![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
By Jim Celer 67.54.190.87 00:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC) A bit of suggestion, I intend of moving some parts of SGI main history article in regards to Daisaku Ikeda personal history to this main article about him.I would like some views please. TY. Gammadion 18:43, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Whether or not the accusations are true, I think it deserves a mention that there are so many accusations. Perhaps address why such accusations came up, and the evidence for and against, but to not mention them at all is clearly POV. The majority of Japanese fear Ikeda and SG, I think that merits a mention beyond "he is a controversial figure but all accusations have proven false."
Tallasse
13:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
A personality cult *has* grown up around Ikeda in the form of his religious corporation known as SGI or Soka Gakkai, and this is well documented in the press. I have noticed that when others try to add this fact to this profile, someone comes along to remove it. I think it's only fair to state that while there are many who adore Ikeda, there are many who see him as a cult leader.
http://freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/s/soka/
Who is Steve Hassan? What criteria are we to use when deciding what sources to cite? The author of the above website offers the following disclaimer of his own page:
"Copyright © 2001-2005 Freedom of Mind Resource Center, Inc. Freedomofmind.com fully supports religious freedom and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The fact that a person’s name or group appears on our website does not necessarily mean they are a destructive mind control cult. They appear because we have received inquiries and have established a file on the group. The Freedom of Mind Resource Center Inc. was established by cult expert Steve Hassan'
That doesn't seem to lend credibility to him or his views. As a .com site, his purpose is commercial, not informational per se. Shouldn't we be using higher standards in selecting our sources? Especially as Wikipedia's presence is so strong. Don't we contributors have a responsibility to use only the most credible, reliable, authoritative sources? Isn't it part of our responsibility to help sort through this kind of stuff? I am a librarian and I teach high school students how to evaluate their inormation sources. This one does not stand up. Here's a quick review for anyone interested > Evaluating Resources > Kathy Shrock's Guide to Website Evaluation > THinking Critically About... Just a thought - Ruby-- 138.89.144.194 00:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
-- Goettel 01:24, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
The allegations of rape on the above site are very serious:Did the case go to court? Andycjp 8/5/04
Good question. I do not know. The following link has many news reports from the New York Times. I will look for more info. http://www.sokacult.com/JealousLies.html -- Goettel 06:48, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
Daisaku Ikeda doesn't own the Seikyo Shimbun newspaper. It Soka Gakkai that owns it. Distribution is between 5 and 6 million.
About the rape: "The Tokyo District Court dismissed the allegations in May 2000 as "an abuse of the right of action." The judge found "no factual evidence" to support their allegations and stated that their lawsuit was "entirely against the principle of good faith."
I don't know how to get to the actual court documents, but there is unofficial summary and translation of the court judgment at http://www.sokagakkai.info/html3/viewpoint3/record3/rec08_nobu_case.html
And Soka Gakkai's official answer to some of other accusations at http://www.sokagakkai.info/html3/viewpoint3/record3/record_index3f.html
---
I question the use of the terms "personality cult" and "cult" altogether. Nothing stated in the article, or in the discussion seem to fit even Wikipedia's entry on this topic, which defines the term as follows: "A Cult of Personality differs from charismatic authority in that it has a negative connotation by definition, and is thus a pejorative term. It also differs from general hero worship in that it is specifically built around political leaders."
(By the way, it seems that a good portion of the Wikipedia article on "cult of personality" seems to have been lifted from the site InovoyagerIs that appropriate? )
In addition, according to Infopedia, "A cult of personality is a generally derogative term to criticize the worship of a single leader". Although Dr. Ikeda seems to be quite popular among a large population of people, and though he has many accomplishments, (like any good leader, I would think) is there any evidence that anyone "worships" him or that he himself seeks such adulation? Isn't it POV to apply terms that are "derogatory" "criticisms" to descriptions of people or organizations as if they are factual, without substantiation? I haven't really seen anything that really substantiates the claim...
Also, according to dictionary.com, the definition of the word "cult" has not been shown to be accurate either. Can examples be provided? The definition is: "1.A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. 2. The followers of such a religion or sect. 3. A system or community of religious worship and ritual. 4. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual. 5. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease. 6. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing. The object of such devotion. 7. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest. "
It's just not clear to me that the application of these terms to Dr. Ikeda are well founded. Especially since Wikipedia's definitions of the two terms are themselves under dispute. It would seem innappropriate that a disputed term be used in reference to anyone in Wikipedia.
Not to mention, it raises some real issues, say for high school students doing research on the topic, when the first result in a Google or dictionary.com's encyclopedia site search are references to Wikipedia's definitions.
Perhaps the terms should not be applied to Dr, Ikeda, SGI, or anyone else, for that matter, until the definitions themselves are at least agreed upon. Just a thought...Ruby-- 68.45.57.193 02:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC) -- 68.45.57.193 02:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
If you happen to bounce upon a site that speaks ill of Mr. Ikeda, please ignore it. Those people have absolutely nothing to do and are wasting their time. They fabricate stories and tell lies just to mislead people, and I hope you will instead go to the following site: Soka Gakkai International
Mr. Ikeda is an recipient of more than 150 honorary degrees and citizenships, and has held dialogs with many important figures around the world. Every year, he sends his proposals for peace and sustainability to the United Nations. Like all people through peace, culture, and education, Mr. Ikeda has great hopes for the future of humanity. For more information please visit www.sgi.org
Money can do a lot. LordofHavoc 18:50, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
-- 13:43, 9 Sep 2004 User:193.166.21.100
--- 23:30, 30 October 2005
I have no personal or dogmatic quarrel with Mr. Ikeda or his successors, however in light of evasive obsfucations engaged in by SGI at the direction of Mr. Ikeda and his successors there is grounds for a reasoned debate, but not WikiGraffiti. My experiences with and observations of SGI are that like many other religious orders, the adherents are sincerely interested in their causes and beliefs. However, if questioned "Is SGI a religion / faith" the standard was to vehemently deny that, and state that SGI was a non-denominational inter-faith NGO established for world peace. Again, I feel that to be an honorable effort. However, the evidence clearly shows that SGI is a unification Buddhist denomination with lay orders, doctrine, ministries, dogmas, and ordinances, contrary to their assertations of non-religious activities. The controversies surrounding Mr. Ikeda specificly, and SGI in particular, are similar to arguments made about L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. The arguements lie at the evasiveness regarding what Mr. Ikeda and SGI's intents and pretenses are, not their activities or faith. NotRegisteredUser
doesn't quite fit that mold. In some respects, yes it does But in others, not at all. (But, again, I ask - why must it fit in the first place? And why must its followers and Ikeda say "It fits!" Just to make YOU feel more comfortable? To make you feel "Right?" At any rate, I think that is causing a lot of confusion.
representing a broad range of ethnic and social backgrounds" Source: www.sgi-usa.org.
Given the level of vitriol spewing forth from the keyboards of some visitors, I am not surprised that people won't sign! Nonethelss, I would suggest to one and all that the best way to determine the validity of any of these claims - good or bad - is to visit the sites, SGI USA, or SGI, get to know someone who practices, and read something -- try The Buddha in Daily Life by Robert Causton (if you can find a copy - it is currently out of print), or The Buddha in your Mirror by By Hochswender, Martin & Moreno ISBN 0-9674697-1-6, available at Barnes' and Noble and other fine book stores near you -- 151.198.99.71 22:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Trying to silence the voices of dissent is typical behaviour of brainwashed cultists. It is really very unpleasant to witness.
Ikeda is a controversial figure, but this article reads like an autobiography of L. Ron Hubbard.
And your point is....
Do we really need to know about every award he ever received? The Rumanian ex-dictatur Ceausescu and his wife also had some impressive titles. They were still put up against a wall and shot. (That's something you don't see often enough.) -- 04:04, 15 Apr 2005 User:62.107.63.48
Really. Daisaku Ikeda and his wife can hardly be compared to a communist dictator.--
151.198.99.71
22:05, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Name one thing President Ikeda has been accused of that has been proven...I dare you. --- 20:32, 27 May 2005
User:Butsushin And don't forget to cite any sources you have. --- 03:59, 13 July 2005
User:Butsushin
The reason people think Sokka Gakkai is a cult-
Sokka Gakkai members will always defend ANYTHING the organization, it's leader and their political party does. --- 05:26, 15 July 2005 User:64.71.189.133 What sort of religious organization can afford to send a million dollars to a dump? --- 05:36, 15 July 2005 User:64.71.189.133
Rather like Republicans, I'd say...Maybe they are a cult too! Yee Gads! Now THAT is scary!- R.
Excuse me, but that money was actually hidden by the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood, not the Soka Gakkai.-- gab 00:45, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
Actually, that is not necessarily true. I'm an SGI member myself although I could care less for Mr. Ikeda. I'm a member because of the practice, not the people. Personally I see Ikeda as being a money-hungry arrogant tyrant who cares more about his own agenda than that of the SGI. Being a member of SGI-USA I look up to my leaders here, in America, not Japan. Say what you want about Mr. Ikeda. This is one SGI member who will not be offended, promise. :) --- 22:07, 28 July 2005 User:24.215.92.110
The easiest way to determine the validity of any of this is to visit the site, get to know someone who practices, and see for yourself.
SGI International and
SGI-USA. 12 mllion people seem to agree that SGI and Nichiren buddhism works for them. Are they all just mistaken or brainwashed?
151.198.99.71 22:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)--
151.198.99.71
22:29, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
I Find it Funny that the SGI Member did not sign his name, I also find it hard to understand the fact that he repects his leaders, who in turn repect President Ikeda yet he beleives him to be a Tyrannt. Why would his Respected leaders rescept a tyrannt. He is clearly missing the whole point.- Iravan September 28 2005
---
I find it funny that
you find it so funny! "Given the level of vitriol spewing forth from the keyboards of some visitors, I am not surprised that people won't sign!"
In my reading of this article, the dispute seems unfounded - everything that is stated is biographical, and can be proven time and again, by more than one outside source. In addition, the article does address some of the less popular sentiment. So I don't understand where there is a bias. Unless one has already made up ones mind in spite of a wealth of evidence to the contrary -- but then, of course, that would be biassed and POV...
It seems that you may have had bad experiences, and if so, it would be helpful if you would share them, for the sake of other people's well being. At this point, there are over 12 million people who seem to feel that Daisaku Ikeda comes by his accolades and accomplishments quite honestly. They can't all be wrong, can they?
Perhaps it might be worth the effort to get to know someone who practices, and maybe read something.
Try these:
*"The Buddha in Your Mirror," *"Choose Hope: Your Role in Waging Peace in the Nuclear Age" or *"The Toynbee-Ikeda Dialogue: Man Himself Must Choose by Arnold Toynbee and, Daisaku Ikeda.
There are also some interesting articles of note:
*"Born in the USA: Racial Diversity in Soka Gakkai International an excellent and very intriuing article in Tricycle magazine from it's 50th issue, April 2004. Probably available at your local public library *Or perhaps this bok might be helpul "Soka Gakkai: From Lay Movement to Religion," by Karel Dobbelaere
There's also:
*"The Cultural Significance of New Religious Movements: The Case of Soka Gakkai. By: Dawson, Lorne L.. Sociology of Religion, Fall2001, Vol. 62 Issue 3, p337-364, 28p * and NPR's All Things Considered Profile: Practice of Soka Gakkai in the US By: MICHELE NORRIS. All Things Considered (NPR), 05/12/2004
I wish you well. - Ruby -- 68.45.57.193 03:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
The rape charge was thrown out when it was found that the woman had been lying about President Ikeda's whereabouts. It was also found by the judge that the woman, Nobuko Nobuhira and her husband Junko had attempted to extort money from President Ikeda, and when the attempt failed, she charged rape. See http://www.apublicbetrayed.com/case_studies/case_study3.htm, under the subheading "False Accusation." It also includes the court's summation of the case.
-gtdanyelz- gab 00:43, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
This is correct. In fact, there seem to be many accusations, but no convictions. And there are many reprints of the courts' summation and decision on this case, as well as those on several other accusations that have been lodged against Dr. Ikeda and the SGI. For example, here is a summary posted by an organization that appears, on the surface, at least, to be an impartial outside analyst:
From: Human Rights Without Frontiers ,Ave. Winston Churchill 11 / 33 – 1180 Brussels – Belgium – Phone: + 32 2 345 61 45 – Fax: +32 2 343 74 91 – Email address: info@hrwf.net
and...
events, concerts, theatre performances, exhibitions, etc."-- 68.45.57.193 01:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Here is a link to the [ http://http://www.un.org/esa/coordination/ngo/UN section on NGOs. I searched "Soka Gakai" to find it, in case the link doesn't connect. -- 68.45.57.193 01:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
This article is a nightmare to read idependently of the views. Daisaku Ikeda is infact controverse, if he wasn't htere wouldn't be a neutrality dispute. But even if there is a dispute, the article should be at least readble. If mr.Ikeda has that many published books there should be a speciall section for it, a bibliography or whatever just for the sake of design and respect for wikipedia standards.
If we look at other articles we don't have this entangled pasta of actions mixed up with published conversations with assorted figures and worst with different design format.
I don't know if he his a respectable man or a manipulative creature for a fact, and this is not for wikipedia to expose. I'm not pro-Soka Gakkai I must say, but I got my opinion through meeting people of the organization, going to their tupperware like reunions and reading all the babble that they put out, much later did I find criticism that went along with what I felt. I feel that wikipedia, deserves better than this because it is a wonderfull community and it's for all of us, inspite of all nonsense of creed, faith, political whatever, favorite chainsaw massacre film.
I particulary feel an enormous despise for this figure, and I would not be the best person to shape this up, but I will try if no one will.
-- P- 16:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Your feelings are obvious, unfortunately. But controversial does not mean "cult." And besides that, it is possible to cover controversial topics, withouth the article itself becoming controversial. It's about neutrality and balance, exploring a thing without judging it, or supporting it.
That said, I still believe it would be more helpul to know why you you have such strong feelings. I mean "enormous despise for this figure" and "their tupperware like reunions and reading all the babble that they put out," I mean, that is strong. What did he or "they" DO to you or to those you care about? Inquiring minds want to know...seriously, if he/"they" are that bad, it is important for people to know why. Evidence? Anectdotal? Whatever. As long as it is clear what kind of evidence it is, so people can make their own informed judgement. -- 138.89.144.194 00:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC) Please leave this line alone, it's not very strong
Well, my personal experience with SGI and the reading some of human revolution and the new human revolution, the Gosho, The Lotus Sutra, art of living and the older magazine [don't remember the name] visiting sgi.org website, going to some meetings watching how people behaved before and after, the proselytizing [hum...shakubuku anyone...oh no it's sansho-shima] the no effort dogmatic philosophy really gets to me because I think it really affected my friends and consequently myself. Well I might be wrong and enduring unnecessary hatred and Ill feelings here but that's what I feel. I dislike mr.Ikeda because he thinks [looks to me he does] he is the XXI century buddha, he is egotist and everyone thinks he is a saint and I don't trust people who meet with Tatchers and latin american dictators or the fact that he is compromised with establishment, he, and top figures in SGI are just like any other corporation I dislike that too, I dislike dogma even if it's with a good intention as SGI expounds.
I'll continue this discussion privately with you R if you want so, I think this will not help viewers or to clear things in this page. You can reach me here, and I'll reply to your latest...uh.. reply: breakheretic[commercial a]yahoo[little black thingie]com
-- P- 14:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Listen, I have nothing against people that believe in that faith, I have something pretty strong against the faith itself and Daishonin, Toda, Ikeda and the like. I think they are dangerous and more even so because it doesn't look really dangerous.
SGI actually only has 75 years, and it's not like early buddhism nor is it like Zen buddhism. SGI buddhism resembles more a mix between a Tea party and new age positive feelings. Most people never even read the Lotus Sutra and they certainly don't care about the other Sutras. Nooooo, mr.Daishonin discovered the fulcrum, why care about everything else? Nope, follow the recipe and all be well. It's just ludicrous, is this the Occams razor of religion? -- P- 05:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
What are you talking about?? I thought your reference was to the tendency of religion to justify violence as in the Pope justifying slavery, the Crusades, and the genocide of Native Americans, all of which happened in the name of God and Christianity. This would have been a thoughtful and meaningful comment. But you missed the real comeback - so I'll give it to you - in fact, it is true that there was some bloodhed in Nichiren Buddhism -- the 23 people who were killed while defending Nichiren from attackers who didn't like what he was saying. But, hey, compared to the Crusades, and considering it wasn't Nichiren who initiated the bloodshed, it's pretty clean, relatively speaking.
You have so little faith in humanity. And no wonder - look at what we've done. But there is also that positive element, and there is no denying that we have, as a species, grown - a bit.
Delivered at Harvard University, September 24, 1993 available at http://www.sgi.org/english/President/speeches/mahayana.htm
As for Zen and other forms, no it is not like them. Thank goodness. And that was Nichiren's point, afterall. Look, you obviously have a grudge. Why don't you leave it alone and let people who are less emotionally involved - and better researchers - deal with it? -R
They tell you it's possible to have heaven on earth in a earnest way.
Yes great deeds, and the NGO recognition status by the UN. Well I don't have a great deal of confidence in the UN or in democracy to act in the world so that doesn't work for me to the avail of SGI. Great philantropists are also the greates exploiters, just take the Vatican, Bill Gates and drug lords in South America, Middle East helping out all the farmers cropping alcaloids. Democracy works if you have money for a lawyer, i prefer to cal it demo - cracy. [in the bible the devil is sometimes portrayed as a lawyer, the Advocat/Adversary but this is an entirely different story. I never saw no one in SGI to shakubuku a poor man, they only go after middle class and artsy people, that is funny too. Nor have I seen the person that asks for money in the street in a reunion. Where is that kind of man in SGI? Well he can't afford nothing so no, don't you bother with him/they.
I refer to the last paragraph. From what I observed, it is usually the poor and the sick who tends to pick up the practice as opposed to the "middle class and artsy people". I am a member and I met many friends who are suffering from cancer, poverty, mental illness, drug abuse, depression...you name it. In fact the middle class, artsy people are the least likely bunch who pick up the practice because people from that class generally cannot understand what is real suffering. I have a friend from Uganda refugee camp and even I myself can't imagine the magnitude of death and suffering he witnessed. Please do not make value judgments before understanding what is going on. In SG, we believe that we can do something as humans to improve our environment, rather than sit back and do nothing about the injustice in the world and criticize how the UN and democracy doesn't work. World peace is a vision that Ikeda holds very dear to his heart, and something he is working very hard towards.
As a final note, even YOU have the potential to do something about improving democracy in the world. Being an apathatic cynic doesn't really help in moving humanity forward. -- Moon
I call it tupperware because the structure is similar to an SGI chapter, reunion place whatever. Please attend a tupperware meeting and check for yourself please.
If you think SGI doesn't suck up your money, your personal resources, your one anima just see how much time you use up in SGI activity and compare that to a level that you would attain without doing that time. How much did you pay for a gohzon, butsudan, art of living, going to tretz, or that centre in england...taplow? yeah Taplow. Wait let me check your IP, ok you are in the US, so I don't know where you go every year, but add the plane tickets to that and oh yeah all the literature and bibliography they advise you to buy and the beeds and where to stop?
Oh, the things you buy to other people when they start nam-myho.rengue-kyo ad eternum because it's your mission to achieve Kosen Rufu... 1/3 true buddhists, 1/3 supporters, 1/3 aggainst... you can't divide the world like that, the world and humans are organic unless you drive them through mind control or profound faith systems that have you indoctrinated you to behave accordingly.
Mind you that I'm for peace and I'm for realizing your full potential, but you know what? We have so much to learn from each other and from all the philosophers and workers and bakers and mothers and fathers and children that I see no point nor effectiveness in faith systems to achive that because if that faith tells you that this is true buddhism wich means that every other buddhism is false teaching, and that this is the only way to happiness. There is no straight path, if particles and the world revolve in free ways why should we behave differently? The universe is primordial and older than any mystical faith you want to see in it apply in it, and no words can reflect that because Existence is already a...hummmm... there, existing. Monism, Positivism, Determinism to me sound like a living hell. I could go on, but this is the wrong place this at the same time is so small that doesn't reflect my voice.
I'm sorry if this is a too long reply, feel free to delete if you feel it's disturbing this talk page.
--
P-
23:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
SGI member here - no we won't delete the comment but what are you trying to say? This article is about Diasaku Ikeda not how SGI Buddhism is inferior to free moving particles.
and why don't you sign your name in your comments and replies? -- P- 03:12, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Ahhhhh...now I understand. No need to feel so insecure with yourself, P. You are tall enough, young enough, pretty enough, and gosh darn it - people like you! Besides, you have Buddha nature, too! - R.
I got some things cleaned up I think.. and also found a very inspiring article [ What is a featured article]
-- P- 20:43, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Looks better to me...thanks.-- 138.89.144.194 00:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Article was saying that "Gandhi, King, Ikeda" exhibition is "an example of how Ikeda is portrayed to his followers". But as this implies that the exhibition is made by SGI, it makes no sense. Idea and execution is by Morehouse College, SGI is only cosponsoring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.145.221.65 ( talk) 08:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
How/when is an article decided to be no longer POV? It looks good to me as is, and I know it has been through several revisions. Can I move to have it taken off the list? Any seconds? Can we vote on it? - R-- 71.250.88.213 03:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Its good - I would take it of the disputed list - anyone else? - KenV
Whaddya know! A few months later, and we have - through peaceful dialogue! -- all agree to disagree, and still respect each other in the morning. Well done. = Ruby -- 71.250.122.11 02:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
This is a whitewash. Not one single paragraph of criticism of one of the most controversial men in Japan. In Japan his face is on the front page of his own 'newspaper' nearly every day... Andycjp 04:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I removed the follwing paragraph from the article since it's unsourced. I have no idea if it's true or not but if it's included in the article, it must be sourced. Garion96 (talk) 13:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable third party sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral, factual, and understated, avoiding both a sympathetic point of view and an advocacy journalism point of view. (Emphasis mine)
Apologies to those who have been ruffled by my recent additions to this page on Ikeda. This is my first effort and I'm still learning the ropes.
Regarding the information recently added, I beleived that it does name sources, but if anyone is unsatisfied I invite them to be more specific. However, I note that the existing material on Ikeda is full of unreferenced claims.
There does appear to be a lack of balance.
brahilly
Odd, given that at least one of his two sons lives in Osaka, and that both are married and have their own families. Also, it should be noted that his two living sons are his surviving sons, since one son is dead. — Jim_Lockhart 15:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
There is no evidence to suggest that Daisaku Ikeda is funding the Komeito party. The party website clearly outlines its sources of funding. [1] Therefore the reference citing the New York Times article as a criticism of Daisaku Ikeda is slanderous and non-neutral. I also contend that the Time magazine reference, which interestingly enough is not to be found on the Time archives anymore, is not about Daisaku Ikeda per se. It starts with a false case lodged against the Soka Gakkai by Daito and Naoko Asaki on September 23, 1995. On December 22, 1995 the Higashi Murayama police officially announce that 'there was no evidence of criminality' in the case and that it was 'suicide caused by remorse over a shopliftng charge'. On May 15, 2001,The Tokyo High Court upheld Lower Court rulings that Daito and Naoko Asaki defamed the Soka Gakkai. On May 18, 2001 The Tokyo High Court upholds Lower Court rulings that the publishing company, Kodanasha, defamed the Soka Gakkai. On October 29, 2002, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision and ordered defendants to publish a retraction and apology in Shukan Gendai and pay 2 million yen in damages to the Soka Gakkai. Shukan Gendai published a notice of retraction and apology to the Soka Gakkai on the March 8, 2003, issue, which reached the newsstands on February 24. Considering this, it is clear that using an outdated and incorrect article will cause prejudice and not reflect the truth. Therefore, both these criticisms lack substance and must be removed to preserve any modicum of neutrality. (Comment added to article body by User:Sri v123 at 10:11 on 15 September 2007; moved here by Jim_Lockhart 14:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC).)
I have just deleted a mention of a critical article on the Rick Ross website. I believe I was correct to do this, but not for the reason I gave at the time. I said that Rick Ross was not a reliable source. However I had overlooked the fact that the article in question seems to have been one that originally appeared in the Tokyo Journal. By the sound of it, the Tokyo Journal is a moderately respectable publication. However the article in question is extremely poorly researched and full of easily demonstrable factual inaccuracies. For instance it says that Soka Gakkai members regard Ikeda as the earthly reincarnation of Nichiren. Nowhere will you find the slightest bit of evidence for this. In fact Ikeda has himself said that the very notion of a special "living Buddha" is absurd in Buddhism. As far as sources go, the article cites the Shukan Shincho. one of Japan'd disgraceful weekly scandal sheets. [1] The Tokyo Journal article is neither useful nor trustworthy. Ireneshusband ( talk) 09:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict):I reverted. Please find better sources. The Rick Ross section is original research. The link only lists articles, it doesn't source what the section which was removed stated. The articles itself could be used as sources. Regarding the Noriega link. Is there any collaborating source besides that one book? Otherwise it does look like your standard conspiracy theory. ps: feel free to remove any unsourced info from this article, whether it is negative or positive. Garion96 (talk) 12:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
In this edit, an IP removes
with the comment
One thing that's for sure is that the word "liturgy" appears nowhere else in the article, meaning that publication details of this book are not provided.
Further, Worldcat doesn't list any book titled The Liturgy of Nichiren: Daishonin's Buddhism.
Perhaps the editor who added this can explain. -- Hoary ( talk) 13:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I must apologize for my ignorance in not replying here earlier before the re-edit as I was unaware of this talk page.However I feel that readers of this article should be made aware of Daisaku Ikeda's character and not only of his listed achievements.
I do not want to argue with you on this article so if you wish to leave my contribution removed then so be it. 203.100.215.204 ( talk) 23:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
According to certain sources, Ikeda's "real name" is stated to be Song Teajak.
These sources all seem to be in Spanish (or Catalan).
No explanation is given as to why someone apparently of Japanese peasant ancestry would have an imported Korean or Chinese name.
Presumably this information is false?
Varlaam (
talk)
01:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I've just deleted:
The Manchester Guardian didn't exist in 1984. It had become the Guardian years earlier.
The fact that somebody published her thoughts (critical or laudatory) on Ikeda is of little significance. What did she say? If it was substantive and we know precisely where she said it, it should be readded.
I have to say, though, that it does sound vaguely familiar. I think I've read of how Ikeda was badgering Toynbee to talk up his relationship with Arnold Toynbee. Maybe somebody here can come up with a solid reference. -- Hoary ( talk) 11:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
This article is unbalanced -- criticisms of Ikeda abound, and they need to be addressed in this article. Earlier versions of this article were more balanced but criticisms seem to have been removed one by one. While each removal discussed here is perhaps reasonable on its own, the overall effect is that the article does not follow NPOV. It is not reasonable to have a detailed list of dozens of honorary degrees and appointments, while just having a couple of sentences of criticism. 24.128.49.84 ( talk) 11:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The purpose of this article is to be neutral and state facts, which can be cited. The section that was deleted stated series of quotations about Mr. Ikeda's meeting with Arnold Toynbee. The quotes put together created an image that had a bias to a particular viewpoint instead of stating facts in an impartial manner. A wikipedia article is meant to be written in an impartial way, which does not show judgment.(user:sleemcgill)
The number of honorary degrees alone should raise a red flag on the educated reader. Deserving Nobel Peace Prize winners have not collected nearly as many. An educated reader can look at the quality, reputation, and national/international standing of the granting institution and decide whether the awardee actively campaigns to secure such honors. It is a verifiable fact that Mr. Ikeda receives some of those awards in Japan, by fully funding the travel expenses to Japan of the awarding institution dignataries. As the list includes a long number of developing country state institutions and U.S. fourth tier universities, it is not difficult for an educated audience to ascertain the credibility and worth of that many "awards." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.29.128 ( talk) 00:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
The article tells us that:
I can't even guess what that means. Can anyone help? -- Hoary ( talk) 13:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
A great many books by Ikeda are listed. These are given titles in English. Are these titles the original titles, or are they nonce translations for this article? Either way, who published them, and what are their ISBNs? Perhaps somebody interested in Ikeda could provide this information. -- Hoary ( talk) 13:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
In this edit I deleted a set of "Friendship links", whose obscure title actually just listed links to Wikiquote. -- Hoary ( talk) 13:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
First, the article says Ikeda received "the United States Congressional Award." According to Wikepedia's article on the Congressional Award, it is given only to people between the ages of 14 and 23. It's possible the award was given to young people in SGI, but I doubt Ikeda himself received it.
Second, there are a number of controversies surrounding Ikeda that either are not mentioned or sugar-coated, including allegations from several years ago of misappropriation of money and attempts to buy political influence in Japan. There was a huge blow-up in SGI membership in the 1990s after Ikeda's excommunication from Nichiren Shoshu, because Ikeda didn't bother to inform the membership for many months. People found out about it through rumor and the internet and many bailed out of SGI then. His pushing of aggressive proselytizing tactics back in the 1970s also remains controversial. None of this is mentioned in the article.
It's suspected that many of the honors given him, including honorary degrees, were conferred as conditions of some institution receiving a generous donation from SGI. Here is an example:
Mahabarbara ( talk) 20:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
That article you refere to is too subjective, and you there is no proof of attemps to buy government. People are ofcourse afraid of an organization that got 12 million members in 50 years. The article says without arguments: "It's personality-driven and totalitarian in its structure; there's a process of indoctrination compared to what is commonly called brainwashing; and it does harm.". If I want I can visit my national SGI leader without a problem if I have a good reason. Nothing totalitarian about it. And SGI keeps videos and some tekst intern because they can be ripped out of context like these quotes "I am the king of Japan; I am its president; I am the master of its spiritual life," and "I am the supreme power who entirely directs its intellectual culture." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.93.253.54 ( talk) 11:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Honorary Professorships are by no means the same as Honorary Doctorates. The list is misleading & should separate out the 2 different honours. ( EmandTee ( talk) 23:24, 12 May 2011 (UTC))
In this edit, I pulled out a huge number of footnotes that source claims for Ikeda's accomplishments via Ikeda's own website, or the websites of the religion he heads.
No, claims for accomplishments need disinterested sources. -- Hoary ( talk) 12:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
That's one objection. Here, posted to on my talk page, is another:
First, Wikipedia:Quotations is primarily about quotations (as in, the kind of stuff that typically goes between quotation marks), and not primarily about citing sources for factual assertions.
Secondly, Wikipedia:Quotations does say:
Yes, let's see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence. It says:
And what's a "reliable source"? It's hard for me to compress further what's already presented in Wikipedia:Verifiability. But I draw your attention to this within this part of it:
There's more. We read:
The meanings (note plural) within Wikipedia of the word "source" have already been explained ( here), and bearing this explanation in mind it's clear that what I've just quoted means that Ikeda's website, and the website of the religion headed by Ikeda, are self-published and thus questionable sources that may indeed be used within Wikipedia for certain kinds of information (e.g. the names and years of birth of his children, assuming that there is no controversy over this) -- but not for any assertion of any accomplishment by Ikeda.
Note again:
Claims for Ikeda's accomplishments need to be backed by reliable sources. One requirement for reliability is that the source is disinterested. Neither Ikeda's website nor a Sōka Gakkai (International) website is disinterested, and therefore neither can be used to source such assertions as that he has received honorary doctorates, or that his photography is highly regarded. -- Hoary ( talk) 23:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
How do you consider unduly self-serving? By subjective or objective means? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.197.80 ( talk) 07:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
By Jim Celer 67.54.190.87 00:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC) A bit of suggestion, I intend of moving some parts of SGI main history article in regards to Daisaku Ikeda personal history to this main article about him.I would like some views please. TY. Gammadion 18:43, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Whether or not the accusations are true, I think it deserves a mention that there are so many accusations. Perhaps address why such accusations came up, and the evidence for and against, but to not mention them at all is clearly POV. The majority of Japanese fear Ikeda and SG, I think that merits a mention beyond "he is a controversial figure but all accusations have proven false."
Tallasse
13:54, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
A personality cult *has* grown up around Ikeda in the form of his religious corporation known as SGI or Soka Gakkai, and this is well documented in the press. I have noticed that when others try to add this fact to this profile, someone comes along to remove it. I think it's only fair to state that while there are many who adore Ikeda, there are many who see him as a cult leader.
http://freedomofmind.com/resourcecenter/groups/s/soka/
Who is Steve Hassan? What criteria are we to use when deciding what sources to cite? The author of the above website offers the following disclaimer of his own page:
"Copyright © 2001-2005 Freedom of Mind Resource Center, Inc. Freedomofmind.com fully supports religious freedom and the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The fact that a person’s name or group appears on our website does not necessarily mean they are a destructive mind control cult. They appear because we have received inquiries and have established a file on the group. The Freedom of Mind Resource Center Inc. was established by cult expert Steve Hassan'
That doesn't seem to lend credibility to him or his views. As a .com site, his purpose is commercial, not informational per se. Shouldn't we be using higher standards in selecting our sources? Especially as Wikipedia's presence is so strong. Don't we contributors have a responsibility to use only the most credible, reliable, authoritative sources? Isn't it part of our responsibility to help sort through this kind of stuff? I am a librarian and I teach high school students how to evaluate their inormation sources. This one does not stand up. Here's a quick review for anyone interested > Evaluating Resources > Kathy Shrock's Guide to Website Evaluation > THinking Critically About... Just a thought - Ruby-- 138.89.144.194 00:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
-- Goettel 01:24, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
The allegations of rape on the above site are very serious:Did the case go to court? Andycjp 8/5/04
Good question. I do not know. The following link has many news reports from the New York Times. I will look for more info. http://www.sokacult.com/JealousLies.html -- Goettel 06:48, 8 May 2004 (UTC)
Daisaku Ikeda doesn't own the Seikyo Shimbun newspaper. It Soka Gakkai that owns it. Distribution is between 5 and 6 million.
About the rape: "The Tokyo District Court dismissed the allegations in May 2000 as "an abuse of the right of action." The judge found "no factual evidence" to support their allegations and stated that their lawsuit was "entirely against the principle of good faith."
I don't know how to get to the actual court documents, but there is unofficial summary and translation of the court judgment at http://www.sokagakkai.info/html3/viewpoint3/record3/rec08_nobu_case.html
And Soka Gakkai's official answer to some of other accusations at http://www.sokagakkai.info/html3/viewpoint3/record3/record_index3f.html
---
I question the use of the terms "personality cult" and "cult" altogether. Nothing stated in the article, or in the discussion seem to fit even Wikipedia's entry on this topic, which defines the term as follows: "A Cult of Personality differs from charismatic authority in that it has a negative connotation by definition, and is thus a pejorative term. It also differs from general hero worship in that it is specifically built around political leaders."
(By the way, it seems that a good portion of the Wikipedia article on "cult of personality" seems to have been lifted from the site InovoyagerIs that appropriate? )
In addition, according to Infopedia, "A cult of personality is a generally derogative term to criticize the worship of a single leader". Although Dr. Ikeda seems to be quite popular among a large population of people, and though he has many accomplishments, (like any good leader, I would think) is there any evidence that anyone "worships" him or that he himself seeks such adulation? Isn't it POV to apply terms that are "derogatory" "criticisms" to descriptions of people or organizations as if they are factual, without substantiation? I haven't really seen anything that really substantiates the claim...
Also, according to dictionary.com, the definition of the word "cult" has not been shown to be accurate either. Can examples be provided? The definition is: "1.A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. 2. The followers of such a religion or sect. 3. A system or community of religious worship and ritual. 4. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual. 5. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease. 6. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing. The object of such devotion. 7. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest. "
It's just not clear to me that the application of these terms to Dr. Ikeda are well founded. Especially since Wikipedia's definitions of the two terms are themselves under dispute. It would seem innappropriate that a disputed term be used in reference to anyone in Wikipedia.
Not to mention, it raises some real issues, say for high school students doing research on the topic, when the first result in a Google or dictionary.com's encyclopedia site search are references to Wikipedia's definitions.
Perhaps the terms should not be applied to Dr, Ikeda, SGI, or anyone else, for that matter, until the definitions themselves are at least agreed upon. Just a thought...Ruby-- 68.45.57.193 02:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC) -- 68.45.57.193 02:38, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
If you happen to bounce upon a site that speaks ill of Mr. Ikeda, please ignore it. Those people have absolutely nothing to do and are wasting their time. They fabricate stories and tell lies just to mislead people, and I hope you will instead go to the following site: Soka Gakkai International
Mr. Ikeda is an recipient of more than 150 honorary degrees and citizenships, and has held dialogs with many important figures around the world. Every year, he sends his proposals for peace and sustainability to the United Nations. Like all people through peace, culture, and education, Mr. Ikeda has great hopes for the future of humanity. For more information please visit www.sgi.org
Money can do a lot. LordofHavoc 18:50, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
-- 13:43, 9 Sep 2004 User:193.166.21.100
--- 23:30, 30 October 2005
I have no personal or dogmatic quarrel with Mr. Ikeda or his successors, however in light of evasive obsfucations engaged in by SGI at the direction of Mr. Ikeda and his successors there is grounds for a reasoned debate, but not WikiGraffiti. My experiences with and observations of SGI are that like many other religious orders, the adherents are sincerely interested in their causes and beliefs. However, if questioned "Is SGI a religion / faith" the standard was to vehemently deny that, and state that SGI was a non-denominational inter-faith NGO established for world peace. Again, I feel that to be an honorable effort. However, the evidence clearly shows that SGI is a unification Buddhist denomination with lay orders, doctrine, ministries, dogmas, and ordinances, contrary to their assertations of non-religious activities. The controversies surrounding Mr. Ikeda specificly, and SGI in particular, are similar to arguments made about L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. The arguements lie at the evasiveness regarding what Mr. Ikeda and SGI's intents and pretenses are, not their activities or faith. NotRegisteredUser
doesn't quite fit that mold. In some respects, yes it does But in others, not at all. (But, again, I ask - why must it fit in the first place? And why must its followers and Ikeda say "It fits!" Just to make YOU feel more comfortable? To make you feel "Right?" At any rate, I think that is causing a lot of confusion.
representing a broad range of ethnic and social backgrounds" Source: www.sgi-usa.org.
Given the level of vitriol spewing forth from the keyboards of some visitors, I am not surprised that people won't sign! Nonethelss, I would suggest to one and all that the best way to determine the validity of any of these claims - good or bad - is to visit the sites, SGI USA, or SGI, get to know someone who practices, and read something -- try The Buddha in Daily Life by Robert Causton (if you can find a copy - it is currently out of print), or The Buddha in your Mirror by By Hochswender, Martin & Moreno ISBN 0-9674697-1-6, available at Barnes' and Noble and other fine book stores near you -- 151.198.99.71 22:40, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Trying to silence the voices of dissent is typical behaviour of brainwashed cultists. It is really very unpleasant to witness.
Ikeda is a controversial figure, but this article reads like an autobiography of L. Ron Hubbard.
And your point is....
Do we really need to know about every award he ever received? The Rumanian ex-dictatur Ceausescu and his wife also had some impressive titles. They were still put up against a wall and shot. (That's something you don't see often enough.) -- 04:04, 15 Apr 2005 User:62.107.63.48
Really. Daisaku Ikeda and his wife can hardly be compared to a communist dictator.--
151.198.99.71
22:05, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
Name one thing President Ikeda has been accused of that has been proven...I dare you. --- 20:32, 27 May 2005
User:Butsushin And don't forget to cite any sources you have. --- 03:59, 13 July 2005
User:Butsushin
The reason people think Sokka Gakkai is a cult-
Sokka Gakkai members will always defend ANYTHING the organization, it's leader and their political party does. --- 05:26, 15 July 2005 User:64.71.189.133 What sort of religious organization can afford to send a million dollars to a dump? --- 05:36, 15 July 2005 User:64.71.189.133
Rather like Republicans, I'd say...Maybe they are a cult too! Yee Gads! Now THAT is scary!- R.
Excuse me, but that money was actually hidden by the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood, not the Soka Gakkai.-- gab 00:45, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
Actually, that is not necessarily true. I'm an SGI member myself although I could care less for Mr. Ikeda. I'm a member because of the practice, not the people. Personally I see Ikeda as being a money-hungry arrogant tyrant who cares more about his own agenda than that of the SGI. Being a member of SGI-USA I look up to my leaders here, in America, not Japan. Say what you want about Mr. Ikeda. This is one SGI member who will not be offended, promise. :) --- 22:07, 28 July 2005 User:24.215.92.110
The easiest way to determine the validity of any of this is to visit the site, get to know someone who practices, and see for yourself.
SGI International and
SGI-USA. 12 mllion people seem to agree that SGI and Nichiren buddhism works for them. Are they all just mistaken or brainwashed?
151.198.99.71 22:27, 28 September 2005 (UTC)--
151.198.99.71
22:29, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
I Find it Funny that the SGI Member did not sign his name, I also find it hard to understand the fact that he repects his leaders, who in turn repect President Ikeda yet he beleives him to be a Tyrannt. Why would his Respected leaders rescept a tyrannt. He is clearly missing the whole point.- Iravan September 28 2005
---
I find it funny that
you find it so funny! "Given the level of vitriol spewing forth from the keyboards of some visitors, I am not surprised that people won't sign!"
In my reading of this article, the dispute seems unfounded - everything that is stated is biographical, and can be proven time and again, by more than one outside source. In addition, the article does address some of the less popular sentiment. So I don't understand where there is a bias. Unless one has already made up ones mind in spite of a wealth of evidence to the contrary -- but then, of course, that would be biassed and POV...
It seems that you may have had bad experiences, and if so, it would be helpful if you would share them, for the sake of other people's well being. At this point, there are over 12 million people who seem to feel that Daisaku Ikeda comes by his accolades and accomplishments quite honestly. They can't all be wrong, can they?
Perhaps it might be worth the effort to get to know someone who practices, and maybe read something.
Try these:
*"The Buddha in Your Mirror," *"Choose Hope: Your Role in Waging Peace in the Nuclear Age" or *"The Toynbee-Ikeda Dialogue: Man Himself Must Choose by Arnold Toynbee and, Daisaku Ikeda.
There are also some interesting articles of note:
*"Born in the USA: Racial Diversity in Soka Gakkai International an excellent and very intriuing article in Tricycle magazine from it's 50th issue, April 2004. Probably available at your local public library *Or perhaps this bok might be helpul "Soka Gakkai: From Lay Movement to Religion," by Karel Dobbelaere
There's also:
*"The Cultural Significance of New Religious Movements: The Case of Soka Gakkai. By: Dawson, Lorne L.. Sociology of Religion, Fall2001, Vol. 62 Issue 3, p337-364, 28p * and NPR's All Things Considered Profile: Practice of Soka Gakkai in the US By: MICHELE NORRIS. All Things Considered (NPR), 05/12/2004
I wish you well. - Ruby -- 68.45.57.193 03:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
The rape charge was thrown out when it was found that the woman had been lying about President Ikeda's whereabouts. It was also found by the judge that the woman, Nobuko Nobuhira and her husband Junko had attempted to extort money from President Ikeda, and when the attempt failed, she charged rape. See http://www.apublicbetrayed.com/case_studies/case_study3.htm, under the subheading "False Accusation." It also includes the court's summation of the case.
-gtdanyelz- gab 00:43, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
This is correct. In fact, there seem to be many accusations, but no convictions. And there are many reprints of the courts' summation and decision on this case, as well as those on several other accusations that have been lodged against Dr. Ikeda and the SGI. For example, here is a summary posted by an organization that appears, on the surface, at least, to be an impartial outside analyst:
From: Human Rights Without Frontiers ,Ave. Winston Churchill 11 / 33 – 1180 Brussels – Belgium – Phone: + 32 2 345 61 45 – Fax: +32 2 343 74 91 – Email address: info@hrwf.net
and...
events, concerts, theatre performances, exhibitions, etc."-- 68.45.57.193 01:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Here is a link to the [ http://http://www.un.org/esa/coordination/ngo/UN section on NGOs. I searched "Soka Gakai" to find it, in case the link doesn't connect. -- 68.45.57.193 01:29, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
This article is a nightmare to read idependently of the views. Daisaku Ikeda is infact controverse, if he wasn't htere wouldn't be a neutrality dispute. But even if there is a dispute, the article should be at least readble. If mr.Ikeda has that many published books there should be a speciall section for it, a bibliography or whatever just for the sake of design and respect for wikipedia standards.
If we look at other articles we don't have this entangled pasta of actions mixed up with published conversations with assorted figures and worst with different design format.
I don't know if he his a respectable man or a manipulative creature for a fact, and this is not for wikipedia to expose. I'm not pro-Soka Gakkai I must say, but I got my opinion through meeting people of the organization, going to their tupperware like reunions and reading all the babble that they put out, much later did I find criticism that went along with what I felt. I feel that wikipedia, deserves better than this because it is a wonderfull community and it's for all of us, inspite of all nonsense of creed, faith, political whatever, favorite chainsaw massacre film.
I particulary feel an enormous despise for this figure, and I would not be the best person to shape this up, but I will try if no one will.
-- P- 16:22, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Your feelings are obvious, unfortunately. But controversial does not mean "cult." And besides that, it is possible to cover controversial topics, withouth the article itself becoming controversial. It's about neutrality and balance, exploring a thing without judging it, or supporting it.
That said, I still believe it would be more helpul to know why you you have such strong feelings. I mean "enormous despise for this figure" and "their tupperware like reunions and reading all the babble that they put out," I mean, that is strong. What did he or "they" DO to you or to those you care about? Inquiring minds want to know...seriously, if he/"they" are that bad, it is important for people to know why. Evidence? Anectdotal? Whatever. As long as it is clear what kind of evidence it is, so people can make their own informed judgement. -- 138.89.144.194 00:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC) Please leave this line alone, it's not very strong
Well, my personal experience with SGI and the reading some of human revolution and the new human revolution, the Gosho, The Lotus Sutra, art of living and the older magazine [don't remember the name] visiting sgi.org website, going to some meetings watching how people behaved before and after, the proselytizing [hum...shakubuku anyone...oh no it's sansho-shima] the no effort dogmatic philosophy really gets to me because I think it really affected my friends and consequently myself. Well I might be wrong and enduring unnecessary hatred and Ill feelings here but that's what I feel. I dislike mr.Ikeda because he thinks [looks to me he does] he is the XXI century buddha, he is egotist and everyone thinks he is a saint and I don't trust people who meet with Tatchers and latin american dictators or the fact that he is compromised with establishment, he, and top figures in SGI are just like any other corporation I dislike that too, I dislike dogma even if it's with a good intention as SGI expounds.
I'll continue this discussion privately with you R if you want so, I think this will not help viewers or to clear things in this page. You can reach me here, and I'll reply to your latest...uh.. reply: breakheretic[commercial a]yahoo[little black thingie]com
-- P- 14:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Listen, I have nothing against people that believe in that faith, I have something pretty strong against the faith itself and Daishonin, Toda, Ikeda and the like. I think they are dangerous and more even so because it doesn't look really dangerous.
SGI actually only has 75 years, and it's not like early buddhism nor is it like Zen buddhism. SGI buddhism resembles more a mix between a Tea party and new age positive feelings. Most people never even read the Lotus Sutra and they certainly don't care about the other Sutras. Nooooo, mr.Daishonin discovered the fulcrum, why care about everything else? Nope, follow the recipe and all be well. It's just ludicrous, is this the Occams razor of religion? -- P- 05:13, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
What are you talking about?? I thought your reference was to the tendency of religion to justify violence as in the Pope justifying slavery, the Crusades, and the genocide of Native Americans, all of which happened in the name of God and Christianity. This would have been a thoughtful and meaningful comment. But you missed the real comeback - so I'll give it to you - in fact, it is true that there was some bloodhed in Nichiren Buddhism -- the 23 people who were killed while defending Nichiren from attackers who didn't like what he was saying. But, hey, compared to the Crusades, and considering it wasn't Nichiren who initiated the bloodshed, it's pretty clean, relatively speaking.
You have so little faith in humanity. And no wonder - look at what we've done. But there is also that positive element, and there is no denying that we have, as a species, grown - a bit.
Delivered at Harvard University, September 24, 1993 available at http://www.sgi.org/english/President/speeches/mahayana.htm
As for Zen and other forms, no it is not like them. Thank goodness. And that was Nichiren's point, afterall. Look, you obviously have a grudge. Why don't you leave it alone and let people who are less emotionally involved - and better researchers - deal with it? -R
They tell you it's possible to have heaven on earth in a earnest way.
Yes great deeds, and the NGO recognition status by the UN. Well I don't have a great deal of confidence in the UN or in democracy to act in the world so that doesn't work for me to the avail of SGI. Great philantropists are also the greates exploiters, just take the Vatican, Bill Gates and drug lords in South America, Middle East helping out all the farmers cropping alcaloids. Democracy works if you have money for a lawyer, i prefer to cal it demo - cracy. [in the bible the devil is sometimes portrayed as a lawyer, the Advocat/Adversary but this is an entirely different story. I never saw no one in SGI to shakubuku a poor man, they only go after middle class and artsy people, that is funny too. Nor have I seen the person that asks for money in the street in a reunion. Where is that kind of man in SGI? Well he can't afford nothing so no, don't you bother with him/they.
I refer to the last paragraph. From what I observed, it is usually the poor and the sick who tends to pick up the practice as opposed to the "middle class and artsy people". I am a member and I met many friends who are suffering from cancer, poverty, mental illness, drug abuse, depression...you name it. In fact the middle class, artsy people are the least likely bunch who pick up the practice because people from that class generally cannot understand what is real suffering. I have a friend from Uganda refugee camp and even I myself can't imagine the magnitude of death and suffering he witnessed. Please do not make value judgments before understanding what is going on. In SG, we believe that we can do something as humans to improve our environment, rather than sit back and do nothing about the injustice in the world and criticize how the UN and democracy doesn't work. World peace is a vision that Ikeda holds very dear to his heart, and something he is working very hard towards.
As a final note, even YOU have the potential to do something about improving democracy in the world. Being an apathatic cynic doesn't really help in moving humanity forward. -- Moon
I call it tupperware because the structure is similar to an SGI chapter, reunion place whatever. Please attend a tupperware meeting and check for yourself please.
If you think SGI doesn't suck up your money, your personal resources, your one anima just see how much time you use up in SGI activity and compare that to a level that you would attain without doing that time. How much did you pay for a gohzon, butsudan, art of living, going to tretz, or that centre in england...taplow? yeah Taplow. Wait let me check your IP, ok you are in the US, so I don't know where you go every year, but add the plane tickets to that and oh yeah all the literature and bibliography they advise you to buy and the beeds and where to stop?
Oh, the things you buy to other people when they start nam-myho.rengue-kyo ad eternum because it's your mission to achieve Kosen Rufu... 1/3 true buddhists, 1/3 supporters, 1/3 aggainst... you can't divide the world like that, the world and humans are organic unless you drive them through mind control or profound faith systems that have you indoctrinated you to behave accordingly.
Mind you that I'm for peace and I'm for realizing your full potential, but you know what? We have so much to learn from each other and from all the philosophers and workers and bakers and mothers and fathers and children that I see no point nor effectiveness in faith systems to achive that because if that faith tells you that this is true buddhism wich means that every other buddhism is false teaching, and that this is the only way to happiness. There is no straight path, if particles and the world revolve in free ways why should we behave differently? The universe is primordial and older than any mystical faith you want to see in it apply in it, and no words can reflect that because Existence is already a...hummmm... there, existing. Monism, Positivism, Determinism to me sound like a living hell. I could go on, but this is the wrong place this at the same time is so small that doesn't reflect my voice.
I'm sorry if this is a too long reply, feel free to delete if you feel it's disturbing this talk page.
--
P-
23:10, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
SGI member here - no we won't delete the comment but what are you trying to say? This article is about Diasaku Ikeda not how SGI Buddhism is inferior to free moving particles.
and why don't you sign your name in your comments and replies? -- P- 03:12, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
Ahhhhh...now I understand. No need to feel so insecure with yourself, P. You are tall enough, young enough, pretty enough, and gosh darn it - people like you! Besides, you have Buddha nature, too! - R.
I got some things cleaned up I think.. and also found a very inspiring article [ What is a featured article]
-- P- 20:43, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Looks better to me...thanks.-- 138.89.144.194 00:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Article was saying that "Gandhi, King, Ikeda" exhibition is "an example of how Ikeda is portrayed to his followers". But as this implies that the exhibition is made by SGI, it makes no sense. Idea and execution is by Morehouse College, SGI is only cosponsoring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.145.221.65 ( talk) 08:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
How/when is an article decided to be no longer POV? It looks good to me as is, and I know it has been through several revisions. Can I move to have it taken off the list? Any seconds? Can we vote on it? - R-- 71.250.88.213 03:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Its good - I would take it of the disputed list - anyone else? - KenV
Whaddya know! A few months later, and we have - through peaceful dialogue! -- all agree to disagree, and still respect each other in the morning. Well done. = Ruby -- 71.250.122.11 02:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
This is a whitewash. Not one single paragraph of criticism of one of the most controversial men in Japan. In Japan his face is on the front page of his own 'newspaper' nearly every day... Andycjp 04:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I removed the follwing paragraph from the article since it's unsourced. I have no idea if it's true or not but if it's included in the article, it must be sourced. Garion96 (talk) 13:19, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
The article should document, in a non-partisan manner, what reliable third party sources have published about the subject and, in some circumstances, what the subject may have published about themselves. The writing style should be neutral, factual, and understated, avoiding both a sympathetic point of view and an advocacy journalism point of view. (Emphasis mine)
Apologies to those who have been ruffled by my recent additions to this page on Ikeda. This is my first effort and I'm still learning the ropes.
Regarding the information recently added, I beleived that it does name sources, but if anyone is unsatisfied I invite them to be more specific. However, I note that the existing material on Ikeda is full of unreferenced claims.
There does appear to be a lack of balance.
brahilly
Odd, given that at least one of his two sons lives in Osaka, and that both are married and have their own families. Also, it should be noted that his two living sons are his surviving sons, since one son is dead. — Jim_Lockhart 15:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
There is no evidence to suggest that Daisaku Ikeda is funding the Komeito party. The party website clearly outlines its sources of funding. [1] Therefore the reference citing the New York Times article as a criticism of Daisaku Ikeda is slanderous and non-neutral. I also contend that the Time magazine reference, which interestingly enough is not to be found on the Time archives anymore, is not about Daisaku Ikeda per se. It starts with a false case lodged against the Soka Gakkai by Daito and Naoko Asaki on September 23, 1995. On December 22, 1995 the Higashi Murayama police officially announce that 'there was no evidence of criminality' in the case and that it was 'suicide caused by remorse over a shopliftng charge'. On May 15, 2001,The Tokyo High Court upheld Lower Court rulings that Daito and Naoko Asaki defamed the Soka Gakkai. On May 18, 2001 The Tokyo High Court upholds Lower Court rulings that the publishing company, Kodanasha, defamed the Soka Gakkai. On October 29, 2002, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision and ordered defendants to publish a retraction and apology in Shukan Gendai and pay 2 million yen in damages to the Soka Gakkai. Shukan Gendai published a notice of retraction and apology to the Soka Gakkai on the March 8, 2003, issue, which reached the newsstands on February 24. Considering this, it is clear that using an outdated and incorrect article will cause prejudice and not reflect the truth. Therefore, both these criticisms lack substance and must be removed to preserve any modicum of neutrality. (Comment added to article body by User:Sri v123 at 10:11 on 15 September 2007; moved here by Jim_Lockhart 14:28, 16 September 2007 (UTC).)
I have just deleted a mention of a critical article on the Rick Ross website. I believe I was correct to do this, but not for the reason I gave at the time. I said that Rick Ross was not a reliable source. However I had overlooked the fact that the article in question seems to have been one that originally appeared in the Tokyo Journal. By the sound of it, the Tokyo Journal is a moderately respectable publication. However the article in question is extremely poorly researched and full of easily demonstrable factual inaccuracies. For instance it says that Soka Gakkai members regard Ikeda as the earthly reincarnation of Nichiren. Nowhere will you find the slightest bit of evidence for this. In fact Ikeda has himself said that the very notion of a special "living Buddha" is absurd in Buddhism. As far as sources go, the article cites the Shukan Shincho. one of Japan'd disgraceful weekly scandal sheets. [1] The Tokyo Journal article is neither useful nor trustworthy. Ireneshusband ( talk) 09:57, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
(edit conflict):I reverted. Please find better sources. The Rick Ross section is original research. The link only lists articles, it doesn't source what the section which was removed stated. The articles itself could be used as sources. Regarding the Noriega link. Is there any collaborating source besides that one book? Otherwise it does look like your standard conspiracy theory. ps: feel free to remove any unsourced info from this article, whether it is negative or positive. Garion96 (talk) 12:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
In this edit, an IP removes
with the comment
One thing that's for sure is that the word "liturgy" appears nowhere else in the article, meaning that publication details of this book are not provided.
Further, Worldcat doesn't list any book titled The Liturgy of Nichiren: Daishonin's Buddhism.
Perhaps the editor who added this can explain. -- Hoary ( talk) 13:14, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
I must apologize for my ignorance in not replying here earlier before the re-edit as I was unaware of this talk page.However I feel that readers of this article should be made aware of Daisaku Ikeda's character and not only of his listed achievements.
I do not want to argue with you on this article so if you wish to leave my contribution removed then so be it. 203.100.215.204 ( talk) 23:45, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
According to certain sources, Ikeda's "real name" is stated to be Song Teajak.
These sources all seem to be in Spanish (or Catalan).
No explanation is given as to why someone apparently of Japanese peasant ancestry would have an imported Korean or Chinese name.
Presumably this information is false?
Varlaam (
talk)
01:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I've just deleted:
The Manchester Guardian didn't exist in 1984. It had become the Guardian years earlier.
The fact that somebody published her thoughts (critical or laudatory) on Ikeda is of little significance. What did she say? If it was substantive and we know precisely where she said it, it should be readded.
I have to say, though, that it does sound vaguely familiar. I think I've read of how Ikeda was badgering Toynbee to talk up his relationship with Arnold Toynbee. Maybe somebody here can come up with a solid reference. -- Hoary ( talk) 11:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
This article is unbalanced -- criticisms of Ikeda abound, and they need to be addressed in this article. Earlier versions of this article were more balanced but criticisms seem to have been removed one by one. While each removal discussed here is perhaps reasonable on its own, the overall effect is that the article does not follow NPOV. It is not reasonable to have a detailed list of dozens of honorary degrees and appointments, while just having a couple of sentences of criticism. 24.128.49.84 ( talk) 11:44, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
The purpose of this article is to be neutral and state facts, which can be cited. The section that was deleted stated series of quotations about Mr. Ikeda's meeting with Arnold Toynbee. The quotes put together created an image that had a bias to a particular viewpoint instead of stating facts in an impartial manner. A wikipedia article is meant to be written in an impartial way, which does not show judgment.(user:sleemcgill)
The number of honorary degrees alone should raise a red flag on the educated reader. Deserving Nobel Peace Prize winners have not collected nearly as many. An educated reader can look at the quality, reputation, and national/international standing of the granting institution and decide whether the awardee actively campaigns to secure such honors. It is a verifiable fact that Mr. Ikeda receives some of those awards in Japan, by fully funding the travel expenses to Japan of the awarding institution dignataries. As the list includes a long number of developing country state institutions and U.S. fourth tier universities, it is not difficult for an educated audience to ascertain the credibility and worth of that many "awards." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.76.29.128 ( talk) 00:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
The article tells us that:
I can't even guess what that means. Can anyone help? -- Hoary ( talk) 13:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
A great many books by Ikeda are listed. These are given titles in English. Are these titles the original titles, or are they nonce translations for this article? Either way, who published them, and what are their ISBNs? Perhaps somebody interested in Ikeda could provide this information. -- Hoary ( talk) 13:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
In this edit I deleted a set of "Friendship links", whose obscure title actually just listed links to Wikiquote. -- Hoary ( talk) 13:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
First, the article says Ikeda received "the United States Congressional Award." According to Wikepedia's article on the Congressional Award, it is given only to people between the ages of 14 and 23. It's possible the award was given to young people in SGI, but I doubt Ikeda himself received it.
Second, there are a number of controversies surrounding Ikeda that either are not mentioned or sugar-coated, including allegations from several years ago of misappropriation of money and attempts to buy political influence in Japan. There was a huge blow-up in SGI membership in the 1990s after Ikeda's excommunication from Nichiren Shoshu, because Ikeda didn't bother to inform the membership for many months. People found out about it through rumor and the internet and many bailed out of SGI then. His pushing of aggressive proselytizing tactics back in the 1970s also remains controversial. None of this is mentioned in the article.
It's suspected that many of the honors given him, including honorary degrees, were conferred as conditions of some institution receiving a generous donation from SGI. Here is an example:
Mahabarbara ( talk) 20:00, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
That article you refere to is too subjective, and you there is no proof of attemps to buy government. People are ofcourse afraid of an organization that got 12 million members in 50 years. The article says without arguments: "It's personality-driven and totalitarian in its structure; there's a process of indoctrination compared to what is commonly called brainwashing; and it does harm.". If I want I can visit my national SGI leader without a problem if I have a good reason. Nothing totalitarian about it. And SGI keeps videos and some tekst intern because they can be ripped out of context like these quotes "I am the king of Japan; I am its president; I am the master of its spiritual life," and "I am the supreme power who entirely directs its intellectual culture." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.93.253.54 ( talk) 11:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Honorary Professorships are by no means the same as Honorary Doctorates. The list is misleading & should separate out the 2 different honours. ( EmandTee ( talk) 23:24, 12 May 2011 (UTC))
In this edit, I pulled out a huge number of footnotes that source claims for Ikeda's accomplishments via Ikeda's own website, or the websites of the religion he heads.
No, claims for accomplishments need disinterested sources. -- Hoary ( talk) 12:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
That's one objection. Here, posted to on my talk page, is another:
First, Wikipedia:Quotations is primarily about quotations (as in, the kind of stuff that typically goes between quotation marks), and not primarily about citing sources for factual assertions.
Secondly, Wikipedia:Quotations does say:
Yes, let's see Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden of evidence. It says:
And what's a "reliable source"? It's hard for me to compress further what's already presented in Wikipedia:Verifiability. But I draw your attention to this within this part of it:
There's more. We read:
The meanings (note plural) within Wikipedia of the word "source" have already been explained ( here), and bearing this explanation in mind it's clear that what I've just quoted means that Ikeda's website, and the website of the religion headed by Ikeda, are self-published and thus questionable sources that may indeed be used within Wikipedia for certain kinds of information (e.g. the names and years of birth of his children, assuming that there is no controversy over this) -- but not for any assertion of any accomplishment by Ikeda.
Note again:
Claims for Ikeda's accomplishments need to be backed by reliable sources. One requirement for reliability is that the source is disinterested. Neither Ikeda's website nor a Sōka Gakkai (International) website is disinterested, and therefore neither can be used to source such assertions as that he has received honorary doctorates, or that his photography is highly regarded. -- Hoary ( talk) 23:59, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
How do you consider unduly self-serving? By subjective or objective means? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.192.197.80 ( talk) 07:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)