Makiguchi attempted to prove the superiority of Nichiren Buddhism by examining it in terms of value science and its two value phenomena of benefit and punishment. At the same time, he strictly rejected a way of life centered solely on one’s personal happiness. Makiguchi believed that the purpose of religion was not simply to realize the individual value of Benefit, but to realize the social value of Good as well. However, Good could not be realized without a criterion for judging in what actions Good lies.
In volume two of “the System of Value-Creating Pedagogy,” Makiguchi had recognized that the determination of good and evil was a relative matter that varied from one society to the next. And though he searched in religion for absolute Good, he did not touch on this issue in depth there. In “Outline of the System of Value-Creating Pedagogy,” he expressed the need to correct his earlier discussion of criterion for determining relative good and evil, saying, “I realize that there were major flaws in my arguments regarding the criterion for determining value and other matters (vol. 8, p. 411).
Makiguchi next discussed the criterion for determining value in “Experimental Proof.” “In conclusion,” he wrote there, “value is nothing more than the relative importance of expansion or contraction in people’s lives. It is far-sightedness or shot-sightedness, the depth or shallowness of their view of life’s purpose that should become the criterion for judging value (vol. 8, p. 59).” He then identified and ranked three ways of living according to differences in the view of life’s purpose on which they are based.
Later, in his treatise, “「新体制の理想たる大善生活法の意義と可能」On the Significance and Possibility of Learning a Life of Great Good that Matches the Ideal of the New System,” Makiguchi says of these three ways of living:
The first is the selfish life of minor good and minor evil that is based on a worldview with a near-sighted bias. The second is the anti-individualistic (falsely altruistic) life of medium good and great evil that is based on a worldview with a far-sighted bias. The third is the truly altruistic life of great good and no evil that is based on a worldview in which all things are perceived correctly as they are (vol. 10, p. 135).
To the first rank belong the egoistic lives of those who think only of themselves. The second includes the hypocritical lives of certain members of the ruling class who, while outwardly appearing to be acting on behalf of the state and society, inwardly are motivated by personal interests. By contrast, in the third are the lives of those who aspire for the greatest happiness of themselves and others.
Makiguchi believed that a life of great good was a life based on Buddhism. He discussed that idea from three perspectives. The first concerns the establishment of a sense of purpose:
Unless one settles the ultimate purpose of one’s life, one will not be able to set any intermediate objectives. … To establish the life of a family, the life of the nation must first be established. Unless the life of the world settled, the life of the nation will not be settled. One cannot understand the world simply from present conditions. One must understand the world over the three existence of past, present and future. Only when one understands the law of cause and effect operating over the three existences can establish one’s life in the present. This is outside the scope of science, which is limited to the present. Thus, neither the life of the nation nor the life of the individual may be established without religion (vol. 10, p. 7).
In other words, he is saying that ultimate purpose of one’s life is rooted in the Buddhist law of causality operating over the three existences.
Second, he says that it is through Buddhism that true mutual prosperity of oneself and others becomes possible. For in Buddhism the bodhisattva practice, based on constant prayers for the happiness of others, provides the condition for gaining the greatest happiness (Buddhahood) oneself. Makiguchi states this as follows: “There can be no such things as an egoistic Buddha who only seeks benefit for himself and does not share it with others. Unless one undertakes bodhisattva practice, one cannot become a Buddha (vol. 10, p. 151).”
Third, Makiguchi says that a life based on Buddhism will be a life of great good because Buddhism strengthens the life force of human beings to carry out all activities. He writes:
Our individual life force is in every respect the manifestation of the great life force inherent in the universe. The ultimate Law underlying the life force of all phenomena, which, including human beings, are the expression of the cosmic life force, is none other than the entity of the Mystic Law. Accordingly, it is this Law that should be revered as the all-inclusive entity governing all laws of life (vol. 10, p. 20).
Makiguchi further states that in order to put the life of great good into practice one must have courage and be prepared to endure oppression:
Devils certainly will not rise up to attack a person leading a life of minor good who practices faith only for his own sake. By contrast, devils will definitely attack someone who follows the life of great good of bodhisattva practice. By their appearance one may be recognized as a true practitioner (vol. 10, p. 152).
Makiguchi urged people to put the life of great good into practice, despite the anticipated persecution. This conviction arose from this sense of supreme mission to save society by means of religion. He says:
We must lead the nation to great good. We must be like an army invading enemy territory. … That we have gone from but a single member ten years ago to such prosperity now is entirely due to our firm stand on the foundation of faith and because we have demonstrated to one another actual proof. Seeing how far we have come, I believe that we shall succeed in saving our homes and society, and that we shall in the end be able to play a part in kosen-rufu. Now that we share this important mission, I believe we must vow to advance unflagging under any circumstances with the awareness that we are chosen persons of great good, without being self-centered and without using others (vol. 10, p. 147).
In light of Makiguchi’s idea on religion and his interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism, it is clear he was not satisfied with the state of affairs within the Nichiren Shoshu sect at the time. In his 1941 piece, “「創価教育学会の目的」The Purpose of Soka Kyoiku Gakkai,” Makiguchi stated:
We have been fortunate enough to devote ourselves to the Three Great Secret Laws, the essence of the Lotus Sutra. The purpose of our organization is to create peace and security for ourselves and others by putting our faith into practice in our lives, and by showing experimental proof of whether or not this faith has any value, and whether its value is great or small, on the basis of scientific observation of the relationship of religion and daily life (vol. 10, p. 215).
He states here that the raison d’etre of Soka Kyoiku Gakkai is not simply propagation by its members of the Nichiren Shoshu doctrine of Three Great Secret Laws, but to help members show experimental proof of it in their lives. In “『創価教育学会々長牧口常三郎に対する訊問調書抜粋』Excerpts from the Record of the Interrogation of Soka Kyoiku Gakkai President Tsunesaburo Makiguchi,” Makiguchi says:
The guiding principle of my theory of value is to lead people to a recognition of how intimate the relation is between the faith of our organization and human life, and how great the value created through personal devotion to the object of worship of Nichiren Shoshu or, more specifically, through joining the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai (vol. 10, p. 185).
Thus, though he relied on Nichiren Shoshu doctrine when it came to the principles of religious faith, Makiguchi’s purpose of the movement differed from that of Nichiren Shoshu. Fully conscious of this, he stated:
I don’t want to become an ordained priest. Once ordained and put in charge of a temple, then I’d have no freedom but to act within the pure doctrinal framework of Nichiren Shoshu. I couldn’t possibly give sermons on my theory of value in temple. My contribution as a lay person is having incorporated the theory of value into Nichiren Shoshu beliefs, and that is the uniqueness of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai. … The Soka Kyoiku Gakkai is a body of lay believers that, as I said earlier, incorporates my theory of value creation into the faith of Nichiren Shoshu (vol. 10, p. 188).
Makiguchi here makes it clear that while the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai bases its religious philosophy on the doctrines of Nichiren Shoshu, it is a lay organization that differs from Nichiren Shoshu in its structure and activities.
Makiguchi regarded the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai as an independent religious body, and so the state of affairs within Nichiren Shoshu, which had become very much like any other established Buddhist sect, seemed quite problematical. As I have already noted, when Makiguchi asserted his theory of punishment by the Law, his views were opposed by the clergy. In “「法華経の信者と行者と学者及び其研究法」Believers, Practitioners, and Scholars of the Lotus Sutra and Methods of Investigation,” he criticizes priests and believers alike for rejecting his theory:
I hear that some old-style Nichiren Shoshu believers speak critically of us saying, “Those members in the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai with all their talk about punishment are really too bad” and that they have caused some newcomers, despite their fortune at having encountered this teaching, to abandon their faith. Even some priests are saying the same things. This amounts to serious slander (vol. 10, p. 152).
He believed that the theory of punishment was necessary for comparing the value of regions, and that it constituted the logical conclusion of the teachings of Nichiren Buddhism. However, the priests and traditional believers of Nichiren Shoshu were totally oblivious to the value of religion. Makiguchi condemns them, saying:
Pardon me for saying so, but I deplore the fact that the majority of priests, though they explain Buddhism in the name of the Daishonin’s sacred teachings from Gosho and sutra, do not demonstrate it by showing actual proof. They expound the theory of truth nonchalantly, as though gazing off at a fire on the other side of a river, and do not concern themselves with the theory of value that closely relates to daily life. Consequently, there is no way they [the believers] can fully understand the supreme Law (vol. 10, p. 153).
Makiguchi went on to criticize Nichiren Shoshu, saying that not only was the priesthood oblivious to the value of religion, but in faith as well, it had departed from the original spirit of Nichiren Buddhism. He argued that only through following the path of the bodhisattva can one lead a life of a great good, that is, attain the state of greatest happiness (Buddhahood). But it was apparent to him that the condition of faith among lay believers and priests of Nichiren Shoshu was a far cry from the bodhisattva path:
We must distinguish between believers and practitioners. A person will surely gain benefit simply by having faith and offering prayers, but this alone does not qualify as bodhisattva practice. There can be no such thing as an egoistic Buddha who only seeks benefit for himself and does not share it with others. Unless one undertakes bodhisattva practice, one cannot become a Buddha. In other words, a true believer and true practitioner is one who serves others in the spirit of a parent.
In the meanwhile, devils will vie to attack anyone who tries this. Nichiren Daishonin says, “If you propagate it, devils will arise without fail. … Even in the Tendai sect, there are those who profess faith in the Lotus Sutra yet actually lead others toward the pre-Lotus Sutra teachings. They, too, are agents of hell who cause people to fall into the evil path.”
The Tendai sect in Nichiren Daishonin’s day had a status comparable to that of Nichiren Shoshu today among the schools that take Nichiren as their founder. Thus we must ask, “Who among the traditional lay believers of Nichiren Shoshu has faced the three obstacles and four devils?” are not those who give guidance to others without themselves facing devils “agents of hell who cause people to fall into the evil paths? (vol. 10, p. 151)”
Makiguchi critically points out that among neither lay believers nor the priests was there anyone who carries out bodhisattva practice, which is the essential practice of faith in Nichiren Buddhism. In reprinting excerpts on his “theory of punishment by the Law” from “Experimental Proof” in “Kachi Sozo,” Makiguchi appended the following lines to end of the essay:
Slander of the Law is not limited to persons lacking in faith, nor does it apply only to those within other Nichiren schools who believe in erroneous teachings. Rather, it applies even to followers of Nichiren Shoshu who are jealous of those who in sincerity lead lives of great good. Such persons are described in the passage, “Although such people believe in the Lotus Sutra, they will not obtain the benefit of faith but instead incur retribution.” (vol. 10, p. 49)
This is an open declaration that, from the standpoint of the original spirit of Nichiren Buddhism, the faith in Nichiren Shoshu for its failure to carry out the most important practice in Nichiren Buddhism, that of the path of the bodhisattva, foreshadows his criticism of Nichiren Shoshu’s response concerning whether or not a believer should accept a Shinto talisman from Ise Shrine. Strictly observing the principle of shunning Shinto shrines in accordance with the doctrine of the original teaching of Nichiren Buddhism, Makiguchi refused to visit Shinto shrines or accept a talisman, and he instructed members to do the same. In contrast, the Nichiren Shoshu chief administrator (high Priest) and the Administrative Office, even though they recognized the importance of shunning Shintoism, feared that strict observation of this teaching would cause conflict with the government’s religious policies. And so they advised members to visit Shinto shrines and accept the talisman.
In June 1943, Makiguchi was summoned to the Nichiren Shoshu Administrative Office and was urged by the authorities there to accept the talisman. He refused. Makiguchi had often emphasized the principle that one must “rely on the Law and not upon persons,” and regardless of the instruction of Nichiren Shoshu high priest and the Administrative Office, he continued to place central importance on the Law and refused to go against the teaching.
Makiguchi’s criticism of Nichiren Shoshu was the result of his unique perspective in two areas. First, his view of religion rejected the Sanctity as the source of religious value, placing the significance of religion in its capacity to realize the value of Benefit in individual lives and the value of Good in society. Second, he interpreted Nichiren Buddhism to be a teaching that expounds a method for realizing such value wholly. In that light, it can be said that Makiguchi launched a new religious movement based on his unique view of religion and interpretation of Nichiren Buddhism.
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi
Atsushi Ishiwara, “Science and Religion”, contained his book “Kagaku to Shakai Bunka [Science and Social Culture]『科学と社会文化』”, 1939, Iwanami Shoten 岩波書店, Tokyo
Sokei Mitani, “Detailed Interpretation of Rissho Ankokuron”, now reprinted by Komon Shiryo Kanko-Kai 興門資料刊行会 in 2003
Koichi Miyata
Chigaku Tanaka, “Nichiren Shonin no Kyogi [the Teachings of Saint Nichiren 『日蓮聖人の教義』”, now reprinted by Shin-Sekai-Sha 真世界社 in 2004