject or misquotes
and misinterprets the material resented. This is the classic straw
man argument in which one ignores the actual points presented and
instead invents another false issue and "rebuts" it instead.
Rather than actually address the simple fact that his own sensei as
well as two of the Soka Gakkai's own tame "scholars" disagree with
Chas, he chooses to post the same nonsense again and again. This is
regrettable and shows actual proof of the bankrupt spirit that infuses
the so called "Buddhist" practice of the Soka Gakkai which is nothing
more than a personality cult centered on an old, dying Japanese man
known for shameless self promotion and his actions in beating up
Buddhist priests in his youth.
The Soka Gakkai has worked long and hard to rewrite history and erase
reality. It is regrettable that they do so but it is not all that
unusual. Consider how many people in France for example, claimed to
be members of the resistance after the war had ended when actual
historical fact shows that the resistance movement in that country was
small. Further in Japan itself there is a great deal of ambiguity
about the wear and there has been severe criticism of the Japanese for
their attempts to rewrite matters and paint them as different from
what they actually were in popular media as well as in school texts
used in that country.
Chas has twisted all matter of claptrap together to make a case where
none exists. Most of his "writing" is taken verbatim from SGI spin
by its tame “scholars". The reality is that there is no indication
whatsoever that Makiguchi was a pacifist and there is sufficient
evidence that he was not. While Chas, as his handlers, place great
emphasis on statement made by Makiguchi, pre-1935, they ignore both
history and the records of the time period. The most damning part of
that portion they ignore is Makiguchi's own statements post-1935 as
well as the records of the Imperial Government including the very
charges made against Makaguchi, i.e. slandering the Imperial
Talisman.
For example an excerpt from a statement made by Makiguchi after the
start of the Pacific War [which is how the Japanese termed their war
of aggression against the United States, Great Britain and some other
countries] clearly shows he had no actual opposition to the war
itself:
"Sacrifice your own skin to slash the opponent's flesh. Surrender
your own flesh to saw off the opponent's bone.' With their faithful
implementation of this well-known Japanese fencing (kendo) strategy
into actual practice during the war, the Japanese military is able to
achieve her glorious, ever-victorious invincibility in the Sino-Japan
conflict and in the Pacific war, and thus, easing the minds of the
Japanese people. This [strategy of sacrifice] should be held as an
ideal
lifestyle for those remaining on the home front and should be applied
in every aspect of our daily life."
From: Makiguchi’s "The Instruction Manual Summarizing the Experiments
and
Testimonials of Life based on the Philosophy of Value of the Supreme
Goodness."
Chas of course has no idea what any of the actual facts are as he
neither reads nor understands Japanese. He has never seen a single
document nor done any independent research in the matter. All he is
doing is repeating the spin created by his organization. He
excoriates Dr. Victoria, who is an actual scholar. Dr. Victoria does
read and speak Japanese. He does publish in peer reviewed journals
and does not take money from any group to write apologia for them. But
let's not quibble about Dr. Victoria's credentials.
Instead let us focus on the actual published materials put forth by
the Soka Gakkai for public consumption as opposed to what they pump
out for internal distribution. First consider what is written in a
2008 edition of Tricycle
Magazine in a supposed "interview" with Daiseku Ikeda. I say
“supposed interview” as it is simply a cobbled together series of
questions posed via e-mail and responded to by the Soka Gakkai, hardly
what I would call a real interview. However Ikeda is quoted as saying
in the article:
"During World War II, however, they found themselves facing
persecutions when they resisted the currents of Japanese militarist
fascism and criticized the state’s use of Shinto to spiritually unite
the Japanese people behind the war effort. They were arrested and
imprisoned as a result."
In addition the article, which was approved by the SGI leadership and
presumably Ikeda himself states:
"Makiguchi was arrested under the Peace Preservation Act in 1943 by
the Japanese government for refusing to consolidate with other
Buddhist sects under the banner of State Shinto, effectively
challenging the authority of the military government. He died in
prison a year later."
Note that Ikeda does not go on the record with anything about
Makiguchi opposing the actual war. In fact he cannot make such a
claim because there are comments on the record by Makiguchi supporting
the war but stating that the war effort is doomed to failure if the
Imperial Government did not discard provisional teachings such as Zen
and Shingon and embrace Nichiren Buddhism. It was Makiguchi's Rissho
Ankoku-ron moment and there is little doubt that he saw it as exactly
as that. So Chas' own sensei is rebutting Chas’ position.
If that is not enough then let us consider another scholar, a favorite
of the Soka Gakkai in fact:
"Thus, Makiguchi and Toda defied the government and went to prison
not
necessarily for anti-war beliefs, which the Soka Gakkai preaches
today, but because it was against their deeply felt religious
principles to adopt Shinto practices or to merge with another
religious sect, even if it had Nichiren connections. While Makiguchi
may have indeed made the pro-Emperor statements that Victoria alleges,
his overall thinking and demeanor was certainly not pro-militarist.
The evidence simply does not support Victoria's argument."
A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese
Buddhist History by Daniel A. Metraux
So Professor Metraux disputes Professor Victoria's position that
Makiguchi was in fact pro-militarist [without citing any actual
evidence and ignoring Makiguchi’s own statements]. Prof. Metraux does
agree with the position put forward by Prof. Victoria, namely that
Makiguchi and Toda went to prison for what they were charged with -
lesse majesty NOT for any actual anti-war beliefs or positions.
Professor Metraux also admits that Makiguchi made the pro-Emperor
statements that Professor Victoria quotes although he disagrees on the
import of those statements. So Professor Metraux also rebuts Chas’
stated position.
Yet another of the Soka Gakkai’s tame scholars was paid to put forth
an opinion attacking Dr. Victoria’s position. However, if one
carefully reads the comments made by Koichi Miyata in his critique of
Prof. Victoria he affirms Dr. Victoria’s position:
"To enable more systematic repression of religious movements, the
military government revised the Peace Preservation Law in 1939 to
provide for punishment of religious groups found to be committing
blasphemy against the Ise shrine. This shows the military government
viewed religious movements that rejected the authority of the emperor
as the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation behind its
war policies. It was against this political and social backdrop that
Makiguchi came to criticize the religious policy of the military
regime. His arrest under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the
regime judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the war.
Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist ideology of imperial
fascism for its religious policies, and because this opposition
constituted an impediment to conduct of the war by the military
regime, there is no doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-
war activities."
Now Miyata is guilty of sloppy logic here. I have no doubt that the
Imperial Government wished to stifle any opposition to its
expansionist, militaristic policies, including any opposition from the
religious institutions of Japan. The record is clear that the
Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views to its
policies. This includes those who would not go along with the system
that the government was instituting, namely of blind obedience to the
government policies. Makiguchi did indeed threaten this blind
obedience because he asserted that the state policy regarding the
supremacy of the Imperial Talisman over the Buddha was wrong. And
equally important, that the prosecution of the war would fail unless
the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. Miyata’s claim that
this criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto, as well as the
supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms of Buddhism made
Makiguchi “implicitly” a pacifist absurd. Makiguchi is not saying
that the war is wrong under any circumstances. He is saying that it
will fail unless the government suppresses other forms of Buddhism and
acknowledges the supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms
of religious practice including other forms of Buddhism and state
Shinto.
Now I have suggested a position somewhat simpler and quite obvious to
anyone who actually pays attention to what is being said and what is
not being said by either Prof. Metraux or the Soka Gakkai's scholar,
Koichi Miyata. The assertion is made that Prof Victoria is taking
statements out of context to make Makiguchi into a supporter of the
military government and its view of the emperor. That is irrelevant to
my point and further the statements of Metraux and Miyata do not
really support the position put forth by the Soka Gakkai in their
attacks on Dr. Victoria. However this is not the argument I made. Nor
has Chas ever been able to rebut it.
Let's review shall we?
SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up to the
Japanese government during WWII and opposed the war on pacifist
grounds.
SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior to WWII.
However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda were not pacifists, in fact,
they were far from it. There are speeches in existence in which they
affirm their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war. However,
they did remonstrate against the imposition of the Imperial Talisman
as an object of reverence, as well as, in their interpretation of
Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the Japanese Government to suppress all other
Buddhist sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
They were imprisoned for the crime of lese majeste, for their
disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they were pacifists.
President Ikeda admits this as does Professor Metraux, in an article
he was paid to write by the Soka Gakkai.
The “Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists” claim made by the SGI
adds insult to the injury endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan
who did demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those people were
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
affirmed their loyalty to the Emperor and there are no statements made
by either of them which show any actual opposition to the war effort.
However they did oppose the prosecution of the war effort based upon
Imperial Shinto. Based upon their interpretation of the Rissho
Ankoku-
ron, any effort by the Japanese Government to prosecute that war was
doomed to failure unless the Japanese nation was immediately converted
to Nichiren Buddhism and all heretical sects suppressed. Their
criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto over Nichiren Buddhism was
similarly a cause of alarm among the far right government who viewed
any opposition to any policy it promulgated as dangerous. Thus they
were imprisoned for lese mageste, specifically their criticism of the
government’s doctrinal position of the supremacy of the worship of the
Emperor over the Buddha.
I have no doubt that the Imperial Government wished to stifle any
opposition to its expansionist, militaristic policies, including any
opposition from the religious institutions of Japan. The record is
clear that the Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views
to its policies. This includes acting against pacifists of which
there were some, both religious and otherwise. It also includes those
who would not go along with the system that the government was
instituting, namely of blind obedience to the government policies.
Makiguchi did
indeed threaten this blind obedience because he asserted that the
state policy regarding the supremacy of the Imperial Talisman over the
Buddha was wrong. And equally important, that the prosecution of the
war would fail unless the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. The Japanese Government
was quite pathological when it came to their requirement that all the
people of Japan must be in absolute support of the government’s
policy. Any nail head sticking up was most certainly going to be
hammered down.
Makiguchi was such a nail head. Makiguchi wanted the Imperial
Government to suppress all other forms of Buddhism and accept Nichiren
Buddhism as the only form of state accepted Buddhism. His position
was that if they failed to do so the war effort was doomed to
failure. This was a position that the Imperial Japanese Government
was unwilling to tolerate and hence his imprisonment along with that
of Toda.
Chas in his hurry to smear Prof. Victoria has leapt to conclusions and
not bothered to read what was written. This is typical of Chas and
actually in his defense, it really is not his fault. He is simply
regurgitating the nonsense he has been given as speaking points by the
Soka Gakkai leadership he has labored so diligently on behalf of in
spreading their positions on the web. For him this is a holy mission
and one in which is he is completely involved and frankly more than a
little obsessed.
However the level of incompetence among the Soka Gakkai leadership is
such that they attempt to “disprove” Professor Victoria’s statements
by having their own paid “scholars” issue rebuttals which are not
rebuttals of the main issue raised by Dr. Victoria, namely whether
Makiguchi was a pacifist and opposed the Japanese war effort on that
basis. They throw out all sorts of comments concerning the use by Dr.
Victoria of pre-1935 commentary of Makiguchi while ignoring the
reiteration of these comment as well as other statements similar to
them by Makiguchi after the Japanese aggression in China had reached
full pitch and the start of hostilities by the Japanese against the
United States, Great Britain and Holland among others. On top of
this, their attacks on Dr. Victoria are not relevant to my position
which does not rely on Dr. Victoria but rather on the simple fact that
their own sources as well as the historical sources do not support
their position.
SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles and never
compromised them.
SGI Fact 2: The examples of the SGI violating its own principles are
in fact too numerous to detail. But one which is relevant to Chas'
regular rants is the claim that they have held fast to Nikko's
admonitions while the Nichiren Shoshu has not. In particular they
chastise the Nichiren Shoshu for sending priests for education at
Rissho University which is operated by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently
they have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
university, some with the approval of their own governing body in
Japan.
Of even greater amusement however are two other events. Shortly after
the split between the SGI and the Nichiren Shoshu in the early 1990's
the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu and pay for
all overseas missionary work, of course with the Soka Gakkai
administering all overseas propagation. The Nichiren Shu, having seen
what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly declined
the offer. The second incident occurred when the SGI approached the
Nichiren Shu and offered one million US dollars for a Nichiren
authored Mandala. This offer was also rejected.
Then we have the wholesale rewriting of all previous publications of
the Soka Gakkai to rewrite history so to speak and cleanse it of any
undue support for the Nichiren Shoshu temple and its doctrines and
policies that might now appear to be embarrassing in light of the
criticisms being leveled at that organization by the Soka Gakkai. One
classic example is the careful editing of the Gosho to remove any
support for the Nichiren Shoshu position on the requirement of a
specific eye opening ceremony which the Soka Gakkai wholeheartedly
endorsed prior to its split with the Nichiren Shoshu Temple and which
it now rejects. Doctrines such as these once held near and dear to
the SGI have fallen by the wayside and been trampled underfoot in a
scene reminiscent of a Monty Python sketch.
SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about democracy,
has been adamant about stamping out any attempts by its membership to
adopt democratic principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their pleasure with
no accountability to the rank and file.
In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren
Shu, the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI through
proxies such as the Rubys and others made posts belittling that fact.
When members have agitated for more of a say in the actions of their
local chapters and National organization, they are typically
admonished. If they persist, they are drummed out.
Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
towards actual financial accountability, keeping its finances a
closely held secret. Members have no knowledge of what happens to
their money once it is donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is
to be spent. Periodically this is justified by claims that the local
SGI chapters are not financially independent and must depend on Japan
for financial contributions. However this begs the question. How
does anyone know this and if in fact it is true then how much comes
from local sources and how much comes from overseas? Further how is
the local administration using this money? The truth is that no one
knows and no one is going to know so long as the Soka Gakkai can keep
a tight lid on its ship of state.
This is vastly different from say Nichiren Order of North America, the
Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which regularly provides
information to its members as to what funds have been taken in and how
they have been spent, including a say at the local level as to how
they should be spent.
Similarly the local sanghas as well as the national governing
structure of the Nichiren Order of North America is democratically
elected and its governing organs conduct open meetings in which any
member in good standing is welcome to attend and speak.
Reginald Carpenter
Re. "Juanjo" posting on 11/22/09, 5:40pm, I changed the subject/ title
to: Juanjo < JonPetry does the very same thing as "Chas!"
***************************************************
CXhaz repeats his same tired arguments with a cut and paste motif
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Sun, Nov 22, 2009, 5:40pm
From: juanjo <jonp...@mindspring.com>
On Nov 17, 11:14�pm, "Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of
�supposed interview� as it is simply a cobbled together
series of questions posed via e-mail and responded to by the Soka
Gakkai, hardly what I would call a real interview. However Ikeda is
quoted as saying in the article:
"During World War II, however, they found themselves facing persecutions
when they resisted the currents of Japanese militarist fascism and
criticized the state�s use of Shinto to spiritually unite the
The �Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists� claim
Japan must be in absolute support of the government�s policy.
Any nail head sticking up was most certainly going to be hammered down.
Makiguchi was such a nail head. Makiguchi wanted the Imperial Government
to suppress all other forms of Buddhism and accept Nichiren Buddhism as
the only form of state accepted Buddhism. His position was that if they
failed to do so the war effort was doomed to failure. This was a
position that the Imperial Japanese Government was unwilling to tolerate
and hence his imprisonment along with that of Toda.
Chaz in his hurry to smear Prof. Victoria has leapt to conclusions and
not bothered to read what was written. This is typical of Chaz and
actually in his defense, it really is not his fault. He is simply
regurgitating the nonsense he has been given as speaking points by the
Soka Gakkai leadership he works for. However the level of incompetence
among the Soka Gakkai leadership is such that they attempt to
�disprove� Professor Victoria�s statements by
having their own paid �scholars� issue rebuttals which
are not rebuttals of the main issue raised by Dr. Victoria, namely that
Makiguchi was a pacifist and opposed the Japanese war effort on that
basis.
---------------------------------------------------
RC comments: Re. the new subject/ title, Juanjo <JonPetry, nka. JoJo
does the very same thing as "Chas" does -- he just repeats his same old
tired out arguments with a "cut & paste" motif every time Chas posts to
rebut him. This stuff is so old that he even repeats the same
misspelling of the name "Chas" that he made in the subject/ title over
five (5) years ago and has never corrected. So, "Please, Please,
Please" (James Brown) either get yourself some new material and learn to
spell correctly, or "Give It Up, Turn It Loose" (James Brown), JoJo you
old FooL! LOL. WorldPeace! }:<{0
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
-Chas.
Reginald Carpenter
Re. Juanjo <JonPetry posting on 11/27/09, 7:20pm, I changed the subject/
title to: Juanjo doesn't know the meanings of complicity & pacifism!
***************************************************
Chas refuses to acknowledge Soka Gakkai Complicity in World War 2
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Fri, Nov 27, 2009, 7:20pm
From: juanjo <jonp...@mindspring.com>
On Nov 26, 10:47�pm, "Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of
Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren"
<p2q1r0s...@aol.com> wrote:
Once again, more intellectual dishonesty from Nichiren Shu's Jon Petry
in a covering attack on the SGI.
All the Nichiren Schools are complicit in the Shinto war (including
yours, Jon Petry), only the SGI's Makiguchi and Toda stuck it out to the
end in prison to resist the Shinto War on Buddhism and humanity, and
continuously lying about it and trying to pull down the only men who
stood up against evil ... will never change your complicity with it, and
your abject subjugation to that evil at that time. You bowed to evil,
and you cannot change that by attacking those who refused to.
Deal with it.
-Chas.
---------------------------------------------------
Juanjo wrote:
The one thing Chas can never deal with is the simple fact that the cover
story the Soka Gakkai has been telling for years about Makiguchi being a
pacifist is false and easily shown as such. As he points out all the
Nichiren Sects as well as other Buddhist sects were compliant with the
Japanese government's effort's during WWII. There were some courageous
lay and clergy who opposed the war effort and who paid dearly for that
opposition. However Makiguchi and Toda were not among them.
Even Ikeda acknowledges this fact in his public writings. But Chas
cannot do so because he is so wrapped up in the myth he has been told
that he cannot escape his cult influenced obsession with demonizing
other Buddhists and extolling the virtues of the Soka Gakkai.
Tragic really but indicative of the type of people who are attracted to
and remain in the Soka Gakkai.
---------------------------------------------------
RC comments: Re. the new subject/ title, what's really "tragic" here is
the fact that Juanjo <JonPetry, nka. JoJo just does NOT know the
meanings of the words complicity & pacifism. What a "Bozo (the
Clown")?! LOL.
Complicity - 1. "association or participation in, or as if in, a
wrongful act. 2. an instance of complicity."
Re. the subject/ topic, that means that neither the Soka Gakkai
organization or Pres. T. Makiguchi and Josei Toda ever had any
"association or participation" in World War 2 and there was NEVER " an
instance of complicity" by them, because a) they never committed any act
to support the war, b) they refused to accept the order from the
Japanese military government to accept the Shinto talisman for their
religious practice, and c) they were both arrested & imprisoned for
their beliefs without any trials for their resistance to the government
military order until Pres. Makiguchi died there and Josei Toda was NOT
released until near the end of the war in 1944.
Pacifism - 1. "opposition to war or violence as a means of settling
disputes; specifically : refusal to bear arms on moral or religious
grounds
2. an attitude or policy of nonresistance -- pacifist."
So, by both definition & their actions, both Pres. Makiguchi & Josei
Toda were pacifists, because they NEVER advocated anyone to "bear arms"
and they refused to accept the Shinto talisman "on moral or religious
grounds" when they were ordered to do so by the Japanese military
government & Nichiren Shoshu high priest & priest-hoods at the time. Up
until that time, they did in fact have "an attitude or policy of
non-resistance" to the government about the war, but they NEVER actually
supported it; of course NOT. So, Juanjo, nka. JoJo is just an IDIOT, of
course! ROTFL. WorldPeace! }:<{0
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
in reason. Reason requires effort, while unreason is effortless.
-Chas.
Reginald Carpenter
Zen (Victoria, Kisala), Nichiren Shu's Petry, Kempon Hokke's Buku-Mark &
Nichiren Shoshu's Bratcher Perpetrate Coordinated Attacks Against
Makiguchi & Toda of the Soka Gakkai to Cover Up Zen and Nichiren Temple
Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War
Date: Thu, Dec 3, 2009, 6:53pm
From: Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high
Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97 <p2q1r...@aol.com>
Juanjo is not an idiot, he is willfully ignorant of facts and lacking in
reason. Reason requires effort, while unreason is effortless.
-Chas.
---------------------------------------------------
RC replies: Oh, shut Up, "Chas"! LOL. Juanjo, nka. JoJo, is and
always has been an IDIOT on Arbn: "Where the Fun Never Stops!" Because,
the definition of the word, idiot, is: 1) "a person affected with
idiocy" 2) "a silly or foolish person -- idiot"; and, idiocy is simply :
2) "something notably stupid or foolish."**
**Source: definitions of idiocy & idiot in Webster's Ninth New
Collegiate Dictionary, copyright 1990 by Merriam-Webster Inc.; page 597
& 598. (Likewise, the definitions of complicity & pacifism were from
the same source, of course!)
So, since Juanjo, nka. JoJo, has done "something notably stupid or
foolish" over & over again for years -- has LIED & accused Pres.
Makiguchi & Josei Toda of "complicity" in World War 2 despite there
being NO evidence that they ever were involved or did anything to
actively support the war effort, and has LIED & accused them of NOT
being pacifists despite all of the evidence that they were, including
them both being imprisoned for NOT obeying the Japanese military
government's order to support the war effort with the Shinto talisman --
he fits the very definition of being an IDIOT! Furthermore, by
"Juanjo/ JoJo" being knowingly & "willfully ignorant" of the facts/
truth and utterly lacking in common sense as well as NOT having a lick
of logic/ reasoning more than qualifies him as being a Stupid & FooLish
person, too. Case closed! LOL.
WorldPeace! }:<{0
juanjo
foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com> wrote:
> Oh, there's a difference in sincerity.
>
> -Chas.
True, I am sincere and you are simply parroting the party line you
have been fed by your masters.
juanjo
Well there might be some people out there who consider me an idiot but
then again I disagree with their assessment.
I am not willfully ignorant of the facts nor lacking in reason. I
find it amusing that you think so actually given that every source I
quoted to you disagrees with you including Daiseku Ikeda and the tame
Sokka Gakkai scholars.
Ikeda stated in Tricycle Magazine that, "During World War II, however,
they found themselves facing persecutions when they resisted the
currents of Japanese militarist fascism and criticized the state's use
of Shinto to spiritually unite the Japanese people behind the war
effort. They were arrested and imprisoned as a result."
Professor Metraux directly states: Thus, Makiguchi and Toda defied
the government and went to prison not necessarily for anti-war
beliefs, which the Soka Gakkai preaches today, but because it was
against their deeply felt religious principles to adopt Shinto
practices or to merge with another religious sect, even if it had
Nichiren connections."
Miyata admits that "Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist ideology
of imperial fascism for its religious policies".
Now one need only look at what is being said here and compare it to
what was said by numerous scholars including Victoria, namely that
Makiguchi was imprisoned because of his resistance to the Imperial
policy of State Shinto being superior to Buddhism, as well as, the
attempt by the government to incorporate all Buddhist sect into
unified large sects. The fact that these policies may have been
implemented by the government unify the country and get it
wholeheartedly behind the war effort does not matter. The fact is
that Makiguchi and Toda never spoke out against the war. In fact
Makiguchi is on record in supporting the war. For example in an
excerpt from a statement made by Makiguchi after the start of the
Pacific War [which is how the Japanese termed their war of aggression
against the United States, Great Britain and some other countries], he
clearly shows he had no actual opposition to the war itself:
"Sacrifice your own skin to slash the opponent's flesh. Surrender
your own flesh to saw off the opponent's bone.' With their faithful
implementation of this well-known Japanese fencing (kendo) strategy
into actual practice during the war, the Japanese military is able to
achieve her glorious, ever-victorious invincibility in the Sino-Japan
conflict and in the Pacific war, and thus, easing the minds of the
Japanese people. This [strategy of sacrifice] should be held as an
ideal lifestyle for those remaining on the home front and should be
applied
in every aspect of our daily life."
From: Makiguchi’s "The Instruction Manual Summarizing the Experiments
and Testimonials of Life based on the Philosophy of Value of the
Supreme
Goodness."
Now the Merriam Webster dictionary defines pacifism as "opposition to
war or violence as a means of settling disputes; specifically a
refusal to bear arms on moral or religious grounds". Wikipedia
defines pacifism as "the opposition to war or violence as a means of
settling disputes or gaining advantage". When one looks at Makiguchi
and Toda's actions and words, placing them in the time period and
cultural context in which they lived, it is clear that they were not
pacifists. Their objections to State Shinto and the incorporation of
the Nichiren Shoshu sect into a unified Nichiren Sect had nothing to
do with an opposition to the war. Neither of them spoke out against
the war against the Chinese nor the war against the United States and
her allies. Nothing in their writings or public statements indicated
they had an opposition to war or violence as a means to settling
disputes or gaining advantage. Indeed Ikeda's actions in assaulting a
Nichiren Shoshu priest later after the war, show he has never been a
pacifist either despite his words to the contrary.
Chas cannot argue against the facts presented above so he presents the
same massive bombast as always. However his most recent posts
reference the fact that the other Buddhist sects were also complicit
in the Japanese government's war effort, including the Nichiren Shu.
He states that my responses to his posts are an attempt to cover up
the actions of the Nichiren Shu during the war, i.e., their support of
the war effort. I do not dispute that the governing body of the
Nichiren Shu as well as the majority of the members supported the
Japanese war effort and never have. To one degree or another all the
organized Buddhist sects including the Nichiren sects such as the
Nichiren Shu, supported the war effort. It is only a few courageous
individuals, both lay and clergy from different social, religious and
political groups who dared speak out and oppose the Japanese
government's policy of military expansion. Some of those courageous
individuals were members of the Nichiren Shu clergy and lay membership
but far too few for my liking. I have never tried to cover that fact
up and indeed if one were to look at my past postings on the subject I
have admitted the complicity of the Nichiren Shu in supporting the
Japanese war effort.
My opposition to Chas' attempts to whitewash the history of the Soka
Gakkai and to paint them as pacifists is not to uphold my own sect as
some sort of superior, ethical organization resisting the war effort
in Japan while Makiguchi and Toda went along with it. Far from it.
My distaste with this effort of the Soka Gakkai leadership to rewrite
history comes from the fact that there were some courageous people who
did oppose the war in Japan and who did speak out against war as a
policy of their government. Those folks were imprisoned and many were
executed while some were sent into exile. It is an extreme disservice
to the memory of those courageous individuals to paint Makiguchi and
Toda as taking the same pacifist moral stance as those who actually
did when in fact Makiguchi and Toda did not do so. One can respect
Makiguchi and Toda for their principled opposition to the Japanese
government's attempts to assert the superiority of State Shinto over
Buddhism. One can respect their strong opposition to the
consolidation of the Nichiren Shoshu into the Nichiren Shu as the
Japanese government was attempting to do. These positions were taken
in sincere belief of the correctness of their position morally and
doctrinally. But it is fundamentally dishonest to them and to those
who did assert an opposition to the war based upon pacifistic grounds,
for the Soka Gakkai to claim now that they opposed the war on such
grounds as pacifism when that is not the case.
I understand and respect the stance that Makiguchi and Toda took
opposing the Japanese governments assertion of State Shinto as
superior to Buddhism. They deserve credit for being courageous enough
to take that stance knowing what could and did happen to them. No
amount of sophistry is going to make me agree to something which is
not the truth.
BTW so you do not have to look up the word sophistry:
wordnetweb/princeton - a deliberately invalid argument displaying
ingenuity in reasoning in the hope of deceiving someone;
wikipedia - a confusing or illogical argument used for deceiving
someone;
wiktionary - An argument that seems plausible, but is fallacious or
misleading, especially one devised deliberately to be so; The art of
using deceptive speech or writing; Cunning or trickery;
oxford - A seemingly plausible, but fallacious and devious,
argumentation.
Kurt
<85722a4f-0163-4ced...@k13g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
"Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan
And this is all you can "debate"? LOL
Talk about grasping for whatever sliver of a straw you can conjure up.
Poor guy...
Wayno
foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com> wrote:
> Your "facts" are the real drivel here.
>
> Question for you, which no one from Nichiren Shoshu will ever discuss
> "off-the-leash" ...
>
> Where's the transfer box for Taisekiji, which is bequeathed from High
> Priest to High Priest?
An internal matter that is none of your business.
>
> Nichinyo doesn't have it, because Nikken could never produce it in
> court and didn't have it, because Nittatsu didn't give it to him,
> because Nikken was never appointed his successor and the Nikken School
> is is a fraudulent travesty of justice.
>
> When are these frauds going to jail for perpetrating this crime?
Again, an internal matter that is none of your business. It's not a
"crime" if it's an internal matter.
Kurt
<3507af4d-3f0b-490b...@k9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Wayno <uen...@yahoo.com> wrote:
But more importantly, not any sort of reason why he doesn't practice
Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism. It's all about grasping for straws. The old
"Clow lawyer" strategy.
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
and what the implications are of such a disaster for Kosen Rufu: what
the fraudulent nature of the High Priesthood means in a sect that
worships the High Priest.
-Chas.
C
The problem is that you are not qualified to discuss anything important.
All you're qualified to do is parrot the SGI FUD and spam it for over a
decade. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
--
C
Kurt
<46bd2142-2210-4d90...@f20g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
"Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan
doors opened' 4-8-97" <p2q1r...@aol.com> wrote:
Why is it important to you? Hypothetically - Would you have practice
Nichiren Shoshu Buddhism if you felt the transfer process had gone to
your liking?
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-
Confirming Makiguchi's Pacifism & Exposing Putative Scholar Brian
Victoria's Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research, for Jon Petry
Jon Petry initially states,
| Chas is truly a special case. In fact I tend to think
| at times he is doing this effort on his own while at
| others I think this is all part of some silly SGI
| program to keep any real discussion on this board shut
| down. After all ARBN did a lot of damage to the SGI
| story line early on when people fist started using the
| internet. People found out quickly that there were
| other schools of Nichiren Buddhism than the SGI. They
| found out there were other versions of history than the
| one pushed by SGI. They found out that the SGI was much
| smaller than they were told it was. They were exposed
| to a serious critique of the SGI for the first time.
| And they asked questions of their senior leaders,
| questions that their senior leaders could not answer.
|
| The truth can be inconvenient at times and the SGI
| leadership has been squirming for a number of years as
| the number of people questioning it has grown, people
| who cannot merely be dismissed as mentally deranged as
| the SGI has attempted to label them in the past. Worse
| yet events in their history have been exposed to the
| glare of public exposure and they do not like that.
|
| For example:
|
| SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who
| stood up to the Japanese government during WWII and was
| pacifist.
|
| SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist
| prior to WWII. However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda
| were not pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
| There are speeches in existence in which they affirm
| their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
| However they did remonstrate against the imposition of
| the Imperial Talisman as an object of reverence as well
| as in their interpretation of Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged
| the Japanese Government to suppress all other Buddhist
| sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren
| Buddhism. They were imprisoned for the crime of lesse
| majesty, for their disrespect of the Imperial Talisman
| not because they were pacifists. This claim by the SGI
| does add insult to the injury endured by thousands of
| Buddhists in Japan who did demonstrate against the war
| and who were abandoned by the leaderships of their
| respective sects. Many of those people were imprisoned
| and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
| into exile.
|
| SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its
| principles and never compromised them.
|
| SGI Fact 1: The examples of the SGI violating its own
| principles are in fact too numerous to detail. But one
| which is relevant to Chas' regular rants is the claim
| that they have held fast to Nikko's admonitions while
| the NST has not. In particular they chastise the NST
| for sending priests for education at Rissho University
| which is run by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently they
| have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
| university, some with the approval of their own
| governing body in Japan. Of even greater amusement
| however are two other events. Shortly after the split
| between the SGI and the NST in the early 1990's the SGI
| approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
| affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu
| and pay for all overseas missionary work, of course with
| them running it. The Nichiren Shu, having seen what the
| SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly
| declined the offer. The second incident occurred when
| the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu and offered a
| million US dollars for a Nichiren authored Mandala. This
| offer was also rejected.
|
| SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
|
| SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service
| about democracy has been adamant about stamping out any
| attempts by its membership to adopt democratic
| principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
| SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their
| pleasure with no accountability to the rank and file.
| In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in
| the Nichiren Shu, the lay organizations did have elected
| leaders, the SGI through proxies such as the Rubys and
| other made posts belittling that fact. Similarly the
| SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
| towards actual financial accountability, keeping its
| finances a closely held secret. Members have no
| knowledge of what happens to their money once it is
| donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is to
| spent. This is vastly different from say NONA, the
| Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which
| regularly provides information to its members as to what
| funds have been taken in and how they have been spent,
| including a say at the local level as to how they should
| be spent.
|
| These are but a few of the issues that have been exposed
| here on ARBN over the years and caused the SGI no small
| amount of trouble. They are inconvenient truths that
| Chas and others like him would just as soon see burried,
| never to see the light of day. So Chas avoids them
| through his spam.
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
Chas. replies,
From Jon Petry,
| Chas is truly a special case. [snip]
Everyone is a special case. Your opinion of who I am and why I speak
are your opinions, as are yours of the impact of ARBN. Slandering the
Sangha is not a good cause. There are other schools of Buddhism,
distortions of Nichiren and Buddhism in general, yet only Nikko
Shonin's Fuji School correctly practices the Law at the heart of the
Lotus Sutra instead of incessantly slandering it. On this point I
offer you three quotes from the Gosho Zenshu, one from Sensei and one
from Nikko Shonin (I capitalize the relevant lines for clarity):
Quote #1 - From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p.
77-78, Chapter Seven - The Parable of the Phantom City, Point Seven,
on the passage "Now you must press forward diligently / so that
together you may [all] reach the place where the treasure is.",
. The Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings says: The
. word "all" refers to the Ten Worlds. The word "together"
. refers to the words [of the Buddha in chapter two, Expedient
. Means] "hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without
. any distinction between us." The word "reach" means to
. arrive at the level of the highest effect, the state of
. Buddhahood. "The place where the treasure is," the treasure
. land, is the holy mountain, Eagle Peak.
.
. Nichiren and his followers, those who chant Nam-myoho-renge
. -kyo, one and all will "together reach the place where the
. treasure is." This one word "together" means that, as long
. as they are together with Nichiren, they will reach the
. treasure land. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT TOGETHER WITH HIM, THEY
. WILL FALL INTO THE GREAT CITADEL OF THE AVICHI HELL.
[By the way, the first paragraph clarifies the issue of Buddhist
Democracy, without specifying the form, which I will discuss later on.
(Thank you once again, Nichiren Daishonin.)]
Quote #2 - From "The Minobu Transfer Document", WND II, p. 993,
. I NICHIREN, ENTRUST ALL OF THE TEACHINGS I HAVE PROPAGATED
. THROUGHOUT MY LIFE TO NIKKO, ACHARYA BYAKUREN. He should be
. the great guide and teacher in the spread of the essential
. teaching.
.
. When the head of the nation accepts this Law, the ordination
. platform, or sanctuary, of Hommon-ji temple should be
. established at Mount Fuji.
.
. We must wait for the proper time for this. This is what is
. meant by the specified ordination. My followers should abide
. by this document.
.
. Nichiren
.
. The order of the transmission of the Law: from Nichiren to
. Nikko. The ninth month in the fifth year of Koan [1282],
. cyclical sign mizunoe-uma
Quote #3 - From "The Ikegami Transfer Document", WND II, p. 996,
. I transmit the fifty years of teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha
. to Nikko, Acharya Byakuren. He should be the superintendent
. of Minobu-san Kuon-ji temple. ANYONE, EITHER LAY BELIEVER OR
. CLERIC, WHO GOES AGAINST THIS, IS A PERSON WHO ACTS AGAINST
. THE CORRECT TEACHING.
.
. At Ikegami in Musashi Province
. Nichiren
.
. The thirteenth day of the tenth month in the fifth year of
. Koan [1282], cyclical sign mizunoe-uma
In Living Buddhism (April 1998), President Ikeda wrote an article on
Nikko Shonin's 26 Admonitions.
<http://sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/SokaGakkai/Study/26Adm/>
Quote #4 - Sensei writes:
. These articles of warning were originally intended for
. priests. Nonetheless, we in the SGI, awakened [to our
. mission] as Bodhisattvas of the Earth, have strictly put
. these admonitions into practice.
.
. President Toda composed and dedicated the following poem to
. youth:
.
. You, young people,
. ENGRAVING IN YOUR HEARTS
. THE TWENTY-SIX PRECEPTS,
. dedicate your lives
. to the path of the Mystic Law.
.
. The "twenty-six precepts" in this poem refers to Nikko
. Shonin's twenty-six warning articles. President Toda urged
. young people to struggle for kosen-rufu, just as the second
. high priest admonished, with the spirit of not begrudging
. their lives.
Quote #5 - President Ikeda completely lists Nikko Shonin's 26
Admonitions, (from which I include the parts relevant to my arguments)
. I will here set forth some articles for the sake of later
. students of Buddhism. This is solely because I treasure the
. [Daishonin's] golden words regarding kosen- rufu.
.
. [... The 26 Admonitions go here...]
.
. I have set forth these 26 articles for the sake of the
. eternal salvation and protection of humankind. THOSE WHO
. VIOLATE EVEN ONE OF THESE ARTICLES CANNOT BE CALLED
. DISCIPLES OF NIKKO.
.
. thirteenth day of the first month of the third year of the
. Genko era (1333).
. Nikko(Seal)
.
. Note: The Fuji school is the line of Nikko Shonin's
. followers. The "late master" is Nichiren Daishonin.
People will continue to believe and hold forth on the idea that there
is even a glimmer of daylight between, or even the tiniest bit of
difference between these wonderful persons, as far as what Buddhism
is. There is not. They all agree with Nichiren Daishonin.
The function of dividing, of pitting one against the other is the
devilish function. The view of Buddhism as being different in any way
from what these men say is in and of itself, the purest delusion and
the fundamental ignorance or darkness.
I'm just as sure as I can be, that your next argument is to declare
everything I quoted as a forgery (the standard Five Senior Priest's
treachery), and to that I quote Nikko Shonin's 3rd Admonition:
. 3. There will [in the future] appear persons who slander our
. school, saying that the Gosho are forged writings. You must
. not associate with such evil priests.
I cannot participate in such a discussion. The rest of your charges
are unsubstantiated, as usual. We will address what substantiation
might consist of, below.
More from Jon Petry,
| ... the SGI leadership has been squirming [snip]
More unsubstantiated and frankly, not substantiable subjective
allegations. Characterizations such as these presented as evidence are
like asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" It is called the
Fallacy of Interrogation, where an unsupported assumption is inserted
in a question, or a challenge argument, in this case.
[See http://members.aol.com/standardcharter/logic.html]
....................................................................
....................................................................
....................................................................
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up
| to the Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
Notice how, without presenting any proof, a statement is pre-
identified as a myth. This is also, the Fallacy of Interrogation.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior
| to WWII. However its founders, Makiguchi and Toda were not
| pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
Notice how you (Jon Petry) state an untruth about the SGI, and then
immediately reverse yourself.
How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a founder of a
group that did not exist until after the war? This logical fallacy has
no name and is frankly pathetic. You don't even believe your own
rhetorical excesses.
As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis], Soka
Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI [international
emphasis], they really are all the same provisional organization, born
in 1930 and going through stages of growth, much like a person does.
Like little Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the arbiter of
what names should go with what things. Are you really suggesting that
our organization should run their candidate names for the sangha by
you for approval? Get real.
More from Jon Petry,
| There are speeches in existence in which they affirm their
| loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
Substantiation would consist of stating "Who, What, When and Where".
What did the specified person say in what publication or speech, at
which location, and when? Waving an unsubstantiated allegation is like
Joe McCarthy waving around his envelope with the names of Communists
in the State Department that he never got around to disclosing (filled
with blank paper).
"Who, What, When, and Where", Jon Petry. Then you are easily refuted
when you make your errors.
I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian Victoria's
articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked, as he takes
statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen priest on a rampage
against the Lotus Sutra and its votaries.) Victoria is neither
researcher nor scholar, in any sense that I would respect. [I have
planned to write a toxic zen story about him, once I get some other
more crucial things out of the way.]
There are three articles (and counting) debunking the roshi's
inaccuracies:
1. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton
in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
Here's two sample paragraphs from page 1,
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage from
. Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The Geography of
. Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that Russia was
. engaged in a policy of expansionism in the search for year
. -round harbors. Victoria asserts that this world view was
. identical to that of the government of Japan, a view used to
. justify the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), then the
. annexation of the Korean peninsula (1910) and the founding
. of the puppet state of Manchukuo (1932). Victoria's
. assertion, and his implicit criticism of Makiguchi,
. simplistically links analysis of the global situation with
. the policies taken in response to that. Makiguchi was merely
. voicing what was then the accepted understanding of the
. geopolitical motives for Russia's expansionist policies, a
. view held not only by the Japanese government, but shared by
. the British, with whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese
. Alliance. Certainly I know of no scholar of political
. geography who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one
. that Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not only
. Makiguchi but everyone who studies political geography
. guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
.
. Elsewhere in Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi points out that the
. countries of Western Europe had a great deal of trouble
. operating their colonies, and expresses doubts about the
. value of acquiring colonies, particularly from the point of
. view of the financial burden that they would entail. If
. Victoria had read Jinsei Chirigaku carefully, he would not
. identify the thoughts of Makiguchi with the expansionist
. doctrine of the time.
A putative scholar, indeed. Scholars who make sweeping allegations
need to have a similar sweep in their thorough coverage of the
material, otherwise their conclusions are far too easily upended,
along with any respect for their scholasticism.
Brian Victoria cherry-picks the evidence to support his attacks on
Makiguchi's pacifism in the same manner that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/
Wolfowitz cherry picked the WMD intelligence for their erroneous
arguments for the justification to invade Iraq without provocation.
They simply slavered to get their hands on Saddam, and Victoria simply
slavered to trash Makiguchi ... for some reason [this will be shown
forensically in a circumstantial case for libel].
Miyata's third point is especially damning, although he does not jump
on Brian Victoria with the hobnail boots that I use. [Miyata appears
to be a nice person.] Victoria is clearly completely ignorant of the
circumstances of political discourse at the time, which provides the
context for Makiguchi's view of the Emperor as a constitutional
monarch, versus the military's view of him as absolute and all-
justifying god-emperor. That dispute, which ended in 1935, is not even
noticed by Victoria in his skin-deep analysis of Makiguchi's writings
before 1935.
This demonstrates an utter ignorance of a field which is not his own,
Japanese political history. This is a similar error to Shockley the
Nobel Prize-winning Solid State Physicist burying his career and
reputation eternally, by his "scientific" approach to racial science,
and the bad application of statistics to intelligence testing, that
was so thoroughly debunked in "The Mismeasure of Man" by the late
great Biologist Stephen Jay Gould. [That last is one great book.]
Finally, there is the faulty translation of the line "praying" to the
Emperor, which in context should be beseeching the Emperor, because he
is talking about petitioning the authorities for redress. Now we must
question every line translated by Victoria, as well. Is there anything
left to trust him on? Apparently not.
2. Two Views of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's Attitude toward Japanese
Militarism and Education, by Dayle M. Bethel.
<http://www.iop.or.jp/0313/bethel.pdf>
Bethel finds similar broad errors in Victoria's work, which show that
he simply neglected to read Makiguchi's writings thoroughly, even the
ones that he quotes from!!! This may be simply a lack of mastery of
Japanese, which makes a non-native reader lazy about thoroughly
reading the works of someone. However we may understand the reasons
for the loathing of thorough coverage by those with an agenda, that
Wolfowitzian lack of thoroughness provides a rich ground for exactly
the kind of profound injustice that Brian Victoria has committed
against Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.
Bethel goes to the lengths to prove his point by his extensive
Appendices that constitute half of the paper's content, and which
contain a broad spectrum of Makiguchi's pacifism in his writings and
pound home the charge of cherry-picking with a torrent of counter-
evidence. Bethel pounds him like a stake into the ground, but nicely,
of course. These are nice people.
3. A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese Buddhist History, reviewed by Daniel A. Metraux.
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org/5/metraux04.htm>
This paper is more of an appeal to simple reason, that Victoria's
assertions against Makiguchi are just so totally outweighed by vast
evidence against his allegations, that they are totally unsupportable.
More from Jon Petry,
| However they did remonstrate against the imposition of the
| Imperial Talisman as an object of reverence as well as in
| their interpretation of Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the
| Japanese Government to suppress all other Buddhist sects
| and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
This is a distorted description of what Nichiren asks people to
observe, and to do. In brief,
1. The Lotus Sutra is Shakyamuni's highest teaching and in the Nirvana
Sutra, Shakyamuni makes his final demand that the followers of the
Buddha honestly discard the provisional teachings (T'ien-T'ai
identifies these as the pre-Lotus Sutra perfect teachings, Tripitaka
teachings or Hinayana, connecting teachings and specific teachings).
"Buddhism" based on the provisional teachings is not really Buddhism,
according to the Buddha. See below.
<http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=3D815>
2. Once the highest practice of the Law at the heart of the Lotus
Sutra was expounded by Nichiren in the Gosho, lesser Lotus Sutra
practices join the provisional teachings as the enemies of the Lotus
Sutra.
3. From quote #1, either you are in the Treasure Land with Nichiren
Daishonin, or in Avichi Hell. I defer to your enlightened decision as
to your choice of path, of course.
4. Nichiren Daishonin wants you to follow Nikko Shonin exactly (from
quotes #2 and #3).
5. Nikko Shonin wants you not to ignore even one of his 26 Admonitions
(from quote #5).
6. Josei Toda wants the followers of Nikko (the SGI) to engrave the 26
Admonitions in our hearts in quote #4 (we are not a precepts practice,
because Nichiren states that "Precepts are traitorous" in the "14
Slanders" Gosho, so that is why we engrave them in our hearts, and not
obey them as a set of rules).
7. Every single one of these documents was carefully handed to me by
President Ikeda, without whom I would never have heard about Nam-
Myoho- Renge-Kyo. (Thank you, Sensei.)
8. There are no accidents in this chain of events and documents.
Accept it or not, Jon Petry !!!
Followers of Nichiren "wipe out" slanderous temples by converting
their believers to the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren's practice according
to the Gosho. [From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p.
77]
As the government forced the followers of the Fuji School into
practicing Shinto, if those unfortunate victims complained that the
authorities should be selecting a correct Buddhism, instead of the
pitiful corruption and sham of a religion that is Shinto, who's to
blame them? Of course, when the government is selecting your religion
for you, they will never, ever get it right (hence the first amendment
to the U.S. Constitution).
More from Jon Petry,
| They were imprisoned for the crime of lesse majesty, for
| their disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they
| were pacifists.
There was no law against pacifism, because the Japanese government of
the time could not conceive of it. So the absence of that specific
pacifism charge against them is insufficient evidence of non-pacifism.
Openly stating that the Shinto Talisman was not a valid religious
object was the same thing as stating that the Emperor was not a god.
Either action was clear treason against the god-Emperor and his holy
war, and hence it was in-your-face-arrest-me pacifism, of the most
noble kind.
This is because these acts removed the religious justification for the
conflict itself, and also removed the blanket Shinto-Zen holy
authorization for war criminality and holocaust action ("The hand that
holds the sword is the Buddha's hand" - D.T. Suzuki). This is all
summarily explained in Miyata's paper.
More from Jon Petry,
| This claim by the SGI does add insult to the injury
| endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan who did
| demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
| leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those
| people were imprisoned and executed. Others such as
| Nichidatsu Fujii were sent into exile.
Yeah. The point is that individuals of those Buddhist organizations
were fooled into believing that the leaders would stand up against the
military government. When the time came, all of those Buddhist leaders
and their organizations folded, or were arrested and gave in to
pressure from the police. This left their members to suffer the worst
form of persecution combined with the humiliation of abandonment by
their leaders. Shame !!!
Of the leaders of the various Buddhist movements that stood against
the war, only Josei Toda resisted to the end of the war, after
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi had resisted until his death. Among all the
Buddhist organizations, only the SGI in the person of Josei Toda,
resisted and survived to the end, never giving in to the persecution
even in the tiniest way. Makiguchi, as he was led to the detention
center clinic where he soon died, refused to even take the arm of the
guard who offered to help him. THAT is real and determined, enduring
resistance.
Oddly, Brian Victoria seems to have missed this salient point, or to
be incapable of mentioning it ... for some reason? Let me deal with
that now, and unlike the others, I am not in any way a nice person.
In his book "Zen at War" first published in 1997, he has a 6th chapter
on the resistance to the Zen-state war machine. This chapter is in two
sections, organized resistance and the resistance of individuals. In
the organized resistance section he talks about the initial resistance
of very few groups, all of which were crushed. The last resistance
group (he states erroneously) was the Youth League for Revitalizing
Buddhism (Shinko Bukkyo Seinen Domei) led by a man named Seno. On page
73, Victoria describes Seno's arrest for treason against the emperor
system and capitalism (fascists hate communists),
| Seno ... In 1942, however, he was given an early release
| from prison due to ill health. By that time, of course, all
| traces of the League had been eradicated. So, too, had all
| traces of the Buddhist resistance to Japan's war efforts
| (8).
Buried at the end of the book in Note 8 on page 201, is Brian
Victoria's ridiculous explanation of why he neglects to mention the
Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, which would upset his point that Buddhists did not
stand up to Imperial State Zen. His actions are partly explained by
the fact that chapter 6 would have to be re-written, since the central
thesis would be wrong. Victoria is a Zen Roshi, and of course the
culpability of Zen in the war is more easily borne if no one acted to
stop them and the complicity was then universally shared by all
Japanese Buddhists. [Then everyone is corrupted and evil, so nobody
can point fingers at Zen.]
He states in Note 8, that the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai was unworthy to be
mentioned because the arrest of their leaders was for not accepting
the Shinto Talisman, and they were simply being intolerant of other
religions. Once again, his ignorance of context, and his skin deep
coverage of the material while cherry-picking the evidence leads him
to the wrong conclusion. If he knew anything about Nichiren Buddhism,
he would know that neither Makiguchi nor Toda would ever physically
bow to an alter once it was defiled by a corrupt object from a
slanderous Buddhism, like the Shinto Talisman.
You cannot defeat an evil, if you continually bow to it.
In fact, that was the purpose of the Shinto Talisman, to force the
people of Japan to bow to the principle that the Emperor was a god,
and that the war was therefore a holy crusade and the holocaust
actions and war crimes committed were therefore not slanders of the
Buddhist Law. Upending all of that at the root, by Makiguchi and
Toda's fearless resistance, was the greater treason against the
Emperor and the war. Both Seno's group and Makiguchi's groups were
Buddhists. Both were pacifists, in spite of the wrongful assertions of
Victoria's sadly lacking scholarship. Both demonstrated organized
resistance to the military regime. Finally, Seno dropped out in 1942,
while Makiguchi and Toda persisted to the bitter end, upending
Victoria's chapter 6 premise. This injustice against the votaries of
the Lotus Sutra by a Zen Roshi was no accident.
Forensically, we can see the order of Brian Victoria's offenses
against the truth.
1. First he makes his thesis in chapter 6, page 73, of his book "Zen
At War" in 1997, that no Buddhist organization stood against the war
after 1942, even though Makiguchi and Toda were arrested on July 6th,
1943 after repeatedly speaking out against the divinity of the Emperor
in discussion meeting after discussion meeting in the Soka Kyoiku
Gakkai during 1941-1942, knowingly in front of secret police
informants. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi died in the Tokyo Detention Center
on November 18th, 1944. Josei Toda was released from detention
unrepentant, shortly before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and
the end of the war.
Even if you did not believe that Makiguchi was a pacifist, you would
have to describe the stubborn actions of the Soku Kyoiku Gakkai as
"organized resistance" to the Shinto-Zen state and therefore the
Imperial Way Buddhism war effort, and to the divine emperor system
during the war. Which would have made Victoria's chapter 6 at least a
negligent oversight. Victoria himself, presents the view that the
subjugation of all the temples under Imperial Way Buddhism was part of
the war effort in the second half of his book, which makes resistance
to Imperial Way Buddhism effectively war resistance. His own views IN
THE SAME BOOK would make this "oversight" an irrational
compartmentalizing of the prima facia evidence, causing the
destruction of his arguments across half of his book.
2. Adding the buried Note 8, on page 201, as an afterthought to cover
his buck-naked ass, while neglecting to reform his thesis in chapter
6, is clear and unmistakable intellectual dishonesty.
3. In the fall of 2001, Victoria writes his cherry-picking attack
paper, "The Putative Pacifism of Soka Gakkai Founder Makiguchi
Tsunesaburo" (Japanese Studies; Dec2001, Vol. 21 Issue 3, page 275).
In the view of 1 and 2 above, the effort to write this paper is
unmistakably exposed as a guilty murderer's attack on the reputation
of his murder victim in the court of public opinion, to avoid
prosecution for the original crime: Victoria's initial scholarly
laziness and incompetence of judgement in an area of expertise outside
his own, and the subsequent coverup of his foolishness in a notation
at the end of the book. Furthermore, he also duplicated his cherry-
picking attack article in the Journal of Global Buddhism
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org>, also published in the fall of 2001.
Once was not enough.
4. Finally, Victoria stubbornly regurgitates his identical spew in the
2006 second edition of "Zen At War" on the same page 73, although Note
8 is now relegated even further back to page 239. Now it is clearly
not just a negligent oversight that became a discardable data point
(more like the majority of the data thrown out whole-hog) that in turn
disturbed a cherished theorem ... it becomes a serial murder of the
truth. So, a great man's reputation is tarred to cover up his critic's
lack of meticulous and comprehensive study of the great man's work and
the simple historiography of his time.
Diggin' a deep, deep hole, dudes (Jon and Brian). An abyss. Avichi
hell for countless kalpas. Repent now !!!
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles
| and never compromised them.
Once again, the Fallacy of Interrogation. See the discussion above.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 1: The examples of the SGI violating its own
| principles are in fact too numerous to detail.
Both the quality and quantity of your substantiation are insufficient.
No human organization is perfect, but we must not let the perfect be
the enemy of the good. Nichiren Shoshu and the transfer-boxless
exploits of Nikkenists who through outright fraud stole the Fuji
School from the followers of Nikko Shonin ... well, that's not merely
imperfect. That is a wholesale ripoff of a religion with the collusion
of the Japanese government. The Japanese government and the courts
need to set things right, now that the transfer box has been shown not
to be in the possession of the fraudulent High Priest-of-the-moment.
More from Jon Petry,
| But one which is relevant to Chas' regular rants is the
| claim that they have held fast to Nikko's admonitions while
| the NST has not.
This is the typical confusion. Priests are not lay-persons, even
though in NST they have blurred the distinction as far as personal
behavior is concerned, while retaining and grandly enhancing the
higher caste-distinctions between priests and laity.
Both Nichiren Daishonin and Nikko Shonin knew the difference between
priests and lay-persons. Their clear and unmitigated disregard for the
integrity, personal and otherwise, of the vast majority of priests
during their time is on the record. They wanted to avoid, as far as
they could, the cancer of an evil and perpetual dynasty of priests
taking root in the Fuji School. They were also clearly not served well
by Fuji School priests after Nichimoku Shonin, with the singular
exception of Nichikan Shonin.
As an example of the discernment of Nikko's views expressed in the 26
Admonitions between priests and lay persons, let's look at Admonition
#25,
. 25. My disciples should conduct themselves as holy priests,
. patterning their behavior after that of the late master.
. However, even if a high priest or a priest striving for
. practice and understanding should temporarily deviate from
. [the principle of] sexual abstinence, he may still be
. allowed to remain in the priesthood [as a common priest
. without rank].
Since gazing at my lovely kindergarten teacher at the age of 5, I have
not had a moment even approaching the thought of any sexual abstinence
for myself. So I would never have entertained the delusion that I
belonged in a priesthood requiring abstinence. This is merely being
honest about oneself and not misrepresenting for corrupt reasons.
As a lay follower of Nikko Shonin, clearly and unmistakably, the only
way that I can follow the 25th Admonition is to NOT follow any priest
who is not celibate, or any high priest who tolerates lapses of
celibacy in the priesthood. This is because any one of these lapses is
also a cessation of their being a follower of Nikko Shonin, and the
initiation of their becoming a fraudulent priest of the Fuji School.
Although it is not necessary to follow what happens when Fuji School
priests abandon Nikko Shonin (the fact of that abandonment alone, is
evidence enough against them), let's see what happens when faith is
abandoned.
Sex, marriage and having families are the underlying problems with
Nichiren Shoshu (and other) priesthood clans and their clan wars for
control. If the family relationships of celibate priests were extended
to the lay-members as children, rather than the filial family
relationships of non-celibate priests to inheriting descendents, none
of the troubles of the Fuji School in the last century would have
occurred.
On April 25, 1872 the Meiji government lifted the Tokugawa ban on
priests marrying.
From "The Untold History of the Fuji School", Ch. 10, p. 92-93:
<http://sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/10_UHFS_Chapter_10.pdf>
. Once the restrictions were lifted by the new regime, priests
. gladly started to marry. This is a clear indication that the
. Buddhist community had lost the integrity to decide on
. matters of Buddhist tradition. Instead, priests regarded the
. government as the legitimate authority over their
. traditions. Put simply, the years of strict government
. control had made the Buddhist clergy entirely dependent on
. political authority. Some contend that the Meiji government
. issued the decree to enfeeble the morale of the Buddhist
. community and thereby elevate Shinto, which was viewed as
. the chief means of extolling imperial authority.
.
. Nichiden criticized priests of other Buddhist schools for
. their elation over the government decree, regarding it as an
. expression of imperial mercy. He stated that despite the
. trend in the Buddhist community, the priesthood of the Fuji
. School should uphold the precepts of the Daishonin and Nikko
. Shonin and remain celibate. But eventually the priesthood at
. Taiseki-ji succumbed to the trend.
.
. The priesthood's renouncement of celibacy had a significant
. effect on the development of the Fuji School. It gave rise
. to nepotism and the hereditary succession of priesthood
. positions and temple properties within the school. Factions
. of related priests formed, vying for control. Instead of
. regarding the spread of the Daishonin's Buddhism as their
. goal, many priests became increasingly bound by family ties
. and personal interests.
Having decided to follow Meiji while spurning Nikko Shonin and his
25th admonition, the 54th High Priest Nichi'in (from 1869-1874) was
soon (through cause and effect) faced with an unfortunate circumstance
(5 months later), from his newly adopted Meiji master,
From 'Confirming Our Path of Faith - Temple Issue Handbook' (green
booklet), p. 36:
<http://sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/Confirming_Our_Path.pdf>
. [Nichi'in] Requests the government to allow the sect to
. remain independent of other Nichiren schools. However, the
. government orders all Nichiren schools to merge despite
. their differing doctrines to make it easier for the
. government to control them.
Once forced into the broad and all-encompassing (1) Nichiren School in
September 1872, the long and tawdry road was chosen for Taisekiji:
[(2) May 1874: placed under the Shoretsu School of all temples that
think the essential teaching is superior, as a sub-branch of the broad
Nikko branch.
(3) February 1876: placed under a separate Nikko Branch (later renamed
Hon'Mon) of the broad Nichiren School, under the 55th HP Nippu.
(4) September 1900: Taisekiji is 'allowed' to become its own branch,
the Fuji branch of the Nichiren School, under 56th HP Nichio, the
first married HP.
(5) June 1912: Taisekiji is 'allowed' to become its own school:
Nichiren Shoshu.]
So, causes follow effects, which always spring from causes. But like I
said, the mere evidence of abandoning the principles initially, was
enough for me to consider them as corrupt without the playing out of
that corruption.
After priests could marry in the Fuji School and still retain their
position in the hierarchy as priests pretending to have the appearance
of Nikko Shonin and Nichiren Daishonin, without the substance ...
Nichiren Shoshu was doomed.
However, the abstinence of lay members, even those who are obsessed
with sex, is not in the focus of interest for Nikko Shonin in this
document. Lay abstinence traditions like the Shakers, are a self-
limiting proposition. The Fuji School has a self-limiting priesthood
abstinence tradition, thanks to Nikko Shonin and his 25th Admonition.
For Admonitions 18 and 19, the difference between laity and priesthood
is obvious and indisputable.
. 19. Black robes should not be worn [by priests].
.
. 20. Jikitotsu should not be worn [by priests].
So, priests and lay-persons are different. And Fuji School priests are
as different from Nichiren Shoshu priests as day is from night.
More from Jon Petry,
| In particular they chastise the NST for sending priests for
| education at Rissho University which is run by the Nichiren
| Shu. Apparently they have forgotten that SGI members have
| also attended that university, some with the approval of
| their own governing body in Japan.
SGI lay-persons who ignore the warnings of Nikko Shonin's 26
admonitions will suffer and then dig their way out of the hole,
through practice (and that includes their leaders who bid them to
ignore Nikko Shonin). Nikko said nothing about changing the status of
lay-persons who fall short. He was quite explicit about how he treated
priests who fell short, he kicked their ass out the door. For a
TEMPORARY deviation from abstinence, and that doesn't mean marriage or
weekly trips to the red light district, he said to demote them to
common priests. Either married or philandering priests are clearly not
acceptable to Nikko Shonin, and he doesn't seem to care which is
which.
This is the pattern. Priests are not treated the same as lay-persons,
because their corruption leads to the current evil state of affairs,
with a contest for control of the transfer box, and fraud in the
succession of the position of the high priest.
The second admonition, and second only to practice according to the
gosho, means that metriculating at Nichiren Shu's Rissho University is
a violation,
. 2. The doctrines of the five senior priests differ in every
. regard from the teachings of the late master.
The training for priests at Rissho University is vastly different from
the education for lay-persons. If you go to their website (which I
would not recommend to my worst enemy), you will find they teach the
caligraphy and design of Gohonzon, along with all the forms of
Japanese Buddhism. Gohonzon pop out of their instructor websites, here
and there, like the nadir or absolute zero of pornography. (Bring your
barf-bag.)
There is a class where they teach that the Dai-Gohonzon is a fake,
Nikko and Nichimoku are liars, and all the transfer documents are
forgeries.
Does anyone with even a tiny discerning intellect think for a second
that Nikko Shonin would approve of having his priests trained there?
After a cursory inspection, I figure that Fuji School priests and
candidates attending Rissho University are violating at least the
following admonitions of Nikko Shonin (I have capitalized the relevant
phrases),
1. The doctrines of the Fuji school MUST NOT DIFFER in the least from
the teachings of the late master.
2. The doctrines of the five senior priests DIFFER IN EVERY REGARD
from the teachings of the late master.
3.There will [in the future] appear persons who slander our school,
SAYING THAT THE GOSHO ARE FORGED writings. You must not associate with
such evil priests.
4. Those who produce forged writings and say that they are Gosho, or
who practice with the view that the ESSENTIAL AND THEORETICAL
TEACHINGS [of the Lotus Sutra] ARE THE SAME, are parasites in the
lion's body.
5. You should refrain from indulging in poetry or non- Buddhist works,
or from engaging in idleness and chatter WITHOUT [having the aim of]
REBUKING SLANDER.
6. Lay believers should be strictly prohibited from visiting
[heretical] temples and shrines. Moreover, PRIESTS SHOULD NOT VISIT
SLANDEROUS TEMPLES OR SHRINES, which are inhabited by demons, even if
only to have a look around. To do so would be a pitiful violation [of
the Daishonin's Buddhism.] This is not my own personal view; it wholly
derives from the sutras [of Shakyamuni] and the writings [of Nichiren
Daishonin].
9. Until they are well versed in the difference between the
provisional and true teachings, followers of later generations should
visit THIS TEMPLE, setting aside the debt of gratitude they owe to
their parents and teachers, and undertake various studies in order to
free themselves [from the sufferings of birth and death] and attain
the Way.
10.Unless you have a thorough understanding of and firm faith in the
teachings [of Nichiren Daishonin], you SHOULD NOT STUDY T'IEN-T'AI'S
DOCTRINES.
11. Followers of this school should ENGRAVE THE TEACHINGS OF THE GOSHO
IN THEIR LIVES and thereby inherit the ultimate principles expounded
by the master. THEN, if they have any leisure time, they should
inquire into the doctrine of the T'IEN-T'AI SCHOOL.
17. DO NOT FOLLOW even the high priest IF HE GOES AGAINST THE BUDDHA'S
LAW and propounds his own views.
18. Even if a view is set forth unanimously by a conference [of
believers], the high priest should repudiate it IF IT GOES AGAINST THE
BUDDHA'S LAW.
19. BLACK ROBES SHOULD NOT BE WORN [by priests].
20. JIKITOTSU SHOULD NOT BE WORN [by priests].
21. You SHOULD NOT SIT TOGETHER WITH SLANDERERS OF THE LAW [at
religious ceremonies] for fear of suffering the same punishment as
they.
22. You MUST NOT ACCEPT OFFERINGS FROM SLANDERERS OF THE LAW.
25. My disciples should CONDUCT THEMSELVES AS HOLY PRIESTS, PATTERNING
THEIR BEHAVIOR AFTER THAT OF THE LATE MASTER. However, even if a high
priest or a priest striving for practice and understanding should
temporarily deviate from [the principle of] sexual abstinence, he may
still be allowed to remain in the priesthood [as a common priest
without rank].
So it is far, far worse for Fuji School priests to get their training
at Rissho University from the Five Senior Priests, than the slander of
an SGI youth division getting a degree from Nichiren Shu that is most
likely not in the Theology department. Both the content is different
and that special mission as a priest for Kosen Rufu is infinitely more
corrupted by that contact.
Proof of this is the following personal experience from Nikken Abe,
who makes an unmistakable admission of past guilt in the training of
priests at Rissho by Nichiren Shoshu. He makes the former errors
obvious by starting his own training school called Fuji Gakurin ...
rather late in the day,
. (Excerpts from
. http://www.geocities.com/smimoza/vol275.html, the "Fake
. [High Priest]" Newsletter:)
.
| "My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu
| has been polluted with Minobu's wicked
| teachings," Nikken confessed at the opening
| ceremony for the Fuji Gakurin School (Dai-
| Nichiren, May 2000 edition).
.
. Fuji Gakurin is the school that Nikken started to
. belatedly replace Rissho University as the source of
. priest trainees for Nichiren Shoshu. Apparently, he only
. took this action after people started talking about the
. 26 Admonitions publicly (Living Buddhism article by
. Daisaku Ikeda in 1998). The sad fact is, that Nichiren
. Shoshu has violated all 26, most by the letter of the
. admonition, but all 26 by their intent.
.
. In relatively short order after being rebuked in 1998,
. Nikken officially opened the Fuji Gakurin School on
. April 10th, 2000. Many attended and heard his
. statements: Nichijun Fujimoto, Nichiyu Yoshida, Nitto
. (Juken) Ohmura, Nichijo (Gikan) Hayase, Nissho (Shinei)
. Yagi, Chief of the Overseas Department Kotoku Obayashi,
. Chief of the Public Relations Department Kogaku Akimoto
. and Vice Chief of the Study Department Kosho Mizushima.
("Fuji Gakurin" must mean "afterthought" in the Nikkenese dialect.)
Nissho (Shinei) Yagi had to be at the opening of Fuji Gakurin, because
he is the President of the School, as we will see later ...
. Nikken went on to state that "he had been contaminated
. by Minobu's teachings"...
.
| "I once attended the University run by
| Nichiren-shu. The hardest thing for me in my
| campus life was that the teacher said many
| false things about the teachings and history
| of Nichiren Daishonin. I had always thought
| that I should refute these false ideas.
| However, I cannot say that that was my true
| intention, because I was only a student."
|.
| "When we constantly hear false things, we will
| be caught up in false ways of thinking, or I
| can say, we will be trapped in it. As I recall
| my early days, false ideas did exist in my
| view of Nichiren Buddhism, especially
| regarding the legitimate teachings of
| Nichiren-shoshu. At that time, I was not able
| to straighten out my thoughts sufficiently
| from the viewpoint of faith, action, study....
| If I were young now, I could study with you,
| young fellows, in these classes, taught by
| these engaged teachers."
.
. But his distorted views from Rissho were not left there
. at the University.
.
. We are reminded of Nikken's words on October 8th, 1985,
. when he attended the completion ceremony of Komyoji
. Temple, Hachioji City, Tokyo. Kotoku Hirayama, the chief
. priest of the temple, asked Nikken, "What is the biggest
. obstacle you had in your practice?" Nikken answered, "It
. is that I could not truly believe in the Gohonzon. I
. cannot believe truly now. I have to really try."
.
. Also, we are reminded of Nikken's statement that
. "Daigohonzon is a fake" from the Kawabe memo. This
. statement seems to be influenced by the author of "view
. of wood honzon is false", Minobu priest Bentetsu
. Yasunaga, who is an associate professor at Minobu's
. Rissho University and chief priest of Zenshoji Temple.
.
. In recent years, the exchange of Minobu
. priests and Nikken sect priests has become
. more frequent. Monks of the Nikken sect make
. pilgrimages to temples of Minobu sect with
. Hokkeko members, or they invite Minobu monks
. to Taisekiji. General chief of the Hokkeko
. federation, Kisoji Yanagisawa, made a
. pilgrimage to Kuonji Temple, the general head
. temple of the Minobu sect. We [the Fake
. Newsletter] have mentioned this issue before,
. and even "Emyo," one of organ papers of Nikken
. sect, could not argue against this. Taisekiji
. priests Kaido Seki, Jikei Maekawa, Kosho
. Mizushima, Sonfuku Ochiai, Gishu Funabashi,
. all made visits to Minobu's temples
. themselves. They later made excuses during
. lectures at their temples or in their temple
. newsletters, saying, "We went and saw the
. temple but did not chant."...etc.
These arguments and experiences from the afflicted should be enough
for anyone, but of course, reason never prevails with some.
More from Jon Petry,
| Of even greater amusement however are two other events.
| Shortly after the split between the SGI and the NST in the
| early 1990's the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an
| offer. They would affiliate as a lay organization within
| the Nichiren Shu and pay for all overseas missionary work,
| of course with them running it. The Nichiren Shu, having
| seen what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and
| firmly declined the offer. The second incident occurred when
| the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu and offered a million US
| dollars for a Nichiren authored Mandala. This offer was also
| rejected.
Your amusement at the distress of the SGI caused by the criminal fraud
of Nikken and crew in hijacking the high priest position of Nichiren
Shoshu ... is telling. Gloating over anyone's suffering is the
property of the devilish function. How much worse is it to gloat over
the suffering of the sangha of the votaries of the Lotus Sutra who are
followers of Nikko Shonin, when that suffering is clearly caused by an
injustice involving criminality of priests and the complicity of high
crimes of officials of the Japanese government? Certainly, this kind
of gloating is not a good cause for someone to make.
Finally, your "incidents" are presented without substantiation, Jon
Petry.
Presenting the "Who, What, When and Where" for these "incidents" would
provide a basis for fact-checking and refuting your erroneous
allegations. As they are constituted above, they are little more than
slurs and innuendo with no factual basis whatsoever. I think the "Who"
will be the key starting point.
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
Once again, the Fallacy of Interrogation. See the discussion above.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about
| democracy has been adamant about stamping out any attempts
| by its membership to adopt democratic principles in its own
| governance. Leaders within the SGI are appointed by the
| higher ups and serve at their pleasure with no
| accountability to the rank and file. In fact when SGI
| members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren Shu,
| the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI
| through proxies such as the Rubys and other made posts
| belittling that fact.
It's amazing to me that people always confuse Democracy with the
direct election of leaders, which may or may not be Democratic. For
instance, if everyone is not allowed to register or to have access to
voting once having been registered, it is not a Democracy. The direct
election of leaders is a specific implementation of political will, as
is the representative election of leaders or the parliamentary system
(party rules). You can have a direct election with only one party, is
that Democracy?
Buddhist Democracy is actually manifested by a discussion meeting in
the SGI. This is because in front of the Gohonzon, we are as the
Buddha states in the Expedient Means chapter 2 of the Lotus Sutra,
"Hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without any distinction
between us." However leaders are chosen, and no way really works
perfectly, cannot undermine the view of the Lotus Sutra, which will
always prevail.
Think of it this way, the worst leader of the Sangha in history was
Nikken Abe, and yet he did us the greatest favor in history by
excommunicating us from the monstrosity of Nichiren Shoshu as it
spiraled downwards into hellishness. No matter how you dislike your
SGI leader, can they be worse, or do better for us, than Nikken did?
[In the extreme case, logic is easily founded or confounded.]
The delusion in Nichiren Shu is that their elected leaders actually
run something, since they are like cattle to the priesthood, who rule
like the Brahmin caste of priests in every other Japanese Buddhist
School. Lamentably so.
More from Jon Petry,
| Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file
| movement towards actual financial accountability, keeping
| its finances a closely held secret. Members have no
| knowledge of what happens to their money once it is donated
| nor are they allowed a say in how it is to spent. This is
| vastly different from say NONA, the Nichiren Shu lay
| organization in the USA, which regularly provides
| information to its members as to what funds have been taken
| in and how they have been spent, including a say at the
| local level as to how they should be spent.
What follows is "In My Humble Opinion", or IMHO. In other words I
don't have a legitimate stand that is objectively supported by
defensible Logic and Reason.
Most members in the SGI-USA who have been around for a while, know
that we are not as of yet solvent (or at least that was true at the
turn of the century, and I don't think it has changed). It is the
Japanese members who largely pay our way, for which my gratitude is
unbounded, and for which reason it is important to really step up on
yearly Zaimu.
I don't think more visibility improves the picture of how our money is
spent, when it's not all our money initially. Once we actually do
support our own movement fully, more accountability might be in order.
Note that the people who scream for accountability and transparency
are not necessarily those who give more in the way of offerings, they
are more like those who tend to be political and feel neglected or out
of power, and need to grasp power through auditing the books. This is
not very productive.
The truth is that nowadays nonprofits have certain reporting
requirements to the government (since Jim Bakker, et al), and once
those are met, everything else is optional. IMHO, of course. I have
spent enough time working for fortune five hundred companies to know
that nobody gets finance right as they grow bigger. Nobody.
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
Finally from Jon Petry,
| These are but a few of the issues that have been exposed
| here on ARBN over the years and caused the SGI no small
| amount of trouble. They are inconvenient truths that Chas
| and others like him would just as soon see burried, never to
| see the light of day. So Chas avoids them through his spam.
Apparently wrong on all counts, since I have inconvenienced myself to
ravage your every untruth.
-Chas.
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
Jon Petry rebuts the Chas. reply,
> Makiguchi's Pacifism Confirmed, and Putative Scholar Brian Victoria's
> Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research Exposed, for Jon Petry -
> >From Jon Petry,
> | Chas is truly a special case. [snip the rest]
> Everyone is a special case. Your opinion of who I am and why I speak
> are your opinions, as are yours of the impact of ARBN. Slandering the
> Sangha is not a good cause.
And yet Chas in his own little way has worked hard to slander people
who have done him no harm. Spewing [his word] forth Soka Gakkai
agitprop left and right, making wild accusations unconfirmed by any
reliable source of information. However when Chas' motives for doing
so are questioned he screams like a stuck pig and runs back to his
handlers like a good little droid to come up with further slander and
half truths. This has been the hall mark of Soka Gakkai agitprop
since the 1950's.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up
> | to the Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
> Notice how, without presenting any proof, a statement is pre-
> identified as a myth. This is also, the Fallacy of Interrogation.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior
> | to WWII. However its founders, Makiguchi and Toda were not
> | pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
> Notice how you (Jon Petry) state an untruth about the SGI, and then
> immediately reverse yourself.
I didn't and you were kind enough to conform it for me. Soka Kyoiku
Gakkai was an organization whose stated goals were educational reform
whilte the Soka gakkai as it presently exists has strayed far from the
original goal and now presents itself as a religious organization.
> How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a founder of a
> group that did not exist until after the war? This logical fallacy has
> no name and is frankly pathetic. You don't even believe your own
> rhetorical excesses.
Sophistry is not a substitute for legitimate argument.
> As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis], Soka
> Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI [international
> emphasis], they really are all the same provisional organization, born
> in 1930 and going through stages of growth, much like a person does.
> Like little Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
see what I mean.
> Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the arbiter of
> what names should go with what things. Are you really suggesting that
> our organization should run their candidate names for the sangha by
> you for approval? Get real.
more sophistry and some personal attack thrown in for good measure.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | There are speeches in existence in which they affirm their
> | loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
snip of more sophistry and personal attack
> I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian Victoria's
> articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked, as he takes
> statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen priest on a rampage
> against the Lotus Sutra and its votaries.) Victoria is neither
> researcher nor scholar, in any sense that I would respect. [I have
> planned to write a toxic zen story about him, once I get some other
> more crucial things out of the way.]
I will have more to say about this post later but i did want to
comment on this little tidbit. Chas who has no academic credentials I
am aware of, as if he has such he has not shared them with the group,
has chosen to belittle and slander Dr. Victoria who is a scholar and a
respected one at that. Dr. Victoria has written various articles in
peer reviewed journals as well as books on Buddhism including some
highly critical of the role played by Buddhist organization in Japan
prior to and during World War Two. This includes information highly
critical of his own sect of Zen Buddhism which is the primary subject
of one book. Dr. Victoria has presented papers at conferences on the
subject, including the American Academy of Religions some 10+ years
ago in which he participated in panel discussions on Japanese Buddhism
with Dr. Stone and Dr. Habito among others. I was present at one such
panel discussion on pacifism and Japanese Buddhists in which he
discussed his findings and had a question from the audience from a Ms.
Virginia Strauss [?] who was then the head of the Boston based SGI run
group. She asked about the supposed pacifism of the Soka Gakkai and
Dr. Victoria explained his understanding of the situation. Ms.
Strauss suggested that she would be happy to present him with some
information he was unaware of and he told her he would welcome such an
effort. However instead of this, we have seen an attack by tame SGI
pseudo-scholars in non-peer reviewed publications twisting his words
and excoriating the man.
....................................................................
....................................................................
....................................................................
Chas. rebuts Jon Petry's rebuttal,
| And yet Chas in his own little way has worked hard to
| slander people who have done him no harm. [Snip]
Your characterizations are ludicrous and over-the-top. And how would
you know what harm has been done to whom? You spend a lot of time in
this email screaming in the mirror (projecting your anxieties over
your own out-of-control behavior). Take your own advice.
Look. I'm sure that it dismays you that your icon has made grievous
mistakes and is going to take a fall because of them. Furthermore,
some of this has been brought on by your own raising of the issue
endlessly, which caused me to deal with it, which I will pursue
straight through to the end, without fail.
It's like this: Shitei Funi, mentor and disciple are two (in
appearance) but not two (in essence), are from the same source. This
is why they stand together or fall together. Your attachment to Brian
Victoria and his mistakes, is going to figure prominently in the
speedy revelation of those errors.
____ Uncovering A Fraud ____________________________
There are famous frauds in the literature, such as those in science
(like Piltdown Man and the recent Korean Stem Cell line fiasco) which
involve falsifying evidence to support a desired result, producing a
distorted view of the historical or developmental sequence. In the
physical sciences and in paleontology, anthropology, archeology and
historiography, there are myriad examples of fraud, which always
include 2 elements: anachronism (something is misplaced, out of time
sequence) and falsification (from bad translation to outright forgery
of experimental evidence, historical documents or artifacts).
The most famous fraud of the middle ages was a forged document known
as the Donation of Constantine, which falsely ratified the gift of the
Western Roman Empire (Europe) from Emperor Constantine to Pope
Sylvester and the Catholic Church. According to the document, after
the intentional partitioning, Constantine kept the Eastern Empire
(Byzantium, including Asia Minor: Greece, Palestine, Egypt, etc.) for
himself to rule out of Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul, Turkey).
From "Western Civilization: A Brief History" 5th Ed., by Martin Perry,
p. 178,
. The humanist emphasis on historical scholarship yielded a
. method of critical inquiry that could help to undermine
. traditional loyalties and institutions. Medieval thinkers
. generally did not relate a text to its times but accepted it
. uncritically as an authoritative work of wisdom. In
. contrast, Renaissance humanists approached ancient
. civilization with a critical attitude; they studied texts in
. a historical context and examined them for authenticity and
. accuracy. The work of Lorenzo Valla (c. 1407-1457) provides
. the clearest example of this trend. Educated as a
. classicist, Valla trained the guns of critical scholarship
. on the papacy in his most famous work, Declamation
. Concerning the False Decretals of Constantine. The papal
. claim to temporal authority rested on a document that
. purported to verify the socalled Donation of Constantine,
. through which the Emperor Constantine, when he moved the
. capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople in the fourth
. century, had given the pope dominion over the entire Western
. Empire. But Valla proved that the document was based on an
. eighth-century forgery because the language at certain
. points was unknown in Constantine's time and did not come
. into use until much later.
Valla noted that this purported document of the 4th century used
language that could not have existed until the 8th century, when he
presumed it was created as a forgery. The 8th century was a time when
church disputes with monarchs, such as Charlemagne, over control of
the Holy Roman Empire were an issue.
This kind of anachronism is called a prochronism and presents an
impossibility that would require time travel, such as the digital
wristwatches that you see on the arms of revolutionary war soldiers in
movies. The other kind, a parachronism, is possible but remarkable,
like seeing a vintage 1920's car on the street driving around.
The Donation of Constantine was a prochronism, and an impossibility.
Remarkably, the Vatican banned Valla's "False Decretals"(1440), and it
was not until the beginning of the 17th century that the Vatican
finally agreed that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery, since
it had become useless in disputes with monarchs at that point.
From the Introduction to "Lorenzo Valla, Discourse on the Forgery of
the Alleged Donation of Constantine", English translation by
Christopher B. Coleman (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1922).
<http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallaintro.html>:
. The Donation of Constantine (Constitutum Constantini),
. written probably not long after the middle of the eighth
. century, became widely known through its incorporation in
. the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals (about 847-853). Parts of it
. were included in most of the medieval collections of canon
. law; Anselm's, Deusdedit's, and Gratian's great work (the
. Decretum, or Concordia discordantium canonum). It purports
. to reproduce a legal document in which the Emperor
. Constantine the Great, reciting his baptism and the cure of
. his leprosy at the hands of Sylvester, Bishop of Rome 314
. -336, confirmed the privilege of that pontiff as head of all
. the clergy and supreme over the other four patriarchates;
. conferred upon him extensive imperial property in various
. parts of the world, especially the imperial Lateran palace,
. and the imperial diadem and tiara, and other imperial
. insignia; granted the Roman clergy the rank of the highest
. Roman orders and their privileges; gave Sylvester and his
. successors freedom in consecrating men for certain orders of
. the clergy; it tells how he, Constantine, recognized the
. superior dignity of the Pope by holding the bridle of his
. horse; grants Sylvester Rome, all of Italy, and the western
. provinces, to remain forever under the control of the Roman
. See; and states his own determination to retire to Byzantium
. in order that the presence of an earthly emperor may not
. embarrass ecclesiastical authority. This remarkable document
. was almost universally accepted as genuine from the ninth to
. the fifteenth century.
.
. The question of the position of the bishop of Rome in the
. Christian Church lacks but a few generations of being as old
. as Christianity itself. His relation to secular governments
. became an acute problem as soon as the imperial government
. broke down in Italy, and has remained so to the present
. moment. For centuries the Papacy was the strongest
. institution in western Europe. While its control at any one
. time rested principally on the power it actually possessed
. and on the ability of its representatives, legal theories
. and historical documents played a not inconsiderable part in
. its rise and decline. Of these documents the Donation of
. Constantine was perhaps the most spectacular, even though it
. was not the most important. It was cited by no less than ten
. Popes of whom we know, to mention no lesser writers, in
. contentions for the recognition of papal control, and
. contributed not a little to the prestige of the Papacy. On
. the other hand, when its spuriousness became known, the
. reaction against it, as in Luther's case, contributed
. powerfully to the revolt from Rome. Its century-long
. influence entitles it to a respect difficult for any one who
. now reads it to feel. And Valla's discussion of it contains
. many interesting reflections on the secular power of the
. Papacy, perhaps the most interesting expression in this
. connection of fifteenth century Italian humanism.
.
. Among the achievements of modern historical criticism
. Valla's work was a conspicuous pioneer. Its quality and its
. importance have often been exaggerated, and as often
. underestimated. It is some satisfaction to make it more
. generally available in the original text and translation, so
. that the reader may judge for himself. A critical appraisal
. would have to take into account that Nicholas Cusanus some
. seven years earlier in his De concordantia catholica covered
. part of the same ground even better than Valla did, and
. anticipated some of his arguments. But Valla's treatise is
. more exhaustive) is in more finished and effective literary
. form, and in effect established for the world generally the
. proof of the falsity of the Donation. Moreover, for the
. first time, he used effectively the method of studying the
. usage of words in the variations of their meaning and
. application, and other devices of internal criticism which
. are the tools of historical criticism to-day. So, while
. Valla's little book may seem slight beside later
. masterpieces of investigation and beside systematic
. treatises in larger fields, it is none the less a landmark
. in the rise of a new science. I speak from personal
. experience in adding that it is still useful in college
. classes in promoting respect for, and development in,
. critical scholarship.
.
. As to Valla himself the words of Erasmus will bear
. repetition; "Valla, a man who with so much energy, zeal and
. labor, refuted the stupidities of the barbarians, saved
. half-buried letters from extinction, restored Italy to her
. ancient splendor of eloquence, and forced even the learned
. to express themselves henceforth with more
. circumspection."[2] The Italian Renaissance is much extolled
. among us, - and so little known. A short time ago diligent
. search revealed no copy of Valla's works in the United
. States, and many of the larger libraries had none of his
. separate writings. The same is doubtless true in the case of
. other great names in the Renaissance. Meanwhile, there are
. those whose profession it is to teach European history and
. who are utterly unacquainted with medieval and later Latin.
.
. The best life of Valla is that by Girolamo Mancini.[3] There
. is no satisfactory account of him in English.
.
. Valla wrote his Discourse on the Forgery of the alleged
. Donation of Constantine (Declamatio de falso credita et
. ementita donatione Constantini, also referred to as
. Libellus, and Oratio) in 1440, when he was secretary to
. Alfonso, king of Aragon, Sicily, and Naples. It may well be
. considered as part of the campaign which that king was
. conducting against Pope Eugenius IV in furtherance of his
. claims to Italian territories.
Christopher Coleman goes on to summarize the vast assortment of
prochronisms that Valla noted in his banned disproof. It hardly seems
likely that those placing his work on the list of prohibited books
misunderstood the work, or the injustice that they were perpetrating
one more time.
Note that it was a "Humanist" that uncovered this fraud and whose work
was suppressed by the Holy See, the religious authorities of his time.
Note also that this fraud led to Luther and the Protestant
Reformation.
It is no less important in this case that a fraud be unmasked. The
anachronistic view that Makiguchi's earlier loyal support of the
government (in the pre-1935 context of the an existing dispute between
the constitutional monarchists of the Diet and the emperor-is-a-god
factions of the Military) indicated a support of Imperial Way Buddhism
and the war effort at a later time is what is called a prochronism,
and that is an impossibility.
Those who nobly supported the constitutional monarchy until they were
crushed by Imperial State Zen are the noble heroes here and now,
because that pacifist constitutional monarchy currently exists in
Japan. I put forth the causal view that it exists now (in spite of
Junichiro Koizumi's moves towards militarism), primarily because of
the undying organized resistance of Makiguchi and Toda, the only
Buddhists who fought to the bitter end without fail. They won in the
end, because they were not defeated, and their view of government
literally prevailed as a result.
... How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a
... founder of a group that did not exist until after the war?
... This logical fallacy has no name and is frankly pathetic.
... You don't even believe your own rhetorical excesses.
| Sophistry is not a substitute for legitimate argument.
Sophistry [Oxford] is the use or practice of specious reasoning as an
art or dialectic exercise. I am neither artist nor exercising. My
reasoning is sincere.
When you say Makiguchi had nothing to do with the Soka Gakkai or the
SGI, and then in the same breath include both he and Toda as founders
of the selfsame organization, this is more than a malaprop, it is
evidence of cognitive dissonance with your first statement. Your
dismissal of that observation IS sophistry, however, because it cannot
be sincere.
... As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis],
... Soka Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI
... [international emphasis], they really are all the same
... provisional organization, born in 1930 and going through
... stages of growth, much like a person does. Like little
... Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
| see what I mean.
I see that you apparently refuse to allow our organization to grow and
expand and pursue our mission of Kosen Rufu. And you arrogantly and
irrationally place yourself in the position of naming authority, like
some kind of dictator. I categorically reject your attempt at
controlling that issue. Give up on it. No one in their right mind
would submit to your authority. Get real and stop taking the rejection
of your supreme rule as a personal affront.
... Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the
... arbiter of what names should go with what things. Are you
... really suggesting that our organization should run their
... candidate names for the sangha by you for approval? Get
... real.
| more sophistry and some personal attack thrown in for good
| measure.
Like I said, placing limits on your absolute power and your control
over all things is not an insult ... even though you may, in your own
mind, perceive of this as an attack on your authority. It is a
rejection of the control of the devilish function, whose minion you
apparently are, and whose complaints you reflect as the advocate for
that function of evil.
| snip of more sophistry and personal attack
Once again, your view is Tenshi-ma's, and I reject those complaints
categorically. Rejecting the control and authority of the devilish
function over the threefold world is the mission of a bodhisattva.
... I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian
... Victoria's articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked,
... as he takes statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen
... priest on a rampage against the Lotus Sutra and its
... votaries.) Victoria is neither researcher nor scholar, in
... any sense that I would respect. [I have planned to write a
... toxic zen story about him, once I get some other more
... crucial things out of the way.]
| I will have more to say about this post later but i did want
| to comment on this little tidbit. Chas who has no academic
| credentials I am aware of, as if he has such he has not
| shared them with the group, has chosen to belittle and
| slander Dr. Victoria who is a scholar and a respected one at
| that. Dr. Victoria has written various articles in peer
| reviewed journals as well as books on Buddhism including
| some highly critical of the role played by Buddhist
| organization in Japan prior to and during World War Two.
| This includes information highly critical of his own sect of
| Zen Buddhism which is the primary subject of one book. Dr.
| Victoria has presented papers at conferences on the subject,
| including the American Academy of Religions some 10+ years
| ago in which he participated in panel discussions on
| Japanese Buddhism with Dr. Stone and Dr. Habito among
| others. I was present at one such panel discussion on
| pacifism and Japanese Buddhists in which he discussed his
| findings and had a question from the audience from a Ms.
| Virginia Strauss [?] who was then the head of the Boston
| based SGI run group. She asked about the supposed pacifism
| of the Soka Gakkai and Dr. Victoria explained his
| understanding of the situation. Ms. Strauss suggested that
| she would be happy to present him with some information he
| was unaware of and he told her he would welcome such an
| effort. However instead of this, we have seen an attack by
| tame SGI pseudo-scholars in non-peer reviewed publications
| twisting his words and excoriating the man.
[ Was the phenomenon of screaming in the mirror ever morely poignantly
presented than in that last sentence fragment? ]
From what you say, Brian Victoria knew as he was publishing the first
edition of "Zen At War" that there were problems with his thesis in
chapter six (no organized resistance against Imperial State Zen after
1942). He knew that the problems were isolated to the existence of
Makiguchi and Toda, as heads of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai organization,
who after their arrest, resisted to the end and in Toda's case,
survived. He knew that his paper-thin explanation in Note 8 that they
were arrested for refusing the Shinto Talisman and not for pacifism,
would not hold. And this was because of his very own thesis in the
second half of his book that the strategy of the militarists to force
total support of the war upon the people through Imperial Way Buddhism
under the Shinto Talisman ... indicated his sheer intellectual
dishonesty through extremely compartmentalized thinking. It required
cognitive dissonance between the two halves of the book.
Instead of expending the effort to straighten out his work late in the
publication cycle, Victoria decided to straighten out the facts by
cherry picking the research and distorting it, while ignoring the
preponderance of the data regarding the career of Makiguchi, in
finding that indeed and lo, Makiguchi was not really a pacifist. This
is a fraud, clear and simple.
Worse, it is besmirching the reputation of a great man (greater than
you apparently know) for the simple purpose of Victoria's own arrogant
convenience. It is the classical Greek crime of hubris.
From "Like a Worm i' the Bud? A Heterology of Classical Greek
Slavery", by Paul Cartledge, in Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 40, No.
2. (Oct., 1993), p 174,
<http://links.jstor.org/sici?
sici=3D0017-3835%28199310%292%3A40%3A2%3C163%3ALAWITB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M>:
. Hubris has entered our own language and dictionaries with a
. peculiarly theological association: 'overweening pride
. towards the gods' (C.O.D.). But as S.R.E. Fisher has
. demonstrated time and again, hubris meant fundamentally
. transgressive violence, and in particular the sort of
. violence that transgressed the sharp boundary drawn in
. Athenian ideology between free and slave, or citizen and
. non-citizen. As Fisher has also pointed out, in ancient
. discussions of the aims and effects of social actions inside
. Greek communities, central importance was attributed to the
. concepts of status, of honour and shame. So here with the
. public action against hubris: for what this charge in effect
. alleged was that the defendant had committed the public
. crime of treating a citizen (who was by definition 'free'
. - psychologically, legally, and politically) as if he were a
. slave. As such, the graphi hubreos was 'the title of the
. most serious crime in the area of offences against the
. person'.
To be quick and to the point, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi is not your slave,
Brian Victoria. Make or preserve your career or reputation (or selfish
convenience) on the back of some other unfortunate victim.
Let's talk about peer review. Peer review on academic journals is
mostly skin deep, and only a test of the appearance of the work. One's
reliable history is the major factor in acceptance for publication.
So, for scientific journals, no one re-runs your experiments before
your data and conclusions are published, because there isn't time or
frankly, enough energy. If someone subjects your data set to a
statistical test which might reveal a skew due to dropping off some
part of the data set, or other foolish fabrication, that's over and
above the call of typical reviewer duty.
What does occur when a fraud is detected afterwards, is an article
retraction by the journal to "correct the literature".
There is a fine discussion of this in the NPR Science Friday program
about peer review in journals during the breaking case of the Korean
Stem Cell fraud in 2005. (At the time of the show, the full truth was
not yet known.) It is located here:
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=3D5058361>
By the way, the non-peer-reviewed online journal (Global Buddhism)
that Koichi Miyata published in is the very same non-peer-reviewed
online journal that Brian Victoria did his evil in, initially.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
As far as my anonymity and my credentials are concerned, they are also
anonymous. No comment.
But you are right, as I review the literature through the JSTOR
library system, a literature search on "Makiguchi Victoria" only
produces Victoria's erroneous article. This is anathema.
____ Call For Articles _____________________________
<Sound Effect http://ava7.com/sounds/animals/lion-3.wav>
Henceforth, I am openly calling for articles in peer-reviewed
publications (optimally showing up in JSTOR), regarding this matter.
(There are benefits, career and otherwise, to academics both youthful
and aged, who expose a fraud as profound and over-reaching as this
one.)
All aspects of Victoria's fraud should be investigated and publicly
refuted.
New translations of his putative "translation" work in all of his
articles and books should be compared with his work and his now-
questionable conclusions, which should be examined very closely.
Clearly there is great ignorance, at least in the English-reading-
West, of the political debate surrounding the Meiji Constitution
between the Tatsukichi Minobe faction in the Diet (Constitutional
Monarchists) and the Militarists (Absolute Monarchists), before 1935.
I believe this needs exposition in depth with a special treatment of
the errors of Victoria. Ignorance is the breeding ground for distorted
views that lead to conclusions and bad publications in the literature,
requiring retractions by journals. This sorry state of affairs should
be remedied.
The optimal result would be a multi-volume modern history of religious
influences on Japanese political and social life. From the Shogunate's
end to Meiji and the struggles between the Diet and the Militarists
who prevailed in 1935, the march to world war, defeat and destruction,
MacArthur, return to constitutional monarchy and the changes since
then. Cover the same ground that Victoria covers on Imperial Way
Buddhism, Imperial State Zen, but without the distortions providing
cover for his Zen beliefs by gratuitously understating the resistance
of others to the war effort.
____ Healing a Wound _______________________________
It took most of a millenium to finally unmask the falsehood that was
the Donation of Constantine. During that time, darkness ruled European
life under a false legacy of the possession of nations by arrogant
religious authorities.
Were no one to intervene in this, it could take that long or longer to
remove the stain of a powerful academic like Victoria from the
reputation of any man, even one so wonderful as Mr. Makiguchi. This
evil cannot be allowed to persist.
In a public meeting between President Ikeda and Nobel Peace Prize
Laureate Betty Williams, on November 6th, 2006: "Buddhism teaches that
anger can have both positive and negative aspects. I appreciate the
true value of your actions in that context - anger at great evil is
great good. Cowardice is never right."
Tatsukichi Minobe's pre-1935 view, which predominated in the Diet of a
time before the Rape of Nanking, of a constitutional monarchy ruled by
the people's representatives survives today, precisely because of
Makiguchi's sacrifice and Toda's determination to never yield.
The path not taken at first, was the true path taken by these heroic
men, standing alone.
That is the causal view of the political transformation of Japan,
according to the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin. It only takes one
person to transform a nation and to change history.
-Chas.
_________________________________________
Reading from "The Entity of the Mystic Law", Writings of Nichiren
Daishonin, pp. 419-420 ...
When we consider the meaning of these various passages, we understand
that none of the ordinary people and sages of the three vehicles, the
five vehicles, [Note: The five vehicles refer to the three vehicles of
voice-hearers, cause-awakened ones, and bodhisattvas plus the human
and heavenly realms.] the seven expedient means, the nine worlds, or
the four flavors and three teachings can be called Mahayana followers
who are entities of Myohorenge- kyo. Though there are Buddhas in these
teachings, they are Buddhas of the provisional teachings and cannot be
called Buddhas in the true sense. This is because the Buddhas of the
provisional teachings in their three bodies [Note: In sutras other
than the Lotus Sutra, the three bodies were held to exist separately,
such as Mahavairochana in the Dharma-body aspect and Amida in the
reward-body aspect. However, on the basis of the doctrine of three
thousand realms in a single moment of life, T'ien-t'ai maintained that
the three bodies are not separate entities but three integral aspects
of one Buddha.] have not yet freed themselves from impermanence. How
then could beings in realms other than Buddhahood be [called entities
of Myoho-renge-kyo]? That is why it is said that a person of humble
station born in the Latter Day of the Law is more worthy of respect
than the kings and high ministers who lived during the two thousand
years of the Former and Middle Days.
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
Prochronists Brian Victoria, Jon Petry and now Robert Kisala Risk
Becoming Liars Through the Repetition of Debunked Falsehoods
Jon Petry continues to misunderstand the history of Japan, in
particular, the events of 1935 and the "Organ Theory Affair" regarding
the occurrences in the Diet surrounding Minobe Tatsukichi. There were
two major factions, the Constitutional Monarchists who were liberal
and progressive, and the Absolute Monarchists supported by the
militarists who wanted total control over the government, the people
and society, and to quell any voices that might disagree with their
plans.
Minobe's Organ Theory made the case that the Emperor was an organ of
the government and not an absolute ruler. This caused an uproar which
ended with the militarists having total authority to do as they
wished: and their wish was total Pacific war. Secretly, the Princes
and the Emperor were backing the Absolute Monarchists, but the
Constitutionalists never knew this.
So in their writings and in attempting to pull the country back into
the center over a long struggle ending disastrously in 1935, the
Constitutional Monarchists would write expressing loyalty to the
Emperor pleading for a middle way to escape the spiral down into
madness that was coming. The fact that there was no hope for their
cause, does not impugn their efforts to attempt to hold off the
darkness that was descending. That piece of intellectual dishonesty is
utterly disgusting on the part of Brian Victoria, Robert Kisala and
Jon Petry. They should be shunned by academia as prochronists
perpetuating a fraud.
With that history in mind, let's examine Jon Petry's confusion
regarding the misleading writings and intellectual dishonesty of Brian
Victoria and Robert Kisala.
From a recent posting of Jon Petry:
| Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton in the Closet? By Brian
| Daizen Victoria, Senior Lecturer Centre for Asian
| Studies, University of Adelaide
|.
| In both EBW and David Chappell's Buddhist Peacework
| (BP), Tsunesaburo Makiguchi is presented as another
| foundational exemplar of Engaged Buddhism. Makiguchi's
| Buddhist faith, it is claimed, impelled him not only to
| advocate a humane and peaceful world but to sacrifice
| his very life in resisting Japanese militarism.
|.
| In an article in EBW entitled "The Angulimala Lineage:
| Buddhist Prison Ministries," Virginia Cohn Parkum and J.
| Anthony Stultz describe Makiguchi (and his disciple,
| Josei Toda) as having "experienced incarceration in
| Japan during World War II for resisting the war effort
| and refusing to follow state Shinto worship" (p. 360). A
| second article in the same book, "Racial Diversity in
| the Soka Gakkai" by David Chappell, states that "when
| Makiguchi refused to support government thinking during
| the war, he was arrested in 1943 and died in prison on
| November 18, 1944 at the age of seventy-three" (p. 216).
|.
| Though somewhat more ambivalent, Peter Harvey adds his
| voice to the chorus in An Introduction to Buddhist
| Ethics (IBE) where he writes, "In the Second World War,
| most Buddhist schools agreed to support the nation in
| its efforts. Seemingly the one exception was the Soka
| Gakkai, which refused to take part in this unified
| front" (p. 270). Nevertheless, none of these voices can
| compare with that of Daisaku Ikeda, president of Soka
| Gakkai International, who has the strongest words of
| praise for Makiguchi. In an essay included in BP
| entitled "The SGI's Peace Movement," Ikeda writes:
All of those issues are relevant to the discussion of Makiguchi and
his views in wartime, and Jon Petry will go on to distort those
issues.
However, bringing up the following material from 1903 is really a red
herring.
Makiguchi's 1903 writings were from a time long before he came into
contact with Nichiren's Buddhism, when he was basically under earlier
influences of the religion of his family, and are simply not relevant
to the point that Victoria, Kisala and Petry are trying to make: that
he might not have been imprisoned for resisting the War, or even that
he might not have been a pacifist AT THAT MUCH LATER TIME.
One can argue over his pacifistic tendencies in 1903, which
undoubtedly were in conflict at that time with his nationalism, but
that does not in any way pertain to the occurrences in the middle and
late 1930s and the early 1940s. These are truly specious as well as
unjustified and distorted assertions.
Petry continues:
| Early in the twentieth century (1903), President
| Makiguchi published The Geography of Human Life (Jinsei
| Chirigaku), which strongly advocated a shift to
| humanitarian competition at a time when imperialism and
| colonialism were still the prevailing modes of
| international relations. He analyzed competition among
| nations as consisting of the phases of: military
| competition, political competition, economic
| competition, and humanitarian competition. He stressed
| that humanity's aim should be humanitarian competition
| (p. 136).
|.
| Robert Kisala, however, once again presents us with an
| alternative view. He begins by noting that the central
| focus of Makiguchi's first book, Jinsei Chirigaku, was
| on "drawing connections between geography and everyday
| life and advocating the study of geography through field
| trips and other hands-on experiences" (p. 75). As for
| Makiguchi's alleged war resistance, Kisala explains that
| the crux of the matter was Makiguchi's refusal to
| venerate a talisman of Amaterasu, the Sun Goddess,
| issued by the central Shinto shrine at Ise. It was this
| refusal, he claims, not war resistance, which led
| Makiguchi and some twenty other leaders of what was then
| known as Soka Kyoiku Gakkai (Academic Society for Value-
| Creating Education) to be arrested on charges of lese
| majest=E8 and the violation of the Peace Preservation Law
| on July 6, 1943.
This skin-deep analysis, more appropriate to a high school paper,
completely ignores the contextual fact that Shinto was the religion
that identified the Emperor as a kami (god) superior to the hoteke
(the buddhas). That meant the Emperor was the country itself: the
government, the military and the war effort ... and that resisting
Shinto was resisting the Emperor's war. Resisting the state religion
of Imperial Way Buddhism (according to Brian Victoria's very own book)
was resisting Imperial State Zen at war in the Pacific.
This evil Shinto view had evolved according to the honji suijaku
theory (13th century Tendai slanders of Dengyo) and the later
foundations of the Sanno Ichijitsu cult of worshipping Ieyasu as a god
(laid down by Tenkai, another Tendai slanderer of Dengyo, who inserted
lies into his mentor's mouth stating that the gods were greater than
the buddhas, and that the greatest god of all was Ieyasu), all of
which was inherited by the Meiji Restoration to build a new Emperor
Cult, which came to fruition in 1935.
[See my other posting regarding the Toynbee analysis of the Fuji
School for vastly greater detail on this evil.]
Petry continues:
| Kisala concludes his study of Makiguchi by pointing out
| that while "Soka Gakkai literature often claims that
| this persecution was the result of an anti-military
| stance taken by Makiguchi. . . my reading of the
| situation indicates that Makiguchi's opposition was more
| narrowly focused on the religious policy of the
| government" (p. 90).
The utter ignorance of this statement is pathetic. There was no
separation at all between the Emperor and the War effort, in the
religious view of Shinto. Shinto equals War. It has no other purpose
than the absolute power of a monarch leading to War. It was invented
and reinvented by the Tendai at the behest of the Zen bakufu (military
government) over several centuries expressly for the purpose of
governing through distortion of Buddhism. [The fact that it is a
distortion that suits Jon Petry and his Five Senior Priest cronies at
Minobu, is no accident.]
Now, Kisala and Petry go back to the irrelevant evidence of
Makiguchi's writings nearly thirty years before his conversion to
Nichiren Buddhism, with some crazy idea that it informs us of his
views and actions in the middle of the struggle leading to the events
of 1935 and the later events of the early 1940s.
Simply and obviously irrelevant, a red herring is a red herring no
matter how many times you repeat the fallacy: it remains fallacious
reasoning. Indeed, repetition of an obvious fallacy is the propaganda
technique numero uno of the fascists themselves, the big lie that
becomes more acceptable when it is repeated endlessly (Josef
Goebbels).
Petry continues:
| This writer's research on Makiguchi shows that not only
| is Kisala's conclusion correct but that he revealed only
| a small part of the story. That is to say, while
| Makiguchi may, as Ikeda claims, have looked forward to
| the coming of a future world based on "humanitarian
| competition," that world did not yet exist. In Jinsei
| Chirigaku, Makiguchi described the actual world he
| inhabited as follows:
|.
| "It is my view that the sole cause of the present danger
| to world peace is Russia's promotion of its own
| viability. That is to say, in the present age of
| economic struggle for existence, Russia seeks to exploit
| weaknesses among the international powers in order to
| acquire what it must have: access to the oceans. Thus it
| is in the process of expanding in three directions, from
| the Dardanelle Straits in Eastern Europe to the Persian
| Gulf in western Asia and the Yellow Sea in the Far
| East." (Makiguchi 1903:950-951).
|
| In identifying Russia as being solely responsible for
| endangering world peace, Makiguchi adopted a stance
| identical with that of the Japanese government of his
| day. Japan used this alleged threat to justify its
| surprise attack on Russia the following year,
| ostensively to protect Korea's independence and prevent
| further Russian encroachments on Chinese territory, most
| especially Manchuria. The reality, however, was that
| following its victory over Russia in 1905, Japan moved
| to take control of Korea for itself, turning it into a
| full-fledged colony in 1910. As for Manchuria, Japan
| steadily increased its control of this area of China
| until it established the puppet state of Manchukuo in
| February 1932.
The entirety of Jon's and Kisala's irrelevant argument, here, has been
completely debunked already, SEVERAL TIMES IN SEVERAL PLACES.
I refer you to the first time that Koichi Miyata debunked Brian
Victoria's canard (the fourth time that Victoria vomited forth this
filth, polluting the public marketplace of ideas):
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage
. from Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The
. Geography of Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that
. Russia was engaged in a policy of expansionism in the
. search for year-round harbors. Victoria asserts that
. this world view was identical to that of the government
. of Japan, a view used to justify the Russo-Japanese War
. (1904-1905), then the annexation of the Korean peninsula
. (1910) and the founding of the puppet state of Manchukuo
. (1932). Victoria's assertion, and his implicit criticism
. of Makiguchi, simplistically links analysis of the
. global situation with the policies taken in response to
. that. Makiguchi was merely voicing what was then the
. accepted understanding of the geopolitical motives for
. Russia's expansionist policies, a view held not only by
. the Japanese government, but shared by the British, with
. whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
. Certainly I know of no scholar of political geography
. who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one that
. Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not
. only Makiguchi but everyone who studies political
. geography guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism:
.
. From "A Skeleton in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
. <http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
So, this was the actually the view of all of the allies of Britain at
the turn of the 20th century, and not some Japanese imperialistic
view.
Stop repeating this nonsense, Jon Petry and Robert Kisala, you are
obviously lying in your deliberate repetition of debunked falsehoods
(like Propaganda Minister Goebbels and Brian Victoria).
Leaving aside the wretchedness of your methods and lack of connection
with any rational semblence of truth, this line of discussion
continues to be a red herring, by delving again into Makiguchi's
decades past ideas, way before Makiguchi's conversion to Nichiren
Buddhism.
I can understand this from a non-believer like Kisala, but Jon Petry
considers himself a believer, does he not?
Are not people allowed to change and grow as they age, or are we all
simply static entities?
King Ashoka went from being a cruel conqueror to being a peaceful
Buddhist, is that only OK for him to change his life, because he is
ancient history?
I mean, (if it's OK with your Lordship) is it satisfactory to you if
we practice human revolution, even we mortals who are less than your
perfection?
Petry continues:
| Significantly, neither Ikeda nor Kisala mention a second
| seminal book Makiguchi first published in November 1912.
| Entitled Kyodoka Kenky=C2 (Study of Folk Culture), this
| volume was an extension of the ideas contained in Jinsei
| Chirigaku, with special emphasis on their relevance to
| the life and structures of local communities. Makiguchi
| wanted rural educators (rather than the central
| government's bureaucrats) to take the lead in developing
| educational initiatives attuned to local communities.
| But toward what end? The book's concluding chapter
| explained Makiguchi's ultimate goal for education as
| follows:
|.
| "Regardless of social class, everyone should be
| conscious of the nation's destiny, harmonizing their
| lives with that destiny and, at all times, prepared to
| share that destiny. It is for this reason that the work
| of national education is to prepare ourselves to do
| exactly this, omitting nothing in the process. . . .
| However, in order to do this, and prior to placing
| ourselves in service to the state, we should first
| contribute to the local area that has nurtured us and
| with which we share common interests." (Makiguchi
| 1933:460-461).
|.
| It should be noted that Makiguchi wrote the above
| specifically for an enlarged 1933 edition of this book
| (see Makiguchi 1933:6). Despite championing rural
| education under local control, by 1933 both he and his
| publisher, none other than Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, shared a
| vision of education that was as "state-centered" as any
| of his contemporaries.
|.
Once again, this nonsense of yours has been debunked by Koichi Miyata
in the same article. Since you appear incapable of clicking and
reading this article, I have included it in total at the end of this
writing. Here is the passage debunking your (above) hypothesis:
. Secondly, Victoria quotes an extract from Makiguchi's
. book Kyodoka Kenkyu (A Study of Folk Culture), in which
. Makiguchi notes that the state plays an important role
. in the lives of citizens. From this, Victoria draws the
. conclusion that as the Japan moved closer to war,
. Makiguchi adopted the view that education should be "in
. service to the state". (Victoria states that Makiguchi
. added this section for the 1933 revised edition of the
. book. This is incorrect, as it appears in the first
. edition published in 1912.) Since the publication of
. Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi had consistently emphasized
. the formation of identity on three levels-that of a
. person's local community, the national and global
. levels. Within this context, and against a backdrop of
. global competition for empire, he placed particular
. importance on national independence. This is hardly
. unreasonable. Japan was one of only a handful of
. countries in Asia that had maintained independence amid
. encroachment by the Western powers, and Makiguchi was
. well aware of the miserable circumstances of colonized
. peoples. What we may find problematic-in terms of the
. current view that controlling peoples is intrinsically
. wrong-is that Makiguchi did not say enough after Japan
. itself acquired colonies, omitting to comment on the
. issue of independence for these colonized peoples, and
. only suggesting that imperialism was not the optimal
. policy choice because of the financial burden involved.
. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to my essay "Tsunesaburo
. Makiguchi's Theory of the State" in TJOS, in which I
. discuss Makiguchi's view that imperialistic-military and
. economic-competition should be supplanted by a
. cooperative sense of community, what he called
. "humanitarian competition."
Miyata's article "Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's Theory of the State" is
located at:
http://www.tmakiguchi.org/assets/images/miyataforIOPspecialissue.pdf
I wonder if you are capable of clicking and reading this article, or
will you continue to repeat that debunked piece of propaganda, too?
Next time, I will include that article as well, if you continue to
prevaricate, by floating this canard.
By the way, note the date 1933. Even according to your prochronistic
reasoning, Jinsei Chirigaku was enlarged and published just at the
point, 2 years before the crisis and catastrophe of the Constitutional
Monarchists in 1935, when the Constitutionalists were desperately
trying to pull the government back to the middle, while it was sliding
away from them to the far right and utter chaos.
The Constitutionalist case would not be furthered by separation from
the the ruling government, or by separating from the nobility that
they were trying to influence, in vain as it would turn out.
So they made their plea from the center. In support of the Emperor. As
Tony Blair has noted, all progressive governments that survive must
rule from the center. Always from the broad center of the people. The
fact that it did not work this time is not the fault of their
rhetorical support of the Emperor, while trying to influence the
royals.
Petry continues:
| Only a few years later, millions of young Japanese would
| be called on to sacrifice their lives, and those of
| their victims, in the process of "placing [them]selves
| in service to the state." Thus, Makiguchi's quarrel with
| the central government's bureaucrats over the control of
| local education was not about whether or not service to
| the state should be promoted, but simply how best to
| attain that goal.
That few years, after 1935 and a sharp break with the last glimmer of
hope in 1933 when Makiguchi wrote, does not impugn the pre-Absolute
Monarchy attempts of the Constitutional Monarchists in 1933 to
preserve a progressive government in Japan. Those failed efforts were
noble, and had they succeeded, could have prevented much death and
destruction. THIS, TOO IS PACIFISM !!!
And during the last of the war years, Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda were
imprisoned, and they were the only ones who never gave in to the end,
to Mr. Makiguchi's death, and Mr. Toda's unyielding and undefeated
release from prison. The honor of Japan's Buddhists resided only with
these two in the end. Certainly not with Zen and not with Minobu and
their subjugated temples.
And, oh, by the way, Jon Petry. Your show is slipping.
Your evil Minobu sect (Nichiren Shu and the other subjugated temples)
were not hiding away somewhere. They were unabashed cheerleaders for
the war effort and the attack on Pearl Harbor, even worse than the
evil Fuji School Priesthood.
They bowed to the Shinto talisman, that slanderous object of worship,
which stands in opposition to the Lotus Sutra and the Gohonzon, and
which was the direct cause of war, chaos and holocaust.
They bowed to the Shinto talisman and cheered as defeat after glorious
defeat occurred, with the mass suicide of division after division,
running out of the caves burning from the flamethrower's napalm.
Minobu cheered as the kamikaze flew and they cheered as the Yamamoto
went down with all hands without inflicting any damage whatsoever on
the Allies.
So noble.
Your Minobu priests cheered as Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned.
And damn them to hell for it and all the rest of their distorting
garbage Buddhism.
Petry continues:
| If, as the preceding quote demonstrates, Makiguchi
| believed the ultimate goal of education was to serve the
| state, what was the emperor's role in fostering this?
| Was Makiguchi in any way opposed or critical of either
| the emperor or the imperial system?
|.
| Though critical of patriotism based on "superficial
| reasons," Makiguchi wrote, "His Majesty, the Emperor, on
| whom is centered the exercise of Imperial authority,
| does so through his military and civilian officials. The
| reason he exercises this authority is definitely not for
| his own benefit. Rather, as leader and head of the
| entire nation, he graciously exerts himself on behalf of
| all the people. It is for this reason that in our
| country, the state and the emperor, as head of state,
| should be thought of as completely one and indivisible.
| We must make our children thoroughly understand that
| loyal service to their sovereign is synonymous with love
| of country. . . I believe it is only in so doing that we
| can clarify the true meaning of the phrase "loyalty to
| one's sovereign and love of country" [Ch=E2kun Aikoku]
| (Makiguchi 1933:411- 412).
This repeated nonsense of yours HAS ALSO already been repeatedly
debunked, which ALSO throws into question, ONCE AGAIN, your putative
intellectual honesty, Jon Petry. Here is Koichi Miyata's argument from
"A Skeleton In The Closet?"
. Thirdly there is the problem of the emperor system.
. Quoting a section from Kyodoka Kenkyu in which Makiguchi
. argues that loyalty to the emperor is synonymous with
. love of one's country, Victoria implies that Makiguchi's
. view was identical to that of the military government.
. This, however, is a far too loosely framed argument that
. ignores the interpretative issues associated with the
. 1889 Meiji Constitution. The preamble to the Meiji
. Constitution recognizes the supreme authority of the
. emperor, while Article 3 declares the sacred nature of
. the emperor, and Article 4 his sovereign rights over the
. state -- making the state and the emperor system
. inseparable. If we stress the supreme authority of the
. emperor, the emperor is then cast in the role of
. absolute monarch. If we consider instead the role of the
. Constitution as a brake on the supreme authority of the
. emperor, he becomes a constitutional monarch. The former
. view is represented by the imperial fascism supported by
. the military regime, while the latter corresponds to
. Tatsukichi Minobe's theory of the emperor as an organ of
. the state. From the era of Taisho democracy through to
. the suppression of Minobe's theory in 1935, this view
. held sway among constitutional scholars and members of
. the Diet. The idea that loyalty =3D patriotism is common
. to both views, and by aligning Makiguchi with the
. imperial fascism of the military simply on the basis of
. his comments here, Victoria again appears determined to
. ignore the written record of Makiguchi's thoughts. From
. his earliest writings, Makiguchi viewed the emperor as a
. constitutional monarch, and was critical of moves to
. make the emperor's powers absolute.
Once again, Prochronists like Victoria, Kisala and Petry, will always
judge a person's writings before the emergence of Fascism, in a post-
Fascist light, to make whatever conclusion they desire seem correct.
In this way they persecute the noble efforts of those who tried to
forestall catastrophe, by twisting the truth and demonizing their
nobility.
The State Fascism triumphant in 1935 was not the same as the
Constitutional Monarchists struggling to survive as part of the Diet
in 1933. Got that?
It is truly shameful, how Victoria, Kisala and Petry can exploit that
subtle difference in timing, making fools of the public. But that is
indeed what they do. And they call themselves academics. And people
continue to publish their garbage writings.
More from Jon Petry:
| In urging his fellow educators to make the nation's
| children "thoroughly understand that loyal service to
| their sovereign is synonymous with love of country" we
| once again find Makiguchi situated squarely in the
| mainstream of the nationalistic fervor that increasingly
| came to characterize the 1930s. No matter how
| Makiguchi's position toward the emperor may have changed
| later on, in 1933 Makiguchi advocated the widely held
| proposition that love of country was synonymous with
| loyal service to the emperor. It was exactly this
| educational ideology that provided the foundation for
| the Japanese military's demand of absolute and
| unquestioning obedience from its soldiers, claiming that
| "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
| emperor."
This time as well, Petry is repeating a section of Victoria's work
that has been thoroughly debunked over and over by Koichi Miyata in "A
Skeleton In The Closet?":
. Victoria mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers
. that "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
Does Petry simply refuse to read the debunking of his incorrect
positions? Can he not see what is apparent to one and all, that his
autistic lying, like a network device that is an open emitter, only
serves to undermine his validity on every point he makes? Endlessly
reformulating an erroneous statement into a new posting does not make
it true, in spite of Goebbels' guidance to propagandists.
And trashing Makiguchi and Toda without regard to the truth of their
heroism, does not make the devilish priests at Minobu and the other
Nichiren temples into saints. The were, are and will remain war-
mongering slanderers of Buddhism.
More from Jon Petry:
| Makiguchi also touched on Japan's colonization of Korea,
| claiming that Korea, prior to being formally annexed by
| Japan in August 1910, had been in such a state of
| anarchy that it was unable either to defend itself or
| protect its citizens. Not only that, the Chinese people
| presently found themselves in exactly the same situation
| (see Makiguchi 1933:413).
Once again, one does not succeed in influencing the powerful back into
the center, by picking unnecessary fights about past history that
cannot be changed now. Or by encouraging disloyalty against the leader
of the nation, whom you are trying to influence.
This (1933) was the time when fate still held in the balance, when the
course had not been decided (apparently), and when there was still
hope. Should they have given in prematurely?
That appears to be what Kisala and Petry think.
They would rather be viewed in a better light by history, than fight
in an effort to change the outcome. How determinist of them, what
fatalism that is, and such intellectual detachment is merely a
disguise for clucking defeatism.
It is precisely the hopeless causes that require the strongest fight
and the greatest courage. Get your ass off the sidelines and into the
fight, Jon Petry. You and your Tendai-influenced kin need to discard
the notion of "original enlightenment", which is really the devilish
function's most excellent disguise. You cannot attain the way by
having an opinion of Buddhism that differs from Nichiren Daishonin.
You are either with him, or you are in Avichi Hell:
From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p. 77-78, Chapter
Seven - The Parable of the Phantom City, Point Seven, on the passage
"Now you must press forward diligently / so that together you may
[all] reach the place where the treasure is.",
. The Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings says: The
. word "all" refers to the Ten Worlds. The word "together"
. refers to the words [of the Buddha in chapter two, Expedient
. Means] "hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without
. any distinction between us." The word "reach" means to
. arrive at the level of the highest effect, the state of
. Buddhahood. "The place where the treasure is," the treasure
. land, is the holy mountain, Eagle Peak.
.
. Nichiren and his followers, those who chant Nam-myoho-renge
. -kyo, one and all will "together reach the place where the
. treasure is." This one word "together" means that, as long
. as they are together with Nichiren, they will reach the
. treasure land. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT TOGETHER WITH HIM, THEY
. WILL FALL INTO THE GREAT CITADEL OF THE AVICHI HELL.
When Nichiren placed all of Buddhism in the hands of Nikko Shonin,
your ancestral mentors (the Five Senior Priests) ignored the final
words of their dying mentor.
Now you are in Avichi Hell as a result.
While you still live, Jon Petry, you can still escape this hellish
condition by following Nichiren's final admonition. (Yes, even after
all of this evil ranting filth.)
By that, I don't mean joining your fellow Avichi denizens, the
Transfer Box-less followers of Nikken in Nichiren Shoshu. I mean
coming to the SGI. That is the only exit strategy that is sufficient
to make an escape from your present predicament.
More from Jon Petry:
| The clear implication of the latter claim was that
| China, like Korea before it, would greatly benefit from
| Japanese control. This was of course a sentiment shared
| by the Japanese government, as seen, for example, in the
| Amau Statement of April 1934 issued by its Foreign
| Office. China, the statement declared, was not to avail
| itself of the assistance of any country other than
| Japan.
That detailed implication of Makiguchi's that you describe is
actually, clearly and simply, a detailed inference on your part.
Your inference does not equate to Makiguchi's implication.
Makiguchi did not make that prediction: "will greatly benefit from".
Stop putting your thoughts and words into Makiguchi's mouth. If he
didn't say what you really wished that he had, then there is a reason
for it.
Cease your distortions, bad translations and quotes out of context.
More from Jon Petry:
| This said, it is equally clear that Makiguchi's chief
| concern in writing favorably about Japan's expansion
| onto the Asian continent was, as ever, directed toward
| the manner in which Japan's children were to be
| educated. Makiguchi saw, in a discussion of Korea's
| recent past and China's present, a golden opportunity to
| demonstrate to Japanese children just how fortunate they
| were to be living in Japan. Makiguchi continued:
|.
| "It is when we look at these concrete examples [of Korea
| and China] that thoughts about our own country emerge. .
| . . The result is that we cannot help but feel grateful
| and want to repay the debt of gratitude we owe [the
| state]. The practical application of the study of folk
| culture is to provide the fundamental basis for an
| understanding of the state by having [our children] look
| at situations like these that are right before their
| very eyes. I feel very deeply that we must vigorously
| seek to create persons of character who will in the
| future lead a state-centered life, having first acquired
| the germ of the idea of serving the state at the town
| and village levels." (Makiguchi 1933:413).
First off, I have not seen this translation, which is in direct
contradiction to Makiguchi's views, and since all your other
translation errors have been extremely self-serving to your purpose of
trashing Makiguchi, I do not trust this little bit regarding "state-
centered", either.
Since you have ignored Koichi Miyata's references to Makiguchi's other
works delineating his views clearly, I will refer you to President
Ikeda's speech at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in 1996, which appeared
again recently in the World Tribune (10/30/09):
. Two years later, on Nov. 18, 1930, together with his
. disciple and fellow teacher, Josei Toda, Mr. Makiguchi
. published the first volume of
. 'The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy,' and
. it is from this day that we date the establishment of
. our organization.
.
. 'Soka' is Japanese for "value creation." From Mr.
. Makiguchi's viewpoint, the most fundamental and central
. value is that of life itself. Taking into account John
. Dewey's pragmatism, Mr. Makiguchi stated that "the only
. value in the true sense is that of life itself. All
. other values arise solely within the context of
. interaction with life." The fundamental criterion for
. value, in Mr. Makiguchi's view, is whether something
. adds to or detracts from, advances or hinders, the human
. condition.
Since Mr Makiguchi's central thesis is LIFE-CENTERED, as the name of
our organization states clearly (and not state-centered), I think we
can dispose of your putative translation into the same waste-bin as
the other putative translations leading to the rest of the distorting
rhetoric of Victoria, Kisala and Petry.
I repeat once again regarding your continuing fallacious reasoning as
well: Prochronists like Victoria, Kisala and Petry, will always judge
a person's writings before the emergence of Fascism (1933), in a post-
Fascist light (1935 and later), to make whatever conclusion they
desire seem correct. In this way they persecute the noble efforts of
those who tried to forestall catastrophe, by twisting the truth and
demonizing their nobility.
To them, social criticism was the only correct line of attack, since
the Constitutionalists SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that the cause was lost, in
the view of Prochronism. The view of Prochronists is always, that you
should have known the future, that you are to be judged in your
actions in the past, by the unfortunate turn of future events against
your cause and efforts, even when you were simply trying to avert that
future disaster.
Hence, trying to avert disaster by political and rhetorical means is
viewed by the Prochronists as complicity with the perpetration of the
disaster. The only Prochronist-righteous course is to stand on the
sidelines with a carefully positioned (and historically preserved)
letter of protest, without taking any risk by participating in the
fray.
No Philsopher of any note encourages this inactive ethical stance,
they all, to a man (Kant, Descartes, Mill, Hegel, etc.) demand that we
take action to avert disaster, or be branded as cowardly.
This is pure sophistry with an evil purpose, specifically to find
fault where there is none.
More from Jon Petry:
| Makiguchi demonstrates yet again that his ultimate
| concern was implanting in Japan's children a willingness
| to serve the state. Makiguchi simply believed he knew
| how to do this in a more effective way than the central
| government's bureaucrats who showed such little concern
| or understanding of local conditions. While it is true
| that Makiguchi was arrested in July 1943 for refusing to
| worship a talisman of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu issued
| by the Ise shrine, this had nothing to do with being
| disloyal to the emperor.
Pure unadulterated Petry-thought with absolutely no foundation in
fact.
This completely ignores the facts that in Shinto, the Emperor is the
god above the buddhas, whose body is the state, whose word is divine
law, and whose war is a religious practice. Resisting Shinto is
resisting the Emperor's divine war. Imperial Way Buddhism (Shinto) IS
Imperial State Zen and the Zen War on humanity. They are not separate,
not even in the tiniest way.
You cannot defeat an evil by bowing to it.
The absolute monarch must not be obeyed in slandering Buddhism, the
Shinto Talisman and everything it represented (Imperial Way Buddhism,
Imperial State Zen, and the public acknowledgement of divinity of the
Emperor, which is inseperable from supporting his divine Pacific War)
even though required by law, must all be rejected.
The people must not bow down to Shinto, or the world falls into hell,
never to emerge.
More from Jon Petry:
| As he informed his police
| interrogators, "I think it is, for we Japanese, the Way
| of the Subject to be loyal. This is what I have realized
| from my study of the truth of the Lotus Sutra" (Akashi &
| Mats=E2ra, eds. 1975:172). Further, as contradictory as it
| may seem, Makiguchi's refusal to worship a talisman of
| the Sun Goddess did not even signify a lack of respect
| for this alleged progenitress of the Imperial family.
| Makiguchi made this clear when he told the police,
|.
| "The Sun Goddess is the venerable ancestress of our
| Imperial Family, her divine virtue having been
| transmitted to each successive emperor who ascended the
| throne up to and including the present emperor. Thus has
| her virtue been transformed into the August Virtue of
| His Majesty which, shining down on the people, brings
| them happiness. It is for this reason that Article III
| of the Constitution states: "The person of the Emperor
| is sacred and inviolable."
|.
| "Just as we [association members] recognize the
| fundamental unity of filial piety and loyalty, so it is
| our conviction that it is proper to reverently venerate
| His Majesty based on the monistic view that "His
| Majesty, the Emperor is One and Indivisible" [Tenno
| Ichigen-ron], thus making it unnecessary to pay homage
| at the Grand Shrine at Ise. . . . In light of this, who
| is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor himself,
| to whom we should reverently pray?" (Akashi & Mats=E2ra,
| eds. 1975:174-175).
Buddhism is reason. Here, you see the excellent example of Makiguchi's
brilliant shakubuku technique, exercised towards his persecutors. His
mind is like a rapier in the hands of a master fencer.
Makiguchi APPEARS to be simply repeating what was a traditional view
of the Japanese. It was even written into the Constitution that the
Emperor was thus.
ACTUALLY, he is attacking the Shinto system with Reason, by setting
the ends against the middle. You cannot perceive this if you do not
have faith in the mentor: it is necessary to ask yourself, "Why is
Sensei doing this?" That question will never occur to the mind of a
non-disciple.
He tells them, FROM THEIR OWN WORDS, how their views are
contradictory. Not needing to pray at the Ise shrine because of "the
monistic view that 'His Majesty, the Emperor is One and
Indivisible' [Tenno Ichigen-ron]", means that placing the Shinto
talisman in one's altar is therefore redundant, as well.
SIMULTANEOUSLY, he was trying to draw the distinction, even at this
late date, that his disloyalty to state Shinto and the order to accept
the talisman was not the same as disloyalty to the Emperor, because
the Emperor ("one and indivisible") and state Shinto were not the same
entity.
Makiguchi's statement is like a razor, which cuts between loyalty to
State Shinto, which he REFUSES to bow to, and loyalty to the person of
the Emperor ("who is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"), who as leader of the
nation he MUST bow to.
There is a history to using the words and teachings of issendai
against their evil goals. Dengyo (whom Nichiren Daishonin described
himself as a disciple of) went to China to visit Miao-lo's disciple,
where he copied the unmodified versions of the Lotus Sutra and the
True Word Sutras, which he then fetched back to Japan.
Why did Dengyo carry back with him the True Word Sutras, which the
Lord of Teachings, Shakyamuni himself asked his followers to "honestly
discard" while only retaining the Lotus Sutra as his "remnant" -
Nichiren?
Dengyo violated a precept, so that he could defeat the Six Schools at
Nara in the year 792 ["They are the Dharma Analysis Treasury (Kusha),
Establishment of Truth ( Jojitsu), Three Treatises (Sanron), Precepts
(Ritsu), Dharma Characteristics (Hosso), and Flower Garland (Kegon)
schools."
<http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=3D2078>]
... in a historic debate in front of the Emperor, resulting in
Dengyo's Tendai School of Buddhism becoming the national religion of
Japan.
He accomplished this great feat by showing that the Six Schools (which
were not really independent, some temples taught all six) had modified
their versions of the True Word Sutras to incorporate large sections
of the Lotus Sutra. Exposing their flagrant appropriation, forgery and
plagiarism, Dengyo was victorious.
By the way, Nichiren Daishonin gleefully recounts his mentor's victory
in "The Selection of the Time", WND-1, pp. 548-549,
<http:// www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=3D548&m=3D0&q=3D>.
In that VERY SAME Gosho, Nichiren masterfully uses Dengyo's technique,
by quoting the provisional sutras to defeat the schools that embrace
them. That makes the "Selection of the Time" Gosho, itself, an
embodiment of the principal of the Oneness of Mentor and Disciple.
Neat, huh? Dengyo, Nichiren and Makiguchi: cut from the same cloth.
And this is also why Nichiren Buddhism is not a precepts practice.
Here is Koichi Miyata's refutation of Victoria's bad translation in
Petry's passage above (which has been repeatedly ignored by Victoria,
Kisala and Petry):
. Victoria also quotes from a report produced by the
. special police on their interrogation of Makiguchi as
. proof that Makiguchi acknowledged the divine status of
. the emperor. Again, this assertion arises from a
. distortion of the relevant passage. Victoria quotes a
. reference by Makiguchi to "praying" to the emperor. He
. could hardly, however, have been more distorting in
. selecting the passage he quoted, deliberately excluding
. the following extract, which I have underlined:
.
... "The august virtue of His Majesty the Emperor is
... manifested in the security and happiness of the
... people, through the organs of his civil and
... military officials. Should these be deficient in
... some way, the people can petition him through
... the Diet or other bodies. In light of this, who
... is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
... himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"
... ("Pray" is Victoria's translation; "beseech" is
... probably more accurate in this context.)
.
. It is obvious that "beseech/pray" and "petition" have
. the same meaning in this context. The manner in which
. Victoria has misused Makiguchi's choice of a term
. normally used in a religious context, but with a special
. meaning in this context, to claim that Makiguchi
. supported emperor worship, is not what one would expect
. from a serious scholar endeavoring to document his
. claim. Surely in examining the interrogation report
. Victoria must have encountered the following statements
. by Makiguchi:
.
... "His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary man, who
... went to the Peers' School as Crown Prince, and
... studied how to be an emperor. The Emperor too
... makes mistakes. They say that in the early years
... of the Meiji era Tesshu Yamaoka admonished the
... Meiji Emperor and pointed out his mistakes on
... many occasions." [Tokko Geppo (Monthly bulletin
... of Special Higher Police), August 1943 issue, p.
... 152]
.
. These comments indicate clearly that Makiguchi rejected
. completely the deification of the emperor. Victoria
. mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers that
. "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
Does Jon Petry listen? He hasn't in the past, but we continue to hope.
More from Jon Petry:
| In fact, nowhere in Makiguchi's writings, either before
| or during the war, either in prison or out, do we find
| any statements critical of Japan's wartime policies. On
| the contrary, not only did Makiguchi justify Japan's
| colonial takeover of Korea (and earlier war with
| Russia), but he devoted his entire life as an educator
| to devising more effective ways of instilling "service
| to the state" in Japanese children. He further advocated
| that these same children "thoroughly understand that
| loyal service to their sovereign is synonymous with love
| of country." Even after imprisonment, he affirmed that
| loyalty to the emperor was but a natural part of the
| "Way of the Subject" based on his understanding of the
| Lotus Sutra. And, as we have seen, as far as the emperor
| was concerned, Makiguchi asked, "Who is there, apart
| from His Majesty, the Emperor himself, to whom we should
| reverently pray?"
Every single one of these serial distortions, which are serial
defamations of a truly noble person trying to avert disaster (and save
the many millions who died in that disaster), each and every one is
debunked above, and has been repeatedly debunked in the past.
Finally, the last from Jon Petry:
| For apologists to now claim that, his imprisonment and
| death notwithstanding, Makiguchi resisted or opposed
| Japan's war effort is an attempt to turn night into day.
As I said before, Jon Petry, your show is slipping.
This attempt by Zen (Victoria) and slanderous Nichiren Schools (Petry)
to trash Makiguchi and Toda, who were the only honorable Buddhists who
stood their ground against the Shinto War against Buddhism and
humanity to the end of the war, is an obvious ploy.
Victoria had problems with his thesis in chapter six of his book (CH
6: "No Organized Resistance Against Imperial State Zen After 1942").
The problem was that after he wrote it, he found that Makiguchi and
Toda made a liar out of him, or worse, a lazy academic. So he
proceeded to repeatedly attempt to tar these noble men with these
lies, so as to make himself a truthful and a diligent academic, at
least in retrospect. Of course this is a pathetic and vain attempt, no
matter what the outcome, because he did not do his dirtywork within
the confines of his thesis, which is therefore, trash. Then, Victoria,
as an academic, is no more than a producer of trash.
This is the way of Zen, as the Tokugawa bakufu hired Tendai and Zen
scribes to create new Shinto fantasies of themselves as kami (gods),
who were greater than the Hoteke (Buddhas). Writing something down
does not ascribe truth to the writing, nor nobility to the author. A
lie is a lie, however often it is repeated. And even when the truth is
silenced (fortunately, not the case this time).
Similarly, whenever heroes like Makiguchi and Toda rise up nobly, the
mass of weaklings who cower in the face of adversity must later tear
them down, to cover up their own shameful cowardice at the time.
It is no accident that they are led by a Roshi of the Zen School
(Victoria) that perpetrated this horror on humanity. And it is no
accident that his water is (once again) carried by a follower of the
Nichiren Schools and temples (Petry), that gratefully accepted the
Shinto Talisman and worshipped that object of Shinto devotion to the
Zen war against Buddhism and the human race.
No one in the Nichiren Schools refused to bow to Shinto, which is a
mask over the face of Zen War. No one went to prison and stayed there
after 1942 (Victoria's own thesis), with the exception of those
Victoria overlooked: Makiguchi and Toda of the Soka Gakkai, who were
the only ones bearing the honor of Buddhism in the midst of this
holocaust. No other Buddhists had the determination and valor
necessary to stay the course against Imperial State Zen to the bitter
end (Makiguchi's death and Toda's release after the war was lost).
Indeed, Nichiren Shoshu and the other schools gleefully supported the
war, cheering every victory, screaming for more blood, and
highlighting the glorious sacrifice of young Japanese in this 'noble'
cause. This is all on record, for every school. Here is a list of
infamy, of Nichiren Schools that accepted the Shinto Talisman and
supported the war (some are now split off from temples, which at that
time, were infamous):
... Nichiren Schools
...
... Nichiren Shu (Kuon-ji at Minobu)
... Nichiren Shoshu (Taiseki-ji at Fujinomiya)
... Honmon Butsuryu Shu ja
... Kempon Hokke Shu (Myoman-ji)
... Hokkeshu, Honmon Ryu
... Hokkeshu, Jinmon Ryu
... Hokkeshu, Shinmon Ryu
... Honmon Hokke Shu (Myoren-ji)
... Nichiren Honshu (Yobo-ji)
... Nichiren Shu Fuju-fuse-ha (Myokaku-ji)
... Nichiren Hokke Shu
... Hokke Nichiren Shu
... Hompa Nichiren Shu
... Honke Nichiren Shu (Hyogo)
... Fuju-fuse Nichiren Komon Shu
... Honke Nichiren Shu (Kyoto)
... Shobo Hokke Shu
... Honmon Kyoo Shu
... Nichiren Komon Shu
... Reiyukai (Spiritual-Friendship-Association)
... Rissho Kosei Kai
... Nipponzan Myohoji
... Kokuchukai
... Shoshinkai
... Fuji Taisekiji Kenshokai
... Honmon Shoshu
They all bowed to the great evil that is Shinto, wielded as a weapon
by Imperial State Zen. They all bowed to the destruction of Buddhism
and the human race that would have been the outcome of Shinto War.
Only Makiguchi and Toda stood up against and refused to bow to this
evil to the end.
Trashing these heroes will not raise up the lot of you by even a
millimeter in stature. Your heritage will remain that of cowardly and
treasonous Buddhists, who betrayed the Buddha, the Law and the human
race.
Live with it.
-Chas.
_________________________________________________
Jon Petry, since you seem incapable of going and looking at this paper
of Miyata's I include the entire text here, so that you could not
possibly miss it:
. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism:
. A Skeleton in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
.
. <http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
.
. Abstract
. In "Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton in the Closet?"
. (Vol. 2) Brian Daizen Victoria claims, among
. other things, that Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-
. 1944), founder of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai
. (forebear of the Soka Gakkai and Soka Gakkai
. International), was an active supporter of the
. Japanese wars of aggression. In this response,
. Koichi Miyata argues that Victoria's claims rest
. on the highly selective use of quotes, and
. ignore key interpretative issues associated with
. Japanese imperial fascism and its underlying
. belief structures. Miyata discusses the
. significance of Makiguchi's arrest and
. imprisonment under a law specifically aimed at
. opponents of the war efforts, in his analysis of
. critical lapses in Victoria's article.
.
. Having read the recent essay by Brian Daizen Victoria, I
. found its contents so problematic that, as someone who
. has studied the ideas of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-
. 1944) for many years, I feel compelled to respond.
.
. While many studies and essays on Tsunesaburo Makiguchi
. exist in Japanese, researchers unable to read Japanese
. have had limited access to Makiguchi's ideas and
. actions. To help fill this gap, last year I edited a
. small collection of English-language essays for the 2000
. special edition of The Journal of Oriental Studies
. (TJOS) which was devoted to the "Ideas and Influence of
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi." In this response, I will refer
. to this research as I attempt to shed some light on the
. thoughts and actions of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.
.
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage
. from Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The
. Geography of Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that
. Russia was engaged in a policy of expansionism in the
. search for year-round harbors. Victoria asserts that
. this world view was identical to that of the government
. of Japan, a view used to justify the Russo-Japanese War
. (1904-1905), then the annexation of the Korean peninsula
. (1910) and the founding of the puppet state of Manchukuo
. (1932). Victoria's assertion, and his implicit criticism
. of Makiguchi, simplistically links analysis of the
. global situation with the policies taken in response to
. that. Makiguchi was merely voicing what was then the
. accepted understanding of the geopolitical motives for
. Russia's expansionist policies, a view held not only by
. the Japanese government, but shared by the British, with
. whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
. Certainly I know of no scholar of political geography
. who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one that
. Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not
. only Makiguchi but everyone who studies political
. geography guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
.
. Elsewhere in Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi points out that
. the countries of Western Europe had a great deal of
. trouble operating their colonies, and expresses doubts
. about the value of acquiring colonies, particularly from
. the point of view of the financial burden that they
. would entail. If Victoria had read Jinsei Chirigaku
. carefully, he would not identify the thoughts of
. Makiguchi with the expansionist doctrine of the time.
.
. Secondly, Victoria quotes an extract from Makiguchi's
. book Kyodoka Kenkyu (A Study of Folk Culture), in which
. Makiguchi notes that the state plays an important role
. in the lives of citizens. From this, Victoria draws the
. conclusion that as the Japan moved closer to war,
. Makiguchi adopted the view that education should be "in
. service to the state". (Victoria states that Makiguchi
. added this section for the 1933 revised edition of the
. book. This is incorrect, as it appears in the first
. edition published in 1912.) Since the publication of
. Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi had consistently emphasized
. the formation of identity on three levels-that of a
. person's local community, the national and global
. levels. Within this context, and against a backdrop of
. global competition for empire, he placed particular
. importance on national independence. This is hardly
. unreasonable. Japan was one of only a handful of
. countries in Asia that had maintained independence amid
. encroachment by the Western powers, and Makiguchi was
. well aware of the miserable circumstances of colonized
. peoples. What we may find problematic-in terms of the
. current view that controlling peoples is intrinsically
. wrong-is that Makiguchi did not say enough after Japan
. itself acquired colonies, omitting to comment on the
. issue of independence for these colonized peoples, and
. only suggesting that imperialism was not the optimal
. policy choice because of the financial burden involved.
. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to my essay "Tsunesaburo
. Makiguchi's Theory of the State" in TJOS, in which I
. discuss Makiguchi's view that imperialistic-military and
. economic-competition should be supplanted by a
. cooperative sense of community, what he called
. "humanitarian competition."
.
. Further, in deciding that Makiguchi viewed education as
. a means of serving the state, Victoria completely
. ignores Makiguchi's argument in his 1930 Soka Kyoikugaku
. Taikei (The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy) that the
. goal of education must in fact be the happiness of the
. child. In the March 1942 issue of Kachi Sozo (Value
. Creation), the short-lived periodical of the Soka Kyoiku
. Gakkai, Makiguchi criticizes the ideologically central
. concept of messhi hoko -- sacrificing the interests of
. the individual to those of the state. He noted that this
. was mere rhetoric to ordinary Japanese, impossible to
. put into practice. Rather, he stressed, it is natural to
. strive for the realization of one's own and others'
. happiness. In May 1942, he was ordered to halt
. publication of Kachi Sozo. While Makiguchi did view the
. state as having an important role to play, this is
. entirely different from holding the ultra nationalist
. view of education that people should be educated to
. ensure their uncritical acceptance of the policies of
. the state. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to "Value-Creating
. Pedagogy and Japanese Education in the Modern Era," in
. TJOS, by Kazunori Kumagai in which he compares
. Makiguchi's educational philosophy with the statist
. educational system.
.
. Thirdly there is the problem of the emperor system.
. Quoting a section from Kyodoka Kenkyu in which Makiguchi
. argues that loyalty to the emperor is synonymous with
. love of one's country, Victoria implies that Makiguchi's
. view was identical to that of the military government.
. This, however, is a far too loosely framed argument that
. ignores the interpretative issues associated with the
. 1889 Meiji Constitution. The preamble to the Meiji
. Constitution recognizes the supreme authority of the
. emperor, while Article 3 declares the sacred nature of
. the emperor, and Article 4 his sovereign rights over the
. state -- making the state and the emperor system
. inseparable. If we stress the supreme authority of the
. emperor, the emperor is then cast in the role of
. absolute monarch. If we consider instead the role of the
. Constitution as a brake on the supreme authority of the
. emperor, he becomes a constitutional monarch. The former
. view is represented by the imperial fascism supported by
. the military regime, while the latter corresponds to
. Tatsukichi Minobe's theory of the emperor as an organ of
. the state. From the era of Taisho democracy through to
. the suppression of Minobe's theory in 1935, this view
. held sway among constitutional scholars and members of
. the Diet. The idea that loyalty =3D patriotism is common
. to both views, and by aligning Makiguchi with the
. imperial fascism of the military simply on the basis of
. his comments here, Victoria again appears determined to
. ignore the written record of Makiguchi's thoughts. From
. his earliest writings, Makiguchi viewed the emperor as a
. constitutional monarch, and was critical of moves to
. make the emperor's powers absolute.
.
. Victoria also quotes from a report produced by the
. special police on their interrogation of Makiguchi as
. proof that Makiguchi acknowledged the divine status of
. the emperor. Again, this assertion arises from a
. distortion of the relevant passage. Victoria quotes a
. reference by Makiguchi to "praying" to the emperor. He
. could hardly, however, have been more distorting in
. selecting the passage he quoted, deliberately excluding
. the following extract, which I have underlined:
.
... "The august virtue of His Majesty the Emperor is
... manifested in the security and happiness of the
... people, through the organs of his civil and
... military officials. Should these be deficient in
... some way, the people can petition him through
... the Diet or other bodies. In light of this, who
... is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
... himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"
... ("Pray" is Victoria's translation; "beseech" is
... probably more accurate in this context.)
.
. It is obvious that "beseech/pray" and "petition" have
. the same meaning in this context. The manner in which
. Victoria has misused Makiguchi's choice of a term
. normally used in a religious context, but with a special
. meaning in this context, to claim that Makiguchi
. supported emperor worship, is not what one would expect
. from a serious scholar endeavoring to document his
. claim. Surely in examining the interrogation report
. Victoria must have encountered the following statements
. by Makiguchi:
.
... "His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary man, who
... went to the Peers' School as Crown Prince, and
... studied how to be an emperor. The Emperor too
... makes mistakes. They say that in the early years
... of the Meiji era Tesshu Yamaoka admonished the
... Meiji Emperor and pointed out his mistakes on
... many occasions." [Tokko Geppo (Monthly bulletin
... of Special Higher Police), August 1943 issue, p.
... 152]
.
. These comments indicate clearly that Makiguchi rejected
. completely the deification of the emperor. Victoria
. mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers that
. "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
.
. My fourth point concerns the significance of Makiguchi's
. persecution by the military government for criticizing
. its policy on religion. This is also relevant to the
. arguments of Robert Kisala, which Victoria cites in
. developing his own argument. We must remember that when
. Makiguchi was persecuted by the authorities for
. instructing members of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai to burn
. talismans provided by the Ise shrine, regarded as home
. of the ancestral deity of the imperial family, it was
. not under any law dealing with religious matters, but
. the Peace Preservation Law. Neither Victoria nor Kisala
. appear to understand the significance of this. The Peace
. Preservation Law was demanded by the Privy Council in
. exchange for approving the Universal Manhood Suffrage
. Law in 1925 to ensure that the newly enfranchised
. populace did not begin criticizing the emperor system.
. It was originally designed for the suppression of anti-
. Establishment groups such as socialists, communists and
. anarchists. Having all but eliminated anti-Establishment
. activity of an overtly political nature with a massive
. crackdown on the Communist Party in the early years of
. the Showa era (1926-1989), the military government next
. targeted liberals and religious movements as impediments
. to implementation of their war policies. By completely
. obliterating Tatsukichi Minobe's liberal view of the
. emperor as organ of the state in 1935, the militarists
. established the absolute authority of the emperor,
. brooking no opposition whatsoever their policies, now
. fully shielded by imperial authority.
.
. Next they turned to the religious movements. Religions
. having as their object of worship gods, or the Buddha,
. which their teachings accord a position in the cosmic
. order far superior to that of the emperor, religious
. groups tended to have less regard for his authority. The
. year 1936 saw a crackdown on Ohmotokyo, a new Shinto
. movement that preached the restoration of peace and
. order to the world under a mythical god. To enable more
. systematic repression of religious movements, the
. military government revised the Peace Preservation Law
. in 1939 to provide for punishment of religious groups
. found to be committing blasphemy against the Ise shrine.
. This shows the military government viewed religious
. movements that rejected the authority of the emperor as
. the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation
. behind its war policies. It was against this political
. and social backdrop that Makiguchi came to criticize the
. religious policy of the military regime. His arrest
. under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the regime
. judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the
. war. Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist
. ideology of imperial fascism for its religious policies,
. and because this opposition constituted an impediment to
. conduct of the war by the military regime, there is no
. doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-war
. activities. I refer Dr. Victoria to my Introduction to
. TSOJ in which I examine the historical background and
. significance of Makiguchi's wartime persecution.
.
. I have responded to the views of Brian Victoria on four
. fronts. I can only imagine that in order to prove
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi cooperated with the war effort,
. Victoria has shaped his arguments to fit his pre-
. established conclusion, willfully quoting only those
. passages of Makiguchi's writings that would seem to
. support it. I cannot imagine he studied all ten volumes
. of Makiguchi's writings in Japanese to reach this
. conclusion. While there is ample room for the frank
. exchange of academic views, including highly critical
. ones, it is important that a tendentious agenda, clothed
. in the guise of academic research, not stand
. unchallenged.
______________________________________________________
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
-Chas.
juanjo
foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com> wrote:
> Zen and the Nichiren Schools Attack the Soka Gakkai to Cover Their
> Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 2-
The true tragedy of Chas' repeated attempts to raise issues regarding
the alleged pacifism of the founders of the Soka Gakkai during World
War II is his inability to address actual facts. Instead he relies on
regurgitated agit-prop from his organization, the Soka Gakkai. He
also deliberately mis-attributes authorship of material in that he
quotes material as my own when in fact it is not. It is material I
have quoted from. Most troubling is that neither Chas nor the
voluminous material he quotes from actually address the material
presented but rather attempt to overwhelm the reader with massive
volumes of material which speaks all around the subject or misquotes
and misinterprets the material resented. This is the classic straw
man argument in which one ignores the actual points presented and
instead invents another false issue and "rebuts" it instead.
Rather than actually address the simple fact that his own sensei as
well as two of the Soka Gakkai's own tame "scholars" disagree with
Chas, he chooses to post the same nonsense again and again. This is
regrettable and shows actual proof of the bankrupt spirit that infuses
the so called "Buddhist" practice of the Soka Gakkai which is nothing
more than a personality cult centered on an old, dying Japanese man
known for shameless self promotion and his actions in beating up
Buddhist priests in his youth.
The Soka Gakkai has worked long and hard to rewrite history and erase
reality. It is regrettable that they do so but it is not all that
unusual. Consider how many people in France for example, claimed to
be members of the resistance after the war had ended when actual
historical fact shows that the resistance movement in that country was
small. Further in Japan itself there is a great deal of ambiguity
about the wear and there has been severe criticism of the Japanese for
their attempts to rewrite matters and paint them as different from
what they actually were in popular media as well as in school texts
used in that country.
Chas has twisted all matter of claptrap together to make a case where
none exists. Most of his "writing" is taken verbatim from SGI spin
by its tame “scholars". The reality is that there is no indication
whatsoever that Makiguchi was a pacifist and there is sufficient
evidence that he was not. While Chas, as his handlers, place great
emphasis on statement made by Makiguchi, pre-1935, they ignore both
history and the records of the time period. The most damning part of
that portion they ignore is Makiguchi's own statements post-1935 as
well as the records of the Imperial Government including the very
charges made against Makaguchi, i.e. slandering the Imperial
Talisman.
For example an excerpt from a statement made by Makiguchi after the
start of the Pacific War [which is how the Japanese termed their war
of aggression against the United States, Great Britain and some other
countries] clearly shows he had no actual opposition to the war
itself:
Chas' most recent posts reference the fact that the other Buddhist
Chas of course has no idea what any of the actual facts are as he
neither reads nor understands Japanese. He has never seen a single
document nor done any independent research in the matter. All he is
doing is repeating the spin created by his organization. He
excoriates Dr. Victoria, who is an actual scholar. Dr. Victoria does
read and speak Japanese. He does publish in peer reviewed journals
and does not take money from any group to write apologia for them. But
let's not quibble about Dr. Victoria's credentials.
Instead let us focus on the actual published materials put forth by
the Soka Gakkai for public consumption as opposed to what they pump
out for internal distribution. First consider what is written in a
2008 edition of Tricycle Magazine in a supposed "interview" with
Daiseku Ikeda. I say
“supposed interview” as it is simply a cobbled together series of
questions posed via e-mail and responded to by the Soka Gakkai, hardly
what I would call a real interview. However Ikeda is quoted as saying
in the article:
"During World War II, however, they found themselves facing
persecutions when they resisted the currents of Japanese militarist
fascism and criticized the state’s use of Shinto to spiritually unite
the Japanese people behind the war effort. They were arrested and
imprisoned as a result."
In addition the article, which was approved by the SGI leadership and
presumably Ikeda himself states:
"Makiguchi was arrested under the Peace Preservation Act in 1943 by
the Japanese government for refusing to consolidate with other
Buddhist sects under the banner of State Shinto, effectively
challenging the authority of the military government. He died in
prison a year later."
Note that Ikeda does not go on the record with anything about
Makiguchi opposing the actual war. In fact he cannot make such a
claim because there are comments on the record by Makiguchi supporting
the war but stating that the war effort is doomed to failure if the
Imperial Government did not discard provisional teachings such as Zen
and Shingon and embrace Nichiren Buddhism. It was Makiguchi's Rissho
Ankoku-ron moment and there is little doubt that he saw it as exactly
as that. So Chas' own sensei is rebutting Chas’ position.
If that is not enough then let us consider another scholar, a favorite
of the Soka Gakkai in fact:
"Thus, Makiguchi and Toda defied the government and went to prison
not necessarily for anti-war beliefs, which the Soka Gakkai preaches
today, but because it was against their deeply felt religious
principles to adopt Shinto practices or to merge with another
religious sect, even if it had Nichiren connections. While Makiguchi
may have indeed made the pro-Emperor statements that Victoria alleges,
his overall thinking and demeanor was certainly not pro-militarist.
The evidence simply does not support Victoria's argument."
A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese Buddhist History by Daniel A. Metraux
So Professor Metraux disputes Professor Victoria's position that
Makiguchi was in fact pro-militarist [without citing any actual
evidence and ignoring Makiguchi’s own statements]. Prof. Metraux does
agree with the position put forward by Prof. Victoria, namely that
Makiguchi and Toda went to prison for what they were charged with -
lesse majesty NOT for any actual anti-war beliefs or positions.
Professor Metraux also admits that Makiguchi made the pro-Emperor
statements that Professor Victoria quotes although he disagrees on the
import of those statements. So Professor Metraux also rebuts Chas’
stated position.
Yet another of the Soka Gakkai’s tame scholars was paid to put forth
an opinion attacking Dr. Victoria’s position. However, if one
carefully reads the comments made by Koichi Miyata in his critique of
Prof. Victoria he affirms Dr. Victoria’s position:
"To enable more systematic repression of religious movements, the
military government revised the Peace Preservation Law in 1939 to
provide for punishment of religious groups found to be committing
blasphemy against the Ise shrine. This shows the military government
viewed religious movements that rejected the authority of the emperor
as the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation behind its
war policies. It was against this political and social backdrop that
Makiguchi came to criticize the religious policy of the military
regime. His arrest under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the
regime judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the war.
Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist ideology of imperial
fascism for its religious policies, and because this opposition
constituted an impediment to conduct of the war by the military
regime, there is no doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-
war activities."
Now Miyata is guilty of sloppy logic here. I have no doubt that the
Imperial Government wished to stifle any opposition to its
expansionist, militaristic policies, including any opposition from the
religious institutions of Japan. The record is clear that the
Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views to its
policies. This includes those who would not go along with the system
that the government was instituting, namely of blind obedience to the
government policies regarding the consolidation of the various
religious sects as well as their subservience to State Shinto.
Makiguchi did indeed threaten this blind
obedience because he asserted that the state policy regarding the
supremacy of the Imperial Talisman over the Buddha was wrong. And
equally important, that the prosecution of the war would fail unless
the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. Miyata’s claim that
this criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto, as well as the
supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms of Buddhism made
Makiguchi “implicitly” a pacifist absurd. Makiguchi is not saying
that the war is wrong under any circumstances. He is saying that it
will fail unless the government suppresses other forms of Buddhism and
acknowledges the supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms
of religious practice including other forms of Buddhism and state
Shinto.
Now I have suggested a position somewhat simpler and quite obvious to
anyone who actually pays attention to what is being said and what is
not being said by either Prof. Metraux or the Soka Gakkai's scholar,
Koichi Miyata. The assertion is made that Prof Victoria is taking
statements out of context to make Makiguchi into a supporter of the
military government and its view of the emperor. That is irrelevant to
my point and further the statements of Metraux and Miyata do not
really support the position put forth by the Soka Gakkai in their
attacks on Dr. Victoria. However this is not the argument I made. Nor
has Chas ever been able to rebut it.
Let's review shall we?
SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up to the
Japanese government during WWII and opposed the war on pacifist
grounds.
SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior to WWII.
However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda were not pacifists, in fact,
they were far from it. There are speeches in existence in which they
affirm their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war. However,
they did remonstrate against the imposition of the Imperial Talisman
as an object of reverence, as well as, in their interpretation of
Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the Japanese Government to suppress all other
Buddhist sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
They were imprisoned for the crime of lese majeste, for their
disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they were pacifists.
President Ikeda admits this as does Professor Metraux, in an article
he was paid to write by the Soka Gakkai.
The “Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists” claim made by the SGI
adds insult to the injury endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan
who did demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those people were
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
affirmed their loyalty to the Emperor and there are no statements made
by either of them which show any actual opposition to the war effort.
However they did oppose the prosecution of the war effort based upon
Imperial Shinto. Based upon their interpretation of the Rissho
Ankoku-ron, any effort by the Japanese Government to prosecute that
war was
doomed to failure unless the Japanese nation was immediately converted
to Nichiren Buddhism and all heretical sects suppressed. Their
criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto over Nichiren Buddhism was
similarly a cause of alarm among the far right government who viewed
any opposition to any policy it promulgated as dangerous. Thus they
were imprisoned for lese mageste, specifically their criticism of the
government’s doctrinal position of the supremacy of the worship of the
Emperor over the Buddha.
I have no doubt that the Imperial Government wished to stifle any
opposition to its expansionist, militaristic policies, including any
opposition from the religious institutions of Japan. The record is
clear that the Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views
to its policies. This includes acting against pacifists of which
there were some, both religious and otherwise. It also includes those
who would not go along with the system that the government was
instituting, namely of blind obedience to the government policies.
Makiguchi did indeed threaten this blind obedience because he asserted
that the
state policy regarding the supremacy of the Imperial Talisman over the
Buddha was wrong. And equally important, that the prosecution of the
war would fail unless the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. The Japanese Government
was quite pathological when it came to their requirement that all the
people of Japan must be in absolute support of the government’s
policy. Any nail head sticking up was most certainly going to be
hammered down.
Makiguchi was such a nail head. Makiguchi wanted the Imperial
Government to suppress all other forms of Buddhism and accept Nichiren
Buddhism as the only form of state accepted Buddhism. His position
was that if they failed to do so the war effort was doomed to
failure. This was a position that the Imperial Japanese Government
was unwilling to tolerate and hence his imprisonment along with that
of Toda.
Chas in his hurry to smear Prof. Victoria has leapt to conclusions and
not bothered to read what was written. This is typical of Chas and
actually in his defense, it really is not his fault. He is simply
regurgitating the nonsense he has been given as speaking points by the
Soka Gakkai leadership he has labored so diligently on behalf of in
spreading their positions on the web. For him this is a holy mission
and one in which is he is completely involved and frankly more than a
little obsessed.
However the level of incompetence among the Soka Gakkai leadership is
such that they attempt to “disprove” Professor Victoria’s statements
by having their own paid “scholars” issue rebuttals which are not
rebuttals of the main issue raised by Dr. Victoria, namely whether
Makiguchi was a pacifist and opposed the Japanese war effort on that
basis. They toss out all sorts of comments concerning the use by Dr.
Victoria of pre-1935 commentary of Makiguchi while ignoring the
reiteration of these comments as well as other statements similar to
them by Makiguchi after the Japanese aggression in China had reached
full pitch and the start of hostilities by the Japanese against the
United States, Great Britain and Holland among others. On top of
this, their attacks on Dr. Victoria are not relevant to my position
which does not rely on Dr. Victoria but rather on the simple fact that
their own sources as well as the historical sources do not support
their position.
SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles and never
compromised them.
SGI Fact 2: The examples of the SGI violating its own principles are
in fact too numerous to detail. But one which is relevant to Chas'
regular rants is the claim that they have held fast to Nikko's
admonitions while the Nichiren Shoshu has not. In particular they
chastise the Nichiren Shoshu for sending priests for education at
Rissho University which is operated by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently
they have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
university, some with the approval of their own governing body in
Japan.
Of even greater amusement however are two other events. Shortly after
the split between the SGI and the Nichiren Shoshu in the early 1990's
the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu and pay for
all overseas missionary work, of course with the Soka Gakkai
administering all overseas propagation. The Nichiren Shu, having seen
what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly declined
the offer. The second incident occurred when the SGI approached the
Nichiren Shu and offered one million US dollars for a Nichiren
authored Mandala. This offer was also rejected.
Then we have the wholesale rewriting of all previous publications of
the Soka Gakkai to rewrite history so to speak and cleanse it of any
undue support for the Nichiren Shoshu temple and its doctrines and
policies that might now appear to be embarrassing in light of the
criticisms being leveled at that organization by the Soka Gakkai. One
classic example is the careful editing of the Gosho to remove any
support for the Nichiren Shoshu position on the requirement of a
specific eye opening ceremony which the Soka Gakkai wholeheartedly
endorsed prior to its split with the Nichiren Shoshu Temple and which
it now rejects. Doctrines such as these once held near and dear to
the SGI have fallen by the wayside and been trampled underfoot in a
scene reminiscent of a Monty Python sketch.
SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about democracy,
has been adamant about stamping out any attempts by its membership to
adopt democratic principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their pleasure with
no accountability to the rank and file.
In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren
Shu, the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI through
proxies such as the Rubys and others made posts belittling that fact.
When members have agitated for more of a say in the actions of their
local chapters and National organization, they are typically
admonished. If they persist, they are drummed out.
Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
towards actual financial accountability, keeping its finances a
closely held secret. Members have no knowledge of what happens to
their money once it is donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is
to be spent. Periodically this is justified by claims that the local
SGI chapters are not financially independent and must depend on Japan
for financial contributions. However this begs the question. How
does anyone know this and if in fact it is true then how much comes
from local sources and how much comes from overseas? Further how is
the local administration using this money? The truth is that no one
knows and no one is going to know so long as the Soka Gakkai can keep
a tight lid on its ship of state.
This is vastly different from say Nichiren Order of North America, the
Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which regularly provides
information to its members as to what funds have been taken in and how
they have been spent, including a say at the local level as to how
they should be spent.
Similarly the local sanghas as well as the national governing
juanjo
> Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-
>
A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up to the
Japanese government during WWII and opposed the war on pacifist
grounds.
SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior to WWII.
However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda were not pacifists, in fact,
they were far from it. There are speeches in existence in which they
affirm their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war. However,
they did remonstrate against the imposition of the Imperial Talisman
as an object of reverence, as well as, in their interpretation of
Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the Japanese Government to suppress all other
Buddhist sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
They were imprisoned for the crime of lese majeste, for their
disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they were pacifists.
President Ikeda admits this as does Professor Metraux, in an article
he was paid to write by the Soka Gakkai.
The “Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists” claim made by the SGI
adds insult to the injury endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan
who did demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those people were
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles and never
compromised them.
SGI Fact 2: The examples of the SGI violating its own principles are
in fact too numerous to detail. But one which is relevant to Chas'
regular rants is the claim that they have held fast to Nikko's
admonitions while the Nichiren Shoshu has not. In particular they
chastise the Nichiren Shoshu for sending priests for education at
Rissho University which is operated by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently
they have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
university, some with the approval of their own governing body in
Japan.
Of even greater amusement however are two other events. Shortly after
the split between the SGI and the Nichiren Shoshu in the early 1990's
the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu and pay for
all overseas missionary work, of course with the Soka Gakkai
administering all overseas propagation. The Nichiren Shu, having seen
what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly declined
the offer. The second incident occurred when the SGI approached the
Nichiren Shu and offered one million US dollars for a Nichiren
authored Mandala. This offer was also rejected.
Then we have the wholesale rewriting of all previous publications of
the Soka Gakkai to rewrite history so to speak and cleanse it of any
undue support for the Nichiren Shoshu temple and its doctrines and
policies that might now appear to be embarrassing in light of the
criticisms being leveled at that organization by the Soka Gakkai. One
classic example is the careful editing of the Gosho to remove any
support for the Nichiren Shoshu position on the requirement of a
specific eye opening ceremony which the Soka Gakkai wholeheartedly
endorsed prior to its split with the Nichiren Shoshu Temple and which
it now rejects. Doctrines such as these once held near and dear to
the SGI have fallen by the wayside and been trampled underfoot in a
scene reminiscent of a Monty Python sketch.
SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about democracy,
has been adamant about stamping out any attempts by its membership to
adopt democratic principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their pleasure with
no accountability to the rank and file.
In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren
Shu, the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI through
proxies such as the Rubys and others made posts belittling that fact.
When members have agitated for more of a say in the actions of their
local chapters and National organization, they are typically
admonished. If they persist, they are drummed out.
Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
towards actual financial accountability, keeping its finances a
closely held secret. Members have no knowledge of what happens to
their money once it is donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is
to be spent. Periodically this is justified by claims that the local
SGI chapters are not financially independent and must depend on Japan
for financial contributions. However this begs the question. How
does anyone know this and if in fact it is true then how much comes
from local sources and how much comes from overseas? Further how is
the local administration using this money? The truth is that no one
knows and no one is going to know so long as the Soka Gakkai can keep
a tight lid on its ship of state.
This is vastly different from say Nichiren Order of North America, the
Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which regularly provides
information to its members as to what funds have been taken in and how
they have been spent, including a say at the local level as to how
they should be spent.
Similarly the local sanghas as well as the national governing
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
analysis of your methods is accurate (mindless cut and paste,
repeating clearly debunked material). This is not right.
-Chas.
Kurt
<e914e42a-5112-4151...@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
"Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan
LOL. Actually debate the debunked rehash you post and maybe we'll have
something to talk about.
cmk
> "Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan
>
> > Like I said, you refuse to discuss the absence of the Transfer Box,
> > which proves that Nichiren Shoshu are fraudulently occupying Taisekiji
> > and need to get the hell out.
>
> > -Chas.
>
> And this is all you can "debate"? LOL
> Talk about grasping for whatever sliver of a straw you can conjure up.
> Poor guy...
>
> --
> To reply by email, remove the word "space"
> Like I said, you refuse to discuss the absence of the Transfer Box,
> which proves that Nichiren Shoshu are fraudulently occupying Taisekiji
> and need to get the hell out.
> -Chas.
And this is all you can "debate"? LOL
Talk about grasping for whatever sliver of a straw you can conjure
up.
Poor guy...
--
To reply by email, remove the word "space"
Who the HECK cares about a stupid TRANSFER
BOX, Go to NST and LOOK at what they do!!!!!
Fighting, putting people down, reading sermons
instead of the GOSHO, you have no rights, you
have no FUN, you can't defend yourselves when
there is a dispute because your automatically
wrong.
Now WHY on earth would a person in their RIGHT
MIND join THAT?
AS IF Kurt!
cmk
juanjo
You poor boy. The reality is that you have never bothered to actually
read what is written nor have your continually reposted barrages of
verbiage ever actually addressed what is written. As for Reggie, as I
have said before, he is the class clown here and being called names by
him is about as meaningful as being disliked by Chrystal Whack Job.
Actually she is more intelligent, cogent and far better looking so he
is even less significant than she.
Reginald Carpenter
Chas shows actual proof he cannot read for content and respond on point
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Sun, Jan 3, 2010, 4:06pm
From: juanjo <jonp...@mindspring.com>
On Jan 2, 2:48�pm, "Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as
the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
wrote:
I disagree with Reginald's analysis of you (as an idiot). However, his
analysis of your methods is accurate (mindless cut and paste, repeating
clearly debunked material). This is not right.
-Chas.
---------------------------------------------------
Juanjo wrote:
You poor boy. The reality is that you have never bothered to actually
read what is written nor have your continually reposted barrages of
verbiage ever actually addressed what is written. As for Reggie, as I
have said before, he is the class clown here and being called names by
him is about as meaningful as being disliked by Chrystal [sic] Whack
Job. Actually she is more intelligent, cogent and far better looking so
he is even less significant than she.
---------------------------------------------------
RC comments: Well "Chas.", old JonPetry, aka. "Juanjo", nka. "JoJo",
has once again just proven "the reality" that he really is an IDIOT!
Although he has never in his life ever seen or heard either "CMK" or
"Reggie" (who dat?) in person, JoJo just wrote that she is "far better
looking." As I have said/ written before time & again for years, "JoJo"
doesn't have a cent of common sense or a lick of logic even if he's
trying to make a joke about anybody. His mess-age "fits the profile"
perfectly, what the Daishonin/ True Buddha taught & wrote about people
just the other day in the DGP - Daily Gosho Passages for Jan 2nd, 2010:
"As a rule, we can perceive the qualitative level of a person's mind
through his writings due to the principle of the oneness of mind and
body.". . . "and hence what a person has written will reveal whether
that person is well or poorly endowed in nature." That's why it's easy
for anyone to / read/ see his postings and tell that the Zen quality of
JoJo's mind is at an all-time low, life condition of Stupidity and that
he is very much endowed with the nature of a FooL & Liar! ROTFL.
WorldPeace! }:<{0
Reginald Carpenter
Re. RC (my) posting on 1/05/10, 4:05pm, I just changed the subject/
title to: Re: Juanjo shows Actual Proof that he's just an Idiot!
***************************************************
Re: Chas shows actual proof he cannot read for content and respond on
point
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Tue, Jan 5, 2010, 4:05pm
From: Reginald Carpenter <chiefst...@msn.com>
for anyone to read/ see his postings and tell that the Zen quality of
Nikken's obstacle: ''It is that I could not truly believe in the Gohonzon. '' Komyo-ji, 10-8-85
Changing back to the title of my original post. I'm thinking of
replying to every one of Juanjo's posts and changing those to this
same title, unless he stops obscuring mine.
-Chas.
SunDevil2001
believe in the Gohonzon. '' Komyo-ji, 10-8-85" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
wrote:
oh, that IS funny.
Beyond Jon, I am quite certain that no one reads your Unabomber-esque
spam treatises anyway.
sd
juanjo
> replying to every one of Juanjo's posts and changing those to this
> same title, unless he stops obscuring mine.
>
The reply I make is accurate concerning your nonsense.
juanjo
quite true
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Box is not one of them.
Now I am holding out, for when even one of you wants to debate the
awful truth of the Transfer Box and your Self-Appointed Hige Priest
Nikken and his "successor" henchman in fraud, Nichinyo.
Charlie ...
juanjo
Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
wrote:
Keep twisting in the wind Chas. The transfer box issue has nothing to
do with the Nichiren Shu.
Kurt
<be31f9a0-80aa-4740...@r24g2000yqd.googlegroups.com>,
juanjo <jonp...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Nor does he have any intent to debate. We've been down this road many
times with him.
juanjo
>
> juanjo <jonpe...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 12, 7:16 pm, "Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren
> > Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
> > wrote:
> > > I have debated you on numerous topics over the years, but the Transfer
> > > Box is not one of them.
>
> > > Now I am holding out, for when even one of you wants to debate the
> > > awful truth of the Transfer Box and your Self-Appointed Hige Priest
> > > Nikken and his "successor" henchman in fraud, Nichinyo.
>
> > Keep twisting in the wind Chas. The transfer box issue has nothing to
> > do with the Nichiren Shu.
>
> Nor does he have any intent to debate. We've been down this road many
> times with him.
>
> --
True
cmk
It's anyone's business that feels like it. When PUBLIC
figures make accusations against people that aren't true,
it's PUBLIC. Nikken is a PUBLIC figure. It IS PUBLIC.
IF he didn't want his business PUBLIC he shouldn't BE
High Priest.
cmk.
cmk
cmk
AS IF, Nichiren Shoshu tried to SUE SGI how many times? WITH
NO PROOF, and they were laughed out of court!
Your such a nitwit!
cmk
cmk
AS IF. All you people do is down SGI 24/7. OVER AND OVER with
NO PROOF whatsoever! Why don't you get a job!
We are darn tired of hearing you.
cmk
cmk
>
> read more »
Oh PUHLEASE, AS IF, and Nichiren Shoshu
has all the PROOF in the world with their
HEARSAY, no-witness witness reports,
putting people in jail due to hearsay,
name calling of leaders, sick and twisted
anti-Gakkai accusations, and their no picture
accusations of SGI harassment.
Everyone should just call SGI a cult
because Nikken says so, is that right?
YOU ARE THE DUMBEST PEOPLE
I EVER HEARD!
Why don't you do something unique
to Hokekko or Danto and get a REAL
religion! I will chant daimoku that
you don't believe everything you hear,
so you can. Okay? Sheesh!
cmk
cmk
AS IF, When people in Nichiren Shoshu ACCUSE SGI
members of setting fire to their homes when they don't have proof,
and say they had witnesses with NO WITNESS SIGNATURES
on their police report, and tell us this is why they are shakubukuing
us, DO WE NEED DEBUNKING? GET A CLUE, who's the CULT?
IF you did have witnesses, then WHY NO SIGNATURES
on that police report. Did you really think it wouldn't be READ?
We were told that there were witnesses, then WHY no signatures?
Look, I went to NST to see why someone I knew was there.
I found out she had NO reason for her hate of SGI except a
grudge she had from YEARS previous. NST/SGI/NSA all have/had
PEOPLE. PEOPLE are a problem, not SGI. A person created
a problem for her, NOT SGI! You have to stop your STUPID
accusations because we are going to nail you to the wall
when you lie.
So why blame Ikeda? Because it's easier than getting along
with people that are not ALL good. What do you expect? NST
will have the same problems, and THEN what are you going to
do? Blame Hokekko? Blame Danto? Have ANOTHER dispute?
You have had several already because you cannot get along with
others. NST has broken off from how many other organizations?
Get a clue! It's time you realize WHAT THE REAL problem was
and it's not that SGI is a cult!
cmk
C
> On Dec 11 2009, 4:22 pm, C <nospamm...@please.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan
>>
>> doors opened' 4-8-97 wrote:
>>> I would be happy just to discuss the transfer box (or the lack of it)
>>> and what the implications are of such a disaster for Kosen Rufu: what
>>> the fraudulent nature of the High Priesthood means in a sect that
>>> worships the High Priest.
>>> -Chas.
>> The problem is that you are not qualified to discuss anything important.
>> All you're qualified to do is parrot the SGI FUD and spam it for over a
>> decade. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
>>
>> --
>> C
>
> AS IF.
True,
> All you people do is down SGI 24/7. OVER AND OVER with
> NO PROOF whatsoever!
You mean like you do with Nichiren Shoshu? If it weren't for Nichiren
Shoshu, Ikeda would be a collection agent and an unknown person. The
Soka Gakkai would have become a third rate business school. Are you
totally ignorant of *everything*?
> Why don't you get a job!
I own my own business.
> We are darn tired of hearing you.
>
> cmk
The irony!
--
C
C
> Everyone should just call SGI a cult
> because Nikken says so, is that right?
>
> cmk
>
The French government calls it a cult. Cult watcher organizations call
it a cult. I was a member for 22 years and I KNOW it's a cult.
--
C
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Shu) does involves Nichiren Shu. They are not separable, the mold and
its slime.
Any time you want to talk about the Transfer Box, Kurt, all you have
to do is start talking, like maybe with an explanation of where it is,
and why you don't have it?
-Chas.
Reginald Carpenter
Re. "Chas"/ anonymous poster posting, 1/18/10, 1:52pm, I changed the
subject/ title to: Nichiren Shu (shoo!) & Nichiren Shoshu (shoo!)
Slanderers!
***************************************************Zen (Victoria,
Kisala), Nichiren Shu's Petry, Kempon Hokke's Buku-Mark & Nichiren
Shoshu's Bratcher Perpetrate Coordinated Attacks Against Makiguchi &
Toda of the Soka Gakkai to Cover Up Zen and Nichiren Temple Complicity
in the Shinto Pacific War
Date: Mon, Jan 18, 2010, 1:52pm
From: Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been
polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren <p2q1r...@aol.com>
RC comments: Re. the new subject/ title, the Nichiren Shu (shoo!) &
Nichiren Shoshu (shoo!) are Slanderers and just like "two peas in a
pod": one burns Up & forges their Gosho, the other one burns Up temples
& violates their Gosho! LOL.
WorldPeace! }:<{0
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
crimes and should have swung at the gallows after the war, just like
Julius Streicher did at Nuremberg. Their continued persecution of Mr.
Makiguchi and Mr. Toda is the scream of guilt reaching up from the
depths of hell.
-Chas.
juanjo
Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
wrote:
Yet again you revise reality to conform to your twisted view of the
world. Most importantly the various points I made using the sources
within the Soka Gakkai which refute your nonsense completely.
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Just because you find a quote from someone in the SGI that disagrees
with me does not make me wrong.
Rightness or wrongness is not a team sport.
An individiual is either speaking correctly or incorrectly at any
point in time.
One refutes an error with facts, not by quoting a difference in point
of view with someone on the same team as the person you differ with.
So, let me repeat the facts, and see if you can refute a single line
in what I say:
Reginald Carpenter
Re. "Chas"/ anonymous poster posting, 1/18/10, 1:52pm, I changed the
subject/ title to: Nichiren Shu (shoo!) & Nichiren Shoshu (shoo!)
Slanderers!
Nichiren Shu's Petry, Kempon Hokke's Buku-Mark & Nichiren Shoshu's
Bratcher Perpetrate Coordinated Attacks Against Makiguchi & Toda of the
Soka Gakkai to Cover Up Zen and Nichiren Temple Complicity in the Shinto
Pacific War
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Mon, Jan 18, 2010, 1:52pm
From: Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been
polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren <p2q1r...@aol.com>
"Chas" wrote:
Everything that Nichiren Shoshu (those running dog lackeys of Nichiren
Shu) does involves Nichiren Shu. They are not separable, the mold and
its slime.
Any time you want to talk about the Transfer Box, Kurt, all you have to
do is start talking, like maybe with an explanation of where it is, and
why you don't have it?
-Chas.
---------------------------------------------------
RC comments: Re. the new subject/ title, the Nichiren Shu (shoo!) &
Nichiren Shoshu (shoo!) are Slanderers and just like "two peas in a
pod": one burns Up & forges their Gosho, the other one burns Up temples
& violates their Gosho! LOL.
WorldPeace! }:<{0
Re-edited & reposted 1/29/10, 8:35am CST
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
juanjo
Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
wrote:
Yet again you revise reality to conform to your twisted view of the
world. Now you seek to change the subject, moving to the actions of
the various religious establishments issuing statements of support for
the Japanese war effort while ignoring Makiguchi's own such
statements. Most importantly you ignore the various points I made
using the sources within the Soka Gakkai which refute your nonsense
about Makiguchi being a pacifist completely.
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-
Confirming Makiguchi's Pacifism & Exposing Putative Scholar Brian
Victoria's Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research, for Jon Petry
Jon Petry initially states,
| Chas is truly a special case. In fact I tend to think
| at times he is doing this effort on his own while at
| others I think this is all part of some silly SGI
| program to keep any real discussion on this board shut
| down. After all ARBN did a lot of damage to the SGI
| story line early on when people fist started using the
| internet. People found out quickly that there were
| other schools of Nichiren Buddhism than the SGI. They
| found out there were other versions of history than the
| one pushed by SGI. They found out that the SGI was much
| smaller than they were told it was. They were exposed
| to a serious critique of the SGI for the first time.
| And they asked questions of their senior leaders,
| questions that their senior leaders could not answer.
|
| The truth can be inconvenient at times and the SGI
| leadership has been squirming for a number of years as
| the number of people questioning it has grown, people
| who cannot merely be dismissed as mentally deranged as
| the SGI has attempted to label them in the past. Worse
| yet events in their history have been exposed to the
| glare of public exposure and they do not like that.
|
| For example:
|
| SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who
| stood up to the Japanese government during WWII and was
| pacifist.
|
| SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist
| prior to WWII. However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda
| were not pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
| There are speeches in existence in which they affirm
| their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
| However they did remonstrate against the imposition of
| the Imperial Talisman as an object of reverence as well
| as in their interpretation of Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged
| the Japanese Government to suppress all other Buddhist
| sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren
| Buddhism. They were imprisoned for the crime of lesse
| majesty, for their disrespect of the Imperial Talisman
| not because they were pacifists. This claim by the SGI
| does add insult to the injury endured by thousands of
| Buddhists in Japan who did demonstrate against the war
| and who were abandoned by the leaderships of their
| respective sects. Many of those people were imprisoned
| and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
| into exile.
|
| SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its
| principles and never compromised them.
|
| SGI Fact 1: The examples of the SGI violating its own
| principles are in fact too numerous to detail. But one
| which is relevant to Chas' regular rants is the claim
| that they have held fast to Nikko's admonitions while
| the NST has not. In particular they chastise the NST
| for sending priests for education at Rissho University
| which is run by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently they
| have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
| university, some with the approval of their own
| governing body in Japan. Of even greater amusement
| however are two other events. Shortly after the split
| between the SGI and the NST in the early 1990's the SGI
| approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
| affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu
| and pay for all overseas missionary work, of course with
| them running it. The Nichiren Shu, having seen what the
| SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly
| declined the offer. The second incident occurred when
| the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu and offered a
| million US dollars for a Nichiren authored Mandala. This
| offer was also rejected.
|
| SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
|
| SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service
| about democracy has been adamant about stamping out any
| attempts by its membership to adopt democratic
| principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
| SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their
| pleasure with no accountability to the rank and file.
| In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in
| the Nichiren Shu, the lay organizations did have elected
| leaders, the SGI through proxies such as the Rubys and
| other made posts belittling that fact. Similarly the
| SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
| towards actual financial accountability, keeping its
| finances a closely held secret. Members have no
| knowledge of what happens to their money once it is
| donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is to
| spent. This is vastly different from say NONA, the
| Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which
| regularly provides information to its members as to what
| funds have been taken in and how they have been spent,
| including a say at the local level as to how they should
| be spent.
|
| These are but a few of the issues that have been exposed
| here on ARBN over the years and caused the SGI no small
| amount of trouble. They are inconvenient truths that
| Chas and others like him would just as soon see burried,
| never to see the light of day. So Chas avoids them
| through his spam.
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
Chas. replies,
From Jon Petry,
| Chas is truly a special case. [snip]
Everyone is a special case. Your opinion of who I am and why I speak
are your opinions, as are yours of the impact of ARBN. Slandering the
Sangha is not a good cause. There are other schools of Buddhism,
distortions of Nichiren and Buddhism in general, yet only Nikko
Shonin's Fuji School correctly practices the Law at the heart of the
Lotus Sutra instead of incessantly slandering it. On this point I
offer you three quotes from the Gosho Zenshu, one from Sensei and one
from Nikko Shonin (I capitalize the relevant lines for clarity):
Quote #1 - From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p.
77-78, Chapter Seven - The Parable of the Phantom City, Point Seven,
on the passage "Now you must press forward diligently / so that
together you may [all] reach the place where the treasure is.",
. The Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings says: The
. word "all" refers to the Ten Worlds. The word "together"
. refers to the words [of the Buddha in chapter two, Expedient
. Means] "hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without
. any distinction between us." The word "reach" means to
. arrive at the level of the highest effect, the state of
. Buddhahood. "The place where the treasure is," the treasure
. land, is the holy mountain, Eagle Peak.
.
. Nichiren and his followers, those who chant Nam-myoho-renge
. -kyo, one and all will "together reach the place where the
. treasure is." This one word "together" means that, as long
. as they are together with Nichiren, they will reach the
. treasure land. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT TOGETHER WITH HIM, THEY
. WILL FALL INTO THE GREAT CITADEL OF THE AVICHI HELL.
[By the way, the first paragraph clarifies the issue of Buddhist
Democracy, without specifying the form, which I will discuss later on.
(Thank you once again, Nichiren Daishonin.)]
Quote #2 - From "The Minobu Transfer Document", WND II, p. 993,
. I NICHIREN, ENTRUST ALL OF THE TEACHINGS I HAVE PROPAGATED
. THROUGHOUT MY LIFE TO NIKKO, ACHARYA BYAKUREN. He should be
. the great guide and teacher in the spread of the essential
. teaching.
.
. When the head of the nation accepts this Law, the ordination
. platform, or sanctuary, of Hommon-ji temple should be
. established at Mount Fuji.
.
. We must wait for the proper time for this. This is what is
. meant by the specified ordination. My followers should abide
. by this document.
.
. Nichiren
.
. The order of the transmission of the Law: from Nichiren to
. Nikko. The ninth month in the fifth year of Koan [1282],
. cyclical sign mizunoe-uma
Quote #3 - From "The Ikegami Transfer Document", WND II, p. 996,
. I transmit the fifty years of teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha
. to Nikko, Acharya Byakuren. He should be the superintendent
. of Minobu-san Kuon-ji temple. ANYONE, EITHER LAY BELIEVER OR
. CLERIC, WHO GOES AGAINST THIS, IS A PERSON WHO ACTS AGAINST
. THE CORRECT TEACHING.
.
. At Ikegami in Musashi Province
. Nichiren
.
. The thirteenth day of the tenth month in the fifth year of
. Koan [1282], cyclical sign mizunoe-uma
In Living Buddhism (April 1998), President Ikeda wrote an article on
Nikko Shonin's 26 Admonitions.
<http://sgi-usa.org/buddhism/library/SokaGakkai/Study/26Adm/>
Quote #4 - Sensei writes:
. These articles of warning were originally intended for
. priests. Nonetheless, we in the SGI, awakened [to our
. mission] as Bodhisattvas of the Earth, have strictly put
. these admonitions into practice.
.
. President Toda composed and dedicated the following poem to
. youth:
.
. You, young people,
. ENGRAVING IN YOUR HEARTS
. THE TWENTY-SIX PRECEPTS,
. dedicate your lives
. to the path of the Mystic Law.
.
. The "twenty-six precepts" in this poem refers to Nikko
. Shonin's twenty-six warning articles. President Toda urged
. young people to struggle for kosen-rufu, just as the second
. high priest admonished, with the spirit of not begrudging
. their lives.
Quote #5 - President Ikeda completely lists Nikko Shonin's 26
Admonitions, (from which I include the parts relevant to my arguments)
. I will here set forth some articles for the sake of later
. students of Buddhism. This is solely because I treasure the
. [Daishonin's] golden words regarding kosen- rufu.
.
. [... The 26 Admonitions go here...]
.
. I have set forth these 26 articles for the sake of the
. eternal salvation and protection of humankind. THOSE WHO
. VIOLATE EVEN ONE OF THESE ARTICLES CANNOT BE CALLED
. DISCIPLES OF NIKKO.
.
. thirteenth day of the first month of the third year of the
. Genko era (1333).
. Nikko(Seal)
.
. Note: The Fuji school is the line of Nikko Shonin's
. followers. The "late master" is Nichiren Daishonin.
People will continue to believe and hold forth on the idea that there
is even a glimmer of daylight between, or even the tiniest bit of
difference between these wonderful persons, as far as what Buddhism
is. There is not. They all agree with Nichiren Daishonin.
The function of dividing, of pitting one against the other is the
devilish function. The view of Buddhism as being different in any way
from what these men say is in and of itself, the purest delusion and
the fundamental ignorance or darkness.
I'm just as sure as I can be, that your next argument is to declare
everything I quoted as a forgery (the standard Five Senior Priest's
treachery), and to that I quote Nikko Shonin's 3rd Admonition:
. 3. There will [in the future] appear persons who slander our
. school, saying that the Gosho are forged writings. You must
. not associate with such evil priests.
I cannot participate in such a discussion. The rest of your charges
are unsubstantiated, as usual. We will address what substantiation
might consist of, below.
More from Jon Petry,
| ... the SGI leadership has been squirming [snip]
More unsubstantiated and frankly, not substantiable subjective
allegations. Characterizations such as these presented as evidence are
like asking "When did you stop beating your wife?" It is called the
Fallacy of Interrogation, where an unsupported assumption is inserted
in a question, or a challenge argument, in this case.
[See http://members.aol.com/standardcharter/logic.html]
....................................................................
....................................................................
....................................................................
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up
| to the Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
Notice how, without presenting any proof, a statement is pre-
identified as a myth. This is also, the Fallacy of Interrogation.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior
| to WWII. However its founders, Makiguchi and Toda were not
| pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
Notice how you (Jon Petry) state an untruth about the SGI, and then
immediately reverse yourself.
How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a founder of a
group that did not exist until after the war? This logical fallacy has
no name and is frankly pathetic. You don't even believe your own
rhetorical excesses.
As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis], Soka
Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI [international
emphasis], they really are all the same provisional organization, born
in 1930 and going through stages of growth, much like a person does.
Like little Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the arbiter of
what names should go with what things. Are you really suggesting that
our organization should run their candidate names for the sangha by
you for approval? Get real.
More from Jon Petry,
| There are speeches in existence in which they affirm their
| loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
Substantiation would consist of stating "Who, What, When and Where".
What did the specified person say in what publication or speech, at
which location, and when? Waving an unsubstantiated allegation is like
Joe McCarthy waving around his envelope with the names of Communists
in the State Department that he never got around to disclosing (filled
with blank paper).
"Who, What, When, and Where", Jon Petry. Then you are easily refuted
when you make your errors.
I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian Victoria's
articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked, as he takes
statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen priest on a rampage
against the Lotus Sutra and its votaries.) Victoria is neither
researcher nor scholar, in any sense that I would respect. [I have
planned to write a toxic zen story about him, once I get some other
more crucial things out of the way.]
There are three articles (and counting) debunking the roshi's
inaccuracies:
1. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton
in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
Here's two sample paragraphs from page 1,
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage from
. Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The Geography of
. Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that Russia was
. engaged in a policy of expansionism in the search for year
. -round harbors. Victoria asserts that this world view was
. identical to that of the government of Japan, a view used to
. justify the Russo-Japanese War (1904-1905), then the
. annexation of the Korean peninsula (1910) and the founding
. of the puppet state of Manchukuo (1932). Victoria's
. assertion, and his implicit criticism of Makiguchi,
. simplistically links analysis of the global situation with
. the policies taken in response to that. Makiguchi was merely
. voicing what was then the accepted understanding of the
. geopolitical motives for Russia's expansionist policies, a
. view held not only by the Japanese government, but shared by
. the British, with whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese
. Alliance. Certainly I know of no scholar of political
. geography who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one
. that Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not only
. Makiguchi but everyone who studies political geography
. guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
.
. Elsewhere in Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi points out that the
. countries of Western Europe had a great deal of trouble
. operating their colonies, and expresses doubts about the
. value of acquiring colonies, particularly from the point of
. view of the financial burden that they would entail. If
. Victoria had read Jinsei Chirigaku carefully, he would not
. identify the thoughts of Makiguchi with the expansionist
. doctrine of the time.
A putative scholar, indeed. Scholars who make sweeping allegations
need to have a similar sweep in their thorough coverage of the
material, otherwise their conclusions are far too easily upended,
along with any respect for their scholasticism.
Brian Victoria cherry-picks the evidence to support his attacks on
Makiguchi's pacifism in the same manner that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/
Wolfowitz cherry picked the WMD intelligence for their erroneous
arguments for the justification to invade Iraq without provocation.
They simply slavered to get their hands on Saddam, and Victoria simply
slavered to trash Makiguchi ... for some reason [this will be shown
forensically in a circumstantial case for libel].
Miyata's third point is especially damning, although he does not jump
on Brian Victoria with the hobnail boots that I use. [Miyata appears
to be a nice person.] Victoria is clearly completely ignorant of the
circumstances of political discourse at the time, which provides the
context for Makiguchi's view of the Emperor as a constitutional
monarch, versus the military's view of him as absolute and all-
justifying god-emperor. That dispute, which ended in 1935, is not even
noticed by Victoria in his skin-deep analysis of Makiguchi's writings
before 1935.
This demonstrates an utter ignorance of a field which is not his own,
Japanese political history. This is a similar error to Shockley the
Nobel Prize-winning Solid State Physicist burying his career and
reputation eternally, by his "scientific" approach to racial science,
and the bad application of statistics to intelligence testing, that
was so thoroughly debunked in "The Mismeasure of Man" by the late
great Biologist Stephen Jay Gould. [That last is one great book.]
Finally, there is the faulty translation of the line "praying" to the
Emperor, which in context should be beseeching the Emperor, because he
is talking about petitioning the authorities for redress. Now we must
question every line translated by Victoria, as well. Is there anything
left to trust him on? Apparently not.
2. Two Views of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's Attitude toward Japanese
Militarism and Education, by Dayle M. Bethel.
<http://www.iop.or.jp/0313/bethel.pdf>
Bethel finds similar broad errors in Victoria's work, which show that
he simply neglected to read Makiguchi's writings thoroughly, even the
ones that he quotes from!!! This may be simply a lack of mastery of
Japanese, which makes a non-native reader lazy about thoroughly
reading the works of someone. However we may understand the reasons
for the loathing of thorough coverage by those with an agenda, that
Wolfowitzian lack of thoroughness provides a rich ground for exactly
the kind of profound injustice that Brian Victoria has committed
against Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.
Bethel goes to the lengths to prove his point by his extensive
Appendices that constitute half of the paper's content, and which
contain a broad spectrum of Makiguchi's pacifism in his writings and
pound home the charge of cherry-picking with a torrent of counter-
evidence. Bethel pounds him like a stake into the ground, but nicely,
of course. These are nice people.
3. A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese Buddhist History, reviewed by Daniel A. Metraux.
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org/5/metraux04.htm>
This paper is more of an appeal to simple reason, that Victoria's
assertions against Makiguchi are just so totally outweighed by vast
evidence against his allegations, that they are totally unsupportable.
More from Jon Petry,
| However they did remonstrate against the imposition of the
| Imperial Talisman as an object of reverence as well as in
| their interpretation of Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the
| Japanese Government to suppress all other Buddhist sects
| and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
This is a distorted description of what Nichiren asks people to
observe, and to do. In brief,
1. The Lotus Sutra is Shakyamuni's highest teaching and in the Nirvana
Sutra, Shakyamuni makes his final demand that the followers of the
Buddha honestly discard the provisional teachings (T'ien-T'ai
identifies these as the pre-Lotus Sutra perfect teachings, Tripitaka
teachings or Hinayana, connecting teachings and specific teachings).
"Buddhism" based on the provisional teachings is not really Buddhism,
according to the Buddha. See below.
<http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=3D815>
2. Once the highest practice of the Law at the heart of the Lotus
Sutra was expounded by Nichiren in the Gosho, lesser Lotus Sutra
practices join the provisional teachings as the enemies of the Lotus
Sutra.
3. From quote #1, either you are in the Treasure Land with Nichiren
Daishonin, or in Avichi Hell. I defer to your enlightened decision as
to your choice of path, of course.
4. Nichiren Daishonin wants you to follow Nikko Shonin exactly (from
quotes #2 and #3).
5. Nikko Shonin wants you not to ignore even one of his 26 Admonitions
(from quote #5).
6. Josei Toda wants the followers of Nikko (the SGI) to engrave the 26
Admonitions in our hearts in quote #4 (we are not a precepts practice,
because Nichiren states that "Precepts are traitorous" in the "14
Slanders" Gosho, so that is why we engrave them in our hearts, and not
obey them as a set of rules).
7. Every single one of these documents was carefully handed to me by
President Ikeda, without whom I would never have heard about Nam-
Myoho- Renge-Kyo. (Thank you, Sensei.)
8. There are no accidents in this chain of events and documents.
Accept it or not, Jon Petry !!!
Followers of Nichiren "wipe out" slanderous temples by converting
their believers to the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren's practice according
to the Gosho. [From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p.
77]
As the government forced the followers of the Fuji School into
practicing Shinto, if those unfortunate victims complained that the
authorities should be selecting a correct Buddhism, instead of the
pitiful corruption and sham of a religion that is Shinto, who's to
blame them? Of course, when the government is selecting your religion
for you, they will never, ever get it right (hence the first amendment
to the U.S. Constitution).
More from Jon Petry,
| They were imprisoned for the crime of lesse majesty, for
| their disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they
| were pacifists.
There was no law against pacifism, because the Japanese government of
the time could not conceive of it. So the absence of that specific
pacifism charge against them is insufficient evidence of non-pacifism.
Openly stating that the Shinto Talisman was not a valid religious
object was the same thing as stating that the Emperor was not a god.
Either action was clear treason against the god-Emperor and his holy
war, and hence it was in-your-face-arrest-me pacifism, of the most
noble kind.
This is because these acts removed the religious justification for the
conflict itself, and also removed the blanket Shinto-Zen holy
authorization for war criminality and holocaust action ("The hand that
holds the sword is the Buddha's hand" - D.T. Suzuki). This is all
summarily explained in Miyata's paper.
More from Jon Petry,
| This claim by the SGI does add insult to the injury
| endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan who did
| demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
| leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those
| people were imprisoned and executed. Others such as
| Nichidatsu Fujii were sent into exile.
Yeah. The point is that individuals of those Buddhist organizations
were fooled into believing that the leaders would stand up against the
military government. When the time came, all of those Buddhist leaders
and their organizations folded, or were arrested and gave in to
pressure from the police. This left their members to suffer the worst
form of persecution combined with the humiliation of abandonment by
their leaders. Shame !!!
Of the leaders of the various Buddhist movements that stood against
the war, only Josei Toda resisted to the end of the war, after
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi had resisted until his death. Among all the
Buddhist organizations, only the SGI in the person of Josei Toda,
resisted and survived to the end, never giving in to the persecution
even in the tiniest way. Makiguchi, as he was led to the detention
center clinic where he soon died, refused to even take the arm of the
guard who offered to help him. THAT is real and determined, enduring
resistance.
Oddly, Brian Victoria seems to have missed this salient point, or to
be incapable of mentioning it ... for some reason? Let me deal with
that now, and unlike the others, I am not in any way a nice person.
In his book "Zen at War" first published in 1997, he has a 6th chapter
on the resistance to the Zen-state war machine. This chapter is in two
sections, organized resistance and the resistance of individuals. In
the organized resistance section he talks about the initial resistance
of very few groups, all of which were crushed. The last resistance
group (he states erroneously) was the Youth League for Revitalizing
Buddhism (Shinko Bukkyo Seinen Domei) led by a man named Seno. On page
73, Victoria describes Seno's arrest for treason against the emperor
system and capitalism (fascists hate communists),
| Seno ... In 1942, however, he was given an early release
| from prison due to ill health. By that time, of course, all
| traces of the League had been eradicated. So, too, had all
| traces of the Buddhist resistance to Japan's war efforts
| (8).
Buried at the end of the book in Note 8 on page 201, is Brian
Victoria's ridiculous explanation of why he neglects to mention the
Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, which would upset his point that Buddhists did not
stand up to Imperial State Zen. His actions are partly explained by
the fact that chapter 6 would have to be re-written, since the central
thesis would be wrong. Victoria is a Zen Roshi, and of course the
culpability of Zen in the war is more easily borne if no one acted to
stop them and the complicity was then universally shared by all
Japanese Buddhists. [Then everyone is corrupted and evil, so nobody
can point fingers at Zen.]
He states in Note 8, that the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai was unworthy to be
mentioned because the arrest of their leaders was for not accepting
the Shinto Talisman, and they were simply being intolerant of other
religions. Once again, his ignorance of context, and his skin deep
coverage of the material while cherry-picking the evidence leads him
to the wrong conclusion. If he knew anything about Nichiren Buddhism,
he would know that neither Makiguchi nor Toda would ever physically
bow to an alter once it was defiled by a corrupt object from a
slanderous Buddhism, like the Shinto Talisman.
You cannot defeat an evil, if you continually bow to it.
In fact, that was the purpose of the Shinto Talisman, to force the
people of Japan to bow to the principle that the Emperor was a god,
and that the war was therefore a holy crusade and the holocaust
actions and war crimes committed were therefore not slanders of the
Buddhist Law. Upending all of that at the root, by Makiguchi and
Toda's fearless resistance, was the greater treason against the
Emperor and the war. Both Seno's group and Makiguchi's groups were
Buddhists. Both were pacifists, in spite of the wrongful assertions of
Victoria's sadly lacking scholarship. Both demonstrated organized
resistance to the military regime. Finally, Seno dropped out in 1942,
while Makiguchi and Toda persisted to the bitter end, upending
Victoria's chapter 6 premise. This injustice against the votaries of
the Lotus Sutra by a Zen Roshi was no accident.
Forensically, we can see the order of Brian Victoria's offenses
against the truth.
1. First he makes his thesis in chapter 6, page 73, of his book "Zen
At War" in 1997, that no Buddhist organization stood against the war
after 1942, even though Makiguchi and Toda were arrested on July 6th,
1943 after repeatedly speaking out against the divinity of the Emperor
in discussion meeting after discussion meeting in the Soka Kyoiku
Gakkai during 1941-1942, knowingly in front of secret police
informants. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi died in the Tokyo Detention Center
on November 18th, 1944. Josei Toda was released from detention
unrepentant, shortly before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and
the end of the war.
Even if you did not believe that Makiguchi was a pacifist, you would
have to describe the stubborn actions of the Soku Kyoiku Gakkai as
"organized resistance" to the Shinto-Zen state and therefore the
Imperial Way Buddhism war effort, and to the divine emperor system
during the war. Which would have made Victoria's chapter 6 at least a
negligent oversight. Victoria himself, presents the view that the
subjugation of all the temples under Imperial Way Buddhism was part of
the war effort in the second half of his book, which makes resistance
to Imperial Way Buddhism effectively war resistance. His own views IN
THE SAME BOOK would make this "oversight" an irrational
compartmentalizing of the prima facia evidence, causing the
destruction of his arguments across half of his book.
2. Adding the buried Note 8, on page 201, as an afterthought to cover
his buck-naked ass, while neglecting to reform his thesis in chapter
6, is clear and unmistakable intellectual dishonesty.
3. In the fall of 2001, Victoria writes his cherry-picking attack
paper, "The Putative Pacifism of Soka Gakkai Founder Makiguchi
Tsunesaburo" (Japanese Studies; Dec2001, Vol. 21 Issue 3, page 275).
In the view of 1 and 2 above, the effort to write this paper is
unmistakably exposed as a guilty murderer's attack on the reputation
of his murder victim in the court of public opinion, to avoid
prosecution for the original crime: Victoria's initial scholarly
laziness and incompetence of judgement in an area of expertise outside
his own, and the subsequent coverup of his foolishness in a notation
at the end of the book. Furthermore, he also duplicated his cherry-
picking attack article in the Journal of Global Buddhism
<http://www.globalbuddhism.org>, also published in the fall of 2001.
Once was not enough.
4. Finally, Victoria stubbornly regurgitates his identical spew in the
2006 second edition of "Zen At War" on the same page 73, although Note
8 is now relegated even further back to page 239. Now it is clearly
not just a negligent oversight that became a discardable data point
(more like the majority of the data thrown out whole-hog) that in turn
disturbed a cherished theorem ... it becomes a serial murder of the
truth. So, a great man's reputation is tarred to cover up his critic's
lack of meticulous and comprehensive study of the great man's work and
the simple historiography of his time.
Diggin' a deep, deep hole, dudes (Jon and Brian). An abyss. Avichi
hell for countless kalpas. Repent now !!!
............................................................
............................................................
............................................................
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles
| and never compromised them.
Once again, the Fallacy of Interrogation. See the discussion above.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 1: The examples of the SGI violating its own
| principles are in fact too numerous to detail.
Both the quality and quantity of your substantiation are insufficient.
No human organization is perfect, but we must not let the perfect be
the enemy of the good. Nichiren Shoshu and the transfer-boxless
exploits of Nikkenists who through outright fraud stole the Fuji
School from the followers of Nikko Shonin ... well, that's not merely
imperfect. That is a wholesale ripoff of a religion with the collusion
of the Japanese government. The Japanese government and the courts
need to set things right, now that the transfer box has been shown not
to be in the possession of the fraudulent High Priest-of-the-moment.
More from Jon Petry,
| But one which is relevant to Chas' regular rants is the
| claim that they have held fast to Nikko's admonitions while
| the NST has not.
This is the typical confusion. Priests are not lay-persons, even
though in NST they have blurred the distinction as far as personal
behavior is concerned, while retaining and grandly enhancing the
higher caste-distinctions between priests and laity.
Both Nichiren Daishonin and Nikko Shonin knew the difference between
priests and lay-persons. Their clear and unmitigated disregard for the
integrity, personal and otherwise, of the vast majority of priests
during their time is on the record. They wanted to avoid, as far as
they could, the cancer of an evil and perpetual dynasty of priests
taking root in the Fuji School. They were also clearly not served well
by Fuji School priests after Nichimoku Shonin, with the singular
exception of Nichikan Shonin.
As an example of the discernment of Nikko's views expressed in the 26
Admonitions between priests and lay persons, let's look at Admonition
#25,
. 25. My disciples should conduct themselves as holy priests,
. patterning their behavior after that of the late master.
. However, even if a high priest or a priest striving for
. practice and understanding should temporarily deviate from
. [the principle of] sexual abstinence, he may still be
. allowed to remain in the priesthood [as a common priest
. without rank].
Since gazing at my lovely kindergarten teacher at the age of 5, I have
not had a moment even approaching the thought of any sexual abstinence
for myself. So I would never have entertained the delusion that I
belonged in a priesthood requiring abstinence. This is merely being
honest about oneself and not misrepresenting for corrupt reasons.
As a lay follower of Nikko Shonin, clearly and unmistakably, the only
way that I can follow the 25th Admonition is to NOT follow any priest
who is not celibate, or any high priest who tolerates lapses of
celibacy in the priesthood. This is because any one of these lapses is
also a cessation of their being a follower of Nikko Shonin, and the
initiation of their becoming a fraudulent priest of the Fuji School.
Although it is not necessary to follow what happens when Fuji School
priests abandon Nikko Shonin (the fact of that abandonment alone, is
evidence enough against them), let's see what happens when faith is
abandoned.
Sex, marriage and having families are the underlying problems with
Nichiren Shoshu (and other) priesthood clans and their clan wars for
control. If the family relationships of celibate priests were extended
to the lay-members as children, rather than the filial family
relationships of non-celibate priests to inheriting descendents, none
of the troubles of the Fuji School in the last century would have
occurred.
On April 25, 1872 the Meiji government lifted the Tokugawa ban on
priests marrying.
From "The Untold History of the Fuji School", Ch. 10, p. 92-93:
<http://sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/10_UHFS_Chapter_10.pdf>
. Once the restrictions were lifted by the new regime, priests
. gladly started to marry. This is a clear indication that the
. Buddhist community had lost the integrity to decide on
. matters of Buddhist tradition. Instead, priests regarded the
. government as the legitimate authority over their
. traditions. Put simply, the years of strict government
. control had made the Buddhist clergy entirely dependent on
. political authority. Some contend that the Meiji government
. issued the decree to enfeeble the morale of the Buddhist
. community and thereby elevate Shinto, which was viewed as
. the chief means of extolling imperial authority.
.
. Nichiden criticized priests of other Buddhist schools for
. their elation over the government decree, regarding it as an
. expression of imperial mercy. He stated that despite the
. trend in the Buddhist community, the priesthood of the Fuji
. School should uphold the precepts of the Daishonin and Nikko
. Shonin and remain celibate. But eventually the priesthood at
. Taiseki-ji succumbed to the trend.
.
. The priesthood's renouncement of celibacy had a significant
. effect on the development of the Fuji School. It gave rise
. to nepotism and the hereditary succession of priesthood
. positions and temple properties within the school. Factions
. of related priests formed, vying for control. Instead of
. regarding the spread of the Daishonin's Buddhism as their
. goal, many priests became increasingly bound by family ties
. and personal interests.
Having decided to follow Meiji while spurning Nikko Shonin and his
25th admonition, the 54th High Priest Nichi'in (from 1869-1874) was
soon (through cause and effect) faced with an unfortunate circumstance
(5 months later), from his newly adopted Meiji master,
From 'Confirming Our Path of Faith - Temple Issue Handbook' (green
booklet), p. 36:
<http://sokaspirit.org/resource/downloads/Confirming_Our_Path.pdf>
. [Nichi'in] Requests the government to allow the sect to
. remain independent of other Nichiren schools. However, the
. government orders all Nichiren schools to merge despite
. their differing doctrines to make it easier for the
. government to control them.
Once forced into the broad and all-encompassing (1) Nichiren School in
September 1872, the long and tawdry road was chosen for Taisekiji:
[(2) May 1874: placed under the Shoretsu School of all temples that
think the essential teaching is superior, as a sub-branch of the broad
Nikko branch.
(3) February 1876: placed under a separate Nikko Branch (later renamed
Hon'Mon) of the broad Nichiren School, under the 55th HP Nippu.
(4) September 1900: Taisekiji is 'allowed' to become its own branch,
the Fuji branch of the Nichiren School, under 56th HP Nichio, the
first married HP.
(5) June 1912: Taisekiji is 'allowed' to become its own school:
Nichiren Shoshu.]
So, causes follow effects, which always spring from causes. But like I
said, the mere evidence of abandoning the principles initially, was
enough for me to consider them as corrupt without the playing out of
that corruption.
After priests could marry in the Fuji School and still retain their
position in the hierarchy as priests pretending to have the appearance
of Nikko Shonin and Nichiren Daishonin, without the substance ...
Nichiren Shoshu was doomed.
However, the abstinence of lay members, even those who are obsessed
with sex, is not in the focus of interest for Nikko Shonin in this
document. Lay abstinence traditions like the Shakers, are a self-
limiting proposition. The Fuji School has a self-limiting priesthood
abstinence tradition, thanks to Nikko Shonin and his 25th Admonition.
For Admonitions 18 and 19, the difference between laity and priesthood
is obvious and indisputable.
. 19. Black robes should not be worn [by priests].
.
. 20. Jikitotsu should not be worn [by priests].
So, priests and lay-persons are different. And Fuji School priests are
as different from Nichiren Shoshu priests as day is from night.
More from Jon Petry,
| In particular they chastise the NST for sending priests for
| education at Rissho University which is run by the Nichiren
| Shu. Apparently they have forgotten that SGI members have
| also attended that university, some with the approval of
| their own governing body in Japan.
SGI lay-persons who ignore the warnings of Nikko Shonin's 26
admonitions will suffer and then dig their way out of the hole,
through practice (and that includes their leaders who bid them to
ignore Nikko Shonin). Nikko said nothing about changing the status of
lay-persons who fall short. He was quite explicit about how he treated
priests who fell short, he kicked their ass out the door. For a
TEMPORARY deviation from abstinence, and that doesn't mean marriage or
weekly trips to the red light district, he said to demote them to
common priests. Either married or philandering priests are clearly not
acceptable to Nikko Shonin, and he doesn't seem to care which is
which.
This is the pattern. Priests are not treated the same as lay-persons,
because their corruption leads to the current evil state of affairs,
with a contest for control of the transfer box, and fraud in the
succession of the position of the high priest.
The second admonition, and second only to practice according to the
gosho, means that metriculating at Nichiren Shu's Rissho University is
a violation,
. 2. The doctrines of the five senior priests differ in every
. regard from the teachings of the late master.
The training for priests at Rissho University is vastly different from
the education for lay-persons. If you go to their website (which I
would not recommend to my worst enemy), you will find they teach the
caligraphy and design of Gohonzon, along with all the forms of
Japanese Buddhism. Gohonzon pop out of their instructor websites, here
and there, like the nadir or absolute zero of pornography. (Bring your
barf-bag.)
There is a class where they teach that the Dai-Gohonzon is a fake,
Nikko and Nichimoku are liars, and all the transfer documents are
forgeries.
Does anyone with even a tiny discerning intellect think for a second
that Nikko Shonin would approve of having his priests trained there?
After a cursory inspection, I figure that Fuji School priests and
candidates attending Rissho University are violating at least the
following admonitions of Nikko Shonin (I have capitalized the relevant
phrases),
1. The doctrines of the Fuji school MUST NOT DIFFER in the least from
the teachings of the late master.
2. The doctrines of the five senior priests DIFFER IN EVERY REGARD
from the teachings of the late master.
3.There will [in the future] appear persons who slander our school,
SAYING THAT THE GOSHO ARE FORGED writings. You must not associate with
such evil priests.
4. Those who produce forged writings and say that they are Gosho, or
who practice with the view that the ESSENTIAL AND THEORETICAL
TEACHINGS [of the Lotus Sutra] ARE THE SAME, are parasites in the
lion's body.
5. You should refrain from indulging in poetry or non- Buddhist works,
or from engaging in idleness and chatter WITHOUT [having the aim of]
REBUKING SLANDER.
6. Lay believers should be strictly prohibited from visiting
[heretical] temples and shrines. Moreover, PRIESTS SHOULD NOT VISIT
SLANDEROUS TEMPLES OR SHRINES, which are inhabited by demons, even if
only to have a look around. To do so would be a pitiful violation [of
the Daishonin's Buddhism.] This is not my own personal view; it wholly
derives from the sutras [of Shakyamuni] and the writings [of Nichiren
Daishonin].
9. Until they are well versed in the difference between the
provisional and true teachings, followers of later generations should
visit THIS TEMPLE, setting aside the debt of gratitude they owe to
their parents and teachers, and undertake various studies in order to
free themselves [from the sufferings of birth and death] and attain
the Way.
10.Unless you have a thorough understanding of and firm faith in the
teachings [of Nichiren Daishonin], you SHOULD NOT STUDY T'IEN-T'AI'S
DOCTRINES.
11. Followers of this school should ENGRAVE THE TEACHINGS OF THE GOSHO
IN THEIR LIVES and thereby inherit the ultimate principles expounded
by the master. THEN, if they have any leisure time, they should
inquire into the doctrine of the T'IEN-T'AI SCHOOL.
17. DO NOT FOLLOW even the high priest IF HE GOES AGAINST THE BUDDHA'S
LAW and propounds his own views.
18. Even if a view is set forth unanimously by a conference [of
believers], the high priest should repudiate it IF IT GOES AGAINST THE
BUDDHA'S LAW.
19. BLACK ROBES SHOULD NOT BE WORN [by priests].
20. JIKITOTSU SHOULD NOT BE WORN [by priests].
21. You SHOULD NOT SIT TOGETHER WITH SLANDERERS OF THE LAW [at
religious ceremonies] for fear of suffering the same punishment as
they.
22. You MUST NOT ACCEPT OFFERINGS FROM SLANDERERS OF THE LAW.
25. My disciples should CONDUCT THEMSELVES AS HOLY PRIESTS, PATTERNING
THEIR BEHAVIOR AFTER THAT OF THE LATE MASTER. However, even if a high
priest or a priest striving for practice and understanding should
temporarily deviate from [the principle of] sexual abstinence, he may
still be allowed to remain in the priesthood [as a common priest
without rank].
So it is far, far worse for Fuji School priests to get their training
at Rissho University from the Five Senior Priests, than the slander of
an SGI youth division getting a degree from Nichiren Shu that is most
likely not in the Theology department. Both the content is different
and that special mission as a priest for Kosen Rufu is infinitely more
corrupted by that contact.
Proof of this is the following personal experience from Nikken Abe,
who makes an unmistakable admission of past guilt in the training of
priests at Rissho by Nichiren Shoshu. He makes the former errors
obvious by starting his own training school called Fuji Gakurin ...
rather late in the day,
. (Excerpts from
. http://www.geocities.com/smimoza/vol275.html, the "Fake
. [High Priest]" Newsletter:)
.
| "My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu
| has been polluted with Minobu's wicked
| teachings," Nikken confessed at the opening
| ceremony for the Fuji Gakurin School (Dai-
| Nichiren, May 2000 edition).
.
. Fuji Gakurin is the school that Nikken started to
. belatedly replace Rissho University as the source of
. priest trainees for Nichiren Shoshu. Apparently, he only
. took this action after people started talking about the
. 26 Admonitions publicly (Living Buddhism article by
. Daisaku Ikeda in 1998). The sad fact is, that Nichiren
. Shoshu has violated all 26, most by the letter of the
. admonition, but all 26 by their intent.
.
. In relatively short order after being rebuked in 1998,
. Nikken officially opened the Fuji Gakurin School on
. April 10th, 2000. Many attended and heard his
. statements: Nichijun Fujimoto, Nichiyu Yoshida, Nitto
. (Juken) Ohmura, Nichijo (Gikan) Hayase, Nissho (Shinei)
. Yagi, Chief of the Overseas Department Kotoku Obayashi,
. Chief of the Public Relations Department Kogaku Akimoto
. and Vice Chief of the Study Department Kosho Mizushima.
("Fuji Gakurin" must mean "afterthought" in the Nikkenese dialect.)
Nissho (Shinei) Yagi had to be at the opening of Fuji Gakurin, because
he is the President of the School, as we will see later ...
. Nikken went on to state that "he had been contaminated
. by Minobu's teachings"...
.
| "I once attended the University run by
| Nichiren-shu. The hardest thing for me in my
| campus life was that the teacher said many
| false things about the teachings and history
| of Nichiren Daishonin. I had always thought
| that I should refute these false ideas.
| However, I cannot say that that was my true
| intention, because I was only a student."
|.
| "When we constantly hear false things, we will
| be caught up in false ways of thinking, or I
| can say, we will be trapped in it. As I recall
| my early days, false ideas did exist in my
| view of Nichiren Buddhism, especially
| regarding the legitimate teachings of
| Nichiren-shoshu. At that time, I was not able
| to straighten out my thoughts sufficiently
| from the viewpoint of faith, action, study....
| If I were young now, I could study with you,
| young fellows, in these classes, taught by
| these engaged teachers."
.
. But his distorted views from Rissho were not left there
. at the University.
.
. We are reminded of Nikken's words on October 8th, 1985,
. when he attended the completion ceremony of Komyoji
. Temple, Hachioji City, Tokyo. Kotoku Hirayama, the chief
. priest of the temple, asked Nikken, "What is the biggest
. obstacle you had in your practice?" Nikken answered, "It
. is that I could not truly believe in the Gohonzon. I
. cannot believe truly now. I have to really try."
.
. Also, we are reminded of Nikken's statement that
. "Daigohonzon is a fake" from the Kawabe memo. This
. statement seems to be influenced by the author of "view
. of wood honzon is false", Minobu priest Bentetsu
. Yasunaga, who is an associate professor at Minobu's
. Rissho University and chief priest of Zenshoji Temple.
.
. In recent years, the exchange of Minobu
. priests and Nikken sect priests has become
. more frequent. Monks of the Nikken sect make
. pilgrimages to temples of Minobu sect with
. Hokkeko members, or they invite Minobu monks
. to Taisekiji. General chief of the Hokkeko
. federation, Kisoji Yanagisawa, made a
. pilgrimage to Kuonji Temple, the general head
. temple of the Minobu sect. We [the Fake
. Newsletter] have mentioned this issue before,
. and even "Emyo," one of organ papers of Nikken
. sect, could not argue against this. Taisekiji
. priests Kaido Seki, Jikei Maekawa, Kosho
. Mizushima, Sonfuku Ochiai, Gishu Funabashi,
. all made visits to Minobu's temples
. themselves. They later made excuses during
. lectures at their temples or in their temple
. newsletters, saying, "We went and saw the
. temple but did not chant."...etc.
These arguments and experiences from the afflicted should be enough
for anyone, but of course, reason never prevails with some.
More from Jon Petry,
| Of even greater amusement however are two other events.
| Shortly after the split between the SGI and the NST in the
| early 1990's the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an
| offer. They would affiliate as a lay organization within
| the Nichiren Shu and pay for all overseas missionary work,
| of course with them running it. The Nichiren Shu, having
| seen what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and
| firmly declined the offer. The second incident occurred when
| the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu and offered a million US
| dollars for a Nichiren authored Mandala. This offer was also
| rejected.
Your amusement at the distress of the SGI caused by the criminal fraud
of Nikken and crew in hijacking the high priest position of Nichiren
Shoshu ... is telling. Gloating over anyone's suffering is the
property of the devilish function. How much worse is it to gloat over
the suffering of the sangha of the votaries of the Lotus Sutra who are
followers of Nikko Shonin, when that suffering is clearly caused by an
injustice involving criminality of priests and the complicity of high
crimes of officials of the Japanese government? Certainly, this kind
of gloating is not a good cause for someone to make.
Finally, your "incidents" are presented without substantiation, Jon
Petry.
Presenting the "Who, What, When and Where" for these "incidents" would
provide a basis for fact-checking and refuting your erroneous
allegations. As they are constituted above, they are little more than
slurs and innuendo with no factual basis whatsoever. I think the "Who"
will be the key starting point.
...................................................................
...................................................................
...................................................................
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
Once again, the Fallacy of Interrogation. See the discussion above.
More from Jon Petry,
| SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about
| democracy has been adamant about stamping out any attempts
| by its membership to adopt democratic principles in its own
| governance. Leaders within the SGI are appointed by the
| higher ups and serve at their pleasure with no
| accountability to the rank and file. In fact when SGI
| members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren Shu,
| the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI
| through proxies such as the Rubys and other made posts
| belittling that fact.
It's amazing to me that people always confuse Democracy with the
direct election of leaders, which may or may not be Democratic. For
instance, if everyone is not allowed to register or to have access to
voting once having been registered, it is not a Democracy. The direct
election of leaders is a specific implementation of political will, as
is the representative election of leaders or the parliamentary system
(party rules). You can have a direct election with only one party, is
that Democracy?
Buddhist Democracy is actually manifested by a discussion meeting in
the SGI. This is because in front of the Gohonzon, we are as the
Buddha states in the Expedient Means chapter 2 of the Lotus Sutra,
"Hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without any distinction
between us." However leaders are chosen, and no way really works
perfectly, cannot undermine the view of the Lotus Sutra, which will
always prevail.
Think of it this way, the worst leader of the Sangha in history was
Nikken Abe, and yet he did us the greatest favor in history by
excommunicating us from the monstrosity of Nichiren Shoshu as it
spiraled downwards into hellishness. No matter how you dislike your
SGI leader, can they be worse, or do better for us, than Nikken did?
[In the extreme case, logic is easily founded or confounded.]
The delusion in Nichiren Shu is that their elected leaders actually
run something, since they are like cattle to the priesthood, who rule
like the Brahmin caste of priests in every other Japanese Buddhist
School. Lamentably so.
More from Jon Petry,
| Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file
| movement towards actual financial accountability, keeping
| its finances a closely held secret. Members have no
| knowledge of what happens to their money once it is donated
| nor are they allowed a say in how it is to spent. This is
| vastly different from say NONA, the Nichiren Shu lay
| organization in the USA, which regularly provides
| information to its members as to what funds have been taken
| in and how they have been spent, including a say at the
| local level as to how they should be spent.
What follows is "In My Humble Opinion", or IMHO. In other words I
don't have a legitimate stand that is objectively supported by
defensible Logic and Reason.
Most members in the SGI-USA who have been around for a while, know
that we are not as of yet solvent (or at least that was true at the
turn of the century, and I don't think it has changed). It is the
Japanese members who largely pay our way, for which my gratitude is
unbounded, and for which reason it is important to really step up on
yearly Zaimu.
I don't think more visibility improves the picture of how our money is
spent, when it's not all our money initially. Once we actually do
support our own movement fully, more accountability might be in order.
Note that the people who scream for accountability and transparency
are not necessarily those who give more in the way of offerings, they
are more like those who tend to be political and feel neglected or out
of power, and need to grasp power through auditing the books. This is
not very productive.
The truth is that nowadays nonprofits have certain reporting
requirements to the government (since Jim Bakker, et al), and once
those are met, everything else is optional. IMHO, of course. I have
spent enough time working for fortune five hundred companies to know
that nobody gets finance right as they grow bigger. Nobody.
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
Finally from Jon Petry,
| These are but a few of the issues that have been exposed
| here on ARBN over the years and caused the SGI no small
| amount of trouble. They are inconvenient truths that Chas
| and others like him would just as soon see burried, never to
| see the light of day. So Chas avoids them through his spam.
Apparently wrong on all counts, since I have inconvenienced myself to
ravage your every untruth.
-Chas.
................................................................
................................................................
................................................................
Jon Petry rebuts the Chas. reply,
> Makiguchi's Pacifism Confirmed, and Putative Scholar Brian Victoria's
> Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research Exposed, for Jon Petry -
> >From Jon Petry,
> | Chas is truly a special case. [snip the rest]
> Everyone is a special case. Your opinion of who I am and why I speak
> are your opinions, as are yours of the impact of ARBN. Slandering the
> Sangha is not a good cause.
And yet Chas in his own little way has worked hard to slander people
who have done him no harm. Spewing [his word] forth Soka Gakkai
agitprop left and right, making wild accusations unconfirmed by any
reliable source of information. However when Chas' motives for doing
so are questioned he screams like a stuck pig and runs back to his
handlers like a good little droid to come up with further slander and
half truths. This has been the hall mark of Soka Gakkai agitprop
since the 1950's.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up
> | to the Japanese government during WWII and was pacifist.
> Notice how, without presenting any proof, a statement is pre-
> identified as a myth. This is also, the Fallacy of Interrogation.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior
> | to WWII. However its founders, Makiguchi and Toda were not
> | pacifists, in fact they were far from it.
> Notice how you (Jon Petry) state an untruth about the SGI, and then
> immediately reverse yourself.
I didn't and you were kind enough to conform it for me. Soka Kyoiku
Gakkai was an organization whose stated goals were educational reform
whilte the Soka gakkai as it presently exists has strayed far from the
original goal and now presents itself as a religious organization.
> How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a founder of a
> group that did not exist until after the war? This logical fallacy has
> no name and is frankly pathetic. You don't even believe your own
> rhetorical excesses.
Sophistry is not a substitute for legitimate argument.
> As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis], Soka
> Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI [international
> emphasis], they really are all the same provisional organization, born
> in 1930 and going through stages of growth, much like a person does.
> Like little Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
see what I mean.
> Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the arbiter of
> what names should go with what things. Are you really suggesting that
> our organization should run their candidate names for the sangha by
> you for approval? Get real.
more sophistry and some personal attack thrown in for good measure.
> More from Jon Petry,
> | There are speeches in existence in which they affirm their
> | loyalty to the Japanese government and the war.
snip of more sophistry and personal attack
> I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian Victoria's
> articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked, as he takes
> statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen priest on a rampage
> against the Lotus Sutra and its votaries.) Victoria is neither
> researcher nor scholar, in any sense that I would respect. [I have
> planned to write a toxic zen story about him, once I get some other
> more crucial things out of the way.]
I will have more to say about this post later but i did want to
comment on this little tidbit. Chas who has no academic credentials I
am aware of, as if he has such he has not shared them with the group,
has chosen to belittle and slander Dr. Victoria who is a scholar and a
respected one at that. Dr. Victoria has written various articles in
peer reviewed journals as well as books on Buddhism including some
highly critical of the role played by Buddhist organization in Japan
prior to and during World War Two. This includes information highly
critical of his own sect of Zen Buddhism which is the primary subject
of one book. Dr. Victoria has presented papers at conferences on the
subject, including the American Academy of Religions some 10+ years
ago in which he participated in panel discussions on Japanese Buddhism
with Dr. Stone and Dr. Habito among others. I was present at one such
panel discussion on pacifism and Japanese Buddhists in which he
discussed his findings and had a question from the audience from a Ms.
Virginia Strauss [?] who was then the head of the Boston based SGI run
group. She asked about the supposed pacifism of the Soka Gakkai and
Dr. Victoria explained his understanding of the situation. Ms.
Strauss suggested that she would be happy to present him with some
information he was unaware of and he told her he would welcome such an
effort. However instead of this, we have seen an attack by tame SGI
pseudo-scholars in non-peer reviewed publications twisting his words
and excoriating the man.
....................................................................
....................................................................
....................................................................
Chas. rebuts Jon Petry's rebuttal,
| And yet Chas in his own little way has worked hard to
| slander people who have done him no harm. [Snip]
Your characterizations are ludicrous and over-the-top. And how would
you know what harm has been done to whom? You spend a lot of time in
this email screaming in the mirror (projecting your anxieties over
your own out-of-control behavior). Take your own advice.
Look. I'm sure that it dismays you that your icon has made grievous
mistakes and is going to take a fall because of them. Furthermore,
some of this has been brought on by your own raising of the issue
endlessly, which caused me to deal with it, which I will pursue
straight through to the end, without fail.
It's like this: Shitei Funi, mentor and disciple are two (in
appearance) but not two (in essence), are from the same source. This
is why they stand together or fall together. Your attachment to Brian
Victoria and his mistakes, is going to figure prominently in the
speedy revelation of those errors.
____ Uncovering A Fraud ____________________________
There are famous frauds in the literature, such as those in science
(like Piltdown Man and the recent Korean Stem Cell line fiasco) which
involve falsifying evidence to support a desired result, producing a
distorted view of the historical or developmental sequence. In the
physical sciences and in paleontology, anthropology, archeology and
historiography, there are myriad examples of fraud, which always
include 2 elements: anachronism (something is misplaced, out of time
sequence) and falsification (from bad translation to outright forgery
of experimental evidence, historical documents or artifacts).
The most famous fraud of the middle ages was a forged document known
as the Donation of Constantine, which falsely ratified the gift of the
Western Roman Empire (Europe) from Emperor Constantine to Pope
Sylvester and the Catholic Church. According to the document, after
the intentional partitioning, Constantine kept the Eastern Empire
(Byzantium, including Asia Minor: Greece, Palestine, Egypt, etc.) for
himself to rule out of Constantinople (modern-day Istanbul, Turkey).
From "Western Civilization: A Brief History" 5th Ed., by Martin Perry,
p. 178,
. The humanist emphasis on historical scholarship yielded a
. method of critical inquiry that could help to undermine
. traditional loyalties and institutions. Medieval thinkers
. generally did not relate a text to its times but accepted it
. uncritically as an authoritative work of wisdom. In
. contrast, Renaissance humanists approached ancient
. civilization with a critical attitude; they studied texts in
. a historical context and examined them for authenticity and
. accuracy. The work of Lorenzo Valla (c. 1407-1457) provides
. the clearest example of this trend. Educated as a
. classicist, Valla trained the guns of critical scholarship
. on the papacy in his most famous work, Declamation
. Concerning the False Decretals of Constantine. The papal
. claim to temporal authority rested on a document that
. purported to verify the socalled Donation of Constantine,
. through which the Emperor Constantine, when he moved the
. capital of the Roman Empire to Constantinople in the fourth
. century, had given the pope dominion over the entire Western
. Empire. But Valla proved that the document was based on an
. eighth-century forgery because the language at certain
. points was unknown in Constantine's time and did not come
. into use until much later.
Valla noted that this purported document of the 4th century used
language that could not have existed until the 8th century, when he
presumed it was created as a forgery. The 8th century was a time when
church disputes with monarchs, such as Charlemagne, over control of
the Holy Roman Empire were an issue.
This kind of anachronism is called a prochronism and presents an
impossibility that would require time travel, such as the digital
wristwatches that you see on the arms of revolutionary war soldiers in
movies. The other kind, a parachronism, is possible but remarkable,
like seeing a vintage 1920's car on the street driving around.
The Donation of Constantine was a prochronism, and an impossibility.
Remarkably, the Vatican banned Valla's "False Decretals"(1440), and it
was not until the beginning of the 17th century that the Vatican
finally agreed that the Donation of Constantine was a forgery, since
it had become useless in disputes with monarchs at that point.
From the Introduction to "Lorenzo Valla, Discourse on the Forgery of
the Alleged Donation of Constantine", English translation by
Christopher B. Coleman (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1922).
<http://history.hanover.edu/texts/vallaintro.html>:
. The Donation of Constantine (Constitutum Constantini),
. written probably not long after the middle of the eighth
. century, became widely known through its incorporation in
. the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretals (about 847-853). Parts of it
. were included in most of the medieval collections of canon
. law; Anselm's, Deusdedit's, and Gratian's great work (the
. Decretum, or Concordia discordantium canonum). It purports
. to reproduce a legal document in which the Emperor
. Constantine the Great, reciting his baptism and the cure of
. his leprosy at the hands of Sylvester, Bishop of Rome 314
. -336, confirmed the privilege of that pontiff as head of all
. the clergy and supreme over the other four patriarchates;
. conferred upon him extensive imperial property in various
. parts of the world, especially the imperial Lateran palace,
. and the imperial diadem and tiara, and other imperial
. insignia; granted the Roman clergy the rank of the highest
. Roman orders and their privileges; gave Sylvester and his
. successors freedom in consecrating men for certain orders of
. the clergy; it tells how he, Constantine, recognized the
. superior dignity of the Pope by holding the bridle of his
. horse; grants Sylvester Rome, all of Italy, and the western
. provinces, to remain forever under the control of the Roman
. See; and states his own determination to retire to Byzantium
. in order that the presence of an earthly emperor may not
. embarrass ecclesiastical authority. This remarkable document
. was almost universally accepted as genuine from the ninth to
. the fifteenth century.
.
. The question of the position of the bishop of Rome in the
. Christian Church lacks but a few generations of being as old
. as Christianity itself. His relation to secular governments
. became an acute problem as soon as the imperial government
. broke down in Italy, and has remained so to the present
. moment. For centuries the Papacy was the strongest
. institution in western Europe. While its control at any one
. time rested principally on the power it actually possessed
. and on the ability of its representatives, legal theories
. and historical documents played a not inconsiderable part in
. its rise and decline. Of these documents the Donation of
. Constantine was perhaps the most spectacular, even though it
. was not the most important. It was cited by no less than ten
. Popes of whom we know, to mention no lesser writers, in
. contentions for the recognition of papal control, and
. contributed not a little to the prestige of the Papacy. On
. the other hand, when its spuriousness became known, the
. reaction against it, as in Luther's case, contributed
. powerfully to the revolt from Rome. Its century-long
. influence entitles it to a respect difficult for any one who
. now reads it to feel. And Valla's discussion of it contains
. many interesting reflections on the secular power of the
. Papacy, perhaps the most interesting expression in this
. connection of fifteenth century Italian humanism.
.
. Among the achievements of modern historical criticism
. Valla's work was a conspicuous pioneer. Its quality and its
. importance have often been exaggerated, and as often
. underestimated. It is some satisfaction to make it more
. generally available in the original text and translation, so
. that the reader may judge for himself. A critical appraisal
. would have to take into account that Nicholas Cusanus some
. seven years earlier in his De concordantia catholica covered
. part of the same ground even better than Valla did, and
. anticipated some of his arguments. But Valla's treatise is
. more exhaustive) is in more finished and effective literary
. form, and in effect established for the world generally the
. proof of the falsity of the Donation. Moreover, for the
. first time, he used effectively the method of studying the
. usage of words in the variations of their meaning and
. application, and other devices of internal criticism which
. are the tools of historical criticism to-day. So, while
. Valla's little book may seem slight beside later
. masterpieces of investigation and beside systematic
. treatises in larger fields, it is none the less a landmark
. in the rise of a new science. I speak from personal
. experience in adding that it is still useful in college
. classes in promoting respect for, and development in,
. critical scholarship.
.
. As to Valla himself the words of Erasmus will bear
. repetition; "Valla, a man who with so much energy, zeal and
. labor, refuted the stupidities of the barbarians, saved
. half-buried letters from extinction, restored Italy to her
. ancient splendor of eloquence, and forced even the learned
. to express themselves henceforth with more
. circumspection."[2] The Italian Renaissance is much extolled
. among us, - and so little known. A short time ago diligent
. search revealed no copy of Valla's works in the United
. States, and many of the larger libraries had none of his
. separate writings. The same is doubtless true in the case of
. other great names in the Renaissance. Meanwhile, there are
. those whose profession it is to teach European history and
. who are utterly unacquainted with medieval and later Latin.
.
. The best life of Valla is that by Girolamo Mancini.[3] There
. is no satisfactory account of him in English.
.
. Valla wrote his Discourse on the Forgery of the alleged
. Donation of Constantine (Declamatio de falso credita et
. ementita donatione Constantini, also referred to as
. Libellus, and Oratio) in 1440, when he was secretary to
. Alfonso, king of Aragon, Sicily, and Naples. It may well be
. considered as part of the campaign which that king was
. conducting against Pope Eugenius IV in furtherance of his
. claims to Italian territories.
Christopher Coleman goes on to summarize the vast assortment of
prochronisms that Valla noted in his banned disproof. It hardly seems
likely that those placing his work on the list of prohibited books
misunderstood the work, or the injustice that they were perpetrating
one more time.
Note that it was a "Humanist" that uncovered this fraud and whose work
was suppressed by the Holy See, the religious authorities of his time.
Note also that this fraud led to Luther and the Protestant
Reformation.
It is no less important in this case that a fraud be unmasked. The
anachronistic view that Makiguchi's earlier loyal support of the
government (in the pre-1935 context of the an existing dispute between
the constitutional monarchists of the Diet and the emperor-is-a-god
factions of the Military) indicated a support of Imperial Way Buddhism
and the war effort at a later time is what is called a prochronism,
and that is an impossibility.
Those who nobly supported the constitutional monarchy until they were
crushed by Imperial State Zen are the noble heroes here and now,
because that pacifist constitutional monarchy currently exists in
Japan. I put forth the causal view that it exists now (in spite of
Junichiro Koizumi's moves towards militarism), primarily because of
the undying organized resistance of Makiguchi and Toda, the only
Buddhists who fought to the bitter end without fail. They won in the
end, because they were not defeated, and their view of government
literally prevailed as a result.
... How could Makiguchi, who died during the war ... be a
... founder of a group that did not exist until after the war?
... This logical fallacy has no name and is frankly pathetic.
... You don't even believe your own rhetorical excesses.
| Sophistry is not a substitute for legitimate argument.
Sophistry [Oxford] is the use or practice of specious reasoning as an
art or dialectic exercise. I am neither artist nor exercising. My
reasoning is sincere.
When you say Makiguchi had nothing to do with the Soka Gakkai or the
SGI, and then in the same breath include both he and Toda as founders
of the selfsame organization, this is more than a malaprop, it is
evidence of cognitive dissonance with your first statement. Your
dismissal of that observation IS sophistry, however, because it cannot
be sincere.
... As far as the names Soka Kyoiku Gakkai [education emphasis],
... Soka Gakkai [broad education and culture emphasis], SGI
... [international emphasis], they really are all the same
... provisional organization, born in 1930 and going through
... stages of growth, much like a person does. Like little
... Nicky, becomes Nick, Jr., and then Nicholas the lawyer.
| see what I mean.
I see that you apparently refuse to allow our organization to grow and
expand and pursue our mission of Kosen Rufu. And you arrogantly and
irrationally place yourself in the position of naming authority, like
some kind of dictator. I categorically reject your attempt at
controlling that issue. Give up on it. No one in their right mind
would submit to your authority. Get real and stop taking the rejection
of your supreme rule as a personal affront.
... Apparently, you (Jon Petry) have appointed yourself the
... arbiter of what names should go with what things. Are you
... really suggesting that our organization should run their
... candidate names for the sangha by you for approval? Get
... real.
| more sophistry and some personal attack thrown in for good
| measure.
Like I said, placing limits on your absolute power and your control
over all things is not an insult ... even though you may, in your own
mind, perceive of this as an attack on your authority. It is a
rejection of the control of the devilish function, whose minion you
apparently are, and whose complaints you reflect as the advocate for
that function of evil.
| snip of more sophistry and personal attack
Once again, your view is Tenshi-ma's, and I reject those complaints
categorically. Rejecting the control and authority of the devilish
function over the threefold world is the mission of a bodhisattva.
... I will pre-fetch your response. The putative scholar Brian
... Victoria's articles about Mr. Makiguchi have been debunked,
... as he takes statements out of context wildly. (Another Zen
... priest on a rampage against the Lotus Sutra and its
... votaries.) Victoria is neither researcher nor scholar, in
... any sense that I would respect. [I have planned to write a
... toxic zen story about him, once I get some other more
... crucial things out of the way.]
| I will have more to say about this post later but i did want
| to comment on this little tidbit. Chas who has no academic
| credentials I am aware of, as if he has such he has not
| shared them with the group, has chosen to belittle and
| slander Dr. Victoria who is a scholar and a respected one at
| that. Dr. Victoria has written various articles in peer
| reviewed journals as well as books on Buddhism including
| some highly critical of the role played by Buddhist
| organization in Japan prior to and during World War Two.
| This includes information highly critical of his own sect of
| Zen Buddhism which is the primary subject of one book. Dr.
| Victoria has presented papers at conferences on the subject,
| including the American Academy of Religions some 10+ years
| ago in which he participated in panel discussions on
| Japanese Buddhism with Dr. Stone and Dr. Habito among
| others. I was present at one such panel discussion on
| pacifism and Japanese Buddhists in which he discussed his
| findings and had a question from the audience from a Ms.
| Virginia Strauss [?] who was then the head of the Boston
| based SGI run group. She asked about the supposed pacifism
| of the Soka Gakkai and Dr. Victoria explained his
| understanding of the situation. Ms. Strauss suggested that
| she would be happy to present him with some information he
| was unaware of and he told her he would welcome such an
| effort. However instead of this, we have seen an attack by
| tame SGI pseudo-scholars in non-peer reviewed publications
| twisting his words and excoriating the man.
[ Was the phenomenon of screaming in the mirror ever morely poignantly
presented than in that last sentence fragment? ]
From what you say, Brian Victoria knew as he was publishing the first
edition of "Zen At War" that there were problems with his thesis in
chapter six (no organized resistance against Imperial State Zen after
1942). He knew that the problems were isolated to the existence of
Makiguchi and Toda, as heads of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai organization,
who after their arrest, resisted to the end and in Toda's case,
survived. He knew that his paper-thin explanation in Note 8 that they
were arrested for refusing the Shinto Talisman and not for pacifism,
would not hold. And this was because of his very own thesis in the
second half of his book that the strategy of the militarists to force
total support of the war upon the people through Imperial Way Buddhism
under the Shinto Talisman ... indicated his sheer intellectual
dishonesty through extremely compartmentalized thinking. It required
cognitive dissonance between the two halves of the book.
Instead of expending the effort to straighten out his work late in the
publication cycle, Victoria decided to straighten out the facts by
cherry picking the research and distorting it, while ignoring the
preponderance of the data regarding the career of Makiguchi, in
finding that indeed and lo, Makiguchi was not really a pacifist. This
is a fraud, clear and simple.
Worse, it is besmirching the reputation of a great man (greater than
you apparently know) for the simple purpose of Victoria's own arrogant
convenience. It is the classical Greek crime of hubris.
From "Like a Worm i' the Bud? A Heterology of Classical Greek
Slavery", by Paul Cartledge, in Greece & Rome, 2nd Ser., Vol. 40, No.
2. (Oct., 1993), p 174,
<http://links.jstor.org/sici?
sici=3D0017-3835%28199310%292%3A40%3A2%3C163%3ALAWITB%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M>:
. Hubris has entered our own language and dictionaries with a
. peculiarly theological association: 'overweening pride
. towards the gods' (C.O.D.). But as S.R.E. Fisher has
. demonstrated time and again, hubris meant fundamentally
. transgressive violence, and in particular the sort of
. violence that transgressed the sharp boundary drawn in
. Athenian ideology between free and slave, or citizen and
. non-citizen. As Fisher has also pointed out, in ancient
. discussions of the aims and effects of social actions inside
. Greek communities, central importance was attributed to the
. concepts of status, of honour and shame. So here with the
. public action against hubris: for what this charge in effect
. alleged was that the defendant had committed the public
. crime of treating a citizen (who was by definition 'free'
. - psychologically, legally, and politically) as if he were a
. slave. As such, the graphi hubreos was 'the title of the
. most serious crime in the area of offences against the
. person'.
To be quick and to the point, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi is not your slave,
Brian Victoria. Make or preserve your career or reputation (or selfish
convenience) on the back of some other unfortunate victim.
Let's talk about peer review. Peer review on academic journals is
mostly skin deep, and only a test of the appearance of the work. One's
reliable history is the major factor in acceptance for publication.
So, for scientific journals, no one re-runs your experiments before
your data and conclusions are published, because there isn't time or
frankly, enough energy. If someone subjects your data set to a
statistical test which might reveal a skew due to dropping off some
part of the data set, or other foolish fabrication, that's over and
above the call of typical reviewer duty.
What does occur when a fraud is detected afterwards, is an article
retraction by the journal to "correct the literature".
There is a fine discussion of this in the NPR Science Friday program
about peer review in journals during the breaking case of the Korean
Stem Cell fraud in 2005. (At the time of the show, the full truth was
not yet known.) It is located here:
<http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=3D5058361>
By the way, the non-peer-reviewed online journal (Global Buddhism)
that Koichi Miyata published in is the very same non-peer-reviewed
online journal that Brian Victoria did his evil in, initially.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
As far as my anonymity and my credentials are concerned, they are also
anonymous. No comment.
But you are right, as I review the literature through the JSTOR
library system, a literature search on "Makiguchi Victoria" only
produces Victoria's erroneous article. This is anathema.
____ Call For Articles _____________________________
<Sound Effect http://ava7.com/sounds/animals/lion-3.wav>
Henceforth, I am openly calling for articles in peer-reviewed
publications (optimally showing up in JSTOR), regarding this matter.
(There are benefits, career and otherwise, to academics both youthful
and aged, who expose a fraud as profound and over-reaching as this
one.)
All aspects of Victoria's fraud should be investigated and publicly
refuted.
New translations of his putative "translation" work in all of his
articles and books should be compared with his work and his now-
questionable conclusions, which should be examined very closely.
Clearly there is great ignorance, at least in the English-reading-
West, of the political debate surrounding the Meiji Constitution
between the Tatsukichi Minobe faction in the Diet (Constitutional
Monarchists) and the Militarists (Absolute Monarchists), before 1935.
I believe this needs exposition in depth with a special treatment of
the errors of Victoria. Ignorance is the breeding ground for distorted
views that lead to conclusions and bad publications in the literature,
requiring retractions by journals. This sorry state of affairs should
be remedied.
The optimal result would be a multi-volume modern history of religious
influences on Japanese political and social life. From the Shogunate's
end to Meiji and the struggles between the Diet and the Militarists
who prevailed in 1935, the march to world war, defeat and destruction,
MacArthur, return to constitutional monarchy and the changes since
then. Cover the same ground that Victoria covers on Imperial Way
Buddhism, Imperial State Zen, but without the distortions providing
cover for his Zen beliefs by gratuitously understating the resistance
of others to the war effort.
____ Healing a Wound _______________________________
It took most of a millenium to finally unmask the falsehood that was
the Donation of Constantine. During that time, darkness ruled European
life under a false legacy of the possession of nations by arrogant
religious authorities.
Were no one to intervene in this, it could take that long or longer to
remove the stain of a powerful academic like Victoria from the
reputation of any man, even one so wonderful as Mr. Makiguchi. This
evil cannot be allowed to persist.
In a public meeting between President Ikeda and Nobel Peace Prize
Laureate Betty Williams, on November 6th, 2006: "Buddhism teaches that
anger can have both positive and negative aspects. I appreciate the
true value of your actions in that context - anger at great evil is
great good. Cowardice is never right."
Tatsukichi Minobe's pre-1935 view, which predominated in the Diet of a
time before the Rape of Nanking, of a constitutional monarchy ruled by
the people's representatives survives today, precisely because of
Makiguchi's sacrifice and Toda's determination to never yield.
The path not taken at first, was the true path taken by these heroic
men, standing alone.
That is the causal view of the political transformation of Japan,
according to the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin. It only takes one
person to transform a nation and to change history.
-Chas.
_________________________________________
Reading from "The Entity of the Mystic Law", Writings of Nichiren
Daishonin, pp. 420 ...
Nan-yüeh says in his commentary, "All living beings have within
themselves the storehouse of the Dharma body, and therefore they are
in no way different from the Buddha."[On the Peaceful Practices.] That
is why the Lotus Sutra says, "The pure and ordinary eyes, ears, nose,
tongue, body, and mind that one received at birth from one’s father
and mother are also like this."[A summary of a passage in the
"Benefits of the Teacher of the Law" chapter of the Lotus Sutra.]
Bratcher's Sho Hondo: ''We were in awe as the 65 foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97
Prochronists Brian Victoria, Jon Petry and now Robert Kisala Risk
Becoming Liars Through the Repetition of Debunked Falsehoods
Jon Petry continues to misunderstand the history of Japan, in
particular, the events of 1935 and the "Organ Theory Affair" regarding
the occurrences in the Diet surrounding Minobe Tatsukichi. There were
two major factions, the Constitutional Monarchists who were liberal
and progressive, and the Absolute Monarchists supported by the
militarists who wanted total control over the government, the people
and society, and to quell any voices that might disagree with their
plans.
Minobe's Organ Theory made the case that the Emperor was an organ of
the government and not an absolute ruler. This caused an uproar which
ended with the militarists having total authority to do as they
wished: and their wish was total Pacific war. Secretly, the Princes
and the Emperor were backing the Absolute Monarchists, but the
Constitutionalists never knew this.
So in their writings and in attempting to pull the country back into
the center over a long struggle ending disastrously in 1935, the
Constitutional Monarchists would write expressing loyalty to the
Emperor pleading for a middle way to escape the spiral down into
madness that was coming. The fact that there was no hope for their
cause, does not impugn their efforts to attempt to hold off the
darkness that was descending. That piece of intellectual dishonesty is
utterly disgusting on the part of Brian Victoria, Robert Kisala and
Jon Petry. They should be shunned by academia as prochronists
perpetuating a fraud.
With that history in mind, let's examine Jon Petry's confusion
regarding the misleading writings and intellectual dishonesty of Brian
Victoria and Robert Kisala.
From a recent posting of Jon Petry:
| Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton in the Closet? By Brian
| Daizen Victoria, Senior Lecturer Centre for Asian
| Studies, University of Adelaide
|.
| In both EBW and David Chappell's Buddhist Peacework
| (BP), Tsunesaburo Makiguchi is presented as another
| foundational exemplar of Engaged Buddhism. Makiguchi's
| Buddhist faith, it is claimed, impelled him not only to
| advocate a humane and peaceful world but to sacrifice
| his very life in resisting Japanese militarism.
|.
| In an article in EBW entitled "The Angulimala Lineage:
| Buddhist Prison Ministries," Virginia Cohn Parkum and J.
| Anthony Stultz describe Makiguchi (and his disciple,
| Josei Toda) as having "experienced incarceration in
| Japan during World War II for resisting the war effort
| and refusing to follow state Shinto worship" (p. 360). A
| second article in the same book, "Racial Diversity in
| the Soka Gakkai" by David Chappell, states that "when
| Makiguchi refused to support government thinking during
| the war, he was arrested in 1943 and died in prison on
| November 18, 1944 at the age of seventy-three" (p. 216).
|.
| Though somewhat more ambivalent, Peter Harvey adds his
| voice to the chorus in An Introduction to Buddhist
| Ethics (IBE) where he writes, "In the Second World War,
| most Buddhist schools agreed to support the nation in
| its efforts. Seemingly the one exception was the Soka
| Gakkai, which refused to take part in this unified
| front" (p. 270). Nevertheless, none of these voices can
| compare with that of Daisaku Ikeda, president of Soka
| Gakkai International, who has the strongest words of
| praise for Makiguchi. In an essay included in BP
| entitled "The SGI's Peace Movement," Ikeda writes:
All of those issues are relevant to the discussion of Makiguchi and
his views in wartime, and Jon Petry will go on to distort those
issues.
However, bringing up the following material from 1903 is really a red
herring.
Makiguchi's 1903 writings were from a time long before he came into
contact with Nichiren's Buddhism, when he was basically under earlier
influences of the religion of his family, and are simply not relevant
to the point that Victoria, Kisala and Petry are trying to make: that
he might not have been imprisoned for resisting the War, or even that
he might not have been a pacifist AT THAT MUCH LATER TIME.
One can argue over his pacifistic tendencies in 1903, which
undoubtedly were in conflict at that time with his nationalism, but
that does not in any way pertain to the occurrences in the middle and
late 1930s and the early 1940s. These are truly specious as well as
unjustified and distorted assertions.
Petry continues:
| Early in the twentieth century (1903), President
| Makiguchi published The Geography of Human Life (Jinsei
| Chirigaku), which strongly advocated a shift to
| humanitarian competition at a time when imperialism and
| colonialism were still the prevailing modes of
| international relations. He analyzed competition among
| nations as consisting of the phases of: military
| competition, political competition, economic
| competition, and humanitarian competition. He stressed
| that humanity's aim should be humanitarian competition
| (p. 136).
|.
| Robert Kisala, however, once again presents us with an
| alternative view. He begins by noting that the central
| focus of Makiguchi's first book, Jinsei Chirigaku, was
| on "drawing connections between geography and everyday
| life and advocating the study of geography through field
| trips and other hands-on experiences" (p. 75). As for
| Makiguchi's alleged war resistance, Kisala explains that
| the crux of the matter was Makiguchi's refusal to
| venerate a talisman of Amaterasu, the Sun Goddess,
| issued by the central Shinto shrine at Ise. It was this
| refusal, he claims, not war resistance, which led
| Makiguchi and some twenty other leaders of what was then
| known as Soka Kyoiku Gakkai (Academic Society for Value-
| Creating Education) to be arrested on charges of lese
| majest=E8 and the violation of the Peace Preservation Law
| on July 6, 1943.
This skin-deep analysis, more appropriate to a high school paper,
completely ignores the contextual fact that Shinto was the religion
that identified the Emperor as a kami (god) superior to the hoteke
(the buddhas). That meant the Emperor was the country itself: the
government, the military and the war effort ... and that resisting
Shinto was resisting the Emperor's war. Resisting the state religion
of Imperial Way Buddhism (according to Brian Victoria's very own book)
was resisting Imperial State Zen at war in the Pacific.
This evil Shinto view had evolved according to the honji suijaku
theory (13th century Tendai slanders of Dengyo) and the later
foundations of the Sanno Ichijitsu cult of worshipping Ieyasu as a god
(laid down by Tenkai, another Tendai slanderer of Dengyo, who inserted
lies into his mentor's mouth stating that the gods were greater than
the buddhas, and that the greatest god of all was Ieyasu), all of
which was inherited by the Meiji Restoration to build a new Emperor
Cult, which came to fruition in 1935.
[See my other posting regarding the Toynbee analysis of the Fuji
School for vastly greater detail on this evil.]
Petry continues:
| Kisala concludes his study of Makiguchi by pointing out
| that while "Soka Gakkai literature often claims that
| this persecution was the result of an anti-military
| stance taken by Makiguchi. . . my reading of the
| situation indicates that Makiguchi's opposition was more
| narrowly focused on the religious policy of the
| government" (p. 90).
The utter ignorance of this statement is pathetic. There was no
separation at all between the Emperor and the War effort, in the
religious view of Shinto. Shinto equals War. It has no other purpose
than the absolute power of a monarch leading to War. It was invented
and reinvented by the Tendai at the behest of the Zen bakufu (military
government) over several centuries expressly for the purpose of
governing through distortion of Buddhism. [The fact that it is a
distortion that suits Jon Petry and his Five Senior Priest cronies at
Minobu, is no accident.]
Now, Kisala and Petry go back to the irrelevant evidence of
Makiguchi's writings nearly thirty years before his conversion to
Nichiren Buddhism, with some crazy idea that it informs us of his
views and actions in the middle of the struggle leading to the events
of 1935 and the later events of the early 1940s.
Simply and obviously irrelevant, a red herring is a red herring no
matter how many times you repeat the fallacy: it remains fallacious
reasoning. Indeed, repetition of an obvious fallacy is the propaganda
technique numero uno of the fascists themselves, the big lie that
becomes more acceptable when it is repeated endlessly (Josef
Goebbels).
Petry continues:
| This writer's research on Makiguchi shows that not only
| is Kisala's conclusion correct but that he revealed only
| a small part of the story. That is to say, while
| Makiguchi may, as Ikeda claims, have looked forward to
| the coming of a future world based on "humanitarian
| competition," that world did not yet exist. In Jinsei
| Chirigaku, Makiguchi described the actual world he
| inhabited as follows:
|.
| "It is my view that the sole cause of the present danger
| to world peace is Russia's promotion of its own
| viability. That is to say, in the present age of
| economic struggle for existence, Russia seeks to exploit
| weaknesses among the international powers in order to
| acquire what it must have: access to the oceans. Thus it
| is in the process of expanding in three directions, from
| the Dardanelle Straits in Eastern Europe to the Persian
| Gulf in western Asia and the Yellow Sea in the Far
| East." (Makiguchi 1903:950-951).
|
| In identifying Russia as being solely responsible for
| endangering world peace, Makiguchi adopted a stance
| identical with that of the Japanese government of his
| day. Japan used this alleged threat to justify its
| surprise attack on Russia the following year,
| ostensively to protect Korea's independence and prevent
| further Russian encroachments on Chinese territory, most
| especially Manchuria. The reality, however, was that
| following its victory over Russia in 1905, Japan moved
| to take control of Korea for itself, turning it into a
| full-fledged colony in 1910. As for Manchuria, Japan
| steadily increased its control of this area of China
| until it established the puppet state of Manchukuo in
| February 1932.
The entirety of Jon's and Kisala's irrelevant argument, here, has been
completely debunked already, SEVERAL TIMES IN SEVERAL PLACES.
I refer you to the first time that Koichi Miyata debunked Brian
Victoria's canard (the fourth time that Victoria vomited forth this
filth, polluting the public marketplace of ideas):
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage
. from Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The
. Geography of Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that
. Russia was engaged in a policy of expansionism in the
. search for year-round harbors. Victoria asserts that
. this world view was identical to that of the government
. of Japan, a view used to justify the Russo-Japanese War
. (1904-1905), then the annexation of the Korean peninsula
. (1910) and the founding of the puppet state of Manchukuo
. (1932). Victoria's assertion, and his implicit criticism
. of Makiguchi, simplistically links analysis of the
. global situation with the policies taken in response to
. that. Makiguchi was merely voicing what was then the
. accepted understanding of the geopolitical motives for
. Russia's expansionist policies, a view held not only by
. the Japanese government, but shared by the British, with
. whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
. Certainly I know of no scholar of political geography
. who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one that
. Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not
. only Makiguchi but everyone who studies political
. geography guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism:
.
. From "A Skeleton in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
. <http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
So, this was the actually the view of all of the allies of Britain at
the turn of the 20th century, and not some Japanese imperialistic
view.
Stop repeating this nonsense, Jon Petry and Robert Kisala, you are
obviously lying in your deliberate repetition of debunked falsehoods
(like Propaganda Minister Goebbels and Brian Victoria).
Leaving aside the wretchedness of your methods and lack of connection
with any rational semblence of truth, this line of discussion
continues to be a red herring, by delving again into Makiguchi's
decades past ideas, way before Makiguchi's conversion to Nichiren
Buddhism.
I can understand this from a non-believer like Kisala, but Jon Petry
considers himself a believer, does he not?
Are not people allowed to change and grow as they age, or are we all
simply static entities?
King Ashoka went from being a cruel conqueror to being a peaceful
Buddhist, is that only OK for him to change his life, because he is
ancient history?
I mean, (if it's OK with your Lordship) is it satisfactory to you if
we practice human revolution, even we mortals who are less than your
perfection?
Petry continues:
| Significantly, neither Ikeda nor Kisala mention a second
| seminal book Makiguchi first published in November 1912.
| Entitled Kyodoka Kenky=C2 (Study of Folk Culture), this
| volume was an extension of the ideas contained in Jinsei
| Chirigaku, with special emphasis on their relevance to
| the life and structures of local communities. Makiguchi
| wanted rural educators (rather than the central
| government's bureaucrats) to take the lead in developing
| educational initiatives attuned to local communities.
| But toward what end? The book's concluding chapter
| explained Makiguchi's ultimate goal for education as
| follows:
|.
| "Regardless of social class, everyone should be
| conscious of the nation's destiny, harmonizing their
| lives with that destiny and, at all times, prepared to
| share that destiny. It is for this reason that the work
| of national education is to prepare ourselves to do
| exactly this, omitting nothing in the process. . . .
| However, in order to do this, and prior to placing
| ourselves in service to the state, we should first
| contribute to the local area that has nurtured us and
| with which we share common interests." (Makiguchi
| 1933:460-461).
|.
| It should be noted that Makiguchi wrote the above
| specifically for an enlarged 1933 edition of this book
| (see Makiguchi 1933:6). Despite championing rural
| education under local control, by 1933 both he and his
| publisher, none other than Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, shared a
| vision of education that was as "state-centered" as any
| of his contemporaries.
|.
Once again, this nonsense of yours has been debunked by Koichi Miyata
in the same article. Since you appear incapable of clicking and
reading this article, I have included it in total at the end of this
writing. Here is the passage debunking your (above) hypothesis:
. Secondly, Victoria quotes an extract from Makiguchi's
. book Kyodoka Kenkyu (A Study of Folk Culture), in which
. Makiguchi notes that the state plays an important role
. in the lives of citizens. From this, Victoria draws the
. conclusion that as the Japan moved closer to war,
. Makiguchi adopted the view that education should be "in
. service to the state". (Victoria states that Makiguchi
. added this section for the 1933 revised edition of the
. book. This is incorrect, as it appears in the first
. edition published in 1912.) Since the publication of
. Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi had consistently emphasized
. the formation of identity on three levels-that of a
. person's local community, the national and global
. levels. Within this context, and against a backdrop of
. global competition for empire, he placed particular
. importance on national independence. This is hardly
. unreasonable. Japan was one of only a handful of
. countries in Asia that had maintained independence amid
. encroachment by the Western powers, and Makiguchi was
. well aware of the miserable circumstances of colonized
. peoples. What we may find problematic-in terms of the
. current view that controlling peoples is intrinsically
. wrong-is that Makiguchi did not say enough after Japan
. itself acquired colonies, omitting to comment on the
. issue of independence for these colonized peoples, and
. only suggesting that imperialism was not the optimal
. policy choice because of the financial burden involved.
. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to my essay "Tsunesaburo
. Makiguchi's Theory of the State" in TJOS, in which I
. discuss Makiguchi's view that imperialistic-military and
. economic-competition should be supplanted by a
. cooperative sense of community, what he called
. "humanitarian competition."
Miyata's article "Tsunesaburo Makiguchi's Theory of the State" is
located at:
http://www.tmakiguchi.org/assets/images/miyataforIOPspecialissue.pdf
I wonder if you are capable of clicking and reading this article, or
will you continue to repeat that debunked piece of propaganda, too?
Next time, I will include that article as well, if you continue to
prevaricate, by floating this canard.
By the way, note the date 1933. Even according to your prochronistic
reasoning, Jinsei Chirigaku was enlarged and published just at the
point, 2 years before the crisis and catastrophe of the Constitutional
Monarchists in 1935, when the Constitutionalists were desperately
trying to pull the government back to the middle, while it was sliding
away from them to the far right and utter chaos.
The Constitutionalist case would not be furthered by separation from
the the ruling government, or by separating from the nobility that
they were trying to influence, in vain as it would turn out.
So they made their plea from the center. In support of the Emperor. As
Tony Blair has noted, all progressive governments that survive must
rule from the center. Always from the broad center of the people. The
fact that it did not work this time is not the fault of their
rhetorical support of the Emperor, while trying to influence the
royals.
Petry continues:
| Only a few years later, millions of young Japanese would
| be called on to sacrifice their lives, and those of
| their victims, in the process of "placing [them]selves
| in service to the state." Thus, Makiguchi's quarrel with
| the central government's bureaucrats over the control of
| local education was not about whether or not service to
| the state should be promoted, but simply how best to
| attain that goal.
That few years, after 1935 and a sharp break with the last glimmer of
hope in 1933 when Makiguchi wrote, does not impugn the pre-Absolute
Monarchy attempts of the Constitutional Monarchists in 1933 to
preserve a progressive government in Japan. Those failed efforts were
noble, and had they succeeded, could have prevented much death and
destruction. THIS, TOO IS PACIFISM !!!
And during the last of the war years, Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda were
imprisoned, and they were the only ones who never gave in to the end,
to Mr. Makiguchi's death, and Mr. Toda's unyielding and undefeated
release from prison. The honor of Japan's Buddhists resided only with
these two in the end. Certainly not with Zen and not with Minobu and
their subjugated temples.
And, oh, by the way, Jon Petry. Your show is slipping.
Your evil Minobu sect (Nichiren Shu and the other subjugated temples)
were not hiding away somewhere. They were unabashed cheerleaders for
the war effort and the attack on Pearl Harbor, even worse than the
evil Fuji School Priesthood.
They bowed to the Shinto talisman, that slanderous object of worship,
which stands in opposition to the Lotus Sutra and the Gohonzon, and
which was the direct cause of war, chaos and holocaust.
They bowed to the Shinto talisman and cheered as defeat after glorious
defeat occurred, with the mass suicide of division after division,
running out of the caves burning from the flamethrower's napalm.
Minobu cheered as the kamikaze flew and they cheered as the Yamamoto
went down with all hands without inflicting any damage whatsoever on
the Allies.
So noble.
Your Minobu priests cheered as Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki burned.
And damn them to hell for it and all the rest of their distorting
garbage Buddhism.
Petry continues:
| If, as the preceding quote demonstrates, Makiguchi
| believed the ultimate goal of education was to serve the
| state, what was the emperor's role in fostering this?
| Was Makiguchi in any way opposed or critical of either
| the emperor or the imperial system?
|.
| Though critical of patriotism based on "superficial
| reasons," Makiguchi wrote, "His Majesty, the Emperor, on
| whom is centered the exercise of Imperial authority,
| does so through his military and civilian officials. The
| reason he exercises this authority is definitely not for
| his own benefit. Rather, as leader and head of the
| entire nation, he graciously exerts himself on behalf of
| all the people. It is for this reason that in our
| country, the state and the emperor, as head of state,
| should be thought of as completely one and indivisible.
| We must make our children thoroughly understand that
| loyal service to their sovereign is synonymous with love
| of country. . . I believe it is only in so doing that we
| can clarify the true meaning of the phrase "loyalty to
| one's sovereign and love of country" [Ch=E2kun Aikoku]
| (Makiguchi 1933:411- 412).
This repeated nonsense of yours HAS ALSO already been repeatedly
debunked, which ALSO throws into question, ONCE AGAIN, your putative
intellectual honesty, Jon Petry. Here is Koichi Miyata's argument from
"A Skeleton In The Closet?"
. Thirdly there is the problem of the emperor system.
. Quoting a section from Kyodoka Kenkyu in which Makiguchi
. argues that loyalty to the emperor is synonymous with
. love of one's country, Victoria implies that Makiguchi's
. view was identical to that of the military government.
. This, however, is a far too loosely framed argument that
. ignores the interpretative issues associated with the
. 1889 Meiji Constitution. The preamble to the Meiji
. Constitution recognizes the supreme authority of the
. emperor, while Article 3 declares the sacred nature of
. the emperor, and Article 4 his sovereign rights over the
. state -- making the state and the emperor system
. inseparable. If we stress the supreme authority of the
. emperor, the emperor is then cast in the role of
. absolute monarch. If we consider instead the role of the
. Constitution as a brake on the supreme authority of the
. emperor, he becomes a constitutional monarch. The former
. view is represented by the imperial fascism supported by
. the military regime, while the latter corresponds to
. Tatsukichi Minobe's theory of the emperor as an organ of
. the state. From the era of Taisho democracy through to
. the suppression of Minobe's theory in 1935, this view
. held sway among constitutional scholars and members of
. the Diet. The idea that loyalty =3D patriotism is common
. to both views, and by aligning Makiguchi with the
. imperial fascism of the military simply on the basis of
. his comments here, Victoria again appears determined to
. ignore the written record of Makiguchi's thoughts. From
. his earliest writings, Makiguchi viewed the emperor as a
. constitutional monarch, and was critical of moves to
. make the emperor's powers absolute.
Once again, Prochronists like Victoria, Kisala and Petry, will always
judge a person's writings before the emergence of Fascism, in a post-
Fascist light, to make whatever conclusion they desire seem correct.
In this way they persecute the noble efforts of those who tried to
forestall catastrophe, by twisting the truth and demonizing their
nobility.
The State Fascism triumphant in 1935 was not the same as the
Constitutional Monarchists struggling to survive as part of the Diet
in 1933. Got that?
It is truly shameful, how Victoria, Kisala and Petry can exploit that
subtle difference in timing, making fools of the public. But that is
indeed what they do. And they call themselves academics. And people
continue to publish their garbage writings.
More from Jon Petry:
| In urging his fellow educators to make the nation's
| children "thoroughly understand that loyal service to
| their sovereign is synonymous with love of country" we
| once again find Makiguchi situated squarely in the
| mainstream of the nationalistic fervor that increasingly
| came to characterize the 1930s. No matter how
| Makiguchi's position toward the emperor may have changed
| later on, in 1933 Makiguchi advocated the widely held
| proposition that love of country was synonymous with
| loyal service to the emperor. It was exactly this
| educational ideology that provided the foundation for
| the Japanese military's demand of absolute and
| unquestioning obedience from its soldiers, claiming that
| "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
| emperor."
This time as well, Petry is repeating a section of Victoria's work
that has been thoroughly debunked over and over by Koichi Miyata in "A
Skeleton In The Closet?":
. Victoria mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers
. that "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
Does Petry simply refuse to read the debunking of his incorrect
positions? Can he not see what is apparent to one and all, that his
autistic lying, like a network device that is an open emitter, only
serves to undermine his validity on every point he makes? Endlessly
reformulating an erroneous statement into a new posting does not make
it true, in spite of Goebbels' guidance to propagandists.
And trashing Makiguchi and Toda without regard to the truth of their
heroism, does not make the devilish priests at Minobu and the other
Nichiren temples into saints. The were, are and will remain war-
mongering slanderers of Buddhism.
More from Jon Petry:
| Makiguchi also touched on Japan's colonization of Korea,
| claiming that Korea, prior to being formally annexed by
| Japan in August 1910, had been in such a state of
| anarchy that it was unable either to defend itself or
| protect its citizens. Not only that, the Chinese people
| presently found themselves in exactly the same situation
| (see Makiguchi 1933:413).
Once again, one does not succeed in influencing the powerful back into
the center, by picking unnecessary fights about past history that
cannot be changed now. Or by encouraging disloyalty against the leader
of the nation, whom you are trying to influence.
This (1933) was the time when fate still held in the balance, when the
course had not been decided (apparently), and when there was still
hope. Should they have given in prematurely?
That appears to be what Kisala and Petry think.
They would rather be viewed in a better light by history, than fight
in an effort to change the outcome. How determinist of them, what
fatalism that is, and such intellectual detachment is merely a
disguise for clucking defeatism.
It is precisely the hopeless causes that require the strongest fight
and the greatest courage. Get your ass off the sidelines and into the
fight, Jon Petry. You and your Tendai-influenced kin need to discard
the notion of "original enlightenment", which is really the devilish
function's most excellent disguise. You cannot attain the way by
having an opinion of Buddhism that differs from Nichiren Daishonin.
You are either with him, or you are in Avichi Hell:
From the Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings, p. 77-78, Chapter
Seven - The Parable of the Phantom City, Point Seven, on the passage
"Now you must press forward diligently / so that together you may
[all] reach the place where the treasure is.",
. The Record of the Orally Transmitted Teachings says: The
. word "all" refers to the Ten Worlds. The word "together"
. refers to the words [of the Buddha in chapter two, Expedient
. Means] "hoping to make all persons / equal to me, without
. any distinction between us." The word "reach" means to
. arrive at the level of the highest effect, the state of
. Buddhahood. "The place where the treasure is," the treasure
. land, is the holy mountain, Eagle Peak.
.
. Nichiren and his followers, those who chant Nam-myoho-renge
. -kyo, one and all will "together reach the place where the
. treasure is." This one word "together" means that, as long
. as they are together with Nichiren, they will reach the
. treasure land. BUT IF THEY ARE NOT TOGETHER WITH HIM, THEY
. WILL FALL INTO THE GREAT CITADEL OF THE AVICHI HELL.
When Nichiren placed all of Buddhism in the hands of Nikko Shonin,
your ancestral mentors (the Five Senior Priests) ignored the final
words of their dying mentor.
Now you are in Avichi Hell as a result.
While you still live, Jon Petry, you can still escape this hellish
condition by following Nichiren's final admonition. (Yes, even after
all of this evil ranting filth.)
By that, I don't mean joining your fellow Avichi denizens, the
Transfer Box-less followers of Nikken in Nichiren Shoshu. I mean
coming to the SGI. That is the only exit strategy that is sufficient
to make an escape from your present predicament.
More from Jon Petry:
| The clear implication of the latter claim was that
| China, like Korea before it, would greatly benefit from
| Japanese control. This was of course a sentiment shared
| by the Japanese government, as seen, for example, in the
| Amau Statement of April 1934 issued by its Foreign
| Office. China, the statement declared, was not to avail
| itself of the assistance of any country other than
| Japan.
That detailed implication of Makiguchi's that you describe is
actually, clearly and simply, a detailed inference on your part.
Your inference does not equate to Makiguchi's implication.
Makiguchi did not make that prediction: "will greatly benefit from".
Stop putting your thoughts and words into Makiguchi's mouth. If he
didn't say what you really wished that he had, then there is a reason
for it.
Cease your distortions, bad translations and quotes out of context.
More from Jon Petry:
| This said, it is equally clear that Makiguchi's chief
| concern in writing favorably about Japan's expansion
| onto the Asian continent was, as ever, directed toward
| the manner in which Japan's children were to be
| educated. Makiguchi saw, in a discussion of Korea's
| recent past and China's present, a golden opportunity to
| demonstrate to Japanese children just how fortunate they
| were to be living in Japan. Makiguchi continued:
|.
| "It is when we look at these concrete examples [of Korea
| and China] that thoughts about our own country emerge. .
| . . The result is that we cannot help but feel grateful
| and want to repay the debt of gratitude we owe [the
| state]. The practical application of the study of folk
| culture is to provide the fundamental basis for an
| understanding of the state by having [our children] look
| at situations like these that are right before their
| very eyes. I feel very deeply that we must vigorously
| seek to create persons of character who will in the
| future lead a state-centered life, having first acquired
| the germ of the idea of serving the state at the town
| and village levels." (Makiguchi 1933:413).
First off, I have not seen this translation, which is in direct
contradiction to Makiguchi's views, and since all your other
translation errors have been extremely self-serving to your purpose of
trashing Makiguchi, I do not trust this little bit regarding "state-
centered", either.
Since you have ignored Koichi Miyata's references to Makiguchi's other
works delineating his views clearly, I will refer you to President
Ikeda's speech at the Simon Wiesenthal Center in 1996, which appeared
again recently in the World Tribune (10/30/09):
. Two years later, on Nov. 18, 1930, together with his
. disciple and fellow teacher, Josei Toda, Mr. Makiguchi
. published the first volume of
. 'The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy,' and
. it is from this day that we date the establishment of
. our organization.
.
. 'Soka' is Japanese for "value creation." From Mr.
. Makiguchi's viewpoint, the most fundamental and central
. value is that of life itself. Taking into account John
. Dewey's pragmatism, Mr. Makiguchi stated that "the only
. value in the true sense is that of life itself. All
. other values arise solely within the context of
. interaction with life." The fundamental criterion for
. value, in Mr. Makiguchi's view, is whether something
. adds to or detracts from, advances or hinders, the human
. condition.
Since Mr Makiguchi's central thesis is LIFE-CENTERED, as the name of
our organization states clearly (and not state-centered), I think we
can dispose of your putative translation into the same waste-bin as
the other putative translations leading to the rest of the distorting
rhetoric of Victoria, Kisala and Petry.
I repeat once again regarding your continuing fallacious reasoning as
well: Prochronists like Victoria, Kisala and Petry, will always judge
a person's writings before the emergence of Fascism (1933), in a post-
Fascist light (1935 and later), to make whatever conclusion they
desire seem correct. In this way they persecute the noble efforts of
those who tried to forestall catastrophe, by twisting the truth and
demonizing their nobility.
To them, social criticism was the only correct line of attack, since
the Constitutionalists SHOULD HAVE KNOWN that the cause was lost, in
the view of Prochronism. The view of Prochronists is always, that you
should have known the future, that you are to be judged in your
actions in the past, by the unfortunate turn of future events against
your cause and efforts, even when you were simply trying to avert that
future disaster.
Hence, trying to avert disaster by political and rhetorical means is
viewed by the Prochronists as complicity with the perpetration of the
disaster. The only Prochronist-righteous course is to stand on the
sidelines with a carefully positioned (and historically preserved)
letter of protest, without taking any risk by participating in the
fray.
No Philsopher of any note encourages this inactive ethical stance,
they all, to a man (Kant, Descartes, Mill, Hegel, etc.) demand that we
take action to avert disaster, or be branded as cowardly.
This is pure sophistry with an evil purpose, specifically to find
fault where there is none.
More from Jon Petry:
| Makiguchi demonstrates yet again that his ultimate
| concern was implanting in Japan's children a willingness
| to serve the state. Makiguchi simply believed he knew
| how to do this in a more effective way than the central
| government's bureaucrats who showed such little concern
| or understanding of local conditions. While it is true
| that Makiguchi was arrested in July 1943 for refusing to
| worship a talisman of the Sun Goddess Amaterasu issued
| by the Ise shrine, this had nothing to do with being
| disloyal to the emperor.
Pure unadulterated Petry-thought with absolutely no foundation in
fact.
This completely ignores the facts that in Shinto, the Emperor is the
god above the buddhas, whose body is the state, whose word is divine
law, and whose war is a religious practice. Resisting Shinto is
resisting the Emperor's divine war. Imperial Way Buddhism (Shinto) IS
Imperial State Zen and the Zen War on humanity. They are not separate,
not even in the tiniest way.
You cannot defeat an evil by bowing to it.
The absolute monarch must not be obeyed in slandering Buddhism, the
Shinto Talisman and everything it represented (Imperial Way Buddhism,
Imperial State Zen, and the public acknowledgement of divinity of the
Emperor, which is inseperable from supporting his divine Pacific War)
even though required by law, must all be rejected.
The people must not bow down to Shinto, or the world falls into hell,
never to emerge.
More from Jon Petry:
| As he informed his police
| interrogators, "I think it is, for we Japanese, the Way
| of the Subject to be loyal. This is what I have realized
| from my study of the truth of the Lotus Sutra" (Akashi &
| Mats=E2ra, eds. 1975:172). Further, as contradictory as it
| may seem, Makiguchi's refusal to worship a talisman of
| the Sun Goddess did not even signify a lack of respect
| for this alleged progenitress of the Imperial family.
| Makiguchi made this clear when he told the police,
|.
| "The Sun Goddess is the venerable ancestress of our
| Imperial Family, her divine virtue having been
| transmitted to each successive emperor who ascended the
| throne up to and including the present emperor. Thus has
| her virtue been transformed into the August Virtue of
| His Majesty which, shining down on the people, brings
| them happiness. It is for this reason that Article III
| of the Constitution states: "The person of the Emperor
| is sacred and inviolable."
|.
| "Just as we [association members] recognize the
| fundamental unity of filial piety and loyalty, so it is
| our conviction that it is proper to reverently venerate
| His Majesty based on the monistic view that "His
| Majesty, the Emperor is One and Indivisible" [Tenno
| Ichigen-ron], thus making it unnecessary to pay homage
| at the Grand Shrine at Ise. . . . In light of this, who
| is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor himself,
| to whom we should reverently pray?" (Akashi & Mats=E2ra,
| eds. 1975:174-175).
Buddhism is reason. Here, you see the excellent example of Makiguchi's
brilliant shakubuku technique, exercised towards his persecutors. His
mind is like a rapier in the hands of a master fencer.
Makiguchi APPEARS to be simply repeating what was a traditional view
of the Japanese. It was even written into the Constitution that the
Emperor was thus.
ACTUALLY, he is attacking the Shinto system with Reason, by setting
the ends against the middle. You cannot perceive this if you do not
have faith in the mentor: it is necessary to ask yourself, "Why is
Sensei doing this?" That question will never occur to the mind of a
non-disciple.
He tells them, FROM THEIR OWN WORDS, how their views are
contradictory. Not needing to pray at the Ise shrine because of "the
monistic view that 'His Majesty, the Emperor is One and
Indivisible' [Tenno Ichigen-ron]", means that placing the Shinto
talisman in one's altar is therefore redundant, as well.
SIMULTANEOUSLY, he was trying to draw the distinction, even at this
late date, that his disloyalty to state Shinto and the order to accept
the talisman was not the same as disloyalty to the Emperor, because
the Emperor ("one and indivisible") and state Shinto were not the same
entity.
Makiguchi's statement is like a razor, which cuts between loyalty to
State Shinto, which he REFUSES to bow to, and loyalty to the person of
the Emperor ("who is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"), who as leader of the
nation he MUST bow to.
There is a history to using the words and teachings of issendai
against their evil goals. Dengyo (whom Nichiren Daishonin described
himself as a disciple of) went to China to visit Miao-lo's disciple,
where he copied the unmodified versions of the Lotus Sutra and the
True Word Sutras, which he then fetched back to Japan.
Why did Dengyo carry back with him the True Word Sutras, which the
Lord of Teachings, Shakyamuni himself asked his followers to "honestly
discard" while only retaining the Lotus Sutra as his "remnant" -
Nichiren?
Dengyo violated a precept, so that he could defeat the Six Schools at
Nara in the year 792 ["They are the Dharma Analysis Treasury (Kusha),
Establishment of Truth ( Jojitsu), Three Treatises (Sanron), Precepts
(Ritsu), Dharma Characteristics (Hosso), and Flower Garland (Kegon)
schools."
<http://www.sgilibrary.org/search_dict.php?id=3D2078>]
... in a historic debate in front of the Emperor, resulting in
Dengyo's Tendai School of Buddhism becoming the national religion of
Japan.
He accomplished this great feat by showing that the Six Schools (which
were not really independent, some temples taught all six) had modified
their versions of the True Word Sutras to incorporate large sections
of the Lotus Sutra. Exposing their flagrant appropriation, forgery and
plagiarism, Dengyo was victorious.
By the way, Nichiren Daishonin gleefully recounts his mentor's victory
in "The Selection of the Time", WND-1, pp. 548-549,
<http:// www.sgilibrary.org/view.php?page=3D548&m=3D0&q=3D>.
In that VERY SAME Gosho, Nichiren masterfully uses Dengyo's technique,
by quoting the provisional sutras to defeat the schools that embrace
them. That makes the "Selection of the Time" Gosho, itself, an
embodiment of the principal of the Oneness of Mentor and Disciple.
Neat, huh? Dengyo, Nichiren and Makiguchi: cut from the same cloth.
And this is also why Nichiren Buddhism is not a precepts practice.
Here is Koichi Miyata's refutation of Victoria's bad translation in
Petry's passage above (which has been repeatedly ignored by Victoria,
Kisala and Petry):
. Victoria also quotes from a report produced by the
. special police on their interrogation of Makiguchi as
. proof that Makiguchi acknowledged the divine status of
. the emperor. Again, this assertion arises from a
. distortion of the relevant passage. Victoria quotes a
. reference by Makiguchi to "praying" to the emperor. He
. could hardly, however, have been more distorting in
. selecting the passage he quoted, deliberately excluding
. the following extract, which I have underlined:
.
... "The august virtue of His Majesty the Emperor is
... manifested in the security and happiness of the
... people, through the organs of his civil and
... military officials. Should these be deficient in
... some way, the people can petition him through
... the Diet or other bodies. In light of this, who
... is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
... himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"
... ("Pray" is Victoria's translation; "beseech" is
... probably more accurate in this context.)
.
. It is obvious that "beseech/pray" and "petition" have
. the same meaning in this context. The manner in which
. Victoria has misused Makiguchi's choice of a term
. normally used in a religious context, but with a special
. meaning in this context, to claim that Makiguchi
. supported emperor worship, is not what one would expect
. from a serious scholar endeavoring to document his
. claim. Surely in examining the interrogation report
. Victoria must have encountered the following statements
. by Makiguchi:
.
... "His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary man, who
... went to the Peers' School as Crown Prince, and
... studied how to be an emperor. The Emperor too
... makes mistakes. They say that in the early years
... of the Meiji era Tesshu Yamaoka admonished the
... Meiji Emperor and pointed out his mistakes on
... many occasions." [Tokko Geppo (Monthly bulletin
... of Special Higher Police), August 1943 issue, p.
... 152]
.
. These comments indicate clearly that Makiguchi rejected
. completely the deification of the emperor. Victoria
. mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers that
. "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
Does Jon Petry listen? He hasn't in the past, but we continue to hope.
More from Jon Petry:
| In fact, nowhere in Makiguchi's writings, either before
| or during the war, either in prison or out, do we find
| any statements critical of Japan's wartime policies. On
| the contrary, not only did Makiguchi justify Japan's
| colonial takeover of Korea (and earlier war with
| Russia), but he devoted his entire life as an educator
| to devising more effective ways of instilling "service
| to the state" in Japanese children. He further advocated
| that these same children "thoroughly understand that
| loyal service to their sovereign is synonymous with love
| of country." Even after imprisonment, he affirmed that
| loyalty to the emperor was but a natural part of the
| "Way of the Subject" based on his understanding of the
| Lotus Sutra. And, as we have seen, as far as the emperor
| was concerned, Makiguchi asked, "Who is there, apart
| from His Majesty, the Emperor himself, to whom we should
| reverently pray?"
Every single one of these serial distortions, which are serial
defamations of a truly noble person trying to avert disaster (and save
the many millions who died in that disaster), each and every one is
debunked above, and has been repeatedly debunked in the past.
Finally, the last from Jon Petry:
| For apologists to now claim that, his imprisonment and
| death notwithstanding, Makiguchi resisted or opposed
| Japan's war effort is an attempt to turn night into day.
As I said before, Jon Petry, your show is slipping.
This attempt by Zen (Victoria) and slanderous Nichiren Schools (Petry)
to trash Makiguchi and Toda, who were the only honorable Buddhists who
stood their ground against the Shinto War against Buddhism and
humanity to the end of the war, is an obvious ploy.
Victoria had problems with his thesis in chapter six of his book (CH
6: "No Organized Resistance Against Imperial State Zen After 1942").
The problem was that after he wrote it, he found that Makiguchi and
Toda made a liar out of him, or worse, a lazy academic. So he
proceeded to repeatedly attempt to tar these noble men with these
lies, so as to make himself a truthful and a diligent academic, at
least in retrospect. Of course this is a pathetic and vain attempt, no
matter what the outcome, because he did not do his dirtywork within
the confines of his thesis, which is therefore, trash. Then, Victoria,
as an academic, is no more than a producer of trash.
This is the way of Zen, as the Tokugawa bakufu hired Tendai and Zen
scribes to create new Shinto fantasies of themselves as kami (gods),
who were greater than the Hoteke (Buddhas). Writing something down
does not ascribe truth to the writing, nor nobility to the author. A
lie is a lie, however often it is repeated. And even when the truth is
silenced (fortunately, not the case this time).
Similarly, whenever heroes like Makiguchi and Toda rise up nobly, the
mass of weaklings who cower in the face of adversity must later tear
them down, to cover up their own shameful cowardice at the time.
It is no accident that they are led by a Roshi of the Zen School
(Victoria) that perpetrated this horror on humanity. And it is no
accident that his water is (once again) carried by a follower of the
Nichiren Schools and temples (Petry), that gratefully accepted the
Shinto Talisman and worshipped that object of Shinto devotion to the
Zen war against Buddhism and the human race.
No one in the Nichiren Schools refused to bow to Shinto, which is a
mask over the face of Zen War. No one went to prison and stayed there
after 1942 (Victoria's own thesis), with the exception of those
Victoria overlooked: Makiguchi and Toda of the Soka Gakkai, who were
the only ones bearing the honor of Buddhism in the midst of this
holocaust. No other Buddhists had the determination and valor
necessary to stay the course against Imperial State Zen to the bitter
end (Makiguchi's death and Toda's release after the war was lost).
Indeed, Nichiren Shoshu and the other schools gleefully supported the
war, cheering every victory, screaming for more blood, and
highlighting the glorious sacrifice of young Japanese in this 'noble'
cause. This is all on record, for every school. Here is a list of
infamy, of Nichiren Schools that accepted the Shinto Talisman and
supported the war (some are now split off from temples, which at that
time, were infamous):
... Nichiren Schools
...
... Nichiren Shu (Kuon-ji at Minobu)
... Nichiren Shoshu (Taiseki-ji at Fujinomiya)
... Honmon Butsuryu Shu ja
... Kempon Hokke Shu (Myoman-ji)
... Hokkeshu, Honmon Ryu
... Hokkeshu, Jinmon Ryu
... Hokkeshu, Shinmon Ryu
... Honmon Hokke Shu (Myoren-ji)
... Nichiren Honshu (Yobo-ji)
... Nichiren Shu Fuju-fuse-ha (Myokaku-ji)
... Nichiren Hokke Shu
... Hokke Nichiren Shu
... Hompa Nichiren Shu
... Honke Nichiren Shu (Hyogo)
... Fuju-fuse Nichiren Komon Shu
... Honke Nichiren Shu (Kyoto)
... Shobo Hokke Shu
... Honmon Kyoo Shu
... Nichiren Komon Shu
... Reiyukai (Spiritual-Friendship-Association)
... Rissho Kosei Kai
... Nipponzan Myohoji
... Kokuchukai
... Shoshinkai
... Fuji Taisekiji Kenshokai
... Honmon Shoshu
They all bowed to the great evil that is Shinto, wielded as a weapon
by Imperial State Zen. They all bowed to the destruction of Buddhism
and the human race that would have been the outcome of Shinto War.
Only Makiguchi and Toda stood up against and refused to bow to this
evil to the end.
Trashing these heroes will not raise up the lot of you by even a
millimeter in stature. Your heritage will remain that of cowardly and
treasonous Buddhists, who betrayed the Buddha, the Law and the human
race.
Live with it.
-Chas.
_________________________________________________
Jon Petry, since you seem incapable of going and looking at this paper
of Miyata's I include the entire text here, so that you could not
possibly miss it:
. Critical Comments on Brian Victoria's "Engaged Buddhism:
. A Skeleton in the Closet?", by Koichi Miyata.
.
. <http://www.globalbuddhism.org/3/miyata021.htm>
.
. Abstract
. In "Engaged Buddhism: A Skeleton in the Closet?"
. (Vol. 2) Brian Daizen Victoria claims, among
. other things, that Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-
. 1944), founder of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai
. (forebear of the Soka Gakkai and Soka Gakkai
. International), was an active supporter of the
. Japanese wars of aggression. In this response,
. Koichi Miyata argues that Victoria's claims rest
. on the highly selective use of quotes, and
. ignore key interpretative issues associated with
. Japanese imperial fascism and its underlying
. belief structures. Miyata discusses the
. significance of Makiguchi's arrest and
. imprisonment under a law specifically aimed at
. opponents of the war efforts, in his analysis of
. critical lapses in Victoria's article.
.
. Having read the recent essay by Brian Daizen Victoria, I
. found its contents so problematic that, as someone who
. has studied the ideas of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-
. 1944) for many years, I feel compelled to respond.
.
. While many studies and essays on Tsunesaburo Makiguchi
. exist in Japanese, researchers unable to read Japanese
. have had limited access to Makiguchi's ideas and
. actions. To help fill this gap, last year I edited a
. small collection of English-language essays for the 2000
. special edition of The Journal of Oriental Studies
. (TJOS) which was devoted to the "Ideas and Influence of
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi." In this response, I will refer
. to this research as I attempt to shed some light on the
. thoughts and actions of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi.
.
. Turning to my first point: Victoria quotes a passage
. from Makiguchi's 1903 work Jinsei Chirigaku (The
. Geography of Human Life), in which Makiguchi notes that
. Russia was engaged in a policy of expansionism in the
. search for year-round harbors. Victoria asserts that
. this world view was identical to that of the government
. of Japan, a view used to justify the Russo-Japanese War
. (1904-1905), then the annexation of the Korean peninsula
. (1910) and the founding of the puppet state of Manchukuo
. (1932). Victoria's assertion, and his implicit criticism
. of Makiguchi, simplistically links analysis of the
. global situation with the policies taken in response to
. that. Makiguchi was merely voicing what was then the
. accepted understanding of the geopolitical motives for
. Russia's expansionist policies, a view held not only by
. the Japanese government, but shared by the British, with
. whom Japan had formed the Anglo-Japanese Alliance.
. Certainly I know of no scholar of political geography
. who rejects this commonsense view in favor of one that
. Russia posed no danger. If we were to extend Victoria's
. argument, the logical conclusion would be to find not
. only Makiguchi but everyone who studies political
. geography guilty of complicity with Japanese aggression.
.
. Elsewhere in Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi points out that
. the countries of Western Europe had a great deal of
. trouble operating their colonies, and expresses doubts
. about the value of acquiring colonies, particularly from
. the point of view of the financial burden that they
. would entail. If Victoria had read Jinsei Chirigaku
. carefully, he would not identify the thoughts of
. Makiguchi with the expansionist doctrine of the time.
.
. Secondly, Victoria quotes an extract from Makiguchi's
. book Kyodoka Kenkyu (A Study of Folk Culture), in which
. Makiguchi notes that the state plays an important role
. in the lives of citizens. From this, Victoria draws the
. conclusion that as the Japan moved closer to war,
. Makiguchi adopted the view that education should be "in
. service to the state". (Victoria states that Makiguchi
. added this section for the 1933 revised edition of the
. book. This is incorrect, as it appears in the first
. edition published in 1912.) Since the publication of
. Jinsei Chirigaku Makiguchi had consistently emphasized
. the formation of identity on three levels-that of a
. person's local community, the national and global
. levels. Within this context, and against a backdrop of
. global competition for empire, he placed particular
. importance on national independence. This is hardly
. unreasonable. Japan was one of only a handful of
. countries in Asia that had maintained independence amid
. encroachment by the Western powers, and Makiguchi was
. well aware of the miserable circumstances of colonized
. peoples. What we may find problematic-in terms of the
. current view that controlling peoples is intrinsically
. wrong-is that Makiguchi did not say enough after Japan
. itself acquired colonies, omitting to comment on the
. issue of independence for these colonized peoples, and
. only suggesting that imperialism was not the optimal
. policy choice because of the financial burden involved.
. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to my essay "Tsunesaburo
. Makiguchi's Theory of the State" in TJOS, in which I
. discuss Makiguchi's view that imperialistic-military and
. economic-competition should be supplanted by a
. cooperative sense of community, what he called
. "humanitarian competition."
.
. Further, in deciding that Makiguchi viewed education as
. a means of serving the state, Victoria completely
. ignores Makiguchi's argument in his 1930 Soka Kyoikugaku
. Taikei (The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy) that the
. goal of education must in fact be the happiness of the
. child. In the March 1942 issue of Kachi Sozo (Value
. Creation), the short-lived periodical of the Soka Kyoiku
. Gakkai, Makiguchi criticizes the ideologically central
. concept of messhi hoko -- sacrificing the interests of
. the individual to those of the state. He noted that this
. was mere rhetoric to ordinary Japanese, impossible to
. put into practice. Rather, he stressed, it is natural to
. strive for the realization of one's own and others'
. happiness. In May 1942, he was ordered to halt
. publication of Kachi Sozo. While Makiguchi did view the
. state as having an important role to play, this is
. entirely different from holding the ultra nationalist
. view of education that people should be educated to
. ensure their uncritical acceptance of the policies of
. the state. Here I refer Dr. Victoria to "Value-Creating
. Pedagogy and Japanese Education in the Modern Era," in
. TJOS, by Kazunori Kumagai in which he compares
. Makiguchi's educational philosophy with the statist
. educational system.
.
. Thirdly there is the problem of the emperor system.
. Quoting a section from Kyodoka Kenkyu in which Makiguchi
. argues that loyalty to the emperor is synonymous with
. love of one's country, Victoria implies that Makiguchi's
. view was identical to that of the military government.
. This, however, is a far too loosely framed argument that
. ignores the interpretative issues associated with the
. 1889 Meiji Constitution. The preamble to the Meiji
. Constitution recognizes the supreme authority of the
. emperor, while Article 3 declares the sacred nature of
. the emperor, and Article 4 his sovereign rights over the
. state -- making the state and the emperor system
. inseparable. If we stress the supreme authority of the
. emperor, the emperor is then cast in the role of
. absolute monarch. If we consider instead the role of the
. Constitution as a brake on the supreme authority of the
. emperor, he becomes a constitutional monarch. The former
. view is represented by the imperial fascism supported by
. the military regime, while the latter corresponds to
. Tatsukichi Minobe's theory of the emperor as an organ of
. the state. From the era of Taisho democracy through to
. the suppression of Minobe's theory in 1935, this view
. held sway among constitutional scholars and members of
. the Diet. The idea that loyalty =3D patriotism is common
. to both views, and by aligning Makiguchi with the
. imperial fascism of the military simply on the basis of
. his comments here, Victoria again appears determined to
. ignore the written record of Makiguchi's thoughts. From
. his earliest writings, Makiguchi viewed the emperor as a
. constitutional monarch, and was critical of moves to
. make the emperor's powers absolute.
.
. Victoria also quotes from a report produced by the
. special police on their interrogation of Makiguchi as
. proof that Makiguchi acknowledged the divine status of
. the emperor. Again, this assertion arises from a
. distortion of the relevant passage. Victoria quotes a
. reference by Makiguchi to "praying" to the emperor. He
. could hardly, however, have been more distorting in
. selecting the passage he quoted, deliberately excluding
. the following extract, which I have underlined:
.
... "The august virtue of His Majesty the Emperor is
... manifested in the security and happiness of the
... people, through the organs of his civil and
... military officials. Should these be deficient in
... some way, the people can petition him through
... the Diet or other bodies. In light of this, who
... is there, apart from His Majesty, the Emperor
... himself, to whom we should reverently pray?"
... ("Pray" is Victoria's translation; "beseech" is
... probably more accurate in this context.)
.
. It is obvious that "beseech/pray" and "petition" have
. the same meaning in this context. The manner in which
. Victoria has misused Makiguchi's choice of a term
. normally used in a religious context, but with a special
. meaning in this context, to claim that Makiguchi
. supported emperor worship, is not what one would expect
. from a serious scholar endeavoring to document his
. claim. Surely in examining the interrogation report
. Victoria must have encountered the following statements
. by Makiguchi:
.
... "His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary man, who
... went to the Peers' School as Crown Prince, and
... studied how to be an emperor. The Emperor too
... makes mistakes. They say that in the early years
... of the Meiji era Tesshu Yamaoka admonished the
... Meiji Emperor and pointed out his mistakes on
... many occasions." [Tokko Geppo (Monthly bulletin
... of Special Higher Police), August 1943 issue, p.
... 152]
.
. These comments indicate clearly that Makiguchi rejected
. completely the deification of the emperor. Victoria
. mentions the military indoctrination of soldiers that
. "the orders of one's superiors are the orders of the
. emperor," and asserts that Makiguchi supported this
. view. In fact, however, Makiguchi commented: "The orders
. of the emperor could be mistaken, mind you", thereby
. rejecting the absolute authority of the emperor. This
. point is an important one when we come to consider the
. next, that of the relationship between Makiguchi's
. criticism of the religious policies of the military
. government and his anti-war activities. I refer Dr.
. Victoria here to Hiroo Sato "Nichiren Thought in Modern
. Japan: Two Perspectives" in TJOS in which he discusses
. the relationship between Makiguchi and the emperor
. system from a religious-historical perspective.
.
. My fourth point concerns the significance of Makiguchi's
. persecution by the military government for criticizing
. its policy on religion. This is also relevant to the
. arguments of Robert Kisala, which Victoria cites in
. developing his own argument. We must remember that when
. Makiguchi was persecuted by the authorities for
. instructing members of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai to burn
. talismans provided by the Ise shrine, regarded as home
. of the ancestral deity of the imperial family, it was
. not under any law dealing with religious matters, but
. the Peace Preservation Law. Neither Victoria nor Kisala
. appear to understand the significance of this. The Peace
. Preservation Law was demanded by the Privy Council in
. exchange for approving the Universal Manhood Suffrage
. Law in 1925 to ensure that the newly enfranchised
. populace did not begin criticizing the emperor system.
. It was originally designed for the suppression of anti-
. Establishment groups such as socialists, communists and
. anarchists. Having all but eliminated anti-Establishment
. activity of an overtly political nature with a massive
. crackdown on the Communist Party in the early years of
. the Showa era (1926-1989), the military government next
. targeted liberals and religious movements as impediments
. to implementation of their war policies. By completely
. obliterating Tatsukichi Minobe's liberal view of the
. emperor as organ of the state in 1935, the militarists
. established the absolute authority of the emperor,
. brooking no opposition whatsoever their policies, now
. fully shielded by imperial authority.
.
. Next they turned to the religious movements. Religions
. having as their object of worship gods, or the Buddha,
. which their teachings accord a position in the cosmic
. order far superior to that of the emperor, religious
. groups tended to have less regard for his authority. The
. year 1936 saw a crackdown on Ohmotokyo, a new Shinto
. movement that preached the restoration of peace and
. order to the world under a mythical god. To enable more
. systematic repression of religious movements, the
. military government revised the Peace Preservation Law
. in 1939 to provide for punishment of religious groups
. found to be committing blasphemy against the Ise shrine.
. This shows the military government viewed religious
. movements that rejected the authority of the emperor as
. the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation
. behind its war policies. It was against this political
. and social backdrop that Makiguchi came to criticize the
. religious policy of the military regime. His arrest
. under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the regime
. judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the
. war. Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist
. ideology of imperial fascism for its religious policies,
. and because this opposition constituted an impediment to
. conduct of the war by the military regime, there is no
. doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-war
. activities. I refer Dr. Victoria to my Introduction to
. TSOJ in which I examine the historical background and
. significance of Makiguchi's wartime persecution.
.
. I have responded to the views of Brian Victoria on four
. fronts. I can only imagine that in order to prove
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi cooperated with the war effort,
. Victoria has shaped his arguments to fit his pre-
. established conclusion, willfully quoting only those
. passages of Makiguchi's writings that would seem to
. support it. I cannot imagine he studied all ten volumes
. of Makiguchi's writings in Japanese to reach this
. conclusion. While there is ample room for the frank
. exchange of academic views, including highly critical
. ones, it is important that a tendentious agenda, clothed
. in the guise of academic research, not stand
. unchallenged.
______________________________________________________
juanjo
foot high Butsudan doors opened' 4-8-97" <p2q1r0s...@aol.com> wrote:
> Zen and the Nichiren Schools Attack the Soka Gakkai to Cover Their
> Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 2-
>
The true tragedy of Chas' repeated attempts to raise issues regarding
the alleged pacifism of the founders of the Soka Gakkai during World
War II is his inability to address actual facts. Instead he relies on
regurgitated agit-prop from his organization, the Soka Gakkai. He
also deliberately mis-attributes authorship of material in that he
quotes material as my own when in fact it is not. It is material I
have quoted from or indeed he has quoted from! Most troubling is that
neither Chas nor the voluminous material he quotes from actually
address the material presented but rather attempt to overwhelm the
reader with massive volumes of material which speaks all around the
subject or misquotes and misinterprets the material resented. This is
the classic straw man argument in which one ignores the actual points
presented and instead invents another false issue and "rebuts" it
instead.
Rather than actually address the simple fact that his own sensei as
well as two of the Soka Gakkai's own tame "scholars" disagree with
Chas, he chooses to post the same nonsense again and again. This is
regrettable and shows actual proof of the bankrupt spirit that infuses
the so called "Buddhist" practice of the Soka Gakkai which is nothing
more than a personality cult centered on an old, dying Japanese man
known for shameless self promotion and his actions in beating up
Buddhist priests in his youth.
The Soka Gakkai has worked long and hard to rewrite history and erase
reality. It is regrettable that they do so but it is not all that
unusual. Consider how many people in France for example, claimed to
be members of the resistance after the war had ended when actual
historical fact shows that the resistance movement in that country was
much smaller in comparison to the number of those who claimed
membership after the Liberation. Further in Japan there is a great
deal of ambiguity about the wear and there has been severe criticism
of the Japanese for their attempts to rewrite matters and paint
themselves differently from what they actually were, both in popular
clergy and lay membership but far too few for my liking. I have never
opposing the Japanese government’s assertion of State Shinto as
Note that Ikeda does not go on the record with any actual claim that
Makiguchi opposed the war itself. In fact he cannot make such a claim
because there are comments on the record by Makiguchi supporting the
war but stating that the war effort is doomed to failure if the
Imperial Government did not discard provisional teachings such as Zen
and Shingon and embrace Nichiren Buddhism. It was Makiguchi's Rissho
Ankoku-ron moment and there is little doubt that he saw it as exactly
as that. So Chas' own sensei is rebutting Chas’ position.
If that is not enough then let us consider another scholar, a favorite
of the Soka Gakkai in fact:
"Thus, Makiguchi and Toda defied the government and went to prison not
necessarily for anti-war beliefs, which the Soka Gakkai preaches
today, but because it was against their deeply felt religious
principles to adopt Shinto practices or to merge with another
religious sect, even if it had Nichiren connections. While Makiguchi
may have indeed made the pro-Emperor statements that Victoria alleges,
his overall thinking and demeanor was certainly not pro-militarist.
The evidence simply does not support Victoria's argument."
A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese Buddhist History by Daniel A. Metraux
So Professor Metraux disputes Professor Victoria's position that
Makiguchi was in fact pro-militarist [without citing any actual
evidence and ignoring Makiguchi’s own statements]. However, Prof.
Metraux does agree with the position put forward by Prof. Victoria,
namely that Makiguchi and Toda went to prison for what they were
charged with - lesse majesty NOT for any actual anti-war beliefs or
positions. Professor Metraux also admits that Makiguchi made the pro-
Emperor statements that Professor Victoria quotes although he
disagrees on the import of those statements. So Professor Metraux
also rebuts Chas’ stated position.
Yet another of the Soka Gakkai’s tame scholars was paid to put forth
an opinion attacking Dr. Victoria’s position. However, if one
carefully reads the comments made by Koichi Miyata in his critique of
Prof. Victoria he affirms Dr. Victoria’s position:
"To enable more systematic repression of religious movements, the
military government revised the Peace Preservation Law in 1939 to
provide for punishment of religious groups found to be committing
blasphemy against the Ise shrine. This shows the military government
viewed religious movements that rejected the authority of the emperor
as the last remaining impediments to rallying the nation behind its
war policies. It was against this political and social backdrop that
Makiguchi came to criticize the religious policy of the military
regime. His arrest under the Peace Preservation Law shows that the
regime judged his actions a hindrance to their conduct of the war.
Thus, Makiguchi directly opposed the militarist ideology of imperial
fascism for its religious policies, and because this opposition
constituted an impediment to conduct of the war by the military
regime, there is no doubt that he was persecuted for implicitly anti-
war activities."
Now Miyata is guilty of sloppy logic here. I have no doubt that the
Imperial Government wished to stifle any opposition to its
expansionist, militaristic policies, including any opposition from the
religious institutions of Japan. The record is clear that the
Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views to its
policies. This includes those who would not go along with the system
that the government was instituting, namely of blind obedience to the
government policies regarding the consolidation of the various
religious sects as well as their subservience to State Shinto.
Makiguchi did indeed threaten this blind obedience because he asserted
that the state policy regarding the supremacy of the Imperial Talisman
over the Buddha was wrong. And equally important, that the
prosecution of the war would fail unless the government undertook to
fulfill the admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an
effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. Miyata’s claim that
this criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto, as well as of the
supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms of Buddhism made
Makiguchi “implicitly” a pacifist is absurd. Makiguchi is not saying
that the war is wrong under any circumstances. He is saying that it
will fail unless the government suppresses other forms of Buddhism and
acknowledges the supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms
of religious practice including other forms of Buddhism and State
Shinto.
Now I have suggested a position somewhat simpler and quite obvious to
anyone who actually pays attention to what is being said and what is
not being said by either Prof. Metraux or the Soka Gakkai's scholar,
Koichi Miyata. The assertion is made that Prof Victoria is taking
statements out of context to make Makiguchi into a supporter of the
military government and its view of the emperor. That is irrelevant to
my point and further the statements of Metraux and Miyata do not
really support the position put forth by the Soka Gakkai in their
attacks on Dr. Victoria. However this is not the argument I made. Nor
has Chas ever been able to rebut it.
Let's review shall we?
SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up to the
Japanese government during WWII and opposed the war on pacifist
grounds.
SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior to WWII.
However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda were not pacifists, in fact,
they were far from it. There are speeches in existence in which they
affirm their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war. However,
they did remonstrate against the imposition of the Imperial Talisman
as an object of reverence, as well as, in their interpretation of
Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the Japanese Government to suppress all other
Buddhist sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
They were imprisoned for the crime of lese majeste, for their
disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they were pacifists.
President Ikeda admits this as does Professor Metraux, in an article
he was paid to write by the Soka Gakkai.
The “Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists” claim made by the SGI
adds insult to the injury endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan
who did demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those people were
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
affirmed their loyalty to the Emperor and there are no statements made
by either of them which show any actual opposition to the war effort.
However they did oppose the prosecution of the war effort based upon
Imperial Shinto. Based upon their interpretation of the Rissho Ankoku-
ron, any effort by the Japanese Government to prosecute that war was
doomed to failure unless the Japanese nation was immediately converted
to Nichiren Buddhism and all heretical sects suppressed. Their
criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto over Nichiren Buddhism was
similarly a cause of alarm among the far right government who viewed
any opposition to any policy it promulgated as dangerous. Thus they
were imprisoned for lese mageste, specifically their criticism of the
government’s doctrinal position of the supremacy of the worship of the
Emperor over the Buddha.
I have no doubt that the Imperial Government wished to stifle any
opposition to its expansionist, militaristic policies, including any
opposition from the religious institutions of Japan. The record is
clear that the Japanese Government came down hard on dissenting views
to its policies. This includes acting against pacifists of which
there were some, both religious and otherwise. It also includes those
who would not go along with the system that the government was
instituting, namely of blind obedience to the government policies.
Makiguchi did indeed threaten this blind obedience because he asserted
that the state policy regarding the supremacy of the Imperial Talisman
over the Buddha was wrong. And equally important, that the
prosecution of the war would fail unless the government undertook to
fulfill the admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an
effort. Thus Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of
the Imperial Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of
pacifism but rather out of something completely different. The
Japanese Government was quite pathological when it came to their
requirement that all the people of Japan must be in absolute support
of the government’s policy. Any nail head sticking up was most
certainly going to be hammered down.
Makiguchi was such a nail head. Makiguchi wanted the Imperial
Government to suppress all other forms of Buddhism and accept Nichiren
Buddhism as the only form of state accepted Buddhism. His position
was that if they failed to do so the war effort was doomed to
failure. This was a position that the Imperial Japanese Government
was unwilling to tolerate and hence his imprisonment along with that
of Toda.
Chas in his hurry to smear Prof. Victoria has leapt to conclusions and
not bothered to read what was written. This is typical of Chas and
actually in his defense, it really is not his fault. He is simply
regurgitating the nonsense he has been given as speaking points by the
Soka Gakkai leadership he has labored so diligently on behalf of in
spreading their positions on the web. For him this is a holy mission
and one in which is he is completely involved and frankly more than a
little obsessed.
However the level of incompetence among the Soka Gakkai leadership is
such that they attempt to “disprove” Professor Victoria’s statements
by having their own paid “scholars” issue rebuttals which are not
rebuttals of the main issue raised by Dr. Victoria, namely whether
Makiguchi was a pacifist and opposed the Japanese war effort on that
basis. They toss out all sorts of comments concerning the use by Dr.
Victoria of pre-1935 commentary of Makiguchi while ignoring the
reiteration of these comments as well as other statements similar to
them by Makiguchi after the Japanese aggression in China had reached
full pitch and the start of hostilities by the Japanese against the
United States, Great Britain and Holland among others. On top of
this, their attacks on Dr. Victoria are not relevant to my position
which does not rely on Dr. Victoria but rather on the simple fact that
their own sources as well as the historical sources do not support
their position.
SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles and never
compromised them.
SGI Fact 2: The examples of the SGI violating its own principles are
in fact too numerous to detail. But one which is relevant to Chas'
regular rants is the claim that they have held fast to Nikko's
admonitions while the Nichiren Shoshu has not. In particular they
chastise the Nichiren Shoshu for sending priests for education at
Rissho University which is operated by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently
they have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
university, some with the approval of their own governing body in
Japan.
Of even greater amusement however are two other events. Shortly after
the split between the SGI and the Nichiren Shoshu in the early 1990's
the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu and pay for
all overseas missionary work, of course with the Soka Gakkai
administering all overseas propagation. The Nichiren Shu, having seen
what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly declined
the offer. The second incident occurred when the SGI approached the
Nichiren Shu and offered one million US dollars for a Nichiren
authored Mandala. This offer was also rejected.
Then we have the wholesale rewriting of all previous publications of
the Soka Gakkai to rewrite history so to speak and cleanse it of any
undue support for the Nichiren Shoshu temple and its doctrines and
policies that might now appear to be embarrassing in light of the
criticisms being leveled at that organization by the Soka Gakkai. One
classic example is the careful editing of the Gosho to remove any
support for the Nichiren Shoshu position on the requirement of a
specific eye opening ceremony which the Soka Gakkai wholeheartedly
endorsed prior to its split with the Nichiren Shoshu Temple and which
it now rejects. Doctrines such as these once held near and dear to
the SGI have fallen by the wayside and been trampled underfoot in a
scene reminiscent of a Monty Python sketch.
SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about democracy,
has been adamant about stamping out any attempts by its membership to
adopt democratic principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their pleasure with
no accountability to the rank and file.
In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren
Shu, the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI through
proxies such as the Rubys and others made posts belittling that fact.
When SGI members have agitated for more of a say in the actions of
their local chapters and national organization, they are typically
admonished. If they persist, they are drummed out.
Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
towards actual financial accountability, keeping its finances a
closely held secret. Members have no knowledge of what happens to
their money once it is donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is
to be spent. Periodically this is justified by claims that the local
SGI chapters are not financially independent and must depend on Japan
for financial contributions. However this begs the question. How
does anyone know this and if in fact it is true then how much comes
from local sources and how much comes from overseas? Further how is
the local administration using this money and why should the local
members of the SGI sangha not have a say in how funds are expended
regardless of their source? The truth is that no one knows and no one
is going to know so long as the Soka Gakkai can keep a tight lid on
its ship of state.
This is vastly different from say Nichiren Order of North America, the
Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which regularly provides
information to its members as to what funds have been taken in and how
they have been spent, including a say at the local level as to how the
funds should be spent.
Similarly the local sanghas as well as the national governing
structure of the Nichiren Order of North America is democratically
elected and its governing organs conduct open meetings in which any
member in good standing is welcome to attend and speak.
juanjo
> Complicity in the Shinto Pacific War, Part 1-
>
> Confirming Makiguchi's Pacifism & Exposing Putative Scholar Brian
> Victoria's Inaccurate Cherry-Picking Research, for Jon Petry
>
The true tragedy of Chas' repeated attempts to raise issues regarding
the alleged pacifism of the founders of the Soka Gakkai during World
War II is his inability to address actual facts. Instead he relies on
regurgitated agit-prop from his organization, the Soka Gakkai. He
also deliberately mis-attributes authorship of material in that he
quotes material as my own when in fact it is not. It is material I
have quoted from or which he has quoted from! Most troubling is that
A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
SGI Myth 1: The SGI is the only Buddhist group who stood up to the
Japanese government during WWII and opposed the war on pacifist
grounds.
SGI Fact 1: The SGI as it is formed now did not exist prior to WWII.
However its founders, Makaguchi and Toda were not pacifists, in fact,
they were far from it. There are speeches in existence in which they
affirm their loyalty to the Japanese government and the war. However,
they did remonstrate against the imposition of the Imperial Talisman
as an object of reverence, as well as, in their interpretation of
Rissho Ankoku-ron, urged the Japanese Government to suppress all other
Buddhist sects and force everyone to convert to Nichiren Buddhism.
They were imprisoned for the crime of lese majeste, for their
disrespect of the Imperial Talisman not because they were pacifists.
President Ikeda admits this as does Professor Metraux, in an article
he was paid to write by the Soka Gakkai.
The “Makiguchi and Toda were the only pacifists” claim made by the SGI
adds insult to the injury endured by thousands of Buddhists in Japan
who did demonstrate against the war and who were abandoned by the
leaderships of their respective sects. Many of those people were
imprisoned and executed. Others such as Nichidatsu Fujii were sent
into exile.
My position is simpler than Prof. Victoria's. Both Makiguchi and Toda
SGI Myth 2: The SGI has always held fast to its principles and never
compromised them.
SGI Fact 2: The examples of the SGI violating its own principles are
in fact too numerous to detail. But one which is relevant to Chas'
regular rants is the claim that they have held fast to Nikko's
admonitions while the Nichiren Shoshu has not. In particular they
chastise the Nichiren Shoshu for sending priests for education at
Rissho University which is operated by the Nichiren Shu. Apparently
they have forgotten that SGI members have also attended that
university, some with the approval of their own governing body in
Japan.
Of even greater amusement however are two other events. Shortly after
the split between the SGI and the Nichiren Shoshu in the early 1990's
the SGI approached the Nichiren Shu with an offer. They would
affiliate as a lay organization within the Nichiren Shu and pay for
all overseas missionary work, of course with the Soka Gakkai
administering all overseas propagation. The Nichiren Shu, having seen
what the SGI had been doing to the NST, politely and firmly declined
the offer. The second incident occurred when the SGI approached the
Nichiren Shu and offered one million US dollars for a Nichiren
authored Mandala. This offer was also rejected.
Then we have the wholesale rewriting of all previous publications of
the Soka Gakkai to rewrite history so to speak and cleanse it of any
undue support for the Nichiren Shoshu temple and its doctrines and
policies that might now appear to be embarrassing in light of the
criticisms being leveled at that organization by the Soka Gakkai. One
classic example is the careful editing of the Gosho to remove any
support for the Nichiren Shoshu position on the requirement of a
specific eye opening ceremony which the Soka Gakkai wholeheartedly
endorsed prior to its split with the Nichiren Shoshu Temple and which
it now rejects. Doctrines such as these once held near and dear to
the SGI have fallen by the wayside and been trampled underfoot in a
scene reminiscent of a Monty Python sketch.
SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about democracy,
has been adamant about stamping out any attempts by its membership to
adopt democratic principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their pleasure with
no accountability to the rank and file.
In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren
Shu, the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI through
proxies such as the Rubys and others made posts belittling that fact.
When SGI members have agitated for more of a say in the actions of
their local chapters and national organization, they are typically
admonished. If they persist, they are drummed out.
Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
towards actual financial accountability, keeping its finances a
closely held secret. Members have no knowledge of what happens to
their money once it is donated nor are they allowed a say in how it is
to be spent. Periodically this is justified by claims that the local
SGI chapters are not financially independent and must depend on Japan
for financial contributions. However this begs the question. How
does anyone know this and if in fact it is true then how much comes
from local sources and how much comes from overseas? Further how is
the local administration using this money and why should the local
members of the SGI sangha not have a say in how funds are expended
regardless of their source? The truth is that no one knows and no one
is going to know so long as the Soka Gakkai can keep a tight lid on
its ship of state.
This is vastly different from say Nichiren Order of North America, the
Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which regularly provides
information to its members as to what funds have been taken in and how
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Here is the result of the complicity of Buddhist temples during the
war. Is this effect somehow independent of cause? No, it's not. And by
the way, SGI Buddhism is not the one that is "dying out." It's all the
Shinto-War-complicit temples that are dying out (including Nichiren
Shu). GOOD RIDDANCE !
NYTImes: "In Japan, Buddhism May Be Dying Out"
Published: July 14, 2008
... Increasingly, many Japanese, especially those in urban
... areas, have eschewed those traditions. Many no longer
... belong to temples and rely instead on funeral homes when
... their relatives die. The funeral homes provide Buddhist
... priests for funerals. According to a 2007 report by the
... Japan Consumers’ Association, the average cost of a
... funeral, excluding the cemetery plot, was $21,500, of
... which $5,100 covered services performed by a Buddhist
... priest.
...
... As recently as the mid-1980s, almost all Japanese held
... funerals at home or in temples, with the local Buddhist
... priest playing a prominent role.
...
... But the move to funeral homes has sharply accelerated in
... the last decade. In 1999, 62 percent still held funerals
... at home or in temples, while 30 percent chose funeral
... homes, according to the Consumers’ Association. But in
... 2007, the preferences were reversed, with 28 percent
... selecting funerals at home or in temples, and 61 percent
... opting for funeral homes.
...
... In addition, an increasing number of Japanese are
... deciding to have their loved ones cremated without any
... funeral at all, said Noriyuki Ueda, an anthropologist at
... the Tokyo Institute of Technology and an expert on
... Buddhism.
...
... “Because of that, Buddhist priests and temples will no
... longer be involved in funerals,” Mr. Ueda said.
...
... HE SAID JAPANESE BUDDHISM HAD BEEN SAPPED OF ITS
... SPIRITUAL SIDE IN GREAT PART BECAUSE IT HAD COMPROMISED
... ITSELF DURING WORLD WAR II THROUGH ITS CLOSE TIES WITH
... JAPAN’S MILITARY. After Buddhist priests had glorified
... fallen soldiers and given them special posthumous
... Buddhist names, talk of pacifism sounded hollow.
...
... Mr. Mori, the priest here, said that after the war there
... was a desire for increasingly lavish funerals with
... prestigious Buddhist names. These names — with the
... highest ranks traditionally given to those who have led
... honorable lives — are routinely purchased now,
... regardless of a dead person’s conduct in life.
...
... “Soldiers, who gave their lives for the country, were
... given special posthumous Buddhist names, so everybody
... wanted one after that, and prices went up dramatically,”
... Mr. Mori said. “Everyone was getting richer, so everyone
... wanted one.
...
... “But that gave us a bad image,” he said, adding that the
... price of the top name in Akita was about $3,000 — though
... that was a small fraction of the price in Tokyo.
...
... Indeed, that image is reinforced by the way the business
... of funerals and memorial services is conducted. Fees are
... not stated and are left to the family’s discretion, and
... the relatives generally feel an unspoken pressure to be
... quite generous. Money is handed over in envelopes, and
... receipts are not given. Temples, with their status as
... religious organizations, pay no taxes.
...
... It was partly to dispel this bad image that Kazuma
... Hayashi, 41, a Buddhist priest without a temple of his
... own, said he founded a company, Obohsan.com (obohsan
... means priest), three years ago in a Tokyo suburb. The
... company dispatches freelance Buddhist priests to
... funerals and other services, cutting out funeral homes
... and other middlemen.
...
... Prices, which are at least a third lower than the
... average, are listed clearly on the company’s Web site. A
... 10 percent discount is available for members.
...
... “We even give out receipts,” Mr. Hayashi said.
...
... Mr. Hayashi argued that instead of divorcing Japanese
... Buddhism further from its spiritual roots, his business
... attracted more people with its lower prices. The
... highest-ranking posthumous name went for about $1,500, a
... rock-bottom price.
...
... “I know that, originally, that’s not what Buddhism was
... about,” Mr. Hayashi said of the top name. “But it’s a
... brand that our customers choose. Some really want it, so
... that means there’s a strong desire there, and we have to
... respond to it.”
...
... After apologizing for straying from Buddhism’s ideals,
... Mr. Hayashi said he offered his customers the highest-
... ranking name, albeit with a warning: “In short, that
... this is different from going to a shop in town and
... buying a handbag, you know, a Gucci bag.”
What follows is the Zen apology for its complicity in the Shinto War.
The Zen temples ginned up support for the war and had chaplains in all
the services, and yes, that means they were present at any and every
war crime that was perpetrated.
Does this only hold for Zen chaplains? Of course not. Did you really
read and understand what Victoria was saying in his Zen War books?
ALL the temples ginned up support and ALL the temples sent chaplains
into all the services, and this does not disinclude Nichiren Shu in
any way: they have always sucked up to the bakufu in any religious war
effort down through history. It was political gamesmanship for them,
they would never eschew any evil activity to maintain their leading
place at the table of power. They were always first in line, when the
powerful told the temples to line up.
Nichiren Shu is an unapologetic holocaust perpetrator.
January 11, 2003
Meditating on War and Guilt, Zen Says It's Sorry
By ALLAN M. JALON
< http://www.racematters.org/zenatwar.htm >
... To many Americans, Zen Buddhists primarily devote
... themselves to discovering inner serenity and social
... peace. But Zen has had strong ties to militarism —
... indeed so strong, that the leaders of one of the largest
... denominations in Japan have remorsefully compared their
... former religious fanaticism during Japan's brutal
... expansionism in the 1930's and 40's to today's
... murderously militant Islamists.
...
... The unexpected apology for wartime complicity by the
... leaders of Myoshin-ji, the headquarters temple of one of
... Japan's main Zen sects, was issued 16 days after 9/11,
... which gave it a particular resonance. But the leaders of
... Myoshin-ji — as well as other Zen Buddhist leaders who
... have also delivered apologies over the past two years —
... mainly credit a disillusioned Westerner for their public
... regrets: Brian Victoria, a former Methodist missionary,
... who is a Zen priest and historian.
...
... Buddhist leaders in Japan and the United States said in
... recent interviews that Mr. Victoria had exerted a
... profound influence, especially in the West, by revealing
... in his 1997 book, "Zen at War," a shockingly dark and
... unfamiliar picture of Zen during World War II to
... followers who had no idea about its history. Keiitsu
... Hosokawa, secretary general of Myoshin-ji, made a speech
... to the group's general assembly in September 2002 in
... which he said that the Japanese edition of "Zen at War"
... had been one of several factors that "provided the
... impetus" to issue the group's apology.
...
... Now, in a new sequel called "Zen War Stories," Mr.
... Victoria has dug more specifically into relationships
... between Zen leaders and the military during World War
... II.
...
... From its beginnings in Japan, Zen has been associated
... with the warrior culture established by the early
... shoguns. But the extent of its involvement in World War
... II has stayed mostly submerged until recently. Many
... people in the United States and Europe know Zen's
... indirect traces through the poetry of the Beats or the
... quietist aura of contemporary architecture and clothing.
...
... Even John Dower, a Pulitzer Prize-winning historian of
... modern Japan at M.I.T., whose early interest in Japan
... was kindled by Zen-inspired architecture, said that Mr.
... Victoria's works had opened his eyes to "how Zen
... violated Buddhism's teachings about compassion and
... nonviolence."
...
... Ina Buitendijk, a Dutch Zen devotee, was so inspired by
... Mr. Victoria's work in 1999 that she mounted a letter-
... writing campaign pressing Zen leaders to confront their
... history. Mrs. Buitendijk's husband, along with other
... Dutch civilians, was interned by the Japanese in the
... Dutch East Indies during World War II. All this she put
... into the 28 letters she said she had written to Zen
... spiritual figures, educators and administrative leaders
... in Japan. A number of leaders responded, sending her
... official apologies, some of which were published.
...
... The Myoshin-ji statement, first issued on Sept. 27,
... 2001, for example, was expanded in a major religious
... newspaper in Japan in September 2002. The initial
... statement said that the conflict between America and an
... anti-American jihad made it important to remember "that
... in the past our nation, under the banner of Holy War,
... initiated a conflict that led to great suffering."
...
... The more detailed version apologized for helping to lend
... a religious purpose to invasions, colonization and the
... former empire's destruction of "20 million precious
... lives." The self-critical account also described how
... Myoshin-ji members followed Japanese invaders across
... Asia, "established branch headquarters and missions" in
... conquered areas, even "conducted fund-raising drives to
... purchase military aircraft."
...
... Two other Zen groups — the Tenryu-ji temple and the
... Sanbo-kyodan foundation — and several individual Zen
... leaders have also issued apologies after receiving Mrs.
... Buitendijk's letter for war-time complicity, which have
... appeared in Buddhist publications in Europe and the
... United States.
...
... Mr. Victoria, 63, is a former Nebraskan who lives in
... Australia and teaches Japanese studies at the University
... of Adelaide. He embraced Zen in 1961, partly because he
... believed its history was free of the violent conflicts
... that had marked Western religion.
...
... In 1964, ordained a Soto priest while living in Japan
... and increasingly active in opposing the Vietnam War, he
... was chastised by a religious superior for taking part in
... peace protests. He then discovered the writings of
... Ichikawa Hakugen, a Zen priest who had taken an early
... look at Zen's war-time role. It was buried, like that of
... Emperor Hirohito, by efforts to stabilize Japan during
... the cold war, Mr. Victoria said.
...
... Mr. Victoria subsequently conducted numerous interviews
... with aging priests and plumbed Japanese military
... archives to detail how military figures and Zen leaders
... had jointly shaped Zen meditative practice into forms of
... military training.
...
... "Zen was a large part of the spiritual training not only
... of the Japanese military but eventually of the whole
... Japanese people," he said in an interview. "It would
... have led them to commit national suicide if there had
... been an American invasion."
...
... "Zen War Stories" quotes from manuals for battlefield
... behavior that Mr. Victoria says drew on Zen. It tells
... how the military modeled eating utensils on those in
... monasteries, how kamakazi pilots visited for spiritual
... preparation before their final missions.
...
... Japanese Zen is a mosaic of different denominations, the
... two overarching groups being the Soto school, which
... emphasizes quiet sitting meditation, and the Rinzai
... school, which teaches a more aggressive practice based
... on solving spiritual riddles or koans. The Japanese tend
... to combine different kinds of Buddhist practice,
... including Zen and non-Zen forms.
...
... Both of Mr. Victoria's books peel back layers of the
... career of D. T. Suzuki, who taught at Columbia
... University in the 1950's and remains the best-known
... Japanese advocate of Zen in the West. In 1938, however,
... Mr. Suzuki used his prestige as a scholar in Japan to
... assert that Zen's "ascetic tendency" teaches the
... Japanese soldier "that to go straight forward and crush
... the enemy is all that is necessary for him."
...
... "What Brian Victoria has written is mostly right," said
... Jiun Kubota, the third patriarch of Sanbo-kyodan, a
... small Zen group outside Tokyo that has also issued an
... apology. "I dare say that Zen was used as the spiritual
... backbone of the military army and navies during the
... war."
...
... Mr. Victoria's research has revealed that the founder of
... Sanbo-kyodan, Mr. Kubota's longtime teacher, was an
... outspoken militarist and anti-Semite during the war
... years. His name was Hakuun Yasutani, and he was one of
... the most significant figures in advancing the popularity
... of Zen Buddhism in the United States in the 1960's.
...
... In 1999, the New York-based magazine Tricycle published
... excerpts of a 1943 book that Mr. Victoria had unearthed
... in which Yasutani expressed his hatred of "the scheming
... Jews." Actually, the Zen master probably knew few if any
... Jews, and Mr. Victoria believes he was using them as a
... stalking horse for liberalism.
...
... Traditionally, Zen stresses an inward search for
... understanding and mental discipline. But Mr. Victoria
... said that imperial military trainers developed the self-
... denying egolessness Zen prizes into "a form of fascist
... mind-control." He said Suzuki and others helped by
... "romanticizing" the tie between Zen and the warrior
... ethos of the samurai. Worse, he charges, they stressed a
... connection between Buddhist compassion and the
... acceptance of death in a way that justified collective
... martyrdom and killing one's enemies.
...
... "In Islam, as in the holy wars of Christianity, there is
... a promise of eternal life," Mr. Victoria said in an
... interview. "In Zen, there was the promise that there was
... no difference between life and death, so you really
... haven't lost anything."
...
... Despite the apologies, some of the Zen leaders say that
... Mr. Victoria is too hard on Zen Buddhists. Thomas
... Kirchner, an American-born Myoshin-ji monk, who
... translated its World War II apology and those of other
... sects, argued that in the view of Japanese Zen leaders
... Mr. Victoria doesn't sufficiently explain that
... "conformist pressures on all Japanese that were
... immense."
...
... Masataka Toga, secretary general of Tenryu-ji, echoed
... that view. Mr. Kirchner also argued that Mr. Victoria
... doesn't offer a sufficiently textured picture of the
... religious landscape of wartime Japan. Other Buddhist
... sects and Japanese Christians also supported the war,
... along with the emperor-deifying religion of Shinto.
...
... Herbert Bix, author of the Pulitzer Prize-winning
... "Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan," says it is
... important to see Mr. Victoria's work within the broad
... picture of Japanese religion and politics at the time.
...
... Still, Mr. Bix, Mr. Kirchner and others praise Mr.
... Victoria's work. Indeed, it's hard to find a scholar of
... authority who takes issue with the basic findings of
... "Zen at War," which has chapter titles like "The
... Incorporation of Buddhism into the Japanese War Machine
... (1913-30)."
...
... Mr. Victoria sees hope for Buddhism in a Western-style
... "engaged Buddhism" that increasingly seeks to combine
... meditative practice with work for social progress and
... peace.
...
... That moral growth, he believes, must come with a cold-
... eyed look at how basic Zen concepts were abused in the
... past: "I want my work to provide a model that it is
... possible to take an unflinching look at what is really
... happening with a religion while remaining essentially
... committed to it."
What you are trying to do is somehow separate resistance against State
Shinto from resistance against the State Shinto Pacific War. There is
no difference because the Shinto that Nichiren Shu sucked up to and
supported and the Shinto that Makiguchi died to thwart are in fact the
embodiment of the Pacific War.
Shinto is a made up religion for the purposes of political distortion
of the people's desire to practice Buddhism. Nichiren Shu has always
been at the forefront in aiding the bakufu is misleading the people.
1. War is a political means by any state that participates in one.
2. Shinto is the political means of the bakufu, which is the military
(which means war) state for most of Japan's history. This has always
been true.
3. Therefore, resistance to the Shinto War is a specific instance of
war resistance in general. There is no way around this conclusion.
Nichiren Shu is an unapologetic holocaust perpetrator.
Let's contrast this with the SGI, which is the only organized
resistance to the Shinto War to stick it out to the end of the War.
Here, I quote myself:
_________________________________________
In his book "Zen at War" first published in 1997, he has a 6th chapter
on the resistance to the Zen-state war machine. This chapter is in two
sections, organized resistance and the resistance of individuals. In
the organized resistance section he talks about the initial resistance
of very few groups, all of which were crushed. The last resistance
group (he states erroneously) was the Youth League for Revitalizing
Buddhism (Shinko Bukkyo Seinen Domei) led by a man named Seno. On page
73, Victoria describes Seno's arrest for treason against the emperor
system and capitalism (fascists hate communists),
| Seno ... In 1942, however, he was given an early release
| from prison due to ill health. By that time, of course, all
| traces of the League had been eradicated. So, too, had all
| traces of the Buddhist resistance to Japan's war efforts
| (8).
Buried at the end of the book in Note 8 on page 201, is Brian
Victoria's ridiculous explanation of why he neglects to mention the
Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, which would upset his point that Buddhists did not
stand up to Imperial State Zen. His actions are partly explained by
the fact that chapter 6 would have to be re-written, since the central
thesis would be wrong. Victoria is a Zen Roshi, and of course the
culpability of Zen in the war is more easily borne if no one acted to
stop them and the complicity was then universally shared by all
Japanese Buddhists. [Then everyone is corrupted and evil, so nobody
can point fingers at Zen.]
_________________________________________
So, according to Victoria, no "organized resistance" persisted to the
end of the war. In fact, we know that Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda were
the leaders of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai, which was an organization the
resisted the Shinto Pacific War to the end of the War.
This means that the only organized resistance to fight through to the
end of the war in thwarting this political effort to make Buddhists
into robotic killers, were Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda of the Soka
Kyoiku Gakkai, also now known as the SGI.
And, Nichiren Shu is still an unapologetic holocaust perpetrator.
But that does not stop their minions like Jon Petry, AKA Juanho from
their unabated and coordinated attacks against the SGI, the only
organized resistance to persist through to the end of the Pacific War,
which Nichiren Shu and their complicit holocaust perpetrators never
cease persecuting them for.
-Chas.
juanjo
> And, Nichiren Shu is still an unapologetic holocaust perpetrator.
>
> But that does not stop their minions like Jon Petry, AKA Juanho from
> their unabated and coordinated attacks against the SGI, the only
> organized resistance to persist through to the end of the Pacific War,
> which Nichiren Shu and their complicit holocaust perpetrators never
> cease persecuting them for.
>
Chas has posted uncounted words here none of which support his
previous insinuations that Nichiren Temple priests [whether Nichiren
Shu, Nichiren Shoshu or other Nichiren sects] participated in the
atrocities described in the book, the Rape of Nanking.
All Chas can say is that the various leaders of the Nichiren Buddhist
sects like those of other Buddhist and non-Buddhist religious groups
issued general statements in support of the Japanese war effort. He
also ignores that his idol, Makiguchi did the same.
Chumley
<3361965b-33d9-4d99...@e19g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
juanjo <jonp...@mindspring.com> wrote:
Chas continues to rant that he wants to debate his posted issues, but
never does to any specific retort.
The modus operandi of so many we've seen come and go up here.
Chas is one of the creepier ones, almost unibomber in his disjointed
communication and diatribe (and longevity).
I've always thought it was a meds issue.
Where are the real debaters?
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
in the Asian Holocaust.
The complicity of the Zen and Nichiren Temples in the Shinto Pacific
War is indisputable. You say Mr. Makiguchi is also complicit, and I
have shown you that those translations are under dispute and that the
fact that Mr. Makiguchi died in prison as an opponent to the Shinto
War is evidence of his opposition to it. You refuse to accept this for
obvious reasons.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
The reasons are that if you (Jon Petry, Brian Victoria, and Craig
Bratcher et al, of the combined Zen and Nichiren Temples complicit in
the War Crimes committed during the Shinto Pacific War) can prove
Victoria's contention in Chapter six of his Zen War book: that no
organized opposition persisted to the end of the War ... then somehow
you might not feel so bad, or more importantly, look so bad.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
You should feel bad about being complicit in the Asian Holocaust and
the death of 20 million human beings. You should feel bad about
denying complicity in the Holocaust and evading rightful punishment,
in the manner of Julius Streicher. Finally, you should feel bad about
denying the Holocaust and you complicity in it by distracting the eyes
of the world to the false propositions you dishonestly and
conitnuously utter regarding Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda, who remain to
be the ONLY organized opposition to the Shinto Pacific War to persist
throughout the War, from the SGI, which are the only legitimate
followers of Nikko Shonin, who is the only legitimate named successor
to Nichiren Daishonin.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
-Chas.
juanjo
> in the Asian Holocaust.
>
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
The complicity of the Zen and Nichiren Temples in the Shinto Pacific
War is indisputable. You say Mr. Makiguchi is also complicit, and I
have shown you that those translations are under dispute and that the
fact that Mr. Makiguchi died in prison as an opponent to the Shinto
War is evidence of his opposition to it. You refuse to accept this for
obvious reasons.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
The reasons are that if you (Jon Petry, Brian Victoria, and Craig
Bratcher et al, of the combined Zen and Nichiren Temples complicit in
the War Crimes committed during the Shinto Pacific War) can prove
Victoria's contention in Chapter six of his Zen War book: that no
organized opposition persisted to the end of the War ... then somehow
you might not feel so bad, or more importantly, look so bad.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
You should feel bad about being complicit in the Asian Holocaust and
the death of 20 million human beings. You should feel bad about
denying complicity in the Holocaust and evading rightful punishment,
in the manner of Julius Streicher. Finally, you should feel bad about
denying the Holocaust and you complicity in it by distracting the eyes
of the world to the false propositions you dishonestly and
conitnuously utter regarding Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda, who remain to
be the ONLY organized opposition to the Shinto Pacific War to persist
throughout the War, from the SGI, which are the only legitimate
followers of Nikko Shonin, who is the only legitimate named successor
to Nichiren Daishonin.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
-Chas.
juanjo
>
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
can be twisted.
Nichiren Shu and Zen, like the other temple followers of Imperial Way
Buddhism, sent chaplains to join it the holocaust actions, just like
the other war criminals. That is directly holocaust action by a
'Buddhist' temple. Wouldn't the Buddha be proud? Zen has at least made
a tepid and belated apology, 70 years too late.
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
Nichiren Shu and Zen cheered the Shinto war efforts directly,
throughout the Shinto war, whereas you and Roshi Brian Victoria have
to mis-translate and then further misconstrue and twist the words of
Mr. Makiguchi to show support for the government, but not for the war
effort at a later time and under a different gonvernment than when his
comments were made.
juanjo
Chas has posted uncounted words here none of which support his
previous insinuations that Nichiren Temple priests [whether Nichiren
Shu, Nichiren Shoshu or other Nichiren sects] participated in the
atrocities described in the book, the Rape of Nanking. Now he seeks
to deflect attention from that by claiming that Nichiren Sect priests
were participants in "holocaust actions" which is a very vague term.
But yet again he offers no evidence that any Nichiren Sect priests be
they Nichiren Shu, Nichiren Shoshu or some other Nichiren sect
directly participated in any "holocaust actions", whatever he means by
the term.
All Chas can say is that the various leaders of the Nichiren Buddhist
sects like those of other Buddhist and non-Buddhist religious groups
issued general statements in support of the Japanese war effort. He
also ignores that his idol, Makiguchi did the same.
So Chas has twisted all matter of claptrap together to make a case
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Once again, you are mis-translating and adding your own evil
distortions.
Why would we expect anything else? Juanho (Jon Petry), Zen Roshi Brian
Victoria and Nichiren Shoshu are nothing if not consistent. This all
started from distortion of the truth and it will end as a distortion
of the truth.
Source:
http://www.sokaspirit.org/study/features/refuting-lies-about-the-first-two-presidents-of-the-soka-gakkai-part-1-of-2
____________________________________________________________
. Refuting Lies About the First Two Presidents of the Soka
. Gakkai <Part 1 of 2>
.
. Wartime stance of the first and second presidents,
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Josei Toda.
.
. Dave Baldschun
.
. One of the misconceptions put forth by the Nichiren Shoshu
. Temple (NST) priesthood about the Soka Gakkai is the
. wartime stance of the first and second presidents,
. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Josei Toda. It is well known
. that they were arrested during World War II, but the
. reasons for their incarceration given by the priesthood
. have been twisted to suit their purpose in discrediting
. the founders of the lay organization and justifying their
. own behavior in capitulating to the Japanese military
. government. On September 12, 2004, at Chicago's Myogyoji
. temple, the Nichiren Shoshu chief priest, Yuzui Murata,
. gave a lecture (Oko) that perpetuated their lies about the
. Soka Gakkai's first two presidents. This article will
. examine the erroneous claims made by Rev. Murata and
. refute them with the facts.
.
. 1. Rev. Murata stated:
.
||| "The historical facts, however, cannot easily be
||| expunged from the records. It is true, of course, that
||| Mr. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Mr. Josei Toda, the first
||| and second Presidents of the SGI, along with at least
||| ten other SGI leaders, were arrested on July 6, 1943, by
||| the Japanese Special High Police. Mr. Makiguchi died of
||| malnutrition during his imprisonment, and Mr. Toda was
||| released two years later, in July of 1945. These are
||| indisputable facts.
|||
||| "The reasons for their arrest and imprisonment, however,
||| were not at all what the SGI would like us to believe.
||| On August 10, 1942, almost a year before his arrest and
||| imprisonment, Mr. Makiguchi published the following
||| guidance: 'Sacrifice your own skin to slash the
||| opponent's flesh. Surrender your own flesh to saw off
||| the opponent's bone. Because of their faithful
||| incorporation of this well-known Japanese fencing
||| (kendo) strategy into their tactics during the war, the
||| Japanese military is able to achieve its glorious, ever-
||| victorious invincibility in the Sino-Japan conflict and
||| in the Pacific War, thus easing the minds of the
||| Japanese people. This (strategy of sacrifice) should be
||| taken as an ideal lifestyle for those remaining on the
||| home front and should be applied to every aspect of our
||| daily lives.'
|||
||| "This militaristic viewpoint came only a few months
||| after Director Mr. Nojima gave the opening address at
||| the Fourth Soka Kyoiku Gakkai's General Meeting on May
||| 17, 1942. His speech included the words: 'Since the
||| start of the Great East Asia Co-Prosperity War, the
||| brilliant military achievements and glorious war results
||| (of the Japanese military) have occurred solely because
||| the Lotus Sutra is the guardian spirit of our country.
||| After listening to the reassuring news about the string
||| of great victories broadcast on the radio last evening,
||| I am overwhelmed with gratitude and I am ever more
||| appreciative of being able to open the meeting today.'
|||
||| "It is evident that the true reason for the arrest and
||| imprisonment of several SGI leaders was not because of
||| their alleged 'anti-war' stance, but because of their
||| excessively zealous support of the war. They even began
||| to remonstrate with the government in favor of increased
||| nationalism. The aggressive, ultra-nationalistic words
||| and behavior of the SGI, or Soka Kyoiku Gakkai as it was
||| then known, were the actual reasons for the imprisonment
||| of these SGI leaders. The Japanese government was very
||| concerned that any form of dissension would result in
||| social instability, which would interfere with the
||| government's efforts to control the populace's view of
||| the war."
.
. 2. Refutation
.
. On August 10, 1942, Soka Kyoiku Gakkai published a
. booklet, Daizen Seikatsu Jissho-Roku & Dai Yonkai Sokai
. Hokoku (The Record of Actual Proof on Lives Pursuing the
. Greater Good & The Report for the 4th General Meeting).
.
. The booklet includes a report of the 4th general meeting
. of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai and Makiguchi's speech at the
. meeting, as well as two other essays by Makiguchi,
. including Daizen Seikatsuho Jikken Shomei no Shido Youryo
. (Teaching Guidelines for an Experimental Demonstration of
. the Way of Life Based on the Greater Good).
.
. The passage cited in the Murata lecture came from this
. essay of Makiguchi. The translation of the essay, however,
. needs to be carefully examined.
.
. The translation used in the priest's lecture states:
.
||| "'Sacrifice your own skin to slash the opponent's flesh.
||| Surrender your own flesh to saw off the opponent's
||| bone.' Because of their faithful incorporation of this
||| well-known Japanese fencing (kendo) strategy into their
||| tactics during the war, the Japanese military is able to
||| achieve its glorious, ever-victorious invincibility in
||| the Sino- Japan conflict and in the Pacific War, thus
||| easing the minds of the Japanese people. This (strategy
||| of sacrifice) should be taken as an ideal lifestyle for
||| those remaining on the home front and should be applied
||| to every aspect of our daily lives."
.
. When we translate the essay faithfully to the intent of
. the Makiguchi essay, however, it should read as follows:
.
... "'Allow an opponent to cut your skin while you cut his
... flesh. Allow him to cut your flesh while you cut his
... bone.' This is the quintessential strategy of Japanese
... swordsmanship. This strategy should be applied to ensure
... the security of the people. Since it was properly
... implemented in Sino-Japan war and Great East Asia War,
... Japan saw victory after victory in all the battles she
... was engaged in. This essential spirit of swordsmanship
... is fundamentally applicable for bringing an ideal
... victory to every aspect of one's daily life on the home
... front while the war goes on afar."
.
. As we compare the translations, we will find that the
. translator for NST, by mistake or intentionally, added
. words such as "faithful", "glorious," "military" and
. "(strategy of sacrifice)." With these added words, NST is
. trying to imply that the essay shows Makiguchi's "pro-
. military viewpoint."
.
. When we read the entire essay, however, the NST version
. does not make sense. The essay consists of seven chapters
. and the passage cited by NST is at the opening of the
. essay (chapter one) titled "The Essence of the Way of Life
. - Buddhism Equals Daily Life." Then, what is the point of
. Makiguchi's essay? The title of the last chapter is "The
. Crime of Leadership-Classes Who are Ignorant of Religion."
. In that chapter, Makiguchi states:
.
... "[Government leaders are] distorting and misusing the
... freedom of religion, while cautioning people that 'one
... needs to have strong religious faith, yet must not place
... disproportionate weight on one sect or religion.' Thus,
... [government's leaders are] rationalizing their ignorance
... of religion, while forgetting their duty due to their
... high position in society, they lack leadership skills
... even toward their own family members who are agonizing
... about the contradictions. Moreover, it is egregious that
... those leaders are not aware of those people who are
... considered to be their closest friends, who are taking
... advantage of the ignorance of the leadership, not only
... selling useless medicine for the mind [Shinto talisman]
... but also overtly spreading the poisons in the world. One
... must know the root of evil, for confusion of thoughts
... and awkward social situation lies here."
.
. Therefore, the prime point of the essay is not about
. support for the war or Japan's victory in war, but
. criticism toward the Japanese leadership who are ignorant
. of religion.
.
. So why did Makiguchi use such expressions in the opening
. passage, which may possibly be interpreted- as NST is
. doing - as support for the war? To understand this, we
. must understand the social context of the time when the
. essay was written.
.
. During the 1920s and 1930s, Japan's military regime
. tightened its control over thought and religion. There was
. considerable pressure on religious organizations deemed
. unfavorable to government policy. In 1939, the Japanese
. government passed the Religious Organizations Law, which
. allowed the government to disband religious groups whose
. teachings conflicted with the "Imperial Way."
.
. In 1941, the Public Security Preservation Law was passed
. to control socialist and communist movements. The revised
. version specified "dangerous ideas," including any thought
. process that strayed from the dominant policy of that time
. - the viewpoint that painted Japan as a divine nation with
. entitlement to absolute rule according to Manifest
. Destiny.
.
. One development during this period was the emergence of
. the Japanese Special Higher Police. Their goal was to
. identify deviant beliefs and control the so-called
. "thought criminals." Their initial targets were socialist
. and communist organizations.
.
. On December 7, 1941, Japan launched a surprise attack on
. Pearl Harbor and declared war against the United States
. and Great Britain. As Japan plunged further into war,
. government control of religious organizations became more
. intensive. The 1941 amendment to the Public Security
. Preservation Law expanded the targeted groups to include
. any group, particularly religious groups desecrating
. shrines or the dignity of the Imperial household.
.
. In the March 1942 issue of the Kachi Sozo (Value
. Creation), the periodical of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai,
. Makiguchi criticizes the military regime's ideology of
. messhi hoko - sacrificing the interests of the individual
. for those of the state. He noted that this was mere
. rhetoric to ordinary Japanese, impossible to put into
. practice. Rather, he stressed, it is natural to strive for
. the realization of one's own and others' happiness. iv
.
. In May 1942, Makiguchi was ordered to halt publication of
. Kachi Sozo by the military regime.
.
. On May 17th, at the 4th general meeting, Makiguchi
. referred to Nichiren Daishonin's Tatsunokuchi persecution,
. encouraging the participants to not fear any oppression
. and saying "We have to lead the [Japan] nation to the
. greater good." Further, describing the situation facing
. the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai under the military regime, he even
. said that "it must be as if we had made an opposed landing
. in front of enemies. vi"
.
. When Makiguchi wrote the essay (cited by NST) in July
. 1942, he must have realized that it would only be
. published after passing through strict censorship by the
. military regime.
.
. In July 1943, a year after the essay was written,
. Makiguchi was arrested by the dreaded Special Higher
. Police. What was the reason for his imprisonment then?
.
. The NST lecture implies that the actual reason for
. imprisonment of Makiguchi and other leaders of the Soka
. Kyoiku Gakkai as follows:
.
||| "They even began to remonstrate with the government in
||| favor of increased nationalism. The aggressive, ultra-
||| nationalistic words and behavior of the SGI, or Soka
||| Kyoiku Gakkai as it was then known, were the actual
||| reasons for the imprisonment of these SGI leaders."
.
. The July 1943 issue of the Tokko Geppo (Monthly Report of
. the Special Higher Police), the official document of
. Special High Police, shows the actual reasons for their
. arrest:
.
... "The thoughts and beliefs of [Soka Kyoiku Gakkai]-
... related persons centering on President Makiguchi
... manifest a number of subversive and seditious elements.
... Following secret investigations by the Police Agency as
... well as the Fukuoka Prefecture Special Higher Police
... Department, we found that Makiguchi has been saying to
... the members that 'His Majesty the Emperor is an ordinary
... man;', 'The emperor should not demand the
... people's loyalty, so the phrase 'their loyalty to me'
... should be deleted from the Kyoiku Chokugo (Imperial
... Rescript of Education); 'If one slanders the Lotus Sutra
... and Nichiren, one will definitely receive punishment;'
... and 'There is no need to worship the Grand Shrine of
... Ise,' 'thus, the Agency on the 7th day of this
... month arrested and interrogated Tsunesaburo Makiguchi
... and five other persons for suspicion of blaspheming the
... dignity of the Imperial Grand Shrine and l�se majest�."
.
. The Japanese military regime regarded the emperor as
. absolute and sacred; however, Mr. Makiguchi rejected the
. deification of the emperor. In another interrogation
. report (dated August 1943) by the Special High Police,
. Makiguchi commented: "His Majesty the Emperor is an
. ordinary man,... The order of the emperor could be
. mistaken, mind you," thereby rejecting the absolute
. authority of the emperor. In the same report, referring to
. the fundamental reason for the occurrence of the Sino-
. Japan War and the so-called Great East Asia War, Makiguchi
. states that "it has come from the fact that [Japan is] the
. nation slandering the Law." ix As shown in his statement,
. Makiguchi's focus was the misery and suffering of the
. people, and the nation as a whole; he associated the
. outcome of the war with the effects of slandering the
. correct teaching.
.
. In conclusion, unlike NST's assertions, Makiguchi and
. other leaders of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai were arrested
. because: 1) they had rejected the deification of the
. emperor; 2) they had criticized the Imperial Rescript of
. Education; 3) they had regarded Japan's wars as the result
. of 'punishment' for slandering the Lotus Sutra and
. Nichiren, thus criticizing Japan's "divine wars;" and 4)
. they had 'blasphemy against the dignity of the Imperial
. Grand Shrine and l�se majest�.'
____________________________________________________________
Why does Jon Petry continue to distort the truth?
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
And that's the truth.
When the military and government figures were tried as war criminals
after the war, the war tribunals neglected to try and hang the High
Priests of the temples of Imperial State Zen, and Imperial Way
Buddhism, who had been critical to ginning up support for the war and
who had contributed priests and monks to accompany the troops into
what became the Asian Holocaust.
The presence of those chaplains during holocaust actions conferred
"noblesse du robe" upon the war criminals, and that is direct
complicity in war crimes.
juanjo
> started from distortion of the truth and it will end as a distortion
> of the truth.
>
Yes, everything you have posted has been a distortion of the truth.
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
Roshi Brian Victoria slandering Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda as cover
for the complicity of the Zen and Nichiren Temples in war crimes
during the Zen-Shinto Pacific War.
It finishes when Juanho (Jon Petry), et al, stop spreading these lies
and distortions of the truth.
However, nothing anyone will say will undo the Holocaust actions of
the Zen and Nichiren Temples.
juanjo
> Roshi Brian Victoria slandering Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda as cover
> for the complicity of the Zen and Nichiren Temples in war crimes
> during the Zen-Shinto Pacific War.
>
It started with the completely unsubstantiated accusations you have
made concerning the Nichiren sects including the Nichiren Shu,
including that Nichiren Sect priests participated in the atrocities
perpetuated by the Japanese Army in Nanking, China during WWII. You
have been unable to support those accusations just as you have been
unable to refute the fact that Makiguchi was not jailed for being a
pacifist and in fact issued statements in support of the Japanese War
Effort.
Nikken: ''My view of the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu has been polluted'' May 2000 Dai-Nichiren
you, Jon Petry/Juanho, made against Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda on
behalf of your Zen master, Roshi Brian Victoria.
This arrangement, by the way, Nichiren Temples (Imperial Way Buddhism)
serving and doing scut work for Imperial State Zen, is not an
accident. It is a continuation of the Asian Holocaust, which continues
on in the form of Holocaust Denial, by attacking the victims (Mr.
Makiguchi and Mr. Toda), one more time.
I reiterate:
Why does Jon Petry continue to distort the truth?
Nichiren Shu are unindicted and utterly unapologetic co-conspirators
in the Asian Holocaust.
And that's the truth.
When the military and government figures were tried as war criminals
juanjo
> you, Jon Petry/Juanho, made against Mr. Makiguchi and Mr. Toda on
> behalf of your Zen master, Roshi Brian Victoria.
>
Baloney is indeed what I would call Chas' accusations. Chas has
posted uncounted words here over the past few months, none of which
support his previous insinuations that Nichiren Temple priests
[whether Nichiren
Shu, Nichiren Shoshu or other Nichiren sects] participated in the
atrocities described in the book, the Rape of Nanking. When
challenged on this accusation he has now modified it to say that they
"sent chaplains to join it the holocaust actions, just like the other
war criminals", again without any proof of such activity.
All Chas can say and support with any sort of evidence is that the
various leaders of the Nichiren Buddhist sects like those of other
Buddhist and non-Buddhist religious groups issued general statements
in support of the Japanese war effort. No one denies this. But he
also ignores that his idol, Makiguchi did exactly the same. Instead he
claims that the comments made by Makiguchi were mistranslated and
misunderstood. He has no way of knowing that since he does not speak,
read or write Japanese nor has he ever done any actual research on the
subject. He simply has taken the nonsense he has been given by the
Soka Gakkai leadership and twisted even that out of all recognition.
If one goes to the beginning of this series of posts one can easily
see that it is Chas who commenced the series of exchanges between him
and myself with his unsubstantiated attacks on the various Nichiren
Sects including the Nichiren Shu, accusing them of participating in
the Rape of Nanking.
C
>
> I reiterate:
You told that right! Over and over and over for decades.
--
C
juanjo
Chas has attempted tp prove that old adage attributed to Joseph
Goebbels, "If you tell a lie often enough and loud enough, people will
begin to believe you".
juanjo
His usual twisting a dodging nonsense.
Baloney is indeed what I would call Chas' accusations. Chas has
posted uncounted words here over the past few months, none of which
support his accusations that Nichiren Temple priests [whether Nichiren
Shu, Nichiren Shoshu or other Nichiren sects] participated in the
atrocities described in the book, the Rape of Nanking. When
challenged on this accusation he has now modified it to say that they
"sent chaplains to join it the holocaust actions, just like the other
war criminals", again without any proof of such activity. Now he
wants me to prove otherwise as if I am somehow responsible for
disproving his accusations rather than he proving them with solid
evidence.
It should be noted that I have consistently stated that all the
leaders of the various Buddhist sects in Japan, including the Nichiren
Sects such as the Nichiren Shu supported the Japanese war effort.
Only a very small minority of Buddhists, lay and clergy were brave
enough to stand up against the might of the Japanese government and
oppose the militarist expansion because they were truly pacifists and
believed that the war was wrong. Some of these who opposed the war
were members of the Nichiren Shu, some were Pure Land and others were
members of other sects. But what is truly upsetting to Chas and his
masters is the fact that despite their best efforts to rewrite
history, Makiguchi was not a pacifist and did not oppose the Japanese
government on those grounds. That is why Chas has sought at every
turn to change the subject away from his inability to refute the
evidence presented and instead make other accusations he cannot
substantiate.
All Chas can say and support with any sort of evidence is that the
various leaders of the Nichiren Buddhist sects like those of other
Buddhist and non-Buddhist religious groups issued general statements
in support of the Japanese war effort. No one denies this. But he
also ignores that his idol, Makiguchi did exactly the same. Instead he
claims that the comments made by Makiguchi were mistranslated and
misunderstood. He has no way of knowing that since he does not speak,
read or write Japanese nor has he ever done any actual research on the
subject. He simply has taken the nonsense he has been given by the
Soka Gakkai leadership and twisted even that out of all recognition.
If one goes to the beginning of this series of posts one can easily
see that it is Chas who commenced the series of exchanges between him
and myself with his unsubstantiated attacks on the various Nichiren
Sects including the Nichiren Shu, accusing them of participating in
the Rape of Nanking. The burden is on him to prove these accusations
correct and so far he has not done so.
C
That's what the Republicans have been doing for decades.
--
C
Nobody in Particular
> On Feb 21, 2:26 pm, Disbanking Zen Stories <p2q1r0s...@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
> His usual twisting a dodging nonsense.
>
<snip>
You mean, you actually read his garbage?
Buddhism's aim is to reduce suffering, your own and others'.
Chas' aim is to increase suffering, his own and others'.
The way to not increase suffering is to ignore his toxic slime.
juanjo
The true tragedy of Chas' repeated attempts to raise issues regarding
the alleged pacifism of the founders of the Soka Gakkai during World
War II is his inability to address actual facts. Instead he relies on
regurgitated agit-prop from his organization, the Soka Gakkai. He
also deliberately mis-attributes authorship of material in that he
quotes material as my own when in fact it is not. It is material I
voluminous material he quotes from actually address the material
presented but rather attempt to overwhelm the reader with massive
volumes of material which speaks all around the subject or misquotes
and misinterprets the material resented. This is the classic straw
man argument in which one ignores the actual points presented and
instead invents another false issue and "rebuts" it instead.
Rather than actually address the simple fact that his own sensei as
well as two of the Soka Gakkai's own tame "scholars" disagree with
Chas, he chooses to post the same nonsense again and again. This is
regrettable and shows actual proof of the bankrupt spirit that infuses
the so called "Buddhist" practice of the Soka Gakkai which is nothing
more than a personality cult centered on an old, dying Japanese man
known for shameless self promotion and his actions in beating up
Buddhist priests in his youth.
The Soka Gakkai has worked long and hard to rewrite history and erase
reality. It is regrettable that they do so but it is not all that
unusual. Consider how many people in France for example, claimed to
be members of the resistance after the war had ended when actual
historical fact shows that the resistance movement in that country was
small. Further in Japan itself there is a great deal of ambiguity
about the wear and there has been severe criticism of the Japanese for
their attempts to rewrite matters and paint them as different from
what they actually were in popular media as well as in school texts
used in that country.
Chas has twisted all matter of claptrap together to make a case where
none exists. Most of his "writing" is taken verbatim from SGI spin
by its tame “scholars". The reality is that there is no indication
whatsoever that Makiguchi was a pacifist and there is sufficient
evidence that he was not. While Chas, as his handlers, place great
emphasis on statement made by Makiguchi, pre-1935, they ignore both
history and the records of the time period. The most damning part of
that portion they ignore is Makiguchi's own statements post-1935 as
well as the records of the Imperial Government including the very
charges made against Makaguchi, i.e. slandering the Imperial
Talisman.
For example an excerpt from a statement made by Makiguchi after the
start of the Pacific War [which is how the Japanese termed their war
of aggression against the United States, Great Britain and some other
countries] clearly shows he had no actual opposition to the war
itself:
"Sacrifice your own skin to slash the opponent's flesh. Surrender
your own flesh to saw off the opponent's bone.' With their faithful
implementation of this well-known Japanese fencing (kendo) strategy
into actual practice during the war, the Japanese military is able to
achieve her glorious, ever-victorious invincibility in the Sino-Japan
conflict and in the Pacific war, and thus, easing the minds of the
Japanese people. This [strategy of sacrifice] should be held as an
ideal
lifestyle for those remaining on the home front and should be applied
in every aspect of our daily life."
From: Makiguchi’s "The Instruction Manual Summarizing the Experiments
and
Testimonials of Life based on the Philosophy of Value of the Supreme
Goodness."
Chas of course has no idea what any of the actual facts are as he
Note that Ikeda does not go on the record with anything about
Makiguchi opposing the actual war. In fact he cannot make such a
claim because there are
comments on the record by Makiguchi supporting the war but stating
that the war effort is doomed to failure if the Imperial Government
did not discard provisional teachings such as Zen and Shingon and
embrace Nichiren Buddhism. It was Makiguchi's Rissho Ankoku-ron
moment and there is little doubt that he saw it as exactly as that.
So Chas' own sensei is rebutting Chas’ position.
If that is not enough then let us consider another scholar, a favorite
of the Soka Gakkai in fact:
"Thus, Makiguchi and Toda defied the government and went to prison
not
necessarily for anti-war beliefs, which the Soka Gakkai preaches
today, but because it was against their deeply felt religious
principles to adopt Shinto practices or to merge with another
religious sect, even if it had Nichiren connections. While Makiguchi
may have indeed made the pro-Emperor statements that Victoria alleges,
his overall thinking and demeanor was certainly not pro-militarist.
The evidence simply does not support Victoria's argument."
A Critical Analysis of Brian Victoria's Perspectives on Modern
Japanese
Buddhist History by Daniel A. Metraux
So Professor Metraux disputes Professor Victoria's position that
Makiguchi was in fact pro-militarist [without citing any actual
evidence and ignoring Makiguchi’s own statements]. Prof. Metraux does
government policies. Makiguchi did indeed threaten this blind
obedience because he asserted that the state policy regarding the
supremacy of the Imperial Talisman over the Buddha was wrong. And
equally important, that the prosecution of the war would fail unless
the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. Miyata’s claim that
this criticism of the supremacy of State Shinto, as well as the
supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms of Buddhism made
Makiguchi “implicitly” a pacifist absurd. Makiguchi is not saying
that the war is wrong under any circumstances. He is saying that it
will fail unless the government suppresses other forms of Buddhism and
acknowledges the supremacy of Nichiren Buddhism over all other forms
of religious practice including other forms of Buddhism and state
Shinto.
Now I have suggested a position somewhat simpler and quite obvious to
anyone who actually pays attention to what is being said and what is
not being said by either Prof. Metraux or the Soka Gakkai's scholar,
Koichi Miyata. The assertion is made that Prof Victoria is taking
statements out of context to make Makiguchi into a supporter of the
military government and its view of the emperor. That is irrelevant to
my point and further the statements of Metraux and Miyata do not
really support the position put forth by the Soka Gakkai in their
attacks on Dr. Victoria. However this is not the argument I made.
Let's review shall we?
war would fail unless the government undertook to fulfill the
admonishments of the Rissho Ankoku-ron prior to such an effort. Thus
Makiguchi's direct criticism of the religious policy of the Imperial
Japanese Government did not arise out of any basis of pacifism but
rather out of something completely different. The Japanese Government
was quite pathological when it came to their requirement that all the
people of Japan must be in absolute support of the government’s
policy. Any nail head sticking up was most certainly going to be
hammered down.
Makiguchi was such a nail head. Makiguchi wanted the Imperial
Government to suppress all other forms of Buddhism and accept Nichiren
Buddhism as the only form of state accepted Buddhism. His position
was that if they failed to do so the war effort was doomed to
failure. This was a position that the Imperial Japanese Government
was unwilling to tolerate and hence his imprisonment along with that
of Toda.
Chas in his hurry to smear Prof. Victoria has leapt to conclusions and
not bothered to read what was written. This is typical of Chas and
actually in his defense, it really is not his fault. He is simply
regurgitating the nonsense he has been given as speaking points by the
Soka Gakkai leadership he has labored so diligently on behalf of in
spreading their positions on the web. For him this is a holy mission
and one in which is he is completely involved and frankly moiré than a
little obsessed.
However the level of incompetence among the Soka Gakkai leadership is
such that they attempt to “disprove” Professor Victoria’s statements
by having their
own paid “scholars” issue rebuttals which are not rebuttals of the
main issue raised by Dr. Victoria, namely that Makiguchi was a
pacifist and opposed the Japanese war effort on that basis. They throw
out all sorts of comments concerning the use by Dr. Victoria of
pre-1935 commentary of Makiguchi while ignoring the reiteration of
these comment as well as others similar to them by Makiguchi after the
Japanese aggression in China had reached full pitch and the start of
hostilities by the Japanese against the United States, Great Britain
and Holland among others. On top of this their attacks on Dr.
SGI Myth 3: The SGI loves democracy
SGI Fact 3: In fact the SGI while making lip service about democracy
has been adamant about stamping out any attempts by its membership to
adopt democratic principles in its own governance. Leaders within the
SGI are appointed by the higher ups and serve at their pleasure with
no accountability to the rank and file.
In fact when SGI members became aware on the web that in the Nichiren
Shu, the lay organizations did have elected leaders, the SGI through
proxies such as the Rubys and others made posts belittling that fact.
Similarly the SGI has refused to allow any rank and file movement
towards actual financial accountability, keeping its finances a
closely held secret. Members have no
knowledge of what happens to their money once it is donated nor are
they allowed a say in how it is to be spent. Periodically this is
justified by claims that the local SGI chapters are not financially
independent and must depend on Japan for financial contributions.
However this bags the question. How does anyone know this and if in
fact it is true then how much comes from local sources and how much
comes from overseas? Further how is the local administration using
this money? The truth is that no one knows and no one is going to
know so long as the Soka Gakkai can keep a tight lid on its ship of
state.
This is vastly different from say Nichiren Order of North America, the
Nichiren Shu lay organization in the USA, which regularly provides
information to its members as to what funds have been taken in and how
they have been spent,
including a say at the local level as to how they should be spent.
cmk
>
> read more »
Wow you really made a very LONG post I won't read!
cmk
C
> Wow you really made a very LONG post I'm too stupid to read!
>
> cmk
You got that right!
--
C
juanjo
Sorry there aren't any pictures like you are accustomed to looking at
in your books.
Frito Pendejo
duck pond, and yell "Get yer free Obama Crack!" All the ducks will come
running and start quacking for Obama Crack. The ducks quack their
support for your inspiring leadership and will follow you as long as you
keep tossing crack at them.
Man's Best Friend
I'm almost probably very SURE that there is a POINT to all this.
And to think, all of this fucking BRILLIANCE is archived for Eternity
on Google's servers so people who are BORED in the 37th Century (if we
make it that far) can amuse themselves.
O well, have a good day anyway.
MBF
Reginald Carpenter
Re. "Frito Pendejo" posting on 3/13/2010, 5:44pm, I changed the subject/
title to: Evidence of Juanjo's instability is NOT confirmed!
***************************************************
Re: Evidence of Juanjo's instability is confirmed
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Sat, Mar 13, 2010, 5:44pm
From: Frito Pendejo <fr...@pendejo.com>
---------------------------------------------------
RC comments: Seeing that "Frito" has posted the exactly the same above
message for the second time, he/ she seems to be trying to make an
inference that it was written by "Juanjo" someplace else before. Well,
old Stoney (me) did NOT believe that when he/ I saw it the first time
and don't believe it now. And, judging from the few postings that
"Frito" has made thus far on Arbn, the above message seems to reflect
his/ her own mental state & personal biases toward President Obama and
is NOT those of old "Juanjo", nka. "JoJo."
WorldPeace! }:<{ 0
Reginald Carpenter
Re: Evidence of Juanjo's instability is NOT confirmed!
Group: alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren
Date: Sun, Mar 14, 2010, 12:34pm
From: Reginald Carpenter <chiefst...@msn.com>
Re. "Frito Pendejo" posting on 3/13/2010, 5:44pm, I changed the subject/
title to: Evidence of Juanjo's instability is NOT confirmed!
**********************************************
Re: Evidence of Juanjo's instability is confirmed Group:
alt.religion.buddhism.nichiren Date: Sat, Mar 13, 2010, 5:44pm From:
Frito Pendejo <fr...@pendejo.com>
Write "Obama Crack (Free! Menthol!)" on a bag of bread crumbs, find a
duck pond, and yell "Get yer free Obama Crack!" All the ducks will come
running and start quacking for Obama Crack. The ducks quack their
support for your inspiring leadership and will follow you as long as you
keep tossing crack at them.
----------------------------------------------
RC comments: Seeing that "Frito" has posted the exactly the same above
message for the second time, he/ she seems to be trying to make an
inference that it was written by "Juanjo" someplace else before. Well,
old Stoney (me) did NOT believe that when he/ I saw it the first time
and don't believe it now. And, judging from the few postings that
"Frito" has made thus far on Arbn, the above message seems to reflect
his/ her own mental state & personal biases toward President Obama and
is NOT that of old "Juanjo", nka. "JoJo."
WorldPeace! }:<{ 0
Reposted 3/29/10, 9:10am CDT