I have to admit that in the past I have said that I would like to see the destruction of SGI or the collapse of SGI. Mostly this was before I began to seriously train as a Nichiren Shu minister. I was told by my sensei, and others, that I would have to tone it down considerably and stick to issues and that it is not Nichiren Shu policy to "go after" people or a group. If one must, stick to the issues. Since then, I have allowed myself to get drawn into debates or flame wars with SGI die-hards, but I do try to avoid that. Several times I have even tried to instigate further breaches between the die-hards and the reformers in misguided efforts to show the reformers how futile their efforts are, how ugly their organization can get, and in order to provoke the die-hards to even more extreme rhetoric so that they would alienate the moderates. I still find this tactic terribly tempting. But in the end, it is not right speech. It goes exactly against the Buddha's teaching that one should not say over there what was heard here in order to cause dissension. Granted, these teachings are found in the Pali Canon so I suppose they don't count because they are merely provisional and not in the Lotus Sutra, but somehow those teachings seem to always point the way to common sense and the avoidance of trouble and hard feelings.

So where does that leave me? Does it leave me with a fake happy face on? I am all happy and smiling and goody goody and pollyanna because Buddha loves me this I know because the sutras tell me so? Am I wearing my happy Mr. Nice Nice face because the Nichiren Shu, my parents, God, country, etc...want me to at least appear to be the good guy? And underneath there is scheming, hatred, rancor, the all-consuming ravenous desire to destroy? Not really. The truth is more like this - I'm growing up. I am becoming an adult, or more of an adult, or something... And an adult is someone who accepts responsibility for their actions, and does not carry around futile grudges or try to stir up trouble for others for amusement or spite. An adult is willing to let others go on their own way, and to go on his or her own way without having to shore up a shaky ego with the agreement, compliments, and kudos of others. An adult is willing to live and let live.

So what is my actual adult perspective (at least as it has currently developed) on the SGI? My adult perspective is that SGI has a lot of good, well-meaning, and sincere people in it. It has a lot of people who have developed in their faith and practice, and even come to some genuine insights about life. Then there are a lot of people in SGI who are deeply insecure, heavily invested in the organization over and above Buddhism itself. There are people who knew the right things to say and do and so rose to positions of power without necessarily having a corresponding sense of compassion and responsibility. And then there are those who have risen through the ranks and who are compassionate and responsible. In short, all ten worlds are present among the members of SGI. I don't judge any SGI member based on their affiliation. I usually try to get to know them as people first.

When it comes to SGI as an institution, I have many reservations. Reservations about their top-down management style, the lack of financial accountability, the seeming need to control what the average member reads or talks about - at least within SGI buildings, in SGI publicatons, and during official SGI meetings. Even outside official places and events, there seems to be a lot of discouragement towards any unofficial meetings among members. I do not see the encouragement towards really open dialogue, grass-roots democracy and other things that the SGI charter seems to promise on the ground level. But hey, if that is ok with the members, than who am I, a non-member, to complain? I occasionally raise these issues in forums, but mainly I stay clear of them because I figure that the way SGI or any other group manages itself internally is its own business. I voted with my feet long ago. I think it is a shame that SGI doesn't live up to it's own charter (in my view) but that is no reason to want SGI to disappear. I would, in fact, be happy to see it reform itself so as to live up to its potential as a truly democractic and accountable organization. But also realize that is not what everyone wants. Fair enough.

So how about doctrinally. Here is where I have more of a real problem because this has to do with the dissemination of information both internally and even external to the organization (esp. to the extent that SGI tries to propagate it's teachings). The SGI purports to teach Nichiren Buddhism. They even sell a translation of the Lotus Sutra and half the gosho in their bookstores. That is wonderful. I have benefited from SGI's gosho translations (though I have reservations about them as well) so I am actually grateful to all the work that went into them. The SGI teaches people to do gongyo and chant Odaimoku, and this practice at its core is what other Nichiren Buddhists also practice. So it is wonderful that they are exposing people to the Odaimoku and teaching them a dedicated daily practice. So what is the problem? The problem that I see is an uncritical perpetuation of Taisekiji teachings in official SGI publications which are unable to hold up to mainstream scholarship. I belive these Taisekiji teachings are extremist views which create an us vs. them stance towards other schools of Nichiren Buddhism, and which are against the plain words of Nichiren Shonin and the Lotus Sutra. And there are not a lot of these teachings - they boil down to the legend of the transfer documents and the sole succession of Nikko dead link , the legend of the Dai-Gohonzon/Ita-mandala at Taisekiji dead link , and the theory of Nichiren as the True Buddha dead link .

My articles show the history of these teachings that I have been able to discover. But here are the practical consequences:

1. Teaching that Nikko is the only true successor and that the other five major disciples (and other followers like Toki Jonin) were all traitors is not only unfounded, but the perpetuation of a personal fued between only four of the six (Nikko vs Niko, Nissho, and Nichiro) and the unnecessary alienation of all the other legitimate lineages of Nichiren Buddhism. It sets Taisekiji apart even from the other Nikko founded temples like Kitayama Honmonji. If this doctrine and the corresponding polemic and propaganda against the other schools of Nichiren Buddhism is dropped, than SGI will not have to constantly feel they must fight with or justify themselves against the other schools of Nichiren Buddhism. Why perpetuate 700 year old fueds?

2. The Dai-Gohonzon theory is a very blatant power play on the part of Taisekiji. Basically it is the assertion that nobody's practice is any good unless it is hooked up to Taisekiji. Why continue to support such a thing? Every Omandala Nichiren made is a Dai-Gohonzon. Every representation of the Eternal Buddha/Wonderful Dharma is a Gohonzon or Dai-Gohonzon. If SGI wants to stick with the Omandala alone, that is fine. I would still argue that Nichiren approved of different kinds of representation. But at least SGI should recognize that the Dai-Gohonzon story is a myth (though the Ita-mandala itself may be a carved copy of a genuine Nichiren Omandala) which only serves the priesthood of Taisekiji and only serves to make the universal teaching of Nichiren into a parochial cult centered on the worship of an object in Japan. If SGI dropped this it would be free. Daisaku Ikeda could even make his own Omandala. Certainly the SGI must believe that by now he has the prerequisite faith and understanding of what Nichiren was indicating to have the confidence to create an Omandala by and for the SGI firmly based on Nichiren's instructions in Kanjin Honzon Sho?

3. Finally the Nichiren as Buddha theory. I know that many people feel that if Nichiren didn't become a buddha by chanting Odaimoku then how can we? But no one is denying his enlightenment or even buddhahood through chanting Odaimoku. In a way it is perhaps silly to quibble over who gets the title "Awakened One" since Buddhism is not about titles. But the point is that Nichiren himself pointed back to the example and teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha, and that is because I believe the example and teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha are unsurpassed in their universality and comprehensiveness. Nichiren never intended to replace the Buddha or to have his gosho replace the sutras. Rather, he saw himself as a messenger who was bringing the Wonderful Dharma transmitted to Superior Practice Bodhisattva in chapter 21 directly to the Latter Age of the Dharma in the form of the Odaimoku so that all people could take it up.

I even see Daisaku Ikeda in his dialogues speaking about the relationship between Shakyamuni Buddha and the Eternal Buddha of chapter 16 in ways that are more in line with mainstream Nichiren Buddhist teaching than with Taisekiji. I see Daisaku Ikeda and others in SGI referring back to the teachings and examples of Shakyamuni Buddha and downplaying (at least until the recent changes to the prayers and accompanying memos) the idea that Nichiren Shonin has somehow made the Buddha obsolete. I had thought SGI was heading towards a more mainstream position but now I am not so sure.

But here is the bottom line about this for me - I think SGI members should realize that they could have common cause with other Nichiren Buddhists on these two points: (1) that Shakyamuni Buddha historically is the source of the Buddhist teachings and traditions, (2) that Nichiren attained buddhahood through chanting Odaimoku just as we all do. Is there a need to cling to doctrines which seperate and divide and serve only the priesthood of Taisekiji and which cut off people from the rich heritage of Shakyamuni Buddha's teachings and example upon which T'ien-t'ai and Nichiren's teachings are based?

When it comes to these three points I will not keep silent as I believe they are important for all practitioners of Nichiren Buddhism regardless of sectarian affiliation. I even think it is important that those who are not Nichiren Buddhists get a clear idea of what is mainstream Nichiren Buddhism and what is solely the sectarian view of Taisekiji. In short, I am trying to set the record straight. So it is the doctrines and issues I am concerned with and not the fact that SGI holds them. If SGI dropped them tomorrow, then great. I would be happy for the SGI. But I will continue to refute these Taisekiji teachings whether SGI as an institution upholds them or not. I do recognize,however, that even many SGI members no longer subscribe to them, and many more do not even know or care what the issues are.

There are other things SGI does that disturbs me. The campaign against the Nichiren Shoshu priesthood (as opposed to particular issues) and the intemperate rhetoric that it has given rise to makes all Nichiren Buddhists look bad in the eyes of undiscerning outsiders. I would like to see that stop. Also, SGI does sometimes seem to emphasize material benefits to the exclusion of spiritual benefits, but this is something that may be changing for the better, and in any case a critique of this can sometimes lead to the opposite extreme of a practice that becomes so idealistic it is no longer grounded in real life.

So in the end, I find that I am not out to get SGI. I wish SGI would reform itself and give Nichiren Buddhism in general a good reputation. That way we all win. That is one reason Zen has flourished in this country. Though there are differences in styles, teachings, opinions, etc...for the most part all the Zen practitioners see themselves as all in this together. They cooperate, do workshops together, have teacher exchanges, and at the very least do not view each other as adversaries because of differing lineages or sectarian affiliations. I would like to see that happen in Nichiren Buddhism as well. I would like to see SGI drop the barriers and defensiveness it has erected largely due to its clinging to divisive Taisekiji teachings. I would like to see SGI drop the "temple wars" and focus more on real issues that are pertinent to the members. I would like to be able to have the same cameraderie despite disagreement that I share with my fellow Buddhists who are Zen or Vipassana or Vajrayana or Pure Land practitioners. There is so much to share in spite of our differences that I find it a real shame that when it comes to fellow Odaimoku chanters I find defensiveness, triumphalism, us vs. them attitudes, which I don't find among other Buddhists.

So again, am I out to get SGI? No.
But I am out to get certain attitudes and views which I think have become a barrier to real fellowship and growth in Nichiren Buddhism. And isn't breaking down harmful views and attitudes what shakubuku is really about?

In the end, I find that I would rather be a friend than an enemy. It is a shame that we have to keep stepping on each others toes just because four priests couldn't get along 700 years ago.

Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei

******************************************************************