Mahikari healing (and related matters)
Ash's comment on my last post made me wonder just how much Mahikari rhetoric has changed, even amongst members, on the subject of healing vs spiritual purification. Perhaps the new official US site reflects current teachings on this matter better than I thought...are we looking at rewriting of the teachings, rather than false advertising in this case?
Why should I care if Sukyo Mahikari is starting to reinvent itself and modify Okada's teachings? Well, I don't really. A bit of modification may well be an improvement!
Seriously though, is it legitimate for Mahikari teachings to change and evolve over time? That would certainly be legitimate for any group of human origin, but Mahikari claims divine origin. Kumite are not allowed to question the teachings, because they are regarded as revelations from God, and therefore absolutely true. Logically, those teachings should not evolve or change under the influence of mere human wisdom.
I personally don't believe revelations are valid...I'm still trying to decide if Okada suffered from religious delusions, or simply made them all up...but for the leaders and kanbu who teach that all of Okada's words were "golden", isn't it hypocritical to change the teachings?
Okada said, on page 20 of Sunkyo, a collection of Okada's short teachings published in 1984:
Due to human nature, as time passes people are apt to become proud and conceited and they add their own exaggerated embellishments and personal interpretations to original teachings instead of repeating them exactly as they were taught. Eventually the real meaning of the original teachings becomes vague and meaningless. All the religions of the world have followed this historical pattern.
Within our organization this is absolutely out of the question.
I then had a look at what Tebecis says in Is the future in our hands? (2004) on the subjects of healing and change.
From my experience, I can see that the Mahikari organization has been evolving. Of course, the art of True Light and the teachings do not change, but [various factors] have all helped to clarify various misconceptions and are leading to positive changes. [Page 46]
Continuing with this theme, on pages 50-51, he says:
One misconception, for instance, was that Mahikari was regarded as an organization for healing and other self-benefits, much more than occurs nowadays. The founder indicated that the aim of True Light is not for healing disease...Ultimately, it is to enable people to become divine in nature and participate in fulfilling the divine plan.
[Page 53] There is nothing wrong with having an initial attitude of seeking benefits. However, in the longer term, there may be a big difference in the results if people come to serve God out of a genuine desire to do something for God rather than simply a desire to be healed.
Incidentally, this entire section (pages 46 to 58) is a masterful example of manipulative writing, which weaves together several different threads. The thread illustrated by the above quotes basically says that the healing notion was a misconception, but that kumite now understand teachings better. However, woven in amongst that, Tebecis takes every opportunity to offer examples of the miraculous benefits he claims people have received from okiyome! A third thread makes the reader feel that seeking self-benefit is rather small-hearted, and no doubt nudges kumite to resolve to make greater efforts to serve God selflessly. Finally, there is a nasty little thread that suggests that people who have left Mahikari and become critical of it were insufficiently altruistic and were disappointed at not getting expected benefits for themselves, and simply "gave up"!!!
Unraveling all that is going to take a while, so please bear with me.
Firstly, Tebecis does stick much closer to Okada's teachings concerning healing than the official Sukyo Mahikari US site. The latter has pretty much written healing out of the teachings, whereas Tebecis has merely made it seem like a selfish pursuit. I must admit, though, in this, Tebecis is reflecting teachings given by Okada in other parts of Goseigen.
For most of us, altruistic motives, such as wanting to help other people and wanting to help God with his so-called divine plan, probably sound much more noble than wanting benefits for ourselves. However, Sukyo Mahikari does make promises of enormous benefits to those who practice it diligently.
There is an interesting article, by Brian McVeigh, called The Vitalistic Conception of Salvation as Expressed in Sukyo Mahikari. McVeigh points out that religions such as Christianity and Buddhism emphasize benefits in the next world, after death. In contrast, folk religions tend to emphasize this-worldly benefits, such as improved crops and miracle cures. He suggests that the "new" Japanese religions, which includes Mahikari, have a foot in both camps. They are similar to folk religions in that they promise benefits to practitioners in this life, but they also incorporate notions of postponed benefits to be reaped after death.
I wonder if people from different cultures would see pursuit of the supposed health benefits of Mahikari as selfish? Or, is this attitude a product of the Christian-based culture many of us grew up in? Perhaps Okada felt it was only natural for religions to promise this-worldly benefits...and so he did, in quite an up-front manner. I wonder if Sukyo Mahikari kanbu in Japan are writing healing out of Okada's teachings to the extent that is happening in the Western world? If anyone in Japan can comment on this, please tell us!
It's interesting to look again at primary kenshu in the light of McVeigh's comments. Right at the beginning, during the introductory remarks concerning the nature of the organization and the kenshu process itself, the promises of self-benefit start.
During Primary kenshū there are numerous people who have had experiences such as, a hand paralysed by stroke began to move, or those who could not walk started to walk, or those who have been blind for many years began to see.
Then, right there in Chapter 1, in the section concerning ken, wa, fu (health, harmony, and material prosperity) we are told:
It is important to fulfil these three conditions of health, harmony and material well-being.
These are the minimum basic requirements for happiness so make them your primary goal. And as you achieve these three, keep improving them step by step.
Well, it depends on the person, but within three to five years even the condition of the slowest people will improve.
That sounds like a promise of this-worldly self-benefit to me!
Of course, there are other teachings that encourage members to put God first and to not worry about their own welfare. Other teachings stress that one needs to become spiritually purified in order to reap the benefits of health, peace, and material prosperity. Still other teachings imply we all have enormous amounts of ancestral and personal karma, so that we might not receive the promised benefits any time soon...
Altogether, its an interesting mix. There are the promises of observable, this-worldly benefits. These may attract new members, but they are a two-edged sword. If these promises fail to materialize, it is all too obvious. In terms of retaining members in the long-term, it is probably much smarter to shift the emphasis to spiritual purification and selfless service to God.
According to the above kenshu quote, members should be observing improved ken, wa, fu within three to five years. Some of course do observe improved health (for whatever reason). However, by then, I suspect most people who continue to be members have indeed come to believe that they are effectively serving God...whether one is, or not, is of course much harder to measure.
Finally, is Tebecis' assumption that many kumite join Mahikari because they expect self-benefit, and leave due to disappointment, a valid assumption? Sure, we all know some people were encouraged to join because they had health or other problems, but I also know quite a few who were quite healthy. Why did they join?
In my case, I was attracted by what seemed to be a simple, magical, and quite exciting health breakthrough. If one could solve incurable health problems, who wouldn't want to learn how to do that? My health was fine, but I guess I was altruistic enough to want to be able to help other people solve their problems. In his online book, Garry Greenwood talks in some detail about his introduction to Mahikari. I don't recall any particular self-interest motivating him or his wife either.
The picture Tebecis paints of people seeking health cures, and leaving due to disappointment, fits my own observations of some people who came and went fairly quickly. And why not? If Okada is quoted as saying that God told him to "raise his hand and cure people of diseases", and we were taught that omitama gave us the same ability to transmit the light of God, isn't leaving a perfectly valid response for those people?
However, the above picture certainly does not fit my observations of the long-term members who left Mahikari and who now write in criticism of Mahikari. Those I have spoken to had, for many years, bought into the entire myth of selfless service to God. In general, I'd say they left because they had good reasons for no longer believing in that myth.
Incidentally, in the pages I referred to above, Tebecis claimed that Greenwood was a good friend, but he then proceeded to imply that Greenwood "gave up" due to "disappointment" and lack of altruism. I assume that Tebecis has read Greenwood's book. He obviously does not agree with Greenwood's evaluation of the nature of Sukyo Mahikari, but he must realize that Greenwood had much more substantial reasons than "disappointment". There is no obvious reason for Tebecis to mention Greenwood specifically in this section of his book. I can only conclude that Tebecis was trying to belittle Greenwood as a tactical maneuver, in an attempt to make kumite disregard his claims.
Why should I care if Sukyo Mahikari is starting to reinvent itself and modify Okada's teachings? Well, I don't really. A bit of modification may well be an improvement!
Seriously though, is it legitimate for Mahikari teachings to change and evolve over time? That would certainly be legitimate for any group of human origin, but Mahikari claims divine origin. Kumite are not allowed to question the teachings, because they are regarded as revelations from God, and therefore absolutely true. Logically, those teachings should not evolve or change under the influence of mere human wisdom.
I personally don't believe revelations are valid...I'm still trying to decide if Okada suffered from religious delusions, or simply made them all up...but for the leaders and kanbu who teach that all of Okada's words were "golden", isn't it hypocritical to change the teachings?
Okada said, on page 20 of Sunkyo, a collection of Okada's short teachings published in 1984:
Due to human nature, as time passes people are apt to become proud and conceited and they add their own exaggerated embellishments and personal interpretations to original teachings instead of repeating them exactly as they were taught. Eventually the real meaning of the original teachings becomes vague and meaningless. All the religions of the world have followed this historical pattern.
Within our organization this is absolutely out of the question.
I then had a look at what Tebecis says in Is the future in our hands? (2004) on the subjects of healing and change.
From my experience, I can see that the Mahikari organization has been evolving. Of course, the art of True Light and the teachings do not change, but [various factors] have all helped to clarify various misconceptions and are leading to positive changes. [Page 46]
Continuing with this theme, on pages 50-51, he says:
One misconception, for instance, was that Mahikari was regarded as an organization for healing and other self-benefits, much more than occurs nowadays. The founder indicated that the aim of True Light is not for healing disease...Ultimately, it is to enable people to become divine in nature and participate in fulfilling the divine plan.
[Page 53] There is nothing wrong with having an initial attitude of seeking benefits. However, in the longer term, there may be a big difference in the results if people come to serve God out of a genuine desire to do something for God rather than simply a desire to be healed.
Incidentally, this entire section (pages 46 to 58) is a masterful example of manipulative writing, which weaves together several different threads. The thread illustrated by the above quotes basically says that the healing notion was a misconception, but that kumite now understand teachings better. However, woven in amongst that, Tebecis takes every opportunity to offer examples of the miraculous benefits he claims people have received from okiyome! A third thread makes the reader feel that seeking self-benefit is rather small-hearted, and no doubt nudges kumite to resolve to make greater efforts to serve God selflessly. Finally, there is a nasty little thread that suggests that people who have left Mahikari and become critical of it were insufficiently altruistic and were disappointed at not getting expected benefits for themselves, and simply "gave up"!!!
Unraveling all that is going to take a while, so please bear with me.
Firstly, Tebecis does stick much closer to Okada's teachings concerning healing than the official Sukyo Mahikari US site. The latter has pretty much written healing out of the teachings, whereas Tebecis has merely made it seem like a selfish pursuit. I must admit, though, in this, Tebecis is reflecting teachings given by Okada in other parts of Goseigen.
For most of us, altruistic motives, such as wanting to help other people and wanting to help God with his so-called divine plan, probably sound much more noble than wanting benefits for ourselves. However, Sukyo Mahikari does make promises of enormous benefits to those who practice it diligently.
There is an interesting article, by Brian McVeigh, called The Vitalistic Conception of Salvation as Expressed in Sukyo Mahikari. McVeigh points out that religions such as Christianity and Buddhism emphasize benefits in the next world, after death. In contrast, folk religions tend to emphasize this-worldly benefits, such as improved crops and miracle cures. He suggests that the "new" Japanese religions, which includes Mahikari, have a foot in both camps. They are similar to folk religions in that they promise benefits to practitioners in this life, but they also incorporate notions of postponed benefits to be reaped after death.
I wonder if people from different cultures would see pursuit of the supposed health benefits of Mahikari as selfish? Or, is this attitude a product of the Christian-based culture many of us grew up in? Perhaps Okada felt it was only natural for religions to promise this-worldly benefits...and so he did, in quite an up-front manner. I wonder if Sukyo Mahikari kanbu in Japan are writing healing out of Okada's teachings to the extent that is happening in the Western world? If anyone in Japan can comment on this, please tell us!
It's interesting to look again at primary kenshu in the light of McVeigh's comments. Right at the beginning, during the introductory remarks concerning the nature of the organization and the kenshu process itself, the promises of self-benefit start.
During Primary kenshū there are numerous people who have had experiences such as, a hand paralysed by stroke began to move, or those who could not walk started to walk, or those who have been blind for many years began to see.
Then, right there in Chapter 1, in the section concerning ken, wa, fu (health, harmony, and material prosperity) we are told:
It is important to fulfil these three conditions of health, harmony and material well-being.
These are the minimum basic requirements for happiness so make them your primary goal. And as you achieve these three, keep improving them step by step.
Well, it depends on the person, but within three to five years even the condition of the slowest people will improve.
That sounds like a promise of this-worldly self-benefit to me!
Of course, there are other teachings that encourage members to put God first and to not worry about their own welfare. Other teachings stress that one needs to become spiritually purified in order to reap the benefits of health, peace, and material prosperity. Still other teachings imply we all have enormous amounts of ancestral and personal karma, so that we might not receive the promised benefits any time soon...
Altogether, its an interesting mix. There are the promises of observable, this-worldly benefits. These may attract new members, but they are a two-edged sword. If these promises fail to materialize, it is all too obvious. In terms of retaining members in the long-term, it is probably much smarter to shift the emphasis to spiritual purification and selfless service to God.
According to the above kenshu quote, members should be observing improved ken, wa, fu within three to five years. Some of course do observe improved health (for whatever reason). However, by then, I suspect most people who continue to be members have indeed come to believe that they are effectively serving God...whether one is, or not, is of course much harder to measure.
Finally, is Tebecis' assumption that many kumite join Mahikari because they expect self-benefit, and leave due to disappointment, a valid assumption? Sure, we all know some people were encouraged to join because they had health or other problems, but I also know quite a few who were quite healthy. Why did they join?
In my case, I was attracted by what seemed to be a simple, magical, and quite exciting health breakthrough. If one could solve incurable health problems, who wouldn't want to learn how to do that? My health was fine, but I guess I was altruistic enough to want to be able to help other people solve their problems. In his online book, Garry Greenwood talks in some detail about his introduction to Mahikari. I don't recall any particular self-interest motivating him or his wife either.
The picture Tebecis paints of people seeking health cures, and leaving due to disappointment, fits my own observations of some people who came and went fairly quickly. And why not? If Okada is quoted as saying that God told him to "raise his hand and cure people of diseases", and we were taught that omitama gave us the same ability to transmit the light of God, isn't leaving a perfectly valid response for those people?
However, the above picture certainly does not fit my observations of the long-term members who left Mahikari and who now write in criticism of Mahikari. Those I have spoken to had, for many years, bought into the entire myth of selfless service to God. In general, I'd say they left because they had good reasons for no longer believing in that myth.
Incidentally, in the pages I referred to above, Tebecis claimed that Greenwood was a good friend, but he then proceeded to imply that Greenwood "gave up" due to "disappointment" and lack of altruism. I assume that Tebecis has read Greenwood's book. He obviously does not agree with Greenwood's evaluation of the nature of Sukyo Mahikari, but he must realize that Greenwood had much more substantial reasons than "disappointment". There is no obvious reason for Tebecis to mention Greenwood specifically in this section of his book. I can only conclude that Tebecis was trying to belittle Greenwood as a tactical maneuver, in an attempt to make kumite disregard his claims.
posted by Anne at 5:06 AM
1 comments
