Quote

I'm curious, if anyone has chosen any spiritual practice with or without an organization?

I don't know how old you are, AmusedKY, but the Millennial generation - those who turned 18 in 2000 up to present - are showing a marked avoidance of organized religion, yet they consistently identify as "spiritual" and even "Christian"! Some are so turned off by Christianity that they refuse to refer to themselves as "Christian," instead calling themselves "Follower of Jesus" or some such. If you're interested in this new, non-church-based Christianity and other unaffiliated spiritualities, here are some articles on the subject - it's a phenomenon never before witnessed in Western history!

[usatoday30.usatoday.com]

[www.manyvoices.org]

[www.slate.com]

[usatoday30.usatoday.com]

[www.psychologytoday.com]

[www.edge.org]

[islamineurope.blogspot.com]

[www.patheos.com]

[news.bbcimg.co.uk]

The exact same dynamics apply to the SGI - there is no difference. As the Edge article, "Why The Gods Are Not Winning" states:

Disbelief now rivals the great faiths in numbers and influence. Never before has religion faced such enormous levels of disbelief, or faced a hazard as powerful as that posed by modernity. How is organized religion going to regain the true, choice-based initiative when only one of them is growing, and it is doing so with reproductive activity rather than by convincing the masses to join in, when no major faith is proving able to grow as they break out of their ancestral lands via mass conversion, and when securely prosperous democracies appear immune to mass devotion? The religious industry simply lacks a reliable stratagem for defeating disbelief in the 21st century.

Assuming America continues to secularize towards the 1st world norm then what can we expect? The decline in faith-based conservative ideology is predicted to allow the country to adopt the progressive policies that have been proven to work in the rest of the west, and vice-versa. Even Wal-Mart has come out in favor of universal medical coverage as bottom-line busting health care expenditures compel the corporations to turn towards the system that has done so much harm to the churches of Europe. If and when religion declines in the states Darwin's science will automatically benefit enormously as it has in ungodly Europe, but Darwinistic social policies will not fare as well as they have in Christian America.

In the end what humanity chooses to believe will be more a matter of economics than of debate, deliberately considered choice, or reproduction. The more national societies that provide financial and physical security to the population, the fewer that will be religiously devout. The more that cannot provide their citizens with these high standards the more that will hope that supernatural forces will alleviate their anxieties. It is probable that there is little that can be done by either side to alter this fundamental pattern.

If you look at human development over time (I strongly recommend Jared Diamond's excellent book Guns, Germs, and Steel), what you see is that people early on, during the hunter-gatherer stage that was most of our species' history, held egalitarian relationships - studies of modern hunter-gatherer groups show that everyone basically holds the same political position, even if they have a "big man" or other leader/spokesman. Their religion was similarly egalitarian:

Religions (and gods) mirror the needs of the societies that create them.

The earliest societies, the small family bands and tribes, did not have such gods. Theirs was a pantheon of different gods with different personalities; there might have been one overall god-in-charge, but he didn't have much more power than the rest. And people viewed them as benevolent, almost as elder relatives. People could criticize and condemn the gods to force them to do as the people demanded, in fact! [www.fsmitha.com]

Hunter-gatherers did not worship their gods in fear the way people later worshipped the all-powerful monarchs who came with the rise of authoritarianism.

It was only with the advent of civilization (settled living) that you started to see social stratification and the emergence of authoritarian ruling classes, such as the nobles, the military, and the clergy. All these produce *nothing* and simply take from society's producers, which is why Diamond refers to them as "kleptocrats". Up until very recently, only the last coupla hundred years, monarchy was the dominant social structure. With all power and rights held by the ruler and none by the producers. With the advent of the Enlightenment and the discovery of fundamental human rights, people began demanding their fair share of societal power, resulting in rebellion and revolution. Witness the Revolutionary War for US independence and the French Revolution. Now, monarchies are very rare. Now that people understand the concept of basic human rights and human freedom, now that the church can no longer torture and murder people into submission (that's the summary of Christian history up into the 1900s, BTW), people are returning to the original spiritual expression - one of egalitarian, one in tune with the natural world, one where the divine is everywhere. Church buildings are a product of civilization, which is a very new development in human history. So it's hardly surprising that, once people could not be coerced and terrified into obedient compliance, they would go in a different direction. And, thus, the organized religions are in free-fall decline, in every place where fundamental human rights and freedoms are protected by secular law.

Ikeda regards himself as the king, with the members his "producers" - of money. It's a feudal, medieval structure and system (notice no elections) in every respect, for all their blather about how important the members are. Yeah, they're important - they're the only source of money the organization has. For all the blahblah about "soft power" and how bad authoritarianism is, Ikeda is a despot and the organization is absolutely authoritarian in nature.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/09/2013 01:27AM by TaitenAndProud.

Here we go - an interview with Tina Turner where she talks about Buddhism: [www.youtube.com]

At 1:10, she starts talking about how she just swapped Buddhism into her Baptist background, simply substituting NMRK for the Lord's Prayer: [www.youtube.com]

From the Wikipedia article on Tina Turner: Raised a Baptist, Turner melded her faith with Buddhism in 1974, crediting the religion and its spiritual chants for getting her through difficult times in her life. Throughout her childhood and early adulthood, Turner was Baptist. Turner considers herself a "Buddhist-Baptist". Turner stated she still prays in the traditional Baptist sense while also meditating and chanting. [en.wikipedia.org]

Nobody within the SGI seems to feel any sort of queasiness or squeamishness about using as a trophy someone who so clearly mixes religions!

There's a concept 'cultic' milieu which can be helpful. In this social zone, ideas and ideologies are treated as interchangeable--'fungible'

Ideas and ideologies that are actually discordant are slushed toghether.

'The sole thread that unites the denizens of the cultic milieu — true seekers ... the cultic milieu, ideas are fungible."

Fungible means equally exchangable--perennialism is a way half educated salespeople justify slushing complicated traditions together.

And if anyone takes isssue, theyre accused of being excessively intellectual and nitpicky.

This carelesseness about sources and history can be readily exploited.

What these gurus are learned about is marketing technique.

They 'live for' marketing themselves.

Search ResultsThe cultic milieu: oppositional subcultures in an age of globalization - Google Books Result
Jeffrey Kaplan, Heléne Lööw - 2002 - Body, Mind & Spirit - 353 pages
The sole thread that unites the denizens of the cultic milieu — true seekers ... the cultic milieu, ideas are fungible. Adherents of these ideas, however, ...
books.google.com/books?isbn=075910204X...

[www.google.com]

That, corboy, is an excellent word. I was brought up as a roman catholic - I got absolutely nothing out of that, and converted to Quaker (Religious Society of Friends) after years of having no spiritual connection with anything. I began practicing as a Quaker in a small town in VA . . . there were maybe 20 other members, so it was a pretty intimate little group. I was attracted to them by their messages of peace, tolerance and equality, loved the idea that there was "that of God" within everyone, and their was no clergy to deal with. I loved those people and the meditative nature of the practice; there didn't appear to be a brainwashing-thing going on. Nobody hounded you if you didn't get to a meeting (once a week in the meeting house), nobody bugged you with anything. No mid-week discussion groups and, while collections were taken every week, there was no pressure. In fact, the only time I even remember finances being discussed was when one of the other meeting's roof was torn off in a storm, we were asked to donate to help with the reconstruction of the 18th century building. When I moved to a big city, I went to a meeting (that's what the worship services are called - the community itself can be referred to as a meeting as well) and was overwhelmed by the number of people there, and wasn't comfortable having to wear a name-tag; I really missed the closeness of the earlier group I was with and stopped going. I wasn't around long enough to see if there were any politics in the larger meeting, but with that number of people, it's hard to imagine that they didn't exist.

I often considered the parallels between my original Quaker practice and sgi - "fungible," indeed. I'd always felt a strong need to be part of a spiritual community, but became disenchanted with the conventional notion of God. The similarities between RSF and sgi hit me between the eyes . . . peace, tolerance, Buddha-nature . . . in many ways, they were much the same. I think that's one of the reasons I'm so angry with the organization - they not only duped me, but took away something that I thought was really beautiful. The positive things that sgi promotes are perverted into such ugly bullshit - tolerance and equality exist only if you toe the company line and Buddha-nature is available is only available to you if you practice correctly as defined by the leadership.

We are social critters and, as such, there is a very basic need to have sympatico people around us. I would love to find another group to exchange spiritual ideas with but at this point find everyone and everything suspect. I resent that as well . . . I never, ever felt distrustful or suspicious prior to sgi. Not ever. That hasn't always worked out so well, but it still never took away what I consider a positive aspect of my personality - a level of trustfulness and (generally) an ability to give people the benefit of the doubt. I guess it had to happen sooner or later, but you'd think that after four marriages (one to a violent alcoholic), any number of soured relations, a crime victim, chronic bad juju with employment and any number of disappointments with friends and family, getting involved with a bunch of cult-whackos would roll off my back like everything else seemed to. At the tender age of 60-something, I feel like I've finally been robbed of my innocence - does that sound silly?

No. It doesnt sound silly at all.

It hurts. I have been there.

They're still trying to get a fix on cultic milieu--the concept is a rich one.

Ideas being treated as interchangeable (fungible), focusing on similarities rather than differences -- this entails a blurring of distinctions.

Another example of the way cultic milieu treats ideas as interchangeable is
the allegation that science is just another belief system, one among many.

Which ignores that science not at all a belief system, but is a specific method, a method that follows clear guidelines which distinguish it from belief systems.

But if one is part of a large scale social scene that has this characteristic, the undertow is powerful. There may be a lot of conflict avoidance within the group accompanied perhaps by a disdain for the unenlightened 'negative' world outside.

Its a fashionable stance these days--that all religions are one. But it fails to acknowledge actual differences in dogma. People who dont have trouble noting differences in Microsoft and Apple, will act like you've farted in the room if you insist there are differences in belief between Religion A and Religion B.

Someone who has a superficial education, gift of the gab and is attacted to the assets a group has built up--they can slip right in.

There are times there are times when making distinction between self and other is necessary, because thats the one way to form boundaries, notice if someone or something is giving us bad feelings.

And if you or a group doesnt make distinctions and comment on them--this can become a habit of avoiding friction, avoiding confrontations, a fear of 'negativity.' An entire group that dislikes noting differences will have trouble noting and discussing actual discord--and this is a quite exploitable condition.


And, if one doesnt make distinctions between say, salt and sugar, one cannot competantly cook. And if a pharmacist or physician fails to make distinctions between medications--thats hazardous.

But a refusal to make distinctions between what sets one's group apart from other groups the inability to recognize one's identity and areas where this is not negotiable--that can leave one exploitable.

In her book on the spy trials of the 1950s and early 1960s, The New Meaning of Treason, Rebecca West wrote how the communist party tried to get itself into and under the umbrella of the Society of Friends.

But she wrote "Those attempts where checked by shrewd and hard headed leadership."

The real, old quakers, the Silent Friends were Christians. Bible based Christians. They were persecuted as such in the 17th Century.

But unless one reads the literature produced by the founders of the sect and gets into their history where their identity was forged, these days, its all blurry friendliness.

I met a that was part Labrador. Gooey friendly. Delightful to be with. That dog saw no distinctions--everyone was to be loved.

His custodial human sighed heavily and said, "A burglar came in and he didnt even bark."

The dog made no distinction between friend and outsider.

A dog that had distinguished between family vs stranger would have run the burglar off.

A group has to be clear what it stands for and what it does not stand for. Has to be clear on what it can and cannot do.

There are some features that are non negotiable, not fungible, which if blurred or denied, will compromise boundary and identity.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 11/19/2017 09:08AM by corboy.

Maybe that's part of what makes some people vulnerable to cults . . . the inability to identify boundaries. Once again, typical predatory behavior . . . hone in on those vulnerabilities and leverage them for all they're worth. Even when you look at the literature from sgi, there's nothing blatantly creepy or offensive there - all sweetness and light. It's the unpublished agendas that take awhile to figure out, and even then I found myself in denial for awhile.

I'm so glad that out of the three people I tried to shakubuku, two of them turned tail and ran while the other one just kind of disappeared. At least I didn't drag anybody else into this mess.

That brings a question to mind . . . maybe an insensitive or uncomfortable one; when you guys "defected," did you talk to any of your shakubus about it? Just curious. I talked with one woman whom I'd been working on, explained that I'd left the org and why - she had no intention of joining but was sometimes chanting. I apologized to her for trying to get her involved - I was really embarrassed about it.

Quote
meh
I began practicing as a Quaker in a small town in VA . . .

I often considered the parallels between my original Quaker practice and sgi - "fungible," indeed.

The similarities between RSF and sgi hit me between the eyes . . . peace, tolerance, Buddha-nature . . . in many ways, they were much the same. I think that's one of the reasons I'm so angry with the organization - they not only duped me, but took away something that I thought was really beautiful. The positive things that sgi promotes are perverted into such ugly bullshit - tolerance and equality exist only if you toe the company line and Buddha-nature is available is only available to you if you practice correctly as defined by the leadership.

The Quaker & Buddhist connection is fascinating. You'd think it would be a perfect fit /faith move.

I, too, was struck at how the gakkai cult org. was exactly the opposite of everything it was supposed to stand for:

1. World Peace & Harmony --> in reality, dictatorial, authoritative leadership, military like, hierarchical , no personal choice or freedoms, excessive control, manipulation via mystical threats & fear tactics
2. "Respect the inherent human dignity of each individual" (cult speak) --> segregation, no thinking for yourself allowed, rabid intolerance (sometimes bordering on violent) of other faiths, non-democratic decision making, no true dialogue (another cult hijacked word), arrogantly dogmatic
3. CULTural festivals --> rather than celebrations of cultural differences and tolerance, they were manic fascistic displays of marching, yelling hyper-controlling freaks, and all kinds of gakkai cult org. centric over the top displays / behavior

Hypocrisy, doublethink and doublespeak at every turn, everywhere in the cult org..

Quote
meh
At the tender age of 60-something, I feel like I've finally been robbed of my innocence - does that sound silly?

I feel that the gakkai cult org. did this to me literally. As a result, it doesn't sound silly at all.

Quote
meh
I'm so glad that out of the three people I tried to shakubuku, two of them turned tail and ran while the other one just kind of disappeared. At least I didn't drag anybody else into this mess.

That brings a question to mind . . . maybe an insensitive or uncomfortable one; when you guys "defected," did you talk to any of your shakubus about it? Just curious. I talked with one woman whom I'd been working on, explained that I'd left the org and why - she had no intention of joining but was sometimes chanting. I apologized to her for trying to get her involved - I was really embarrassed about it.

Excellent point and question.

People who knew me as a Gakker, I now tell them that I grew up in a cult, apologize and ask them to please forgive me for anything that I might have said or done to influence them to view things differently. We all journey from ignorance to knowledge in our lives, so I don't think it's anything to really be ashamed of. (But I honestly do feel like an idiot sometimes, looking back on it all.)

At the same time, I have no hesitation in telling gakkai members whom I meet or see, the ones who don't know me, that in my opinion and experience, they are in a cult - I have no qualms whatsoever about shooting straight on this point, because I think they actually need to hear it. The few times I've done this, the gakkai member is always shocked and their mouth falls open; vehement denial always follows. It doesn't matter what they say, because I've heard it all and can respond with examples and counterpoints.

For non-members who know about the gakkai (especially in Japan) and may bring the subject up (sometimes I bring it up), same thing, I tell them flat out, it's a cult. A knowing nod, slight smile of agreement and respect of mutual understanding, usually follows.

The $oka Gakkai is a CULT, in every classic sense of the word.



- Hitch

Edit: I forgot to address the point on chanting. I was always embarrassed about this. I had a friend, same age, who we both, together, drifted out of and away from the gakkai cult at the same time. One day, during that whole process, he causally mentioned to me how he doesn't reflexively chant out "NMRK" anymore whenever there was a close accident (for example, driving, etc.). We both agreed that that was a sign of progress, overcoming the programmed fear and dumping the magic incantations.

From my anecdotal experiences with the gakkai cult org., I believe that many (if not most or all) members gravitate toward the magical / wishful thinking out of fear, loneliness and desperation, or some combination of those things. Then, they become addicted to it. I've even seen some obsessive-compulsive type members who can't function and get panic attacks if they can't perform their morning and evening prayers properly or adequately and chant their "x-amount" of mandatory daily, self-imposed, daimoku time. I've even seen some who can't even feel "normal", unless they get their minimum daily fix of the mental magical indulgence.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/10/2013 06:29PM by Hitch.

When I first left (really, can that only be a little over a week ago? Feels like a lifetime . . .), I entertained the notion that it would be ok for me to continue the practice on my own terms. I thought about it and came to realize that everything I'd learned about nichiren Buddhism had come to me through the sgi-lens and, as far as I'm concerned anyway, couldn't be trusted. I even threw away my gosho book, with the opinion that since it came from sgi, it was tainted. I don't mean that in a superstitious way, but that the interpretation had come from them and was bound to have been spun to serve their agenda. I feel the same way about everything they've published, so I've gotten rid of everything associated with him. My gohonzons (I have a regular and omamori) are in a drawer until I figure out what I'm going to do with them. As far as chanting is concerned, I can't. I used to chant myself to sleep, chant when driving . . . anytime my mind was idle or when I was in a stressful situation. I've gone on auto-pilot a couple of times, but it pissed me off that it had become so embedded in my head and seemed as pointless and silly as chanting "abracadabra."

As far as my association/conversations with other members, I'm taking a low-key approach. While I make it abundantly clear that I'm no longer a member, I don't go into the it's-a-cult speech; I know when I was a member, that immediately put me on the defensive and I wouldn't listen to or read a single word after that. I really hope that by showing that a happy, productive life goes on after you leave, I can demonstrate what a load of hooey it is. I've calmly explained my issues with leadership and the organization, but I'm avoiding the topic of ikeda (a strong point of defensiveness). I figure that if I can plant a few doubts here and there, they'll start digging around on their own. I've given a couple of people a link to this website because it's been so informative and helpful for me. I really believe that the best way to "encourage" people away from das organization is to leverage any doubts or questions they may have on their own. Again, until I started doubting, I was completely unwilling to listen to anything that wasn't supportive to the org and it only made me cling more tightly to it. Sgi was us, everybody else was them and the enemies of us. They were the ones to be pitied or reviled.

Two features that, IMO are the mark of a hurtful group or relationship

Too much purpose, not enough time for play, real play. Ever hungry groups and partners are insatiable and want your attention all the time and want your attention all the time.

Any hint that you are playing or just plain having fun in a way that has zero to do with the group or relationship is resented

A story, here of a woman whose parents helped her get out of a cult. By playing a game she had loved her whole life. Scrabble. She was home sick from the cult and it was in playing Scrabble with her family that it slowly dawned on her that...it was the first time since joining the group that...she had actually had fun.

[forum.culteducation.com]


Your loyalty is not reciprocated and you are accused of selfishness if you dare mention this.

(??) A part of play dimension in life is one's free choice in how one decorates one's living space.

Even if a person is encouraged to set aside a place for meditation or prayer, if a person has autonomy, there will be features that are idiosyncratic.

People who belong to the Zen lineage I try to practice in...many do have plenty of recognizable Japanese items, but their living spaces still have plenty of features characteristic of that person. One of my closest friends in that group is a scholar of Buddhism--but also an avid reader of detective stories.

And a good number of persons in the sangha follow the fortunes of the local baseball team.

But if homes or businesses owned by members of a group all have a characteristic 'look'
thats a signal that play dimension is being taken over by the group.

Quote

I thought about it and came to realize that everything I'd learned about nichiren Buddhism had come to me through the sgi-lens and, as far as I'm concerned anyway, couldn't be trusted. I even threw away my gosho book, with the opinion that since it came from sgi, it was tainted. I don't mean that in a superstitious way, but that the interpretation had come from them and was bound to have been spun to serve their agenda. I feel the same way about everything they've published, so I've gotten rid of everything associated with him. My gohonzons (I have a regular and omamori) are in a drawer until I figure out what I'm going to do with them. As far as chanting is concerned, I can't. I used to chant myself to sleep, chant when driving . . . anytime my mind was idle or when I was in a stressful situation. I've gone on auto-pilot a couple of times, but it pissed me off that it had become so embedded in my head and seemed as pointless and silly as chanting "abracadabra."

I used to do the same things - what do you expect? I practiced for over 20 years, though a lot on my own (moved around a lot). The thing about chants and songs is that they really stick in our subconscious - I still find myself occasionally dredging up some hymn we sang over and over in church while I was growing up. And since I deliberately trained my mind to cycle NMRK when going to sleep, when driving, etc., it's hardly surprising that it still switches on from time to time. But I shut it right off :P

There are two ways of looking at the situation per your first sentence in the above extract. First, you can say that Nichiren Buddhism is this great thing that the SGI corrupted; or you can look at the SGI as the natural and predictable effect of Nichiren Buddhism. It's a critically important distinction.

It's similar to how Protestant Christians often say that the Catholics corrupted original/primal Christianity and that they, the Protestants, seek to pare away the layers of Catholicizing accretions to reveal that REAL Christianity, but the fact is that every bit of information, from texts to stories to rituals to tradition and whatever, comes from Catholicism. There *IS* no earlier Christianity - there's just Catholicism! It's just a fancy, an imagining, that there's this pure unsullied original Christianity lurking somewhere, waiting for us to find it if we'll only look. That's a delusion. It doesn't exist.

As with any philosophical system, there is good stuff and there is bad stuff. With Nichiren Buddhism, we have documentary evidence, letters from Nichiren himself, where he threatens the government with destruction if they don't take all the high priests of the Buddhist sects that have higher social standing than Nichiren's, cut their heads off (!), and burn their temples to the ground, and then elevate Nichiren to National Hero and Only Acceptable Form Of Buddhism. It's pure megalomania - greed, selfishness, and crazed for popularity and acclaim. He wants the government to make him a superstar! And THIS is supposed to be the person who has all the insights and answers??