INTRODUCTION
THIS COLLECTION of essays sets out to present to the English-

speaking reader an accurate picture of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s viewof history and the educational and religious movements with which
he was involved. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi was the founder of theVa l u e -C reating Educational Society (Soka Kyoiku Gakkai),forerunner of the modern Soka Gakkai International, a worldwide
cultural, educational and peace movement grounded in religious
conviction.
Modern society is very different from the social setting against
which the world religions, including Buddhism, Judaism, Christianityand Islam, emerged to form the basis of the great spiritual cultures ofhumankind. Some of these differences can be understood throughMax Weber’s theory of secularization, which suggests that varioussystems in society, such as education, health and law, have diverged
from religion, while religion as a rule has grown separate from theprotections of the state and is now to be found more in the faith ofindividual believers. Similarly, in terms of political systems, whilemonarchy was once the norm, the trend worldwide is now toward
democracy, where nations choose their rulers by voting in elections.
In cultural life it was once men and women of religion who played acentral role in society as possessors of knowledge; however, thesedays research and educational institutions function independently ofreligion, and people of religion are not automatically credited withintellectual authority. Modern science, rooted fundamentally inmaterialism, has developed enormously, and its influence on the ideasof modern culture has thrown up problems more serious than any inhuman history.
Changes in culture and society have appeared gradually since thelatter half of the 19th century. Tsunesaburo Makiguchi identified
these trends with a considerable degree of precision. He thought
seriously about the direction humankind should take in the future, theproper roles of education and religion, and the reforms necessary ineducation and religion to enable the roles to be fulfilled.
2INTRODUCTION

Readers of Japanese can now find out more about the developmentof Makiguchi’s ideas from the ten volumes of the Makiguchi Tsunesaburo
Zenshu [The Complete Works of Tsunesaburo Makiguchi] publishedby Daisan Bunmeisha, or from the relatively inexpensive popularversions of Makiguchi’s works Soka Kyoikugaku Taikei [The System ofValue-Creating Pedagogy] and Jinsei Chirigaku [The Geography ofHuman Life] published by Seikyo Bunko. Several scholarly studies
also have been published in Japanese. Readers of English, however,are limited to the two introductory works by Dr. Dayle M. Bethel.
Editor Koichi Miyata’s essay on the religious ideas of Makiguchi andthe discussion of his ideas on education by Susumu Shimazono may
be found in Volume 5 of The Journal of Oriental Studies. Unfortunately,
a limited number of this edition was printed, and it is not by and large
available to the general reader.
With the objective of conveying to English-language readers thebasics of Makiguchi’s ideas and influence, we decided therefore topublish this special journal issue of three essays and one case studyof Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s ideas in practice. “Tsunesaburo
Makiguchi’s Theory of the State,” by Koichi Miyata, follows thenarrative of The Geography of Human Life, Makiguchi’s first bookand Japan’s first systemic work of anthropological geography. Thereare two areas of focus in this essay: Makiguchi’s views on
civilization and history, and his ideas on the role of the state in thelives of its citizens. A running theme in Makiguchi’s thoughts
becomes readily apparent: that the world should move away fromimperialist competition and toward coexistence and cooperation.
This theme can be traced to Makiguchi’s later thoughts, developedin The System of Value-Creating Pedagogy, demonstrating aremarkable consistency in Makiguchi’s ideas on coexistence. The
overview of Makiguchi on the role of the state points to basic
principles he identified: that the state exists to provide safety,
freedom and a better quality of life for its citizens; that these citizens
should not be sacrificed to the goals of the state; and furthermorethat the imperatives of state relations in the imperialist era must shift
from competition for territorial expansion to coexistence andmutual enhancement.
In the second essay, “Value-Creating Pedagogy and Japanese
Education in the Modern Era,” Kazunori Kumagai, contrasts the3Th e Jo ur na l o f O ri en t al St u d ie s 1 0: Sp ec ia l I ss ue

education system of Japan, in which primacy was given to the needsof the state and the military, with the educational ideas of Makiguchi,
whose philosophical roots can be traced to the humanist tradition. In
the modern period of Japan that commenced with the Meiji
Restoration, education and its aims were subsumed under the drivefor national unification and the attempt to place Japan on equal
footing with the advanced capitalist societies. The sought-for parity
came at a heavy cost, however, and Makiguchi advocated thehumanistic approach of his value-creating pedagogy to alleviate thevarious strains placed on society by the nationalist education agenda.
Makiguchi called for a number of changes in education: fromeducation as a manipulative tool of a modern state to education forthe happiness of children, and from the authoritarian education
symbolized by the Imperial Rescript on Education to rational anddemocratic education. Central to his thoughts on education was
Makiguchi’s philosophy of value. Because Makiguchi’s reform
proposals were diametrically opposed to the use of education by themilitarist government as a means of mobilizing society in the war
effort, they were not to be realized until democracy was introduced toJapan following defeat in World War II. Kumagai’s essay clarifies
these points in terms of the history of education in Japan.
In the third essay, “Nichiren Thought in Modern Japan: Two
Perspectives,” Hiroo Sato considers the role of the emperor system inthe formation of modern Japan. He compares the Nichirenism ofChigaku Tanaka with Tsunesaburo Makiguchi’s reception ofNichiren Buddhism; while both thinkers were strongly influenced by
the religious thought of Nichiren, the religious movements which they
initiated were radically divergent. Tanaka accepted the religious
authority of the emperor as ultimate and viewed the imperial family
and Japan as having a special place in the cosmos. He insisted that theworld should be united under Japan and reinterpreted Nichiren’s
ideas in nationalist terms. Makiguchi, on the other hand, believed in
the Buddhist emphasis on the equality of all, refused to recognize thereligious authority of the emperor, and favored an internationalist
interpretation of Nichiren that placed the moral values of Buddhism
above state imperatives.
Sato then examines Nichiren’s own views on imperial authority toshow that Nichiren Buddhism had been misappropriated by4

INTRODUCTION

advocates of Nichirenism while, by contrast, Makiguchi’sinterpretation of Nichiren Buddhism was consistent with Nichiren’sintent. There is a stark contrast in the application of Nichiren thought
to social reform, specifically noted in their differing views on the ideaof the Buddha’s land as ideal society and the destructive implicationsof militarist oppression. The difference is essential to understanding
Makiguchi’s suppression by the militarist authorities.
Dilma de Melo Silva reports in “Makiguchi in Action – Enhancing
Education for Peace” on the educational initiatives taken up inBrazil. Translations in various languages of the two English works byDayle M. Bethel have served to disseminate the educational ideas ofMakiguchi to many countries, and experimental education initiatives
have arisen in a number of locations. By May 2000, 55 schools in theSão Paulo area had joined the Makiguchi Project in Action, involving
over 1,100 teachers and some 34,000 students. The report details theproject and describes the project’s application of the educationalphilosophy of Makiguchi. Comparison of previous education and thehumanistic education of Makiguchi suggests the effectiveness ofMakiguchi’s ideas in dealing with such issues as school violence andhigh drop-out rates. The second half of the report deals with the workof the Brazil–Soka Gakkai International (BSGI) Education Divisionin the area of adult literacy education. The BSGI literacy movement,
which is supported by a large number of volunteers, is compared toother literacy projects and its outstanding success highlighted.
It is hoped that this special issue of The Journal will serve tocommunicate something of the significance of Makiguchi’s ideas andinfluence.
ONE F INAL NOTE is in order regarding Makiguchi’s opposition to

the state policy of the militarist regime on religion resulted in hisoppression and eventual death in prison. On the question ofsignificance in terms of the peace movement in Japan, I would likehere to clarify the surrounding historical facts that led to the charges
against Makiguchi of violating the Public Security Preservation Lawand committing blasphemy.
Ise Shrine received special protection under the state as it was thenational shrine to the Sun God Amaterasu Omikami, legendary
ancestor of the Imperial House. Its worship was imposed by the state5Th e Jou rna l o f Ori en t a l Stu d ie s 10 :S pec i a l Iss u eon the people of Japan. Makiguchi had refused to worship the taima
or paper amulets from Ise Shrine and instructed the members of theSoka Kyoiku Gakkai to do the same. In and of itself, Makiguchi’saction was a purely religious offense. The gravity of his action,
however, comes into relief when we take into account the bizarre
adaptation by the state of the Public Security Preservation Law, a law
designed originally to punish extremist groups attempting to “bringabout radical changes in the national polity.” By a succession ofamendments, this law came to carry a maximum penalty of death andwas expanded to target in effect religious expression.
The Public Security Preservation Law was promulgated in 1925
under pressure of the Privy Council in return for approving theUniversal Manhood Suffrage Law. Established by the state to advise
the emperor on the Constitution of the Empire of Japan (MeijiConstitution), the Privy Council in reality wielded considerable
influence in all state matters. It was composed of an elite and powerfulgroup of elder statesmen that represented interests in preserving theemperor’s rule as stipulated in Article 4 of the Meiji Constitution:“The Emperor is the ruler of the nation, and has complete sovereignty
over the nation.”
By emergency decree in 1928, the Public Security Preservation
Law was amended to warrant the death penalty. According to Article
8 of the Meiji Constitution, an emergency decree could be issued bythe emperor or his state-appointed representative when the Diet wasnot in session, and it would carry the same force of law. To issue thisemergency decree, the government had only to seek review andapproval from the Privy Council. The 1941 amendment to the Public
Security Preservation Law expanded targeted groups to include anygroup, particularly religious groups, “desecrating shrines or thedignity of the Imperial household.” While refusing to venerate theamulets of Ise Shrine was considered blasphemy before theamendment, it was now a violation of the Public Security Preservation
Law and punishable by death. Why was the law revised in thismanner? The military regime utilized the amended law as one ofmany legal instruments to drive pro-war sentiments into the public’s
mind and increase the mobilization of all areas of society for war.
Of course, the next question is this: How did the state place
political instruments of repression at the disposal of the militarists?
6INTRODUCTION

The framing of the Meiji Constitution made it relatively easy forthe military to take control of all government powers. The emperor
was supreme commander of the army, his prerogatives carried out by
proxy given to the army and navy General Staff Offices. Neither theMinister of War, the Prime Minister nor the Diet could intervene inmilitary decisions. The only means available to the Diet for regulating
the military was the allocation of budget. If the proposed budget was
not approved by the Diet, however, the government had the power toimplement the previous year’s budget and, as in the case of issuing anemergency decree, could push through the budget without Dietapproval in times of emergency. The influence of the Diet on themilitary was therefore minimal because of the way in which the system
was constructed. According to the constitution every minister of state
was accountable to the emperor, not to the Diet or the people. The
authority of the Prime Minister was therefore limited, and specificallythe Minister of War had the right to bypass the Prime Minister andexpress his opinions directly to the emperor. Furthermore, appointees
to the position of Minister of War were commissioned officers, giving
the military the right to force the resignation of a minister. By refusing
to appoint a successor, the military could effect, with minimal effort,
the collapse of the entire state cabinet and form a pro-militarist cabinet
to serve its own interests.
Toward the end of the Meiji period (1868–1912) the main body ofthought in constitutional studies held that the emperor exercised
power only as the highest functional organ of the state. This
interpretation meant sovereignty rested not with the emperor but withthe state, and the state then was accountable not only to the emperor
but to the Diet and the people. This functional understanding of theemperor was to develop into the ideological foundations of the shortlived Taisho (1912–26) democracy.
The Showa period, however, began in 1926 in financial crisis
followed by the woes of a worldwide economic depression in 1929.
With the formation of global trading blocs the economic situation in
Japan deteriorated, resulting in the unilateral decision by the military
in 1931 to initiate the aggressive take-over of Manchuria in order tosecure access to markets and resources. In forcing Manchuria to cedefrom China, Japan set itself on the path of isolation and eventually
withdrew from the League of Nations. An internal coup was effected7

The Journal of Oriental Studies 10:Special Issue

in 1932 with the assassination of Prime Minister Tsuyoshi Inukai,bringing about the end of the political party system that had
functioned since the end of the Taisho period. From then on it was themilitarists for the most part that supplied the prime ministers.
In 1935 the militarist regime denounced Tatsukichi Minobe, thecouncilor of the House of Peers and constitutional scholar who wasthe leading advocate of the functional theory of the emperor’s role.
Relying on the authority of Japan’s unique national polity and theemperor, the militarist regime took steps to suppress any liberal
debate on constitutional theory. In 1938 the National General
Mobilization Law was passed, initiating a new round of theindoctrination programs designed to mobilize all national resources
for war. To discourage and indeed suppress popular dissent, severe
penalties were adopted for violation of the law. Again, to emphasize
the moral value of the war, the indoctrination programs drew heavily
on the imperial myths sustained by the Meiji Constitution: Theemperor was the sovereign of Japan, born of an eternally unbroken
line of emperors (Article 1), and therefore the emperor is sacred andinviolable (Article 3).
Denial of the religious dimension of the emperor posed a threat tothe interests of the militarist authorities, who were now charged withkeeping law and order. There was continuing wariness of Christians
and some Buddhists who regarded God and Buddha, respectively, as
the highest religious entity. Their beliefs implicitly placed the Sun
God Amaterasu Omikamai below the status of their own religious
devotions, and this was seen as undermining the authority of theemperor. The promulgation of the Religious Organizations Law in1939 empowered the authorities to disband any religious group that
refused to worship at shrines; the state thus took wholesale control
over religion in Japan. Then in 1941 all households were forced toworship amulets from Ise Shrine, and yet another revision of the
Public Security Preservation Law mandated the suppression ofreligious groups that refused to do so.
In other words, the militarists used the authority of the emperor as
grounds for war, and state-imposed worship at shrines and of the Ise
Shrine amulets enhanced that authority. For refusing to venerate theamulets, Makiguchi was deemed a serious threat to the authority ofthe emperor and, by extension, a serious hindrance to the conduct of8

INTRODUCTION

the war. During his interrogations by the Special Higher Police,
Makiguchi repudiated the myth of the emperor’s divine origins bydeclaring the emperor “an ordinary man who makes mistakes.” Healso denied the sacredness of the war cause, stating “this war has its
origins in the vilification of the laws of the Buddha and is a disaster[to the people].” To the state, no expression of idea or belief was moredangerous to the war effort.
It must be remembered that central to Makiguchi’s ideas andinfluence was the importance he placed on coexistence andcooperation among all peoples. His unequivocal indictment of thestate’s war policies as the instruments of suffering for the people ofJapan and his flat denial of the divinity of the emperor undermined thepro-war ethos. While these events may be interpreted in many ways, I
believe that in the broadest sense Makiguchi’s opposition to militarism
arose from his commitment to the peaceful coexistence of humankind.

– Guest Editor

9