dear commongirl,

most exeriences on this board are quite up to date
- "killing" reassesment groups in the nineties and beginning of this century (those were members who tried to bring transparency and democratic elements to SGI's structure)
- unability of SGI to address critical issues i.e. financial tranparency - soka university
- leaders giving "guidances" not qulaified to do so i.e. in cases of mental illness and domestic violence as an example
- the impeccability like status of Ikeda - reminds me of the critsicms SGI actually voiced against the then high priest of taiseki-ji
- the question of what excatly is SGI's position in a dogmatic sense
- the buying of honorary degrees
the list could be continued - no sensational stuff but urgent matters to those who turned their back to SGI.

you said "Did it ever occur to you that the experiences listed here come from the '70s and '80s, when Mr. Williams was the general director?" --- SURE thats when he was leading what then was NSA so when it comes to Mr. Williams to which time line should one refer to???
May I ask since when you are a member of SGI?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/05/2009 04:20AM by Rothaus.

another thing commongirl. I joined in 1986 and we did quite a good amount of studying - a considerable amount of exiting studying of NICHIERNS teachings, quite good converatiions and discussions as a result ever since the split the content of the studying turned towards ikedas interpretaion of nichirens work - shakyamuni hardly mentioned.

you said "Did it ever occur to you that the experiences listed here come from the '70s and '80s, when Mr. Williams was the general director?" --- SURE thats when he was leading what then was NSA so when it comes to Mr. Williams to which time line should one refer to???
May I ask since when you are a member of SGI?[/quote]

I was asking this question in general terms, because it reads as if the organization continues to advocate those same things. I am not "the SGI," but I am a life-long practitioner, who experienced every decade since. My point: the organization has evolved since Mr. Williams' time and the deplorable conduct you mention here would not be tolerated by the average member today. To remain silent is to be a victim, and I am not a victim. If I see something, I speak out.

- inability of SGI to address critical issues i.e. financial tranparency - soka university

I'm not clued in on the origin of this thread. Did you petition for financial transparency and were you denied access?

- leaders giving "guidances" not qulaified to do so i.e. in cases of mental illness and domestic violence as an example

I would personally never try to give encouragement to someone who has mental illness. I wholly doubt the SGI advocates leaders offering faith encouragement that would deny someone access to medical care. My sister has an illness and was encouraged to chant to find the best medical care possible, which she did. Again, this sounds like the byproduct of the 70s and 80s.

- the impeccability like status of Ikeda - reminds me of the critsicms SGI actually voiced against the then high priest of taiseki-ji

If you read my post, I said exactly the opposite. No one is infallible. That is what we learned after Mr. Williams stepped down. People were duped by him. That is not Buddhism.

- the question of what excatly is SGI's position in a dogmatic sense

Can you explain further? I'm not quite getting your point.

- the buying of honorary degrees

Do you have proof of this?

Listen, I'm not questioning your sincerity or intent. And I would never question someone's personal past experiences. I believe the SGI has evolved after Mr. Williams' time. I am not the SGI, and I am certainly not Ms. Inoashi. When I see something that doesn't sound accurate, I say something. I hope you will take my responses in that spirit.

You won't hear from me for awhile. I have a family and a job, and I have to tend to both.

commongirl:

"No one is infallible."?

Can you name three things wrong with Ikeda? What has done that you feel warrants criticism?

Along these lines what's wrong with SGI today?

Are you specifically aware of a financial report that discloses in detail how SGI handles its money, salaries, compensation, etc.?

Dear Commongirl:

The SGI has rewritten its history many times. Toda rewrote the SGI history under Makiguchi and Ikeda has rewritten the history several times under Toda. Have you read and compared the Human Revolution and the New Human Revolution? Soon to come out I hear, is the New New Human Revolution. An eye opening read is the DOMINATING TRADITION: SOKA GAKKAI AND THE CREATION OF HISTORY. You can find it by joining the Yahoo Group IndependentSangha and going to their files. As far as what the SGI advocated under Williams and today, under Nagashima, the guidance, save for the support of the Nichiren Shoshu, is exactly the same. The guidance in the Guidance Memo and in the Daily Guidance is no different, for example Ikeda's guidance on victory, his guidance on leadership, his guidance on friendship, his guidance on the family, his guidance on attitude, his guidance on cheerfullness, his guidance on betrayal, his guidance on shakabuku... It is easy to the talk the talk but I have yet to see any SGI leader walk the walk.

Nichijew

Commongirl, all experiences are welcome, and you can certainly have your opinion, as I have mine. It sounds as if your family has had very negative experiences with George Williams. If you have time, and are interested in sharing them, I'm sure that many readers would be interested in reading about them.

Financial disclosure has been a huge issue in SGI for a long time. The IRG wanted SGI to be more open about what they had in assets and expenditures. Lisa Jones wrote about the issue in her website in the early 2000's. I'm told that even some senior leaders, like Matilda Buck, have recommended that SGI share information about its finances with members. Yet, nothing changes. Why? Nonprofit organizations in the United States must, by law, make a form called the 990, a financial report, available to anyone who asks for it. SGI claims nonprofit status, and yet won't show their 990. Why? When people or organizations are secretive, you wonder what they've got to hide....just like with the George Williams situation. You wonder what's being hidden.

I'm not perfect and I don't expect leaders to be. I can respect a leader, even if he or she has made serious mistakes -- if they can admit to them, and are willing to make amends for them. SGI's overall secrecy and seeming paranoia raises red flags for me.

The honorary degrees -- are you aware that Ikeda has over 250 honorary degrees from various universities, way more than anyone else? Why?

We agree that nobody is infallible. I don't think anyone is saying that George Williams was perfect -- we simply point out that the NSA members did like him, and were baffled when he was suddenly replaced with no explanations. I see Ikeda being built up as the mentor we must all follow -- I think that that does imply that he's ideal, and flawless. He is human like we are, and I think that the focus needs to be more on Nichiren than Ikeda.

If you had read the whole thread -- you'd have read posts about mentally ill members who've been urged to chant rather than take medication or go to a psychiatrist. We also spoke of a women's division member who was killed by her boyfriend, also an SGI leader. My opinion, and that of other readers, is that leaders are sometimes asked to give advice on matters that they have no experience in, or knowledge of. Leaders are human too, mostly doing the best they can with good intentions --- some can give very poor advice with the best of intentions. I think that leaders need to be trained in giving guidance on sensitive issues -- and especially need to know when and how to get the member to someone who is more qualified to deal with a particular issue.

And yes, I didn't really think that you were Miss Inoashi; some of us were just wondering how she is and what she's doing now.

Lisa Jones, of buddhajones.com speaks -- copied from Fraught With Peril website, Mark Rogow's Kempon Hokke blog.

No, I don't know who Lotus and Vanya are...probably people who posted on Jones's old website.

Lisa Jones, at one point, worked for SGI as a writer. SGI took legal action against her after she started her old Buddha Jones website -- apparently while she worked for SGI, she signed an agreement saying she wouldn't discuss them. It makes you wonder -- what does she know that SGI is afraid she'll tell? It's not like she was in the CIA. It's not like she was a computer engineer for Apple, and they don't want her to spill company secrets to Microsoft. SGI's a religious organization -- what could they have to hide? That secrecy again!

---------------------------------------------Beginning of Quote------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
An Apparition

Lotus and Vanya, financial disclosure has everything to do with it. You may never believe a word I say, but a claim like mine is an independently verifiable fact, not a matter of opinion.

Consider: SGI-USA reported to the Internal Revenue Service that they paid me $15,000 between Sept. 2002 and Jan. 2003. You're members of SGI-USA, so they paid me with your money. Your organization is accountable to you, right? So. Ask them what they paid me for. Ask them to prove it.

Ask Danny Nagashima, the General Director of your organization, what he and several Vice General Directors wanted to talk to me about over lunch in LA on Sept. 6, 2002. You probably paid for that lunch, too, as well as flew me to LA and put me up in a hotel.

Over the years I have seen many sincere, wonderful members defend SGI on internet message boards -- I used to be one of those people. You're putting your heart and personal integrity on the line in defense of an organization about which you know very little. I maybe know a little bit more -- enough to document some of SGI's deceptions.

But why should you believe me? I'm not asking you to. My point: Opinions about SGI vary wildly, granted. Until SGI opens its books and discloses its dealings, it is impossible for you to speak from an informed position about the nature and activities of SGI. You simply don't have access to crucial facts.

Lisa Jones
------------------------------------------------End of Quote-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lisa Jones's letter, continued. Copied from Fraught With Peril website, Kempon Hokke blog, Mark Rogow

--------------------------------Beginning of Quote------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Vanya, ghostwriting is not uncommon. But for a long time, I actually believed that Ikeda wrote all of his own books. He doesn't. He collects the praise, adulation and royalties (the writers get none, fyi.) His underlings hold up each tome as further confirmation of their sensei's greatness, and millions of members are duped into believing that Ikeda is a prolific, award-winning author.

Perhaps you are comfortable with this deception or see it as relatively harmless. I know I did. I rationalized my participation by trying to convince myself that the "end" of spreading the teachings of Nichiren Buddhism justified the means -- namely, pretending Ikeda wrote something he didn't.

So I had a classic cult-member mentality -- the end justifies the means, and members exist to serve the organization/leader even if they have to compromise their own integrity to be of service.

I am deeply grateful that loved ones and friends helped educate me about cults and how members are deceived and emotionally manipulated by cult groups. They helped me to recognize what a fraud SGI is and get out. I'm not proud of my participation, but I'm not going to deny it or pretend it didn't happen.

That being said, the SGI-USA legal department is well financed. I have legal considerations to keep in mind. I am, however, fully prepared to defend and document my statements in court if that's what it comes to.

In speaking out about what I know, I hope to make others think twice about participating in SGI. I hope that SGI members will seek to educate themselves about cults and (possibly) seek professional counselling specifically addressing cult involvement.

Lisa Jones
-----------------------------------------End of Quote-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Commongirl,

You said

Quote
commongirl
To remain silent is to be a victim, and I am not a victim. If I see something, I speak out.

That is a good attitude, but why is it then that SGI-USA can openly by the means of all the media it has available attack Mr. Williams and he is not given the chance to tell his version of the (hi)story. Why is it that if Mr. Williams was so “unbuddhist” SGI quite happily claims the growth it has experienced under his reign? I am in Europe, but the Williams incident did raise eyebrows here too. The way this was dealt with reminds of the way the communist party treated “traitors”. Quite a good comparison actually as they were denied a fair trial too. A number of people in this forum already said that Mr. Williams was controversial and in those days European members thought of the American members to be a weird and crazy bunch, but as SGI grew it seemed okay. Shame on SGI how it rewrites its own history by defaming people, as I said this is a tactic used by extremist parties, instead of holding an ongoing open and critical dialogue on issues that people define as relevant SGI hides those issues under the cover of unity (Itai Doshin). The losers of internal conflicts are later degraded in a defaming campaign – how deplorable and evil such tactics are!!!

Quote
commongirl
I'm not clued in on the origin of this thread. Did you petition for financial transparency and were you denied access?

Many many members have asked for this transparency in their respective national organisations over the years and nothing has happened. Thing is though that in ANY reliable organisation may it be religious or not one would not even have to petition for this information as it would be made public on an annual basis.
I am sure the legal members of any national SGI entity have access to this information. Why do I say legal? Because in a legal sense you, commongirl, are NOT a member of SGI-USA (unless you are on the board of directors). No matter where SGI operates it will use any loop hole to escape this sort of transparency. The German SGI for example has little more than 7 official members and not 4000. Ah, the number of members that would be another interesting subject …

Quote
commongirl
I wholly doubt the SGI advocates leaders offering faith encouragement that would deny someone access to medical care.

We are not talking about your doubts, but about what people on this board have witnessed. It takes an expert to differentiate if somebody just feels down or has serious (mental) issues.
When it comes to family issues I myself have seen how a member was encouraged to stay in a marriage that was highly destructive. The child who grew up in that marriage developed serious mental problems and as soon as the child was older than 16 it was HIS responsibility to have “created” such an environment. Now how sick is that may I ask?
Encourage a mother to stay with a little child in a unhealthy relationship and “fight”, show “actual proof”, the little child gets older develops mental issues and this all of a sudden it is the child’s own fault ????
And this is just one example on what far reaching consequences those sort of guidance’s have, I mean for god’s sake even the personnel working on any teen telephone helpline are better trained and prepared.
It is not a “bi-product” of the 80’s. Beating up a priest in the 1950’s – oh that’s a long time ago, aggressive campaigns to recruit new members in the 60’s and 70’s – oh that’s a long time ago. Compared to that the 80’s were indeed quiet. And in the 90’s? The witch-hunt against those who did not side with SGI or at least not the way SGI had hoped for. Doing so negates all civilised rules of religious tolerance and dialogue (No commongirl I am NOT a Nichiren Shoshu member). The way SGI operated in those days and still does is deplorable and UNBUDDHIST.

Quote
commongirl
If you read my post, I said exactly the opposite. No one is infallible. That is what we learned after Mr. Williams stepped down. People were duped by him. That is not Buddhism.

So it is Buddhist to put Mr. Ikeda on a pedestal beyond doubt and by the way he was not present in SGI during the 50’s, 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s was he?
What did Nichiren write concerning the person and the law? Was not this the central argument against Nikken? Mr. Ikeda is the Nikken of SGI then. He is out of reach not one single word of him may be criticised or questioned and if one dares to do so they sure should chant more and work on their human revolution. Commongirl, you are right when you say: “To remain silent is to be a victim, and I am not a victim. If I see something, I speak out.”
People on this board are not victims, I doubt we see ourselves that way, but we speak out. May SGI like it or not and quite a number here consider themselves still to be Buddhist. SGI in the light of events is by no means in a position to question someone’s faith. Who is SGI to judge people anyway and nourish hate campaigns and ill speaking of people, who has given SGI such an authority? Mr. Ikeda?

SGI's position in a dogmatic sense:
Well commongirl, a dogma is nothing negative, as it defines a religious belief system. The Nichiren Shoshu has one I think the English title would be “the robes of this school” by Nichikan.
Ever since the split the SGI has been very diligent to publish Mr. Ikedas thoughts on the Lotus Sutra and commission new translations and redefine what Nichiren said.
One thing is still unclear, SGI’s position in terms of Nichirens teaching, its position on the the so called Dai-Gohonzon, its position on the alleged succession plan by Nichiren which led to the supreme position of the high priest in Taiseki-ji. By the way the man who actually cemented the high priests position was Nichikan, the same who ordered that Nichiren should be referred to as a Buddha within the Nichiren Shoshu – Nichiren himself never made such a claim. So in terms of dogma SGI is since 1991 in a catch 22 situation.
Certainly it’s easier to defame people and refer to incidents in the past or make them appear as if SGI was different then than it is today than to make a clear cut and give a written document on what exactly SGI teaches in terms of Nichiren Buddhism, what it stands for.
It is interesting by the way that Buddhist studies or even Nichiren Studies are not on the curriculum in SGI’s “educational” institutions. I wonder why that is, maybe because it can not provide any reliable academic resources. On the other hand it would make sense not to go to far in Buddhist studies during SGI meeting people could get the idea to ask questions and draw their own conclusions – now we can not allow that to happen can we?
Have you ever asked who is responsible for what is to be studied in SGI every month? Why is the content the same all over the globe and who decides what should be studied and what qualification do those people have? I would really like to hear what SGI will tell you about that, especially to name the circle of people who decide on those “study issues”.
On the other hand, if SGI would have a dogma it could not easily reinvent or modify the position it takes on issues and redirect criticism towards individuals as it now seems to do in the Williams case. Even worse SGI could be made accountable for its actions past and present – no guess that will never ever happen it is far easier to come up with a scapegoat now and again.

Honorary degrees:
Well you can google an article that was prize wining written by students of Glasgow University in their campus newspaper. Yes right Commongirl, Glasgow University, one of the, and I am glad to say, very few European Universities that Ikeda got a degree from. The article quite nicely sums up the way Glasgow seems to have honoured donations with degrees, Mr. Ikeda was not mentioned since their are more widely known people to have profited form such regulations.
Here in Europe honorary degrees are mostly bestowed on people who have either done exceptional work on an academic level or exceptionally contributed to society and or politics. The boards who decide on who is to receive such a degree are structured in an academic manner and not by members of the accounts department. Sadly in those countries in which this academic neutrality came out of balance are those who have experienced cutbacks in public founding that had to be replaced by private investment. Glasgow is in the UK and its a shame how public financing of its higher education suffered since the early nineties.
Commongirl, certainly no university would publicly admit such donations especially the return of investment that they can offer to the donor. But the ones who have been at university and college KNOW how the system works.

Commongirl, I do have a job too and a lot to do in the evenings even though it does not involve SGI anymore. But I do take the time to speak out and make people aware of what I regard as a cult.
More than 20 years of experience do give me the right to and in a sense I see it as an obligation to do so. Most of the times one reads genuine experiences here and if sources are not reliable (like the bath tub guidances) one is informed about it by another post.
Certainly the posts on inner workings of SGI are in many ways speculative by nature. Why? Because there is a giant divide in what SGI likes to portray itself and how secretive it is about its own structure, finances and controversial issues.

I once asked an SGI leader why we (SGI) do not become more democratic especially when it comes to choose leaders for an area/group/division. He replied that democracy and religion do not go together. Maybe that was one of the very few really honest statements that I ever heard in SGI only that I would replace “religion” in his reply with SGI.
Sure some faiths work from top to bottom, but even the Catholic Church has accommodated for more say of their lay members even though the pope is not to be questioned, but everybody knows that either you agree or you leave. SGI however does not even have the guts to do that, declare Mr. Ikeda as absolute and untouchable. Let him be the world’s highest authority on any subject under the sun, but make it public.
Do not create an air of openness and act as if SGI supports democracy when its reality lacks transparency, accountability and is based on a totalitarian decision making process concerning organisational and doctrinal matters. Stop declaring SGI as redefining of the value of education if it does not meet even the most basic of academic standards.
And for god sake STOP defaming people who disagree with SGI.
If anyone has ever, more or less publicly, said something against SGI one is being compared to Devadata and so forth. Mr. Williams now has not spoken publicly ever since he was stepped down – so he never even said anything since the early nineties that we are aware of and he still is being compared by you, Commogirl, with Devadata. He is being degraded by the means of speculation and rumours …. I wonder what SGI has against him in a legal sense because his silence does not make sense – if he indeed suffers from Alzheimer the commentaries by present SGI-USA leaders are even more deplorable as he won’t have a chance to respond to the charges brought against him. If Mr.Ikeda does redefine his role in the (New) New Human Revolution what a despicable action this would be if the man can not defend himself. Looking at it actually is evidence of SGI’s incapacity.
Commongirl you said “If I see something, I speak out” --- are you blind?
And when the day will hopefully come that questions and even charges will be brought against SGI and its “members” please do NOT use the excuse “we did not know”, you won’t do yourself a favour.
One last thing … ask your leaders about Lisa Jones – I wished a good lawyer would take up her case as whatever was written in her contract is in conflict with the freedom of speech, as far as I know this a good that is (was) held in high esteem in the U.S. or not?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 10/06/2009 12:31AM by Rothaus.