New Mahikari blog
I was about to post the following as a comment on the new Mahikari Mission blog, but I've just noticed that it does not have the comment function of blogger enabled, so I'll post it here instead.
Hi Daosu,
No-one is questioning the integrity or sincerity of members of Sukyo Mahikari (at least, I never have). I simply question the validity of the revelations Okada claimed he received. I admire integrity, sincerity, generosity, selfless and tireless efforts towards improving the world, etc., but logically these are wasted if the foundation of one's beliefs is not sound.
You seem to think that it is presumptuous for individuals to think that they can understand any sort of divine being or hidden divine truths (assuming these exist) without the aid of ....well, you didn't actually say of what. You did say: I can also confirm, insofar as my own understanding and appreciation permits, the veracity of the organization's claims to be in constant contact with an entity or entities... (I assume you mean God or gods).
I don't question the sincerity of that confirmation, but do you have some really solid reason for trusting those claims? Anyone can claim (as various spiritual leaders and cult leaders do) to be in contact with God and to therefore know divine truths that the rest of us don't know. If such claims are false, however, then the believers are being horribly misled.
You also say: What person dares claim to have a complete grasp on absolute truth, to be no longer in need of learning, research, discussion, development, or discovery? Well, I certainly don't claim that (and I think very few people would claim that), but there is an enormous gap between the admission that one does not know absolute truth and the assumption that it is therefore appropriate to believe someone (like Okada) who did claim to know "all the truth".
Can we really believe that Okada knew "all the truth" simply because he claimed he received revelations from God? For me personally, there are enough inconsistencies in the stories Okada told (or at least, in the stories the Sukyo Mahikari organization quotes him as telling) to suggest that he was delusional and/or telling lies. Should there really be any confusion concerning what Okada did and experienced in the years leading up to the founding of Mahikari? After all, it is not really all that long ago, and people who were in contact with Okada in those years are still alive.
Actually, I'm really glad you have started up a blog, because it sounds like you are in an excellent position to clarify some of the facts. You can perhaps answer some of the questions currently being raised on the Internet from your own knowledge of the organization's history, and if not, I imagine you are in a position to be able to clarify points with more senior members.
I won't swamp you with questions right now, but there is one quite basic point I hope you can clarify for us.
According to quotes from Okada published in Sukyo Mahikari literature, Okada was bewildered by the revelation to "raise the hand" and, therefore, first tried out tekazashi on a dog. According to Okada, this dog incident was sometime after receiving the first of the revelations in Goseigen on February 27 1959. However, Okada had already been practicing a form of tekazashi (jorei) during his years in SKK, so the general concept and expected effects of "raising the hand" were already very familiar to him. If the dog story actually happened, it must have occurred many years earlier (before he joined SKK in 1947), or the date given for the first revelation in Goseigen must be incorrect. Can you please clarify what actually did happen?
BTW, given the number of questions people must have about those early years, I think people would be delighted to be able to ask questions of someone with your degree of experience. Could you perhaps enable the comment function on your blog so that interested people can talk to you?
Thanks,
Anne
Hi Daosu,
No-one is questioning the integrity or sincerity of members of Sukyo Mahikari (at least, I never have). I simply question the validity of the revelations Okada claimed he received. I admire integrity, sincerity, generosity, selfless and tireless efforts towards improving the world, etc., but logically these are wasted if the foundation of one's beliefs is not sound.
You seem to think that it is presumptuous for individuals to think that they can understand any sort of divine being or hidden divine truths (assuming these exist) without the aid of ....well, you didn't actually say of what. You did say: I can also confirm, insofar as my own understanding and appreciation permits, the veracity of the organization's claims to be in constant contact with an entity or entities... (I assume you mean God or gods).
I don't question the sincerity of that confirmation, but do you have some really solid reason for trusting those claims? Anyone can claim (as various spiritual leaders and cult leaders do) to be in contact with God and to therefore know divine truths that the rest of us don't know. If such claims are false, however, then the believers are being horribly misled.
You also say: What person dares claim to have a complete grasp on absolute truth, to be no longer in need of learning, research, discussion, development, or discovery? Well, I certainly don't claim that (and I think very few people would claim that), but there is an enormous gap between the admission that one does not know absolute truth and the assumption that it is therefore appropriate to believe someone (like Okada) who did claim to know "all the truth".
Can we really believe that Okada knew "all the truth" simply because he claimed he received revelations from God? For me personally, there are enough inconsistencies in the stories Okada told (or at least, in the stories the Sukyo Mahikari organization quotes him as telling) to suggest that he was delusional and/or telling lies. Should there really be any confusion concerning what Okada did and experienced in the years leading up to the founding of Mahikari? After all, it is not really all that long ago, and people who were in contact with Okada in those years are still alive.
Actually, I'm really glad you have started up a blog, because it sounds like you are in an excellent position to clarify some of the facts. You can perhaps answer some of the questions currently being raised on the Internet from your own knowledge of the organization's history, and if not, I imagine you are in a position to be able to clarify points with more senior members.
I won't swamp you with questions right now, but there is one quite basic point I hope you can clarify for us.
According to quotes from Okada published in Sukyo Mahikari literature, Okada was bewildered by the revelation to "raise the hand" and, therefore, first tried out tekazashi on a dog. According to Okada, this dog incident was sometime after receiving the first of the revelations in Goseigen on February 27 1959. However, Okada had already been practicing a form of tekazashi (jorei) during his years in SKK, so the general concept and expected effects of "raising the hand" were already very familiar to him. If the dog story actually happened, it must have occurred many years earlier (before he joined SKK in 1947), or the date given for the first revelation in Goseigen must be incorrect. Can you please clarify what actually did happen?
BTW, given the number of questions people must have about those early years, I think people would be delighted to be able to ask questions of someone with your degree of experience. Could you perhaps enable the comment function on your blog so that interested people can talk to you?
Thanks,
Anne
posted by Anne at 7:37 AM
1 Comments:
Dear Daosu,
I agree that I too have met some wonderful people in Mahikari who are truly out there to make a difference. However, I have been dillusioned by the findings that Mahikari is not so original after all. It is the grandchild of Oomoto. This is a fact. In Mahikari we have always been told that we are practising the highest art , however johrei[from which Mahikari evolved]practices the same. The light that we radiate does have some healing energy to it. I have no dispute there. But a lot of truth regarding the history of the organization has not been revealed.
Post a Comment
Click << Home to see articles posted more recently.