Special Series:
The Humanist Principle—Compassion and Tolerance (2)Daisaku Ikeda
Felix Unger
ENVIRONMENT AND EDUCATION
Humanity and the Global Environment
Ikeda: Because the loss of harmony means the destruction of the foundation of our existence, you consistently insist on the need for harmonyin three sets of relationships: between humanity and nature, among
humanity, and between humanity and the spirit. Before the emergence ofmodern science, human beings derived essential nourishment from thenatural environment, which they altered only to make living space forthemselves. They maintained a sense of oneness with nature, for which
they never lost their sense of awe. But, owing to the Industrial Revolution and advances in scientific technology, while deriving great benefits
from development, human beings allowed development to get out ofhand and to affect the environment. By the twentieth century, the seriously aggravated pollution problem made us realize that, although we
exploit it, we are still a part of nature. Pollution of the atmosphere andwater harmed agricultural crops and resulted in illnesses threatening ourown physical well-being. What are your thoughts on the imbalance
between humanity and the natural environment that confronts the world
today?
Unger: Our relations to our Earth are shocking. We must understand theextent to which our planet is being exploited, how greatly we squander
our natural resources, and how much we pollute the water and contaminate the air.
Ikeda: I agree. We urgently need policies to deal with the global environment. By the second half of the twentieth century, when the problem
had become serious all over the planet, we finally grasped the scale ofpollution. We realized that the natural resources we were squandering
are not limitless after all. The alarm was sounded, warning that industrially-produced carbon dioxide released into the atmosphere was causing
global warming and imperiling the ecology. We realized that atmospher3

4

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

ic pollution was threatening the ozone layer, which protects us fromharmful cosmic radiation. Awareness of these problems led to the World
Summit for Sustainable Development (WSSD) held in Johannesburg,
South Africa, in 2002.
Unger: We have only one Earth—only one environment to live in—and
we all share concern about its possible destruction. Greater awareness ofthe global crisis can improve our sense of responsibility for the future.
To save the planet means to save all life. We must not, however, beunjust. Over the past 15 years a tremendous amount has been accomplished in Europe. I am thinking of the greater respect now being shownto animals. I also have in mind the halting of pollution, especially waterpollution. Once gravely-polluted bodies of water are now clean enoughfor human beings to bathe in them.
Ikeda: A highly symbolic example. Recently, in Japan too, water quality has improved to the point that fish have returned to many formerlypolluted rivers.
Unger: But we still have one gigantic concern: poverty in the whole
global environment. The only way to combat it is to cancel the debts ofthe poor and never exploit them again. This is, incidentally, an ancient
Biblical recommendation.
Balancing Development and the Environment
Ikeda: One of the most important problems in halting current global
environmental destruction is dealing with the unplanned felling offorests in developing countries and the increasing exhaustion of arable
lands. Conflicts of interests between developing and industrialized
nations further complicate the situation.
At the 2002 summit in Johannesburg, developing nations questioned
industrialized nations’ right to glorify the consumption culture while
telling them to put up with poverty. In other words, a conflict arose overways to balance economic growth and environmental conservation.
Unger: What annoys me terribly is the enormous gap between the affluent North and the impoverished South. Africa is a human tragedy towhich the West has contributed. As the Johannesburg conference indicated, effort to do something about it remains no more than lip service
as long as overexploitation proceeds unrestrained.

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

5

Ikeda: The only way to solve the problem of development-environment
imbalance is for the industrialized nations to see beyond their own interests and adopt a global viewpoint.
Unger: I agree. But the hegemonic, authoritarian views the West has
held to the present prevent industrialized nations from taking a global
view toward improving the environment and dealing with economic
reconstruction of the developing nations. Some Western nations still
desire to dominate everything left over from the colonial period.
Ikeda: Certainly as long as the industrial nations fail to change their
way of operating, the global environmental problem will only become
increasingly grave.
Unger: Yes. But I believe a fundamental paradigm change will takeplace in the twenty-first century to transform our values from lust for
power and domination to willingness to act meaningfully.
Ikeda: Instead of being controlled by desire, we must adopt loftier values and seek for the revolution and perfection of humanity itself.
Unger: Yes, that is true. By “meaningfully” I intend the creation of ahumane foundation by avoiding obsession with ephemeral interests andmaterial desires and willingly ennobling and tempering the self. Whenthe industrialized nations embrace these values and address both environmental problems and the economic recovery of the developing
nations on a global scale, the global environment will improve significantly.
Ikeda: No doubt. Nichiren Buddhism speaks of three kinds of treasures:
treasures in the storehouse (economic affluence), treasures of the body(talents and physical abilities), and the treasures of the heart (virtuous
fortune) and teaches that accumulating the last kind through altruistic
actions is most important. Personal wealth and social position bring notrue happiness. Our goal should be the happiness of others as well asthat of ourselves, which we can promote by refining and elevating ourhumane characteristics and overcoming the lust for power and material
desires.
In his A Geography of Human Life, published in 1903, Tsunesaburo
Makiguchi, first president of Soka Gakkai, was looking a century aheadwhen he proposed that humanity should advance from military, econom-

6

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

ic, and political competition to an age of humanitarian competition.
What he had in mind agrees closely with the change in value paradigm
you mention.
Unger: Yes. In the West we observe a reflection of godlessness andhardheaded materialism that takes no thought for tomorrow.
Ikeda: In connection with relations between humanity and the environment, Nichiren Buddhism teaches “if the minds of living beings are
impure, their land is also impure, but if their minds are pure, so is theirland.”1 To extrapolate, if human life is sullied with greed, antagonism,and egoism, these evils will disturb the social environment and destroy
the ecology. If, on the other hand, the human mind is filled with love,
nonviolence, and reverence for nature, these good traits will harmonize
human actions with the natural world and create a symbiotic social environment. Faith supplies the power enabling the good mind to triumph.
As you say, rejecting faith amounts to rejecting the transcendent andsacred. Making us powerless to control our internal evil, this leads toenvironmental destruction. Materialism that takes no thought of themorrow amounts to a rejection of the spirit and of ethics, thereby weakening the good and strengthening the evil.
Attitudes toward the Environment: Shared Buddhist and Christian Ideas
Unger: I see parallels between Christianity and Buddhism not only interms of their deep concern and moderate attitude toward the Earth.
Both deal strictly with the human being in the sense of a therapeutic
approach to man on his way to salvation.
Ikeda: Speaking of environmental attitudes shared by Buddhism andChristianity calls to mind certain historical figures. One of them is St.
Francis of Assisi (1181/2–1226), who, as you know, had close relations
not only with humans, but also with all creatures, whom he joyfully
called his brothers and sisters. His great compassion for nonhuman creatures is illustrated by Giotto’s famous picture of him preaching to thebirds. Believing that human life and the natural environment are indivisible, he cautioned that exploiting nature is a manifestation of greed. He
had awe and compassionate affection for all creatures. In Saint Francis, I
see something of the Buddhist bodhisattva.
Unger: That is an interesting comparison. The expulsion of humanity

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

7

from the Garden of Eden should serve as a collective warning to us all:if, obsessed with the pleasures of the moment, we neglect to take sufficient care of it, the Earth will become uninhabitable.
Ikeda: Precisely. But, if we control greed, have love toward humanity
and regard nature with respect and if all society shares these values, we
can create a symbiotic civilization that harmonizes with the Earth’s ecology.
Unger: We must once again turn our eyes to the value of God’s Creationand keep in mind the need for science to ensure a tolerable basis for life
for all human beings.
Ikeda: Buddhism teaches how to live in symbiosis with and respect for
nature. This way of life abides by the philosophy of the Middle Way,
avoiding extremes of both asceticism and hedonism. In other words, theBuddhist view of nature and life is of a harmoniously symbiotic relation
between human beings and nonhuman nature.
Unger: I agree completely with that philosophy. The excessively prosperous 20 percent of the global population now consumes 80 percent of
the planet’s natural resources. The remaining 80 percent of the population starve. In keeping with the Buddhist teachings, we must seek a way
to control our own greed and live in communal prosperity with the peoples of the developing countries and with the natural environment. The
Christians claim their mission to be going out in the world to learn while
motivating themselves. This seems to me to approach the Buddhist
ethos.
Ikeda: Buddhism conceives of bodhisattvas as active people concentrating on the salvation of others. Mahayana bodhisattvas take what are
called the Four Universal Vows. First, they vow to save all sentient
beings; that is, to empathize with all suffering people. Second, they vow
to abandon all worldly passions. This means they vow to control all
earthly desires and reform them into such good attitudes as nonviolence,compassion, and hope. Third, they vow to learn all Buddhist teachings.
In today’s terms, this means learning Buddhism and the whole humanspiritual heritage, including all fields of learning, philosophy, and religion. Fourth and finally, they vow to train themselves in Buddhism until
they attain the realm of enlightenment. In other terms, this means developing their own happiness as they save others. These Four Universal

8

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Vows well up from within the bodhisattvas themselves. By proclaiming
them, they manifest the goodness that directs them to their own and toothers’ happiness and salvation. Surely the goodness itself generates anethic making possible symbiosis with nature.
Unger: There is no sense in developing global or environmental ethics,
unless they arise from the human heart. The desire to contribute tohumanity and society arises from within us and can influence education.
I believe that we must constantly be motivated by education. In this way,
we will be able to steer society. We can discover the value of dialogue
and education only when we accept material things like science and economics as what they are: means to serve human existence.
Ikeda: You indicate an important point. The strength born from withinhumanity is indispensable to orienting our values to ensure that science,
economics, politics, and all human endeavours are actually undertaken
for the sake of humanity. Essentially, education, religion, and philosophy should evoke inwardly-generated human spirituality. I discussed theimportance of inner-motivated philosophy in a speech entitled “The Ageof Soft Power and Inner-Motivated Philosophy,” which I delivered at
Harvard University in September, 1991.
Unger: In the twenty-first century, the task of finding a way to ensurethat humanity can develop and grow together confronts us. To ensure
this, we must harmonize three sets of relations—with nature, among
ourselves, and with the spiritual. Humanity occupies the center of thetriangle. But the individual human being is materially limited and capable of exerting little dramatic influence on the lives of others. Humanity
in general, on the other hand, continues to live indefinitely in our progeny. It is therefore important that we globalize the value of individual service to the eternally-continuing life of the whole human race.
Ikeda: I am in full agreement. In the Suttanipata (Karaniya Metta
Sutta), Shakyamuni expresses his desire that all things should be happy:“The seen and the unseen,Those living near and far away,
Those born and to-be-born —May all beings be at ease!”2

In this passage, he is expressing a biological and generational ethics.

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

9

Humanity is required to live together in harmony with everything now
living on the planet. That is to say, we coexist with all beings visible andinvisible, distant or near. Also, those already born are bound to improveand enrich the Earth and the social environment before passing it on toposterity. We must never allow the rich current of eternal human life to
dry up or be blocked. This is why the key to dealing with our environmental problems is, as you mentioned, the globalization of the value ofserving the eternally-continuing life of the human race.
Environmental Education
Ikeda: Earlier, you mentioned the importance of education to environmental problems when you said that it can steer society. Undeniably,
education is both a starting point and a driving force for establishing
global and environmental ethics. What kind of environmental education
should we promote?
Unger: Environmental education isolated from other fields of learning is
impossible. We can, however, try to create awareness about the environment. In this sense, we can foster ideas of sustainability. We must
always ponder the extent to which our deeds burden the world and towhich we consume un-renewable natural resources.
Ikeda: The first step in environmental education is a firm grasp of present conditions: the amount of the world’s forests already lost; the extent
to which pollution of the atmosphere, the water, and the soil has alreadyadvanced; their ecological effects on the earth, and so on. In connection
with this point, I stressed in my proposal to the 2002 Global Summit theimportance of comprehensively addressing the UN’s Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. As part of this undertaking, in cooperation with the Earth Charter Commission, Soka Gakkai Internationalsponsors an exhibition entitled “A Quiet Revolution: The Earth Charterand Human Potential.” It has already been shown in ten countries and, in
2006, will be presented in Japan under the tentative title “The Earth
Charter—In Pursuit of a new Global Ethic.”
Unger: I am sure great things will come of the hard work the membersof SGI are devoting to environmental education. The major problem inEurope is our highly secularized way of life, which generates enormous
materialism enabling, as Nietzsche said, every person to be his or her
own God. In other words, tremendous advances in the natural sciences

10

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

have enabled us to exercise control over many things in ways that once
would have been inconceivable. Our present situation can be comparedto that of Goethe’s sorcerer’s apprentice, who, enchanting a broomstickto fetch water but not knowing the magic word to stop it, is lost in a
massive flood. The spirits we once called on, are no longer available.
The new era we are entering compels us to make completely novel considerations to control science. We must learn to use the new instrumentsscience puts at our disposal better than we have in the past. At the sametime, our scientific research must become more intensive.
Ikeda: Insatiable intellectual curiosity and the spirit of inquiry haveinspired research and technological innovation in many scientific areas.
The pace of these changes is likely to accelerate in the years to come.
Science and medical therapy have already entered realms once reserved
to God, for instance, in such things as cloning technology and advanced
genetic engineering. Now we are forced to draw a line between the technically feasible and the ethically permissible. How far should we beallowed to interfere in the manipulation of human life and nature?
Where should we apply ethical brakes? These are some of the basic
issues now confronting us. We will be unable to put our new scientifictools to use for the betterment of humanity unless we establish ethicalmodels based on the philosophy of respect for the dignity of life.
Unger: Culture and science can survive only if they demonstrate respect
for life and the environment. As is evident from many psychologicalsicknesses, exploiting nature means exploiting ourselves too, thus generating internal psychosomatic illnesses.
Ikeda: I have discussed nonviolence toward the environment with theIndian agricultural scientist Dr. M.S. Swaminathan, who, referring to
Gandhi on this topic, said human beings will use violence toward nature
as long as they use it among themselves. Teaching nonviolence is themost important aspect of environmental education, which itself must be
founded on respect for the dignity of life. Education must always deal
with the potential of each irreplaceable life and the dignity of all life thatis their mainstay.
Unger: I agree. Culture is born, not of exploitation, but of respect. Education can be environmental in nature only if it teaches respect for life.
In this millennium we must determine whether introducing people tosustainable environmental education is possible. Our major starting

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

11

point must be harmonious coexistence on a global social scale. Environmental education culminates in providing our neighbours with habitats
as pleasant as our own. When we disregard these things and concentrateon our own environment alone, we lose our point of reference with thetranscendental. And without it we cannot conduct environmental education in the fullest sense.
Environmental Education for Children
Ikeda: Children, who bear the responsibility for the future, must betaught about respect for the dignity of life and reverence for the transcendental as part of environmental education. In his A Geography of
Human Life, Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, the first president of Soka Gakkai,
pointed out two things we must be aware of in relation to the environment. First, we can intellectually recognize the laws and order of nature,
but we must remember that the laws and order of nature are not the
products of human intelligence. Second, on the emotional plane, wemust be aware of the need of a sense of piety and awe toward the religious entity on which these natural laws are founded. Intellectual elements alone can lead to the arrogant idea that science is omniscient.
Emotional elements alone can lead to disassociation from the realities oflife. Mr. Makiguchi argued that the correct attitude toward nature combines the intellectual elements of rule and order with the emotional element of awe toward the religious entity, or the transcendental.
Unger: Such an attitude toward the natural environment is important toenabling children to grow up with mind, body, and spirit in a state ofbalance.
Ikeda: When you visited the Kansai Soka schools, in July, 1997, you
said that work must be done with the head, the heart, and the hands. You
remarked that done with the head and the intellect alone, it can be cold.
Done with the emotions alone, it loses touch with reality. But, done
without the intellect, without the emotions, and with the hands alone,
work can destroy the planet. That is why we must live in a way in which
all three are balanced. In these clear terms, you pinpointed the origin of
the present global crisis and humanity’s loss of harmony. I am gratefulfor the way you taught our young people the importance of growing up
as total human beings in which cool minds, warm hearts, and speedy
action are harmonized.

12

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Unger: No philosophy or way of thought has meaning if it fails to convey itself to others. Because I wanted to convey my meaning to the Soka
schools students who are responsible for the new century, I spoke simply. I was greatly impressed by the animation of the students I have met
on my visits to the Kansai Soka schools and Soka University in Tokyo. I
wanted to help them become—to borrow your words—total, well-balanced beings.
Ikeda: Mr. Makiguchi thought that the aim of education is not to cramstudents’ heads with fragmentary information but to develop their wholebeings to enable them to use absorbed knowledge for the sake ofhumanity. He proposed what he called the half-day school system forthe sake of cultivating all-round personalities capable of using head,
heart, and actions. According to his system, students did classroom
work during half the school day and practical work during the otherhalf. The cultivation of the all-round personality is one reason why Soka
University of America was founded as a liberal arts college.
Unger: We expect the Soka schools and Soka University to turn out
large numbers of well-rounded human beings qualified to improve theenvironment and create a brighter future.
Humane Education
Ikeda: Now I should like to discuss humane education, the foundationof environmental education. A cause of great concern in Japan during
these past years has been the rise of atrocious crimes and the increasingly younger people involved in them. Behind these developments is a tendency to undervalue life in a society concerned mainly with efficiency
and materialism. The power of education is of great importance toachieving the imperative goal of halting the worrying trends of heinous
crime and prevalent violence.
Unger: The situation in Europe is exactly as you describe conditions inJapan. As I have already said, we are experiencing powerful secularization, which marginalizes the church and makes its voice much weaker
than it used to be. People have forgotten “Thou shalt not kill.” The value
criteria shared by all religions are being lost and replaced by prevailingmaterialistic values. Globalization of the mass media and world homogenization add impetus to the trend. The outcome is disregard for thevalue of life and frequent killings. All of this relates to education.

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

13

Ikeda: I agree entirely. Education provides power to create the futurefor young people, the community, and whole nations. But Japanese education today faces mountainous problems like student absenteeism,
withdrawal and the breakdown of the system of classes. What are yourthoughts on these problems, which are probably common to many countries?
Unger: As a medical scholar, I have a very simple approach to education. I think of my students as my children. Fathers and mothers want
their children to experience the best things possible. Such an experience
nourishes growth. Therefore, as the more experienced, their greatest role
is to lead their children in ways enabling them to have such experiences.
Ikeda: The best kinds of experiences are playing out of doors and bonding with other children. In modern industrialized nations, however, toomuch time given over to things like computer games deprives childrenof opportunities for such experiences.
Unger: That is true. In today’s information society many things, especially the mass media, have a tremendous effect on children. The daily
recurrence of televised scenes of horrible violence clearly takes an educational toll. The appearance on the television screen of terrorist acts
and serial murders is taken for granted. Murder seems the only thingpeople derive from such media.
Ikeda: Undeniably some high-quality television programs cultivate andenrich children’s sensitivities. But, by stimulating hostility and anger,
violently aggressive visual stimulation dulls imagination and empathy
with suffering. Allowing children to confine themselves in environments
where they do nothing but passively receive images weakens their abilities to think, judge, love, and sympathize actively. Family life and goodreading, including the classics, can form a barrier protecting children
from the corrupting influences of prevalent virtual reality. Reading
greatly enriches children’s spiritual world. It helps them pick and choose
from the vast masses of media information and develop their own powers of active judgement and the imagination to empathize.
Unger: Children today experience a society of intolerance, war, andaggression in which it is impossible to overemphasize the importance ofcontacts with good books that cultivate sound judgment and imaginative
powers. Strengthening the family is one way of reducing the bad influ-

14

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

ence of the mass media. Because in some ways the media are more
influential than parents and family, my comment may seem unrealistic.
But we parents must serve as models and not give up on education.
Ikeda: Children are the mirror of society, the era writ small. Today’s
problems with their abnormal behaviors are rooted in the weakening of
educational power that family, community, and school ought to exercise.
In thinking of educational issue, we adults must see ourselves reflectedin that mirror and be always on the lookout for ways to correct ourselves. As you say, good adult examples have a bearing on improving
powers of education.
The Origin of Soka Education
Unger: What are the origins of Soka Education?
Ikeda: Soka Education began with the humane education proposed byPresident Makiguchi. Putting it into practice while serving as principalof an elementary schools, he developed a system that he called pedagogy for value creation. He constantly insisted that children’s happinessmust be the goal of education. This was in the heyday of Japanese militarism, which mobilized all forces for the training of imperial and militaristic-nationalist youth. Nonetheless, he wanted to avoid sacrificing
children to society and to help every child live a happy life of limitlessly-expanded potentialities. This wish is the basis of all aspects of thevalue-creative education.
In his A Geography of Human Life, Mr. Makiguchi wrote, “Theimportant thing is the setting of a goal of well being and protection of
all people, including oneself but not at the increase of self interest alone.
In other words, the aim is the betterment of others and in doing so, onechooses ways that will yield personal benefit as well as benefit to others.
It is a conscious effort to create a more harmonious community life, andit will take considerable time for us to achieve.”3 The fundamental aimof Soka Education, then, is to promote the happiness of both the self andthe other.
Unger: I see. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, founder of Soka Gakkai, advocated the value-creative education and demonstrated how faith can overcome the problems of life. His kind of humane education is essential tothe cultivation of world citizens; that is, citizens who think and act on
the global scale. How does the worldwide Soka Education network pro-THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

15

mote such education?
Ikeda: The high school known as Soka Gakuen, the starting point oftoday’s Soka Education network, was opened in 1968. On that occasion,
I set the following five precepts as goals for humane education.
1. Be a person of wisdom and passion, always pursuing truth and creating value.
2. Never cause problems for others, and be responsible for youractions.
3. Be kind and polite to others, rejecting violence, and value trust andharmony.
4. Express and courageously act on your convictions for the cause ofjustice.
5. Cherish a liberal, adventurous spirit, and grow to become honourable leaders in Japan and in the world.
Then, for the sake of the twenty-first century, I proposed five other principles.
1. Recognition of the unique dignity inherent in every life.
2. Respect for character.
3. Profound friendship enduring throughout life.
4. Rejection of violence.
5. The importance of the intellect and the need to be intellectual.
To my profound gratification, thanks to the unstinting efforts of all ourfaculty members and the self-awareness of our students, these precepts
and principles are being realized.
Unger: All of them are important guidelines.
Ikeda: From the time it was first opened, the students of Tokyo Soka
Gakuen have sung a school song whose title translates as “The Plants
Are Sprouting.” Its lyrics ask about purposes.
1. For what purpose do we refine our wisdom?
2. For what purpose are we passionate?
3. For what purpose do we love others?
4. For what purpose do we strive for glory?
5. For what purpose do we work for peace?

16

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Ignoring the profound goals embodied in these purposes can cause
human beings and society to run wild. The tradition of the Soka schools
entails deepening one’s philosophy by constantly questioning purposes,
creating a personal history through the actions of one’s youth, and pioneering a path of human life. At the initial matriculation ceremonies of
the Kansai Soka High School for girls I set another guideline: it is
impossible to be happy at the cost of others’ unhappiness. I also said
that, in comparison with the wide world, the Soka schools may be as
small as a poppy seed, but that if our students remain true to value-creative ideas and practice schools’ guidelines, our effect will ultimately befelt all over the globe. This is true because there is but one theory ofpeace. I said these things because I want our students to become strong
and wise and create universal happiness and peace wherever they go.
Unger: I see.
The Teacher Is the Educational Environment
Ikeda: I expect faculty members of the Soka schools and of Soka
University to be first rate both academically and in character, anddetermined to improve themselves. I also expect that they create an
educational institution where the students come first. From the students’viewpoint, the teachers themselves constitute the greatest educational
environment. It is a fundamental of Soka education that, as humane
educational leaders, teachers prize their students on a par with their own
children. I want them to be the kind of teachers that students will beglad to have known, whose warmth they will appreciate, who will win
their devotion, and to whom they will attribute their own achievements.
Unger: On the basis of my own experience, I know how important
having wonderful teachers is to young students’ humane education.
Total-personality contact with good teachers refines the balance amongchildren’s brains, bodies, and hearts.
Ikeda: Thomas Arnold (1795–1842), headmaster of the famous English
public school Rugby, wrote that it was not a name, but the quality of thefaculty that made a school good or bad. He also believed that teacher
influence and mutual student-to-student influence fostered by teachersdetermine student personalities. Humane education is character formation and refinement as a result of personality interactions between students and teachers who regard their charges with greater than parental

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

17

affection. Because teachers define education, educational revolution
must entail faculty revolution.
Unger: Your words help me understand why the eyes of the Soka
schools and Soka University students shine with hope. Because children
are the most valuable things we have, we must choose teachers for themvery carefully. Today, schools seem too negligent in this connection.
Personally, if I were in charge, I would lay the greatest emphasis on
schools. We must train children to adopt a global viewpoint. Humane
education enables them to perceive the whole world keenly. This means
not only seeing the material, visible things between heaven and Earth,but also intuitively sensing many spiritual entities. Children who canunderstand things as a whole can learn to contribute to the well-being of
all humanity. It is precisely because of humane education that the important ideas resulting from ordinary natural-scientific education take on
new meanings in our lives, thus making science useful to humanity.
Ikeda: I agree. Without the wisdom to use it for human happiness, themost sophisticated knowledge is not only useless, but also potentiallyperilous. Josei Toda, the second president of Soka Gakkai, used to saythat the greatest delusion of modern humanity is to mistake knowledge
for wisdom. On one level, knowledge can lead to weapons of mass
destruction. It is undeniably true, however, that it can also lead to enormous convenience and industrial wealth. Humane education is in great
demand as a way of guiding knowledge toward happiness and peace. In
the years to come, the task of developing the wisdom to employ
immense amounts of knowledge and information for the sake of humanhappiness through humane education is going to become increasingly
essential.
Nuclear Weapons and Evil
Ikeda: Nuclear weapons are the product of scientific knowledge. In
considering how human beings should deal with them, the issue ofknowledge and wisdom becomes acute. The end of the Cold War provided an excellent opportunity for getting rid of them entirely; andindeed, during the final decade of the twentieth century, the movement
to abolish them made some headway and moved beyond nuclear-arms
reduction toward the creation of an international order in which their use
would be banned. For instance, the International Court of Justice issued
the advisory opinion that use of nuclear weapons violates international

18

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

law. In 2000, in its final document, a review conference for the Nuclear
Proliferation Treaty called for a clear promise to eliminate nuclear
weapons completely. But then the United States’ concept of missile
defence opened the door to destruction of the nuclear balance and thestart of competitive nuclear expansion into space. Furthermore both theUnited States and Russia are conducting critical nuclear experiments not
specifically forbidden by the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.
How do you think humanity should confront the still persisting threat ofnuclear weapons?
Unger: I am truly no friend of weaponry. It frightens me. Today humanity already has sufficient weapons to wipe out the whole world. As it
advances globally, though hypocritically describing itself as peace-oriented, the weapons industry actually becomes increasingly-deeply
involved in war. I have learned, however, that nations need weapons to
defend themselves. Still I am very disturbed by atomic, biological, andchemical weapons. Using them or nuclear weapons is the most cowardly
thing human beings could do. My personal opinion is that Hiroshima
and Nagasaki should have taught us that using atomic weapons iswrong.
Ikeda: The nuclear, like the environmental, question boils down towhether we prefer the interests of nations over the advantage of all
humanity and the whole planet. There can be no mistake: the vital issue
is between humanity and nuclear weapons. In this connection, I must
once again refer to Josei Toda’s Declaration against Nuclear Weapons,
in which he said, “Even if a country should conquer the world throughthe use of nuclear weapons, the conquerors must be viewed as devils, asevil incarnate.” This statement breaks through political and militaryideas to reach the fundamental dimension of the dignity of life itself.
Buddhism teaches that inherent in life is evil, striving to fulfil selfish
desires at the cost of destroying others’ lives and even the natural environment. The state controlled by this evil is called the Realm of Freely
Enjoying Things Conjured by Others. For nations, ethnic groups, or
people in authority to attempt to dominate others by means of nuclear
weapons represents this evil in its purest form. This is the evil that Mr.
Toda said we must crush completely.
Unger: I agree with him. I have a simple answer to the nuclear question:
nuclear weapons must be eliminated.

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

19

Earth and Cosmos
Ikeda: In the midst of economic and cultural globalization, the existence of nuclear weapons still threatens the annihilation of humanity andthe destruction of the planet. We face other grave problems as well, forinstance regional conflict, terrorism, famine, HIV Aids, environmental
pollution, and so on. The famous Russian cosmonaut Dr. Alexandre
Serebrov, with whom I have published a dialogue entitled The Cosmos,
the Earth, and Humanity, told me that viewing the Earth from space not
only provides a valuable and philosophically-pious experience, but also
stimulates a sense of mission to do something for our precious planet.
The American astronaut Dr. Donald K. Slayton once told me that hissimilar experience taught him that the cosmos provides a unifying context for the Earth and that the cosmos is the very place for human unity.
Today we must think first of the advantages of humanity and the Earth.
To do this, we need to adopt the viewpoint of these men who haveobserved the planet from space. What hopes do you have for the space
age in the twenty-first century?
Unger: When we draw up rules for its use, we must consider that spacebelongs to everyone and is the foundation of our existence. As our only
possible habitat, it demands our eternal cooperation. Indeed, it is thestarting point of human cooperation. Consequently, at the beginning of
this new age we must not misuse space development.
Ikeda: Specific nations must not be allowed to monopolize space development in their own interests. Especially, competitive arms races mustnever be permitted. In all major religions, prayer amounts to dialogue
and resonance with the eternal universe, the progenitor of both humanand nonhuman life. In this sense, as you say, the cosmos is the foundation of our existence. Today, as globalization advances, the powerful
influences of narrow nationalism and national egos make the role ofspiritual exchanges with the cosmos immeasurably important.
Unger: I agree. It is especially vital for young people, who are responsible for the future, to have chances for cosmic spiritual exchanges and todevelop a cosmic viewpoint. I believe the Kansai Soka schools participate in an educational program inspiring a sense of intimacy with thecosmos.
Ikeda: Yes. They participate in the American NASA program called

20

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Earth Knowledge Acquired by Middle School Students (Earth KAM).
This program makes it possible to take photographic images of any partof the Earth’s surface using digital cameras mounted on the international
space station. Students calculate the space station orbit and the locus
and time of the photograph and then transmit photographic instructions
in English. These instructions are transmitted to the space station via anorganization like NASA, and the photograph is taken. This systemenables students to perceive visually aspects of the face of the planetthat are difficult to grasp in ordinary class work. The Kansai Soka
schools hold the world record for numbers of times participating inEarth KAM. The Tokyo school, too, is conducting education about
space in cooperation with a world-famous observatory. These opportunities enable students to see the world as a small planet in space totally
without national boundaries and in need of our diligent care.
Unger: These wonderful opportunities to see the Earth from spaceextend your kind of environmental education outward into space.
Ikeda: For the coming era, we must rework the famous admonition
from “think globally, act locally” to “think cosmically, act globally.” The
human race must realize that we children of Earth are all fated to live
together on our planet. Our times require humane education teaching us
to consider the cosmic approach and to act as citizens of the cosmos in
our attempts to deal with the global issues confronting us.
MEDICINE AND BIOETHICS
Health and Longevity
Ikeda: We all hope the twenty-first will be a century of life, one inwhich good health, illness, life and death, and respect for life will be
focal points of increasing attention. In this connection, I should like todiscuss life and bioethics with you.
Unger: As bioscience develops rapidly, we need to look more deeply
into life itself. I am delighted to have this opportunity to learn of thephilosophy of life through this dialogue with you.
Ikeda: You are now a world authority in cardiac surgery. Why did you
select this field?

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

21

Unger: I always wanted to be a doctor. When I was a medical student,
cardiac surgery was still difficult and dangerous. And I decided to dosomething to improve the situation.
Ikeda: Having chosen this difficult path, you have saved many precious
lives. I understand you have performed surgery on more than seventhousand patients.
Unger: About that many major surgical operations.
Ikeda: How do you think we can stay in good health?
Unger: Two conditions determine good health. First is to be free fromthe possible presence of genetic abnormalities. Second is the effort theindividual makes to remain healthy. This means observing dangers togood health and dealing with them. The person who cannot do this runs
the risk of sickness. Beyond the age of forty, each person must be his or
her own doctor.
Ikeda: Very useful and valuable advice. In other words, we require thewisdom and resourcefulness to protect our good health by being ourown doctors and nurses. What is your opinion of the currently held ideathat a stressful society causes sickness?
Unger: Stress has two aspects: a positive and a negative. Challenge
stimulates positive stress. By overcoming it, human beings develop psychologically and physically. Without it we would grow lazy. Negative
stress, on the other hand, is dangerous. When dominated by it, people
become dispirited and pessimistic, losing even the will to accept challenges and ultimately falling ill.
Ikeda: I see. Whether stress operates positively or negatively is determined by the way how we confront it. That is why it is important tohave goals and bravely confront challenges. We must find ways to ignite
the life force inherent in us. Associating with people in whom life force
is abundant and making contacts with a world rich in those forces isimportant. What kinds of people live longest?
Unger: Of course, none of us can live forever. But chances are good for
greater longevity in people who have already lived beyond the age of
sixty.

22

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Ikeda: In the Orient, the age of sixty—called kanreki in Japanese—haslong been afforded special significance as a major stage in the life cycle.
From the many people I have known, I sense that sixty is in fact a milestone.
With your great experience in cardiac surgery, are you able to identify
hearts that promise longevity?
Unger: Each human heart is different. During surgery, examination ofcontraction and color may lead us to assume that, after successful
surgery, a heart that has been operated on may live at least another twenty years. Some people are genetically conditioned to live long. Beyond
genetics, however, physical and spiritual exercise is necessary tolongevity. Indeed, the latter is the key.
Ikeda: I assume you mean that activity on the mental level, like faithand convictions, influence long life. Is that correct?
Unger: Of course. Faith and convictions are the opposite of fear. Having
a foundation of faith means knowing no fear. And this is important totolerance. Faith enables people to make correct judgments and gives
them stability.
Ikeda: Firm faith and convictions put us on the track to good health andlong life. In medical terms, how long can life be extended?
Unger: Unless there are obstacles, I think a person can live a maximumof one hundred and twenty years. The end of life is determined by ourgenes.
Ikeda: Really! By a wonderful coincidence, the same age is given as apossibility in the Buddhist scripture called “Words and Phrases of theGolden Light Sutra.”Unger: Human cells are said to be renewable in one form or anotheruntil the age of 120; thereafter they lose the ability.
Ikeda: Buddhist teachings and modern medical science agree on human
longevity in a remarkable way. Although human beings are naturally
greatly interested in how long they will live, actually quality of life is far
more important than its length. In the Sahassavagga, occurs this passage: “And if anyone were to live for one hundred years, lazy and lack-THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE23

ing in energy, living for one day would be better for him strenuously
putting forth energy.”4 In “The Three Kinds of Treasures,” Nichiren
Daishonin wrote, “But it is better to live a single day with honor than tolive to 120 and die in disgrace.”5
In Japan, where the average life expectancy is longest in the world,
cardiac illnesses come second after cancer as a cause of death. What can
we do in daily life to minimize the danger of heart disease?
Unger: Nutrition is a primary concern. In rural Japanese villages, cancer—especially of the esophagus—causes many deaths, whereas casesof cardiac illness are comparatively few. In Tokyo—as in other big cities
like Los Angeles and San Francisco—where people eat rich diets heavy
in meat, deaths from heart disease are numerous.
Ikeda: Until about the 1970s, the leading cause of death in Japaneserural villages was cerebrovascular disease followed by cancer and casesof cardiac illness were relatively rare. At present, however, as rural people, too, eat more meat, cardiac illness is on the increase. In his Great
Concentration and Insight, the Chinese priest and scholar Tiantai(538–97) listed disorderly dietary habits as a cause of illness. Other
Buddhist scriptures list the following effects of overeating:
1. Laziness.
2. Oversleeping that causes other people trouble.
3. Upset physical condition and sickness.
(Nigantha Nataputta Sutta)
Unger: Stated simply, the way to prevent cardiac sickness is to follow
these three rules:
1. No smoking.
2. Reduce intake of foods high in cholesterol.
3. In diabetics, scrupulous monitoring of blood sugar.
Ikeda: Very clearly set forth! I have heard that a drink of water before
sleep prevents dehydration, promotes good circulation of the blood, andcontributes to good health. Is that so?
Unger: Improving the circulation protects the brain. Getting plenty ofwater is important. It is said that people free of heart or kidney problems
should drink about two liters a day. We should be cautious not to drink

24

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

too much mineral water because it is high in sodium, which contributes
to hypertension.
Ikeda: What foods do you recommend as good for the heart?
Unger: The best thing is to eat only half of everything. Cut back onmeat to only about once a week. But eat fish, fruits, and grains and vegetables. A glass of good wine is fine, too. But balance is all-important.
Overeating and over-drinking must lead to sickness.
Ikeda: Moderation in diet is the key. The Dharma Analysis Treasury
explains four categories of nourishment.
1. Foods actually put in the mouth like meat, fish, and vegetables.
2. Things that give joy and pleasure on contact like good music andfine art.
3. Things that invigorate by inspiring thought and giving hope.
4. Mental power inspiring the will to live.
The mutual interrelation of these four sources of energy maintains good
health. What kind of exercise is best for the heart?
Unger: Walking every day. Climbing stairs, too, is good. I generally do
not ride in elevators. I believe climbing three flights of stairs is better
than jogging for an hour or going to a gymnasium.
Ikeda: A Buddhist walking training called kyogyo (kinhin) that consistsof walking back and forth in a fixed space regulates the physical condition. The Vinaya attributes five effects to it.
1. Increases the ability to walk far.
2. Promotes reflection.
3. Reduces the likelihood of illness.
4. Promotes digestion.
5. Prolongs the steadiness of mind.
Gandhi said that, for even the busiest person, exercise time is as important as meal time. He asserted that exercise does not take away timefrom work; on the contrary, it produces time for work.
What is the best time of day for exercise?

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

25

Unger: Morning, because it stimulates circulation. A little morning
exercise raises the pulse. This makes it easier to deal with the various
stresses encountered throughout the day.
Ikeda: What ways of combating stress are good for the heart?
Unger: Again, walking a little. Getting the right amount of sleep, too, is
important, as are loving others and being loved by others.
Ikeda: A simple statement of important truths. Although individuals
differ, what is the ideal amount of per-day sleep time?
Unger: It varies with age and physical needs. Older people require less.
Active people in the prime of life require more. On the other hand, theyoung can go without sleep for a little while. A short nap after lunch iseffective. This is why Mediterranean peoples customarily take a siesta.
Other adjustments should be made to the activities of the day. For
instance, in hot weather it is better to work during the cool morning
hours and rest in the heat of the day. When adjusting the temperature is
impossible, we can make adjustments in our schedules. It is important
not to rush but to work as slowly as possible.
Ikeda: Your words about good health reflect sound wisdom.
Life and Bioethics
Ikeda: All terrestrial life forms are composed of proteins geneticallydetermined through DNA. They are all descendants of the first DNA on
earth which over a period of four billion years has ramified into myriad
forms, some of which are now extinct. This is the way modern medical
science and molecular biology explain the origins of life and the mechanism of evolution. How do you evaluate it?
Unger: In the course of human development, we have come up withmany biological evolutionary models. In the twentieth century, molecular biology taught us genetic information is inscribed as a DNA
sequence on the four amino acids of which DNA is composed. The discovery of DNA enabled us to explain biological evolution on the basisof genetic engineering. We know that all life forms on Earth descendfrom the original DNA and, at the molecular level, are made in the sameway. Developments in today’s genetic engineering provide the basis for

26

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

explaining biological evolution genetically. Traditional biology could
not explain the origin and evolution of life. Genetic engineering gives us
new knowledge doing so. No doubt further genetic-engineering developments will result in still more detailed elucidation.
Genetic Technology and Human Life
Ikeda: Symbolic of the results of genetic engineering, the decoding of
the human genome in 2003 showed that human beings have about 30
thousand genes.
Unger: Yes. There can be no doubt that month by month advances ingenetic engineering are increasing their impact on biology. In the future,
genome decoding will enable us to discover genes, thus permitting us todevelop diagnoses and therapies for genetically-related illnesses. We
will be able to prevent or retard illnesses. Genetic engineering will be
indispensable in the pharmaceutical industry, which will be able to use it
in the development of many pharmaceuticals like the insulin required bydiabetics.
Ikeda: Undeniably humanity can look forward to many advantages
from genetic engineering. But there are people who consider rapid
advances in this area dangerous manipulation of life itself. Because of
its central importance to human existence we must cautiously discuss
the negative aspects of genetic research. As some people point out, thediscovery of a gene predisposing a person to a certain illness might prejudice that person’s chances for employment or acceptance in an insurance plan. What are your opinions on this situation?
Unger: The European Academy of Sciences and Arts, Salzburg organized a research conference on this topic with the National Academy of
Sciences, Washington, D.C. in 2001. The topic of this conference has
been “The Impact of Gene Technology on the Human Dimension.”
There have been two parts. In the first part, specialists discussed themost recent results in gene technology. In the second part, philosophers,
theologians, and economists showed the human dimension. To be honest, genetic technology leads us into an entirely new world and has asignificant impact on our life. It helps to understand the Creation, too.
Ikeda: For genetic technology to serve the cause of human happiness it
is vitally important to take into consideration the opinions of—as you

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

27

say—philosophers, theologians, and economists and others.
Unger: Genetic technology affects all fields. Our conference showed
grave negative factors and expectations and hopes. One of the hopes isthat genetic technology will give birth to a new industry to recompense
the industrial world for the considerable investments it made in the
genome project.
Ikeda: What is your position in the discussion?
Unger: I represent the natural-scientific viewpoint that human beings
should study everything that exists. Science provides us with plenty of
information helpful in overcoming diseases and enriching human life.
Genetic engineering has the power to revolutionize our way of thinking
and benefiting humanity.
Genetic Therapy and Human Dignity
Ikeda: Focal issues in the future will be how to relate genetic engineering to human happiness and how to control its negative aspects. In the
medical field, genetic engineering opens up advanced possibilities inboth diagnosis and therapy.
Unger: Yes. Genetic engineering is contributing to the development of
new diagnostic and therapeutic methods. But not all genetic information
has been completely decoded. As you point out, decoding of the genetic
information can become, not enhancing, but threatening. For instance,
conceivably a person with a gene making cancer by the age of sixty alikelihood might be refused insurance or rejected by a prospective
employer. At our present stage of knowledge, such a diagnosis is premature and mistaken.
Ikeda: I agree. Using genetic information to invade privacy and serve asa cause of rejection for insurance, employment, or marriage is putting
the cart before the horse. A blueprint of a life, genetic information is theultimate area of human privacy. That is why protecting it and using it
effectively must always be taken into consideration in genetic diagnostics. Science must protect human dignity.

28

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Reproductive Therapy and the Use of Embryos
Ikeda: Today medical science goes beyond therapy and prevention to
manipulate human life itself. The first in-vitro human birth occurred in
1978. Since then reproductive therapy has advanced with astonishing
speed.
Unger: Yes, it has. Originally developed for veterinarian use, in-vitro
fertilization is now fulfilling the hopes of many couples who, thoughwanting them, have been unable to have children. In-vitro fertilization
itself is an assistance technique whereby a process that normally takes
place within a woman’s body is conducted outside it.
Ikeda: As you say, it has been a great blessing to many apparentlyinfertile women. But it has also opened the door to therapeutic invasionof the early stage of life. It is now possible to select fertilized ova andmanipulate cryogenically preserved embryos. The doctors and scientists
who employ such techniques must be respectful of the dignity of lifeand concentrate on human happiness in the form of overcoming infertility.
Unger: I, too, am opposed to limitless intervention in the origins of life.
On the other hand, a bigger problem today entails fertilization, not for
reproduction, but for recycling therapies in other medical fields. For
instance, a technology has been researched to produce various otherkinds of cells from the fertilized ovum at the stage of blastocyst or fromthe cells of an embryo removed from the woman’s body by abortion.
Ikeda: This field is promising in connection with the treatment of
intractable pathologies and in recycling therapy. But the inevitable
destruction of embryos entails ethical problems. The Japanese Council
for Science and Technology Policy (CSTP) is currently debating theissue of embryo use. Unfortunately, however, they adopt as their criterion the usefulness of embryonic research instead of the proper treatmentof life itself.
Unger: But we must remember that many embryos fail to reach thestage at which they can be called life. Not all artificially-inseminatedova are returned to the mothers’ bodies. A certain number of them must
be discarded. Even many naturally-inseminated ova are never implanted
and are wasted. I believe human life starts when the embryo is settled inTHE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

29

the mother’s uterus. Therefore I see no great problem in using as
research material inseminated ova that are not returned to the mothers’
bodies. Still we must remember what the late Franz Cardinal König,who was honorary chairman of the European Academy of Sciences andArts, said: Researchers must do research, but they must also abide by
the voice of conscience.
Ikeda: Although it can be a great blessing, stem-cell research can also
threaten respect for the dignity of life. We must, therefore, be very wary.
Tampering with the embryo, the bud of life, runs the danger of regarding
human beings as means to ends, which relates directly to the loss ofhuman dignity. As it proceeds, embryo research must always bear inmind the nature of the embryo as the bud of human life.
Brain Death and Organ Transplants
Ikeda: Brain death occurs when the brain has irremediably ceased functioning and the heart is kept beating on artificial support systems. In
Japan, opinion is divided as to whether this state constitutes death.
Unger: I hesitate to use the term brain death because people tend to
think that a person in this condition is in fact already dead. If such is thecase, discontinuing intensive care becomes permissible. I prefer the term“coma depasse” excellently defined by a French neurologist. In thisstate, the brain is disordered, the body temperature drops, the heart still
functions but circulation drops, and the nails turn bluish-black. Somehow or other coma depasse was mistranslated into English as brain
death, and the term has stuck.
Ikeda: The focal point of the brain-death issue lies in relation to organtransplants, because they often depend on people in the so-called braindead condition, which artificial support systems can extend for long
periods. What are your opinions on the topic?
Unger: Brain death is determined with a purpose in mind—organ transplants for instance. In such cases, whether to discontinue intensive caremust be decided. This determination serves as justification for removing
organs from donors. Some people fear that organs may be removed fromstill living subjects. Actually, however, international practice has established certain relatively objective standards for judging brain death.
These must be strictly adhered to.

30

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Ikeda: Some time ago, I proposed stringent criteria which, with theaddition of the condition of absence of circulation in the brain, should
alleviate the anxiety suffered by patients’ families. Because of the acutescarcity of donors in Japan, a movement is underway to revise conditions for transplants from the brain dead. Until now, transplants havebeen authorized on the strength of both signed donor cards and family
consent. The revised system would authorize them on the basis of family consent only. I believe, however, that the spontaneous, un-coerced
wish of the patient should be the premise of brain-death organ transplants. Different people define death differently. Authorizing organ
donation solely on the basis of family consent might mean that organs
are removed from the bodies of people who do not equate brain deathwith death. Furthermore, in many instances today, families afflicted byhaving a member sick enough to become brain dead find it difficult togive their full consent on the basis of doctors’ explanations which,owing to time restrictions, may be unsatisfyingly brief. When it is
impossible to know the patient’s attitude toward brain death, death, andorgan donation, the most serious consideration must be made of thegreat burden the revised standards put on surviving family members.
Unger: Some people are afraid that organ transplants from the brain
dead reduce the patient from a subject deserving therapy to an object
from which organs may be harvested. Personally, however, I believe thatthe wording “coma depasse” preserves the dignity of the spontaneous
donor; one subject is giving another subject his organs. Donation oforgans is an act of life. The practice of selling organs for transplants—
which is said to occur in some countries—must be strictly rejected as itseriously damages trust in medical treatment.
Ikeda: I agree completely. To compensate for the scarcity of humanorgans, transplanting organs from nonhuman animals is under consideration. For instance, pig-heart transplantation is being discussed. How doyou react?
Unger: This is a very complicated issue. I react negatively because of
the high likelihood of transplanting the animal’s viruses along with theorgan.
Ikeda: We must then put our hopes in artificial organs. In 1986, youbegan developing the smallest artificial heart and have become world
famous as a pioneer in the field. The project must have been arduous.

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

31

Unger: I started developing an artificial-heart (Ellipsoid heart) in 1975
and implanted it in 1986 clinically as a bridge toward transplantation.
This was a pioneering step and 20 years later this step turned out to be alarge one. The artificial heart must be very simple; otherwise it fails tofunction as it should. Subsequent technological innovations led to thedevelopment of an artificial heart for clinical use. The future looks
bright. The artificial heart will someday become as easy to use as thepacemaker is today.
Euthanasia
Ikeda: The legalization of euthanasia in Holland in 2001 and in Belgium in 2002 has cast death-related bioethics in sharp relief. The salient
point is determining whether it is permissible deliberately to shorten life
in order to terminate the suffering of an incurable patient. What are youropinions?
Unger: Personally I oppose euthanasia. It is impermissible from boththe medical and the humane standpoints. The doctor’s job is to use therapy to prolong, not to destroy life. The debate about euthanasia really
did not arise in the clinic. It is a discussion of whether to recognize thevalue of the lives of people with protracted consciousness disorder (theso-called vegetative state) or of those with grave intellectual disorders.
In other words, it is a discussion of whether it is permissible to curtail
lives that are not worth living. This was the theoretical basis of the Nazi
euthanasia plan. It is not the doctor’s job to judge the quality of life.
This is why I feel it is mistaken for doctors to talk glibly about euthanasia. They should discuss how to free terminally ill patients from pain,
not ways of killing them.
Ikeda: I agree with you. Doctors should make every effort to relieve
pain through the use of anaesthesia and analgesic therapy. Therapy thatoverextends life is thought by some to worsen the patient’s suffering anddiminish his or her dignity. This was one of the ideas behind the recent
legalization of euthanasia. Actually, however, at present considerationsof human dignity miss the mark. They tend to concentrate on the intellect or on the personality as a function of the intellect. Consequently,
intellectual regression or irremediable loss of the psychosomatic functions is thought to detract from human dignity. On the basis of thisapproach, euthanasia may be forced on weak patients with intractable
illnesses. Such a situation should not be allowed to occur.

32

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLEThe Near-death Experience
Ikeda: On the many occasions when you have witnessed patients confront death have you had any experiences indicative of the wondrous
nature of life and the greatness of the strength to live?
Unger: On several occasions I have observed in awe while life has left
the tissues when a patient has died during surgery. One senses the soulleaving the body.
Ikeda: Scholarly reports compiled in the United States on near-deathexperiences speak of seeing rings of light, of being drawn into a darktunnel, and of departing from the physical body and observing oneself
during surgery. Have any of your patients had similar near-death experiences? What are your ideas on them?
Unger: I have known many patients who after several days in a comastate have come back to life after having been pronounced unlikely toregain consciousness. All of them have said that, during the coma, they
were bathed in a wonderful warm light as they traveled a long, narrowtube and that they were reluctant to return to this world. I think thesenear-death experiences reveal to us the meaning of our existence. Perhaps being bathed in light we profoundly long to approach is the meaning of existence.
Ikeda: The American psychologist Elizabeth Kübler-Ross describes her
own experience of having left her body and of having stood over the bed
looking down on herself. She also speaks of approaching and melding
with a light. Her description has much in common with the near-deathexperiences you mention.
The mention of a light brings to mind Tolstoy’s story “The Death ofIvan Ilyich,” in which an ordinary government official falls fatally ill
and struggles with the fear of dying until ultimately he reaches the purehappiness of eternal light. Transcending time, light symbolizes the leapto eternal life.
The Buddhist teaching of the Nine Consciousnesses deals with deeplevel awareness and indicates that after death, the individual life unites
with the eternal life force at the origins of the universe.
Because they are shared by peoples of totally different backgrounds,
near-death experiences include common, universal elements transcending culture and religion. Though much about them remains unexplained,THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

33

they are nonetheless fascinating.
The Eternal Nature of Life
Ikeda: Together with the question of death we confront the difficult
issue of the eternal nature of life. Buddhism deals with it on the basis of
the teaching of cycles of birth and death. What are your ideas about theeternal nature of life?
Unger: This is a very difficult issue. Christianity teaches that the soulwith the spirit is in the body until death, when it is liberated to rise andsublimate with eternal life. Development in gene technology do notinterfere with this way of thinking.
From a physical point of view, let us assume that an abnormality forblindness occurs in the chromosomes of a fly. The offspring of that fly,
too, will be blind. The same kind of thing happens in all animals andplants, including human beings. Our religion teaches that the Creator,
God, gives us life. But if life is determined by genes, or even by chainsof proteins, how are we to know where we came from and where we areheaded? Once again we bump into the old fundamental problem. Perhaps we can only sense the eternity of life with both our conscious andour subconscious. Perhaps the only way to find clues about eternal life isto refine our instinctive intuition.
What does the doctrine of the Nine Consciousnesses teach about eternal life?
Ikeda: The first five of the nine consist of sensory perceptions received
through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, and body. The sixth consciousness
compiles, analyzes, and makes judgement about information received
perceptually. On still deeper levels are the seventh, or mana, consciousness and the eighth, or alaya, consciousness. At this point we are dealing with depth consciousness or the subconscious.
Unger: The interplay of the conscious and the subconscious has become
an important field of research. Recent cerebral science has clarified
cranial-nerve activities that precede consciousness and free will.
Measurements of cerebral structures make it necessary to suppose asubconscious intent behind conscious acts. I understand that our livingin this world arises from the subconscious to expand widely into the conscious.

34

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Ikeda: That is a very stimulating idea. In modern terms, the karma that
Buddhism teaches as continuing through life-death cycles could becalled potential life energy. The eighth, alaya consciousness deals withthe continuity of karma. At the death of the individual, the operations of
all seven other consciousnesses become latent in the eighth, which issaid to continue to operate. When we discussed this issue, the worldfamous physicist and former rector of Moscow State University Anatoli
A. Logunov expressed great interest in the eternal nature of karma.
On a level still deeper than the alaya consciousness, Buddhism postulates a ninth, fundamental, pure consciousness, which can be thought ofas universal life itself. Death makes the individual life latent in cosmic
life. Birth represents manifestation in the mana and other consciousnesses from the alaya consciousness (subconscious).
Medical Ethics
Ikeda: All doctors swear to abide by the Hippocratic Oath, which binds
them to apply dietetic measures for the benefit of the sick, keep themfrom harm and injustice, give no deadly drugs, use harmless principles,
guard patients’ confidentiality, give no abortion-inducing medicines, andso on. What is your idea of the ideal physician?
Unger: The Hippocratic Oath is a universal ethic for doctors because itteaches us our duties to relieve pain, heal, and cure illness. As to theideal, I always say we need doctors, not medical technicians. By doctor
I mean a person whose personality is radiant in totality. A person who iswarmly humane. A person who has a balanced sense enabling him or
her to discriminate between the important and the trivial. Such a doctor
must always have in mind the usual ethical admonitions to honor parents, not to kill or steal, and so on. As medical science progresses, doctors are required to possess various kinds of knowledge and technicalskills. Therapeutic facilities grow increasingly complex. This is why
fundamental ethics of life are so important.
Ikeda: What conditions must doctors fulfill?
Unger: Day and night, doctors must protect and work for their patients.
Ikeda: You state it pithily and with a ring of philosophical conviction.
The Buddhist scripture called Sovereign Kings of the Golden Light Sutra
teaches that in all cases doctors must be compassionate and free from

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

35

lust for profit. Doctors exist to relieve patient suffering, never to profit
from it. They must therefore always have a compassionate heart. You
embody the meaning of working for the sake of patients.
Unger: You are kind to say so. Striving to be that way has become apart of my life.
Ikeda: I imagine that you approach each surgical operation in thatframe of mind and that each is a battlefield where the struggle for victory is continuous. Are there points you keep in mind to ensure you are in
perfect condition for each operation?
Unger: In a natural way, I always remind myself that being a doctor isthe foundation of my work. Through daily consultation and surgery I
can help my patients directly. Meeting them strengthens me, consultingwith them is the source of my energy.
Ikeda: Jivaka was a celebrated doctor who lived in the time of Shakyamuni Buddha. His name in Sanskrit means full of life or life-giver. I am
sure that your own life-giving attitude sets your patient’s minds at rest.
You once said that the patient is the doctor’s king and that all a doctor’s
knowledge and technical skill must be used for the patient’s good. Thisis a very important assertion.
Unger: The doctor’s duty and goal are to serve the patient as his or her
lord. The doctor must never regard the patient as a mere object or ameans to an end. Each individual is a subject. I believe that patients’rights and position must be restored to their proper prominence.
Ikeda: People in leadership positions in any field, not just medicine,have a primary duty to serve the people. The goal of the SGI movement
is to create an age in which the ordinary people play the leading role andleaders serve them.
As an issue related to medical ethics, I am interested to learn yourthoughts on the patient’s right of self-determination. Greater emphasis
on self-determination seems to have established patients’ rights in therapy and equalized the patient-doctor relationship.
Unger: Yes, that is true. As those rights come into greater prominence,people speak out against their violation and against treating patients asobjects. We must act based on the recognition that patients are subjects

36

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

receiving treatment. It is completely appropriate for them to understandproposed therapies fully and to participate in judgments and decisions inconnection with them.
Ikeda: Yes, emphasis should be put on patients’ rights of self-determination. Still the nature of decisions that must be made in modern therapy
is highly diverse and demands consideration from many angles. For
instance, surrogate parenthood, sale of organs for transplants, terminallyill patients’ wish for euthanasia, and so on. What are your thoughts on
this expanded range of things patients must decide?
Unger: A good doctor will do his utmost to explain the situation andmotivate his patients. I think patients have the right to refuse a therapy
even when as a doctor I would recommend it. The doctor-patient dialogue is of central importance. Unfortunately, medicine today is losing
the chance for the kind of dialogue a doctor can use to explain conditions and motivate patients. My thirty years of experience have taughtme that, given the right explanation and allowed to consider things completely, patients make the right choices. When people are ready to talkthings over, many problems can be solved in ways satisfactory to bothsides.
Ikeda: Today it is standard medical practice for doctors to explain therapy to patients thoroughly enough for them to understand and volitionallygive what is called informed consent. This, of course, is premised on theability of the patient to grant consent. How do you regard the situation
when it involves the under-aged?
Unger: When young children are involved, the issue of self-determination is somewhat different. In such cases, their parents and adults mustbe allowed to decide. A child is in no position to decide what is best forhim or her. The same must be said of the severely mentally-disabled. Insuch cases, intense individual examinations are essential. A doctor who
feels obliged to respect the patient’s rights will perform them as a matterof course. As I have said and as deserves repeating, dialogue and trust
are the indispensable basis of medical treatment.
Medical Mishaps
Ikeda: I agree completely. Patients have the right to know and the rightto be convinced about the therapy they are to undergo. Doctors have theTHE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

37

obligation to explain the situation to them.
In Japan, increasing numbers of mistakes on doctors’ parts—mistaken
surgery, wrong drug administration, and so on—have become a serious
social problem. How do you think we can best prevent such mistakes?
Unger: Doctors are human beings liable to make mistakes. That is why
it is essential that every error be exhaustively researched to clarify its
causes. Medicine today clings hard and fast to the defensive approach tothe problem and starts to deal with each problem only after it has
become serious. Moreover, the mountains of documents and the bureaucracy found in our hospitals. Computerization of information likepatient records means that doctors spend more time in front of computers and much less with patients.
Ikeda: That is a worrying situation. Although undeniably medicine ingeneral grows more complex and doctors’ work increases, the more
medical technology advances, the more the doctor must diligently strive
to be humane.
Unger: That is why I constantly insist that our hospital must never
become bureaucratic. A hospital bureaucracy works well only after
patient numbers dwindle down to nothing. I do not want that to happen
to our hospital. Our health system must be patient oriented.
Ikeda: You make an important point that applies to more than just hospitals. From their very origins, organizations must decide for whom andto what purpose they exist. Observing you reminds me of the Hippocratic Oath and its insistence that knowledge and skills be used, not to
exploit, but to serve humanity. This embodies the spirit of your Academy. Hippocrates also states that a physician who is a lover of wisdom isthe equal of a god.6 As a famous physician, the saver of many lives, anda great contributor to European intellectual growth, I pray that you willcontinue your activities with renewed fervor.
Unger: True value comes from the heart and can be transmitted fromheart to heart. In this dialogue I have been deeply moved by your heartfelt words. I believe that on the basis of our many shared ideas we havecreated something very fruitful. I hope that you and I can continue tospread the spirit of tolerance throughout the world for the sake of peace.

38

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Notes
The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin (Soka Gakkai, 1999: Tokyo), p. 4.
Karaniya Metta Sutta, The Buddha’s Words on Loving-Kindness, trans. from thePali by the Amaravati Sangha, http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/khp/khp.9.
amar.html (accessed August 22, 2006)
3
Tsunesaburo Makiguchi, A Geography of Human Life (Caddo Gap Press: San Francisco), p. 286.
4
Pali Translation Series No. 46, The Word of the Doctrine (Dhammapada), trans.
with an introduction and notes by K. R. Norman (The Pali Text Society, 2000: Oxford),
p. 17.
5
The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, p. 851.
6
Hippocrates, trans. W.H.S. Jones (Willian Heinemann Ltd., 1923: London) II,
p. 287.
1
2

THE HUMANIST PRINCIPLE

Daisaku Ikeda
Born in 1928. Honorary President of Soka Gakkai. President ofSoka Gakkai International (SGI). Founder of The Institute ofOriental Philosophy. Established educational institutions suchas Soka University, Soka University of America and Soka
Schools; cultural institutions such as the Min-On Concert Association and the Tokyo Fuji Art Museum; as well as academic
and peace-research institutions such as Toda Institute for Global
Peace & Policy Research and the Boston Research Center forthe 21st Century. Authored numerous literary works such as“The Human Revolution” (12 volumes), “The New Human Revolution” (in progress), and “The Intimate Talks with Global Pioneers,” and “Recollections of My Meetings with Leading World
Figures.” Furthermore, there are many collections of dialogues
with intelligentsia from around the world, “Choose Life” (A.
Toynbee), “Moral Lessons of the Twentieth Century” (M.S.
Gorbachev), “Choose Peace” (Johan Galtung), etc. He hasreceived 200 honorary doctorates and honorary professorships
from universities and institutes around the world, such as
Moscow State University, University of Glasgow and Beijing
University.
Felix Unger
Born in 1946. Doctor of medicine (cardiac surgery). Graduateof Medical School of the University of Vienna in Austria. Headof the Department of Cardiac Surgery at Salzburg State Hospital, by way of Professor at Innsbruck University and resident at
the Clinic for Cardiology of the University of Vienna. In 1990,
as one of the founding members of the European Academy of
Sciences and Arts assumed position of President. He is also
director of European Heart Institute. Author and editor of 16
volumes, including “Health is wealth,” Strategic Visions for
European Health Care at the beginning of the 21st century
Report to the European Parliament. His wife Monika is an
artist. Holds honorary medical doctorates from Budapest University, Timisoara University, and honorary doctorates fromSoka University, Marburg University and Riga University.

39