Thursday, 29 November 2012

Carlos Castaneda

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Carlos Castaneda

Carlos Castaneda 1962
BornCarlos César Salvador Arana Castañeda
(1925-12-25)December 25, 1925
Cajamarca, Perú
DiedApril 27, 1998(1998-04-27) (aged 72)
Los Angeles, California, U.S.
Carlos Arana Castaneda[1] (December 25, 1925 – April 27, 1998) was a Peruvian-American author and student of anthropology.
Starting with The Teachings of Don Juan in 1968, Castaneda wrote a series of books that describe his alleged training in shamanism. The books, narrated in the first person, relate his supposed experiences under the tutelage of a Yaqui "Man of Knowledge" named Don Juan Matus. His 12 books have sold more than 8 million copies in 17 languages. Critics have suggested that they are works of fiction; supporters claim the books are either true or at least valuable works of philosophy and descriptions of practices which enable an increased awareness.
Castaneda withdrew from public view in 1973 to work further on his inner development, living in a large house with three women ("Fellow Travellers of Awareness") who were ready to cut their ties to family and changed their names. He founded Cleargreen, an organization that promoted tensegrity, purportedly a traditional Toltec regimen of spiritually powerful exercises.[2]



[edit] Books

Castaneda's first three books – The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge; A Separate Reality; and Journey to Ixtlan – were written while he was an anthropology student at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). He wrote these books as his research log describing his apprenticeship with a traditional "Man of Knowledge" identified as don Juan Matus, a Yaqui Indian from northern Mexico. Castaneda was awarded his bachelor's and doctoral degrees based on the work described in these books.
In 1974 his fourth book, Tales of Power, was published. This book ended with Castaneda leaping from a cliff into an abyss, and signaled the end of his apprenticeship under the tutelage of Matus. Castaneda continued to be popular with the reading public with subsequent publications.
In his books, Castaneda narrates in first person the events leading to and following after his meeting Matus, a half-Yaqui "Man of Knowledge", in 1960. Castaneda's experiences with Matus inspired the works for which he is known. He also says the sorcerer bequeathed him the position of nagual, or leader of a party of seers. He also used the term "nagual" to signify that part of perception which is in the realm of the unknown yet still reachable by man, implying that, for his party of seers, Don Juan was a connection in some way to that unknown. Castaneda often referred to this unknown realm as nonordinary reality.
The term "nagual" has been used by anthropologists to mean a shaman or sorcerer who is believed capable of shapeshifting into an animal form, or to metaphorically "shift" into another form through magic rituals, shamanism and experiences with psychoactive drugs (e.g., peyote and jimson weed - Datura stramonium).[3]

[edit] Biography

Immigration records for Carlos Cesar Arana Castañeda indicate that he was born on 25 December 1925 in Cajamarca, Peru.[4] His first family name, Arana, is the paternal one, inherited from his father's paternal family name, César Arana Burungaray; while the second family name, Castañeda, is the maternal one, inherited from his mother's paternal family name, Susana Castañeda Navoa. His maternal surname appears with the ñ in many Hispanic dictionaries, even though his famous published works display an anglicized version. He moved to the United States in the early 1950s and became a naturalized citizen in 1957.In January 1960 Carlos married Margaret Runyan. Even though there are many rumors of a divorce in 1973, they were actually never divorced and were still married at the time of Carlos's death in 1998. On August 12, 1961, Carlton Jeremy Castaneda was born in Hollywood, California. Carlos spoke of CJ as his biological son and is listed on the younger Castaneda's birth certificate as his father.
Carlos Castaneda was educated at UCLA (B.A. 1962; Ph.D. 1973).[5]
Castaneda also married Florinda Donner-Grau in Las Vegas in September 1993. According to his will of April 23, 1998, Castaneda adopted Nuri Alexander.
In all, twelve books by Castaneda were published, two posthumously.
Castaneda was the subject of a cover article in the March 5, 1973 issue of Time.[6] The article described him as "an enigma wrapped in a mystery." When confronted by correspondent Sandra Burton about discrepancies in his personal history, Castaneda responded by saying: "To ask me to verify my life by giving you my like using science to validate sorcery. It robs the world of its magic and makes milestones out of us all". The interviewer wrote that "Castaneda makes the reader experience the pressure of mysterious winds and the shiver of leaves at twilight, the hunter's peculiar alertness to sound and smell, the rock-bottom scrubbiness of Indian life, the raw fragrance of tequila and the vile, fibrous taste of peyote, the dust in the car, and the loft of a crow's flight. It is a superbly concrete setting, dense with animistic meaning. This is just as well, in view of the utter weirdness of the events that happen in it." Following that interview, Castaneda retired from public view.
In the 1990s Castaneda once again began appearing in public to promote Tensegrity, a group of movements that he claimed had been passed down by 25 generations of Toltec shamans. On 16 June 1995, articles of incorporation executed by George Short were filed to create Cleargreen Incorporated. The Cleargreen statement of purpose says in part, "Cleargreen is a corporation that has a twofold purpose. First, it sponsors and organizes seminars and workshops on Carlos Castaneda's Tensegrity, and second, it is a publishing house." Cleargreen published three videos of Tensegrity movements while Castaneda was alive. Castaneda himself did not appear in these videos.
Castaneda died on 27 April 1998 in Los Angeles due to complications from hepatocellular cancer. There was no public service; Castaneda was cremated and the ashes were sent to Mexico. It was not until nearly two months later, on 19 June 1998, that an obituary entitled "A Hushed Death for Mystic Author Carlos Castaneda" by staff writer J.R. Moehringer appeared in the Los Angeles Times.[7]
Four months after Castaneda's death, C. J. Castaneda, also known as Adrian Vashon, whose birth certificate claims Carlos Castaneda as his father, challenged Castaneda's will in probate court. For many years Castaneda had referred to Vashon as his son. The will was signed two days before Castaneda's death and Vashon challenged its authenticity. The challenge was ultimately unsuccessful.[8]

[edit] Companions

After Castaneda stepped away from public view in 1973, he bought a large house in Los Angeles which he shared with three of his female companions. The women broke off relationships with friends and family when they joined Castaneda's group. They also refused to be photographed and took new names: Regina Thal became Florinda Donner-Grau, Maryann Simko became Taisha Abelar and Kathleen Pohlman became Carol Tiggs.
In the early 1990s, Florinda Donner-Grau and Taisha Abelar published two books purporting to describe their experiences with Don Juan and his party. Together with Carol Tiggs, they appeared and sometimes lectured at many of the Tensegrity workshops that began in July 1993, and Donner-Grau and Abelar appeared at book signings and gave occasional lectures and radio interviews as well.
Shortly after Castaneda died, Donner-Grau and Abelar disappeared, along with Patricia Partin. Amalia Marquez (also known as Talia Bey) and Tensegrity instructor Kylie Lundal had their phones disconnected and also disappeared. On 2 August 1998, Carol spoke at a workshop in Ontario. The remains of Partin, also referred to by Castaneda as Nury Alexander and/or Claude, were found in 2003 near where her abandoned car had been discovered a few weeks after Castaneda's death in 1998, on the edge of Death Valley. Her remains were in a condition requiring DNA identification, which was made in 2006.[2]
Because the women had cut all ties with family and friends, it was some time before people noticed they were missing. There has been no official investigation into the disappearances of Donner-Grau, Simko and Lundahl. Luis Marquez, the brother of Talia Bey, went to police in 1999 over his sister's disappearance, but was unable to convince them that her disappearance merited investigation. Their opinion changed in 2006 after the remains of Patricia Partin were identified, and the LAPD finally added Bey to their missing person database.[9]

[edit] Reception

Despite the widespread popularity of his works, some critics questioned the validity of Castaneda's books as early as 1969. In a series of articles, international banker and amateur mycologist R. Gordon Wasson, who had originally praised Castaneda's work, questioned the accuracies of Castaneda's botanical claims.[10]
In 1976, former Scientologist defender Richard de Mille published Castaneda's Journey: The Power and the Allegory, in which he argues, "Logical or chronological errors in the narrative constitute the best evidence that Castaneda's books are works of fiction. If no one has discovered these errors before, the reason must be that no one has listed the events of the first three books in sequence. Once that has been done, the errors are unmistakable."[11] On these showings de Mille asserts, The Teachings of Don Juan and Journey to Ixtlan (his third book) cannot both be factual reports.[12]
For his part, Castaneda in the introduction to A Separate Reality, his second book, addressed the incomprehensible nature of his experiences as being understood only in the context of the alien system of perception from which they arose, suggesting that his books are by their very nature contradictory and incomprehensible (as to time and place especially) to academic and critical inquiry.
In a 1968 radio interview with Theodore Rosak, Castaneda, while confirming that his mystical experiences were absolutely true to life, did concede that he took some chronological license in his writing about actual events: "The way the books present it seems to heighten some dramatic sequences, which is, I'm afraid, not true to real life. There are enormous gaps in between in which ordinary things took place, that are not included. I didn't include in the book because they did not pertain to the system I wanted to portray, so I just simply took them away, you see. And that means that the gaps between those very height states, you know, whatever, says that I remove things that are continuous crescendos, in kind of sequence leading to a very dramatic solution. But in real life it was a very simple matter because it took years between, months pass in between them, and in the meantime we did all kinds of things. We even went hunting. He (Don Juan) told me how to trap things, set traps, very old, old ways of setting a trap, and how to catch rattlesnakes. He told me how to prepare rattlesnakes, in fact. And so that eases up, you see, the distrust or the fear."
Castaneda's works were presented as real-life accounts, but critics held that they were fictional. At first, and with the backing of academic qualifications and the UCLA anthropological department, Castaneda's work was critically acclaimed. Notable anthropologists like Edward Spicer (1969) and Edmund Leach (1969)[13] praised Castaneda, alongside more alternative and young anthropologists such as Peter Furst, Barbara Myerhoff and Michael Harner.
The authenticity of Don Juan was accepted for six years, until Richard de Mille and Daniel Noel both published their critical exposés of the Don Juan books in 1976. Most anthropologists had been convinced of Castaneda's authenticity until then — indeed, they had had little reason to question it — but some averred that de Mille's analysis disproved the veracity of Castaneda's work. Later anthropologists specializing in Yaqui Indian culture (William Curry Holden, Jane Holden Kelley and Edward H. Spicer), who originally supported Castaneda's account as true, questioned the accuracies of Castaneda's work.[14]
Others[who?] (including Dr. Clement Meighan) point out that the books largely, and for the most part, do not pretend to describe Yaqui culture at all with its emphasis on Catholic upbringing and conflict with the Federal State of Mexico, but rather focus on the international movements and life of Don Juan who was described in the books as traveling and having many connections, and abodes, in the Southwestern United States (Arizona), Northern Mexico, and Oaxaca. Don Juan was described in the books as a shaman steeped in a mostly lost Toltec philosophy and decidedly anti-catholic. Dr. Clement Meighan, one of Castaneda's professors at UCLA, and an acknowledged expert on Indian culture in the U.S A., Mexico, and other areas in North America, up to his death, never doubted that Castaneda's work was based upon authentic contact with and observations of Indians. Later, Miguel Ruiz also verified the existence of Indian "Brujos" in Mexico with native teachings much like Don Juan's.
In The Power and the Allegory, De Mille compared The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge with Castaneda's library stack requests at the University of California. The stack requests documented that he was sitting in the library when allegedly his journal said he was squatting in Don Juan's hut. One discovery that de Mille alleges to have made in his examination of the stack requests was that when Castaneda was alleged to have said that he was participating in the traditional peyote ceremony – (the least fantastic of many episodes of drug use that Castaneda described in his books) – he was sitting in the UCLA library and he was reading someone else's description of their experience of the peyote ceremony. Other criticisms of Castaneda's work include the total lack of Yaqui vocabulary or terms for any of his experiences.[15]
A March 5, 1973 Time article by Sandra Burton, looking at both sides of the controversy, stated:
... the more worldly claim to importance of Castaneda's books: to wit, that they are anthropology, a specific and truthful account of an aspect of Mexican Indian culture as shown by the speech and actions of one person, a shaman named Juan Matus. That proof hinges on the credibility of Don Juan as a being and Carlos Castaneda as a witness. Yet there is no corroboration beyond Castaneda's writings that Don Juan did what he is said to have done, and very little that he exists at all. A strong case can be made that the Don Juan books are of a different order of truthfulness from Castaneda's pre-Don Juan past. Where, for example, was the motive for an elaborate scholarly put-on? The Teachings were submitted to a university press, an unlikely prospect for bestsellerdom. Besides, getting an anthropology degree from U.C.L.A. is not so difficult that a candidate would employ so vast a confabulation just to avoid research. A little fudging perhaps, but not a whole system in the manner of The Teachings, written by an unknown student with, at the outset, no hope of commercial success.[6]
David Silverman sees value in the work even while considering it fictional. In Reading Castaneda he describes the apparent deception as a critique of anthropology field work in general – a field that relies heavily on personal experience, and necessarily views other cultures through a lens. According to Silverman, not only the descriptions of peyote trips but also the fictional nature of the work are meant to place doubt on other works of anthropology.[16]
Donald Wieve cites Castaneda to explain the insider/outsider problem as it relates to mystical experiences, while acknowledging the fictional nature of his work.[17]

[edit] Related authors

Two other authors, Taisha Abelar and Florinda Donner-Grau, wrote books in which they claimed to be from Matus' party of Toltec warriors. Both Abelar and Donner-Grau were endorsed by Castaneda as being legitimate students of Matus, whereas he dismissed all other writers as pretenders. The two women were part of Castaneda's inner circle, which he referred to as "The Brujas," and both assumed different names as part of their dedication to their new beliefs. They were originally both graduate students in anthropology at UCLA.[2]
Felix Wolf, one of Carlos Castaneda's apprentices and translators, wrote The Art of Navigation: Travels with Carlos Castaneda and Beyond. In his book Wolf details how his life had been transformed by his association with Castaneda. While touching on all aspects of the teachings, Wolf highlights what he perceives to be the overriding and essential transmission that came through Castaneda's work: The Art of Navigation.
Amy Wallace wrote Sorcerer's Apprentice: My Life with Carlos Castaneda,[18] an account of her personal experiences with Castaneda and his followers.
In Carlos Castaneda e a Fenda entre os Mundos - Vislumbres da Filosofia Ānahuacah no Século XXI Brazilian writer Luis Carlos de Morais analyzes the work of Carlos Castaneda, its cultural implications, and its continuation in other authors.

[edit] Bibliography

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Corey Donovan. "Prelude to don Juan: Castaneda's Early Years". Retrieved 2010-05-04.
  2. ^ a b c Robert Marshall (April 12, 2007). "The dark legacy of Carlos Castaneda". Retrieved October 13, 2010.
  3. ^ Castaneda, C: The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge, pp. 88-120, Washington Square Press Publication, 1968 paperback ISBN 0-671-60041-9
  4. ^ The Scribner Encyclopedia of American Lives, Volume 5: 1997-1999. Charles Scribner's Sons, 2002.
  5. ^ De Mille (1976)
  6. ^ a b Burton, Sandra; et. al. (March 5, 1973). "Don Juan and the Sorcerer's Apprentice". Time 101 (10).,10987,903890,00.html. Retrieved December 23, 2011.
  7. ^ Castaneda Obituary All Things Considered, June 19, 1998
  8. ^ "Mystery Man's Death Can't End the Mystery; Fighting Over Carlos Castaneda's Legacy" by Peter Applebome, NY Times, August 19, 1998, retrieved September 3, 2008
  9. ^ The Charley Project
  10. ^ Wasson, R. Gordon. 1969. (Bk. Rev.). Economic Botany vol. 23(2):197. A review of Carlos Castaneda's "The Teachings of Don Juan: A Yaqui Way of Knowledge.", Wasson, R. Gordon. 1972a. (Bk. Rev.). Economic Botany vol. 26(1):98-99. A review of Carlos Castaneda's "A Separate Reality: Further Conversations with Don Juan."; Wasson, R. Gordon. 1973a. (Bk. Rev.). Economic Botany vol. 27(1):151-152. A review of Carlos Castaneda's "Journey to Ixtlan: The Lessons of Don Juan."; Wasson, R. Gordon. . 1974. (Bk. Rev.). Economic Botany vol. 28(3):245-246. A review of Carlos Castaneda's "Tales of Power".; Wasson, R. Gordon. . 1977a. (Mag., Bk. Rev). Head vol. 2(4):52-53, 88-94. November.
  11. ^ De Mille (1976), p. 166
  12. ^ De Mille (1976), pp. 170-171
  13. ^ Leach, Edmund (1969-06-05). "High School". The New York Review of Books (New York). ISSN 0028-7504. Retrieved 2010-10-13.
  14. ^ Kelley, Jane Holden (1978). Yaqui Women: Contemporary Life Histories. University of Nebraska Press. pp. 24–25. ISBN 978-0-8032-0912-1.
  15. ^ Harris, Marvin (2001). Cultural materialism: the struggle for a science of culture. Walnut Creek, California: AltaMira Press. p. 322.
  16. ^ David Silverman. Reading Castaneda: A Prologue to the Social Sciences. ISBN 978-0-7100-8146-9
  17. ^ Donald Wieve. "Does Understanding Religion Require Religious Understanding?" In Russel T. McCutcheon (ed.), The Insider/Outsider Problem in the Study of Religion. New York: Bath Press, 1999. p. 263.
  18. ^ Amy Wallace (2007). Sorcerer's Apprentice: My Life with Carlos Castaneda. North Atlantic Books. ISBN 978-1-58394-206-2.

[edit] References

  • De Mille, Richard (1976). Castaneda's Journey: The Power and the Allegory. Capra Press. ISBN 978-0-88496-067-6.

[edit] Further reading

  • Morais Junior, Luis Carlos de. Carlos Castaneda e a Fresta entre os Mundos: Vislumbres da Filosofia Ānahuacah no Século XXI (Carlos Castaneda and the Crack Between the Worlds: Glimpses of Ānahuacah Philosophy in Century XXI). Rio de Janeiro: Litteris Editora, 2012.
  • Sanchez, Victor. The Teachings of Don Carlos: Practical Applications of the Works of Carlos Castaneda. Bear & Company, 1995. ISBN 1-879181-23-1
  • Williams, Donald. Border Crossings: A Psychological Perspective on Carlos Castaneda's Path of Knowledge Inner City Books, 1981.
  • Collier, Richard "The River That God Forgot" (Background on Julio Cesar Arana, despotic rubber baron, Carlos Castaneda's paternal grandfather) E.P. Dutton & Co., N.Y., 1968. Library of Congress CATALOG CARD NUMBER:68-12451

[edit] External links


Evolution's Purpose

Evolution's Purpose


The following text is excerpted from the book:
Evolution's Purpose:
an integral interpretation of the scientific story of our origins

by Steve McIntosh; published by SelectBooks, New York
ISBN 978-1-59079-220-9 (Hardcover)
© 2012 Steve McIntosh, all rights reserved.

Chapter Two
Necessary Metaphysics for an Evolutionary Worldview

How Metaphysics Is Used in the Science of Evolution
The theory of evolution in all its forms has always been a combination of science and metaphysics. However, this is not a criticism of evolutionary theory, because it really couldn't have been otherwise. In fact, the enterprise of science as a whole depends on an orientation to truth and a commitment to make things better that are grounded in metaphysical premises. For example, all science is founded on faith in reason, logic, and the conviction that the universe is intelligible. Scientists necessarily proceed on the premise that the truth about nature can be discovered and reliably known, and that what is true in our part of the universe is true throughout the universe. Scientists also presume that their minds can be dependably used to investigate the reality of the world, and that their sense perceptions provide accurate descriptions of the subjects of their inquiries. Science also rests on the a priori principle that mathematics is real and can be used to model and describe physical reality. Indeed, the presumption that matter itself is real is ultimately metaphysical.
We can also detect the use of metaphysics in the way scientists rely on the premise that scientific knowledge is a good in itself. This faith in the value of scientific truth is connected to the conviction that humanity will be benefited by science's free inquiry and progressive discovery of the truth about the universe. Similarly, the longing for greater perfection in knowledge and the hunger for discovery that motivates most scientists are also grounded in a metaphysical premise regarding the very possibility of increasing perfection. All of these foundational value assumptions thus generally presuppose a transcendent ground of ultimate value or goodness.
Beyond these specific uses of metaphysics, we can also see how the vast enterprise of science itself is supported and sustained by the metaphysics of the modernist worldview, which originally gave rise to the notion of an objective reality that could be progressively discovered using scientific methods. Prior to the advent of modernism, it did not generally occur to people that carefully controlled experiments or empirical investigations might yield greater understanding of the natural world. For example, the basic act of cutting open a cadaver to learn about the human body for the advancement of medicine was abhorrent to premodern sensibilities. Thus, the very activity of scientific investigation is a product of the modernist reality frame, which firmly rests on the metaphysical foundations of the Enlightenment.6 Without these forms of foundational metaphysics, science would be impossible. And it is worth saying here that I am in firm agreement will all of the general metaphysical principles stated above.
However, when we examine the metaphysics that is bound up with the theory of evolution, we find assumptions about reality that are far less inspiring. Today, the "experts" on evolution generally recognized by mainstream academia and the corporate media are a closely-knit group of scientists known as "neo-Darwinists." Neo-Darwinists are firmly committed to the metaphysical principle that, like physics, biological evolution is essentially a mechanistic process that can be completely explained using reductionistic methods. For example, neo-Darwinists hold that macroevolution (major transitions in species or taxa) is to be understood entirely by the processes involved in microevolution (accumulation of variations in populations). Douglas Futuyama, for instance, declares that "the known mechanisms of evolution [provide] both a sufficient and necessary explanation for the diversity of life."7 Although it has never been proven as a matter of scientific fact, contemporary neo-Darwinists insist that the mechanisms of random genetic variation and the genetic drift of allele frequency, coupled with environmental filtering, can account for practically all forms of biological evolution. Moreover, neo-Darwinists maintain that genetic variations must always be completely random and can never be directed toward an advantageous mutation. Process philosopher David Griffin writes:
This doctrine that mutations are random [in the non-advantageous sense] is important to Darwinists for several reasons: The idea that the organism's purposes could influence evolution would contradict the ideal of making biology a purely mechanistic, deterministic science. Also, the idea that purposes could give a bias to genetic mechanisms seems impossible to most Darwinists. (Richard Dawkins, for example, says that "nobody has ever come close to suggesting any means by which this bias could come about.") And, perhaps most important, the idea that variation is somehow directed toward adaptation would reduce the importance of the central Darwinian conception, natural selection. ... We do know that some mutations are caused by cosmic rays; but we do not know that all mutations are due to these or analogous causes. Many neo-Darwinists, nevertheless, express great confidence in the truth of this speculation—a confidence that, in light of the number of confidently held ideas that have in the past turned out to be false, is somewhat awe-inspiring. For example, Jacques Monod, argues that random mutations "constitute the only possible source of modifications in the genetic text," so that "chance alone is at the source of every innovation, of all creation in the biosphere."8
This insistence on the "scientific reality" of something that has not been proven is a clear example of how metaphysics and science are frequently mixed together. Similar examples of reality-framing metaphysical assumptions can be found in evolutionary science's commitment to the philosophical doctrine of nominalism, which insists that there can be no forms, archetypes, or preexisting information involved in the process of development. Despite the facts of convergent evolution, wherein evolutionary solutions are repeated almost exactly in different evolutionary categories or phyla, the experts are adamant that the mysterious process of organismal development (morphogenesis) cannot involve any kind of "morphic fields" or nonphysical inputs or influences.
Related to this metaphysical commitment to the exclusivity of physical causation is the premise that evolution must always proceed gradually through a step-by-step accumulation of minute changes. This gradualism is essential for neo-Darwinist accounts of evolution. Darwin himself wrote: "If it could be shown that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."9 The fossil record in Darwin's time contained few transitional types, but in the last 150 years abundant transitional species have been discovered. Yet even as the fossil record has been filled in, enough gaps remain that theories such as "punctuated equilibrium" are still needed to explain transitions at the species level. Moreover, paleontologists have found that "once a species appears in the fossil record, it tends to persist with little appreciable change throughout the remainder of its existence."10 This finding underscores that at some point in the appearance of every major new form or evolutionary innovation, significant novelty enters the universe. In other words, evolutionary scientists now agree that emergence is a ubiquitous characteristic of biological evolution, and emergence by definition signifies that there has been a jump or a surge—that something more has come from something less.
Thus, when we face the facts of evolutionary emergence, we can begin to see that the underlying assumption that evolution must always occur randomly through tiny steps and without the influence of any "outside information" is not a scientific fact, but rather a commitment of faith held for the sake of the consistency of the theory. Unproven theoretical conclusions in science do not necessarily amount to metaphysical premises, but when these theoretical conclusions contradict the weight of evidence and are held primarily because they preserve a priori metaphysical commitments to materialism, they are more metaphysical than scientific.
Among the many philosophical principles used in the evolutionary sciences, perhaps the most radically metaphysical of all is the assertion that evolution is not progressive and indeed pointless. Today, it appears that the majority of biologists think that evolution does not progress, and that the development of species over time is merely a "random walk." Stephen Jay Gould went so far as to call the idea of progress in evolution "noxious," maintaining that there are no criteria by which improvement could be measured. Gould wrote: "If an amoeba is as well adapted to its environment as we are to ours, who is to say that we are higher creatures?"11 And despite the basic moral intuition shared by most people that a dolphin or an elephant is "higher" (and thus worthy of greater moral consideration) than an ant or a bacterium, Gould's repudiation of the notion of evolutionary progress is accepted by many biologists without question. This "scientific proposition" can be found not only within the field of biological evolution, it is also echoed by cosmologists. In an oft-quoted passage, Nobel Laureate in physics, Steven Weinberg, writes: "The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless." But by this stage of our discussion, I hope it is obvious that science has not "proven" that evolution is unprogressive, let alone pointless. These pessimistic assertions are based on the philosophy of scientism—the materialistic belief system that has become an embedded feature of the institutional culture of science.
We will return to the discussion of evolutionary progress in chapters 5 and 6. The point to be emphasized here is that within the academic study of evolution, including cosmological, biological, and cultural evolution, the metaphysics of the scientific worldview plays a major role in determining the boundary conditions under which evolution can be studied or even understood. These metaphysical commitments are for the most part unconscious, and thus they are usually held uncritically. And because the metaphysics of the modernist, scientific worldview is generally received by scientists in the course of their training and held unconsciously, this metaphysics is passed on to others far more readily by insinuation rather than by direct argument. Despite the fact that the metaphysics of the modernist worldview has been severely questioned by professional philosophers, professional scientists continue to use this reality frame as a definitional container for the institutional study of evolution.
However, from an integral perspective, modernist metaphysics is not "all wrong," as some postmodern philosophers contend. The naturalistic spirit of the scientific enterprise has been responsible for many of science's greatest achievements. Integral philosophy thus seeks to include the advantages of methodological naturalism within its purview, even as it transcends the limitations of scientific materialism. As we look at the history of science we can see how the various philosophies of materialism and positivism have served the important function of cleansing our thinking about nature by ridding it of superstition and all kinds of fallacious assumptions. In a world that was once dominated by traditional consciousness and state-sponsored religious political authority, mechanistic materialism served as the protective shell out of which the "chick" of science could be born. But now the chick is hatched and science has become the new politically empowered authority on the truth. And this has resulted in the accompanying metaphysics of scientism becoming a new kind of state-sponsored belief system, used by materialists as a quasi-religious power base in academia and the mainstream media.
As we have seen, there is no getting around metaphysics—if we want to investigate reality we must have a categorical framework with which to organize both our investigations and our findings. Historically, the metaphysics of materialism served science well because it was the most minimal form of metaphysics available. Scientists wanted to get at the bare facts, and it was presumed that a philosophy of materialism would interfere the least in their apprehension of these facts. However, scientists adopted materialist metaphysics not only because it seemed to interfere least with the process of getting at the facts. In practice, the primary use of materialistic accounts of evolution was found in their symbolic role of overcoming the cultural power of traditional religious worldviews. Throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries the theory of evolution was used as an effective tool for recruiting people into the modernist worldview because it provided a creation story that was more rational and more satisfying than Biblical, or other scriptural accounts. Thus, despite its abundant utility for science, the theory's greatest power was found in its ability to produce cultural evolution. As Stanford scholar Robert Wesson observes: "Darwinism became the banner of those who would overthrow what they saw as an irrational, superstitious view of human origins. ... The theory of evolution became the focus of the confrontation of science and religion."12
... /snip/ ...
This discussion of the metaphysics that is closely, sometimes imperceptibly, associated with the evolutionary sciences is not an attempt to refute the sturdy basics of descent with modification. As explained in the introduction, I am not trying to smuggle in a specific spiritual belief system or otherwise advocate unscientific theories such as intelligent design. Rather, my intent is to affirm as much evolutionary science as possible. Yet at the same time, I want to show how the abundant metaphysical assumptions that frame so many features of the evolutionary sciences have become theoretical handcuffs that prevent us from moving to the next phase in our understanding of evolution. For most fields of scientific investigation, metaphysical materialism continues to provide an adequate reality frame for doing science. But in the field of evolution, which has such profound explanatory relevance for human affairs, the metaphysics of strict materialism is now worn out.
Contrary to the assertions of scientific materialists, explanations of evolution that rely exclusively on the mechanisms of chance mutation and environmental selection cannot explain the appearance of self-consciousness and the transcendent powers of human awareness. Moreover, as we discussed in chapter 1, materialism's need to assert physical causation as the only possible explanation of the origins of natural phenomena breaks down when confronted with the radical novelty of emergence. As we will explore further below, the ubiquity of emergent novelty and creativity that can be found throughout the evolutionary process, together with the evident affects of the downward causation produced by emergent systems, points to the influence of both the formal causation of information and the final causation of an underlying purpose. Yet if we are to come to grips with these evolutionary causes, we need a new kind of categorical framework. This new framework will not be found through a return to the supernatural metaphysics of premodern reality frames, it must retain the spirit of naturalism and be as "minimally metaphysical" as possible. However, while our new framework must keep its metaphysics both transparent and sparingly lean, it must also be willing to recognize the authentic reality of a variety of causal factors that are presently ruled out by materialism.

Wednesday, 28 November 2012


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Mahikari is a Japanese new religious movement (shinshūkyō), with a number of variants or offshoots, founded in 1963 by Yoshikazu Okada (岡田 良一) (1901–1974). The name "Mahikari" means "true light" in Japanese, being a compilation of the words "ma" (真 – true) and "hikari" (光 – light).[1]
Mahikari borrowed its cosmology and values from another Japanese new religion, Sekai Kyuseikyo, which in turn was strongly influenced by Oomotoko, one of the oldest "new religions" of Japan; each of these "new religions" contain elements of Shintoism (the emphasis on purity, the reference to gods, and the veneration of the emperor), Buddhism (belief in karma and reincarnation), and shamanism (the divine status of the leader, miraculous healing, etc.) [2]



[edit] Foundation

Okada claimed that he experienced a revelation on February 22, 1959; while suffering a high fever, he was transported to the world of divine spirits and saw a god with white hair standing on a beautiful white cloud, washing clothes in a golden tub. "Later Okada would tell his followers that this experience was a revelation from God concerning his future mission of cleansing the world and human kind."[3] To support this mission, Okada founded a religious corporation called "L.H. Yokoshi Tomo no Kai" (陽光子友乃会 – Company of Sun Light Children) and started recruiting followers. In 1963, he registered this group under the name "Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan" (World Divine Light Organization).[4]

[edit] Okada's world view

Okada claimed he received revelations from a deity he called Mioya Motosu Mahikari Omikami ("Original Parent, Lord, God of True Light" – 御親元主真光御み神 ), or Su ("Lord" – 主) God for short. He maintained that this god was the supreme creator of everything. Okada's role was to inaugurate a new era as a heralding messiah (sukuinushi) for this god and to introduce Mahikari no Waza, a method of channelling a 'divine' invisible energy, or true light ("mahikari" – 真光), which could eliminate the causes of illness, poverty, and strife from the world.
Okada claimed that the world was facing a great upheaval, or baptism by fire (hi no senrei)[5] and that the world entered this period on 1 January 1962, during which the spiritual energy of fire would restore the earth and humankind to their original pure state, in harmony with their creator.[6] Okada gave examples of what to expect during the baptism by fire:[7] group (mass) spirits causing disturbances driven by fierce hatred would be reincarnated as people in this world causing battles. He taught that some of these spirits fought in atomic-hydrogen wars between the mythical continents of Mu (lost continent) and Atlantis. He also claimed that there have been battles between the spirits from planets such as Venus and humans with physical bodies in this world. It was his mission, and that of Mahikari members, to help people to prepare for and to survive the baptism of fire.
Okada claimed that Mahikari no Waza was a means by which possessing spirits, earth bound souls, and ancestor spirits could be purified,[8] saved, and receive enlightenment.[9] Okada claimed the increase in energies of purification would also mean that medications would lose their effectiveness, he claimed, due to the need to eliminate impurities from spirit, mind, and body. Similarly, stronger and stronger agricultural herbicides, pesticides, and fungicides would have to be developed to cope with the increasing purification of toxic products from the soil.[10] The new age of progressive dawning also meant that many phenomena not fitting in with divine will would be progressively exposed, as would all falsehood and deceit, just as when night becomes day and all becomes illuminated. Entities that had theretofore opposed the will of heaven would progressively be exposed, admonished, struggle, and face dead ends, but would ultimately awaken and reform.[10]
Okada's writings include a book called Goseigen (御聖言), a collection of songs/poems called the Yokoshi Prayer Book (Norigotoshu, 祈言書), and a book called Kamimuki Sanji Kaisetsu.[11]

[edit] Influences behind the formation of Mahikari

The mythology of several Shinshūkyō feature in the formation of Mahikari. Similarities include claims by Okada and other founders of Shinshūkyō:
  • To be a spokesperson of a Japanese deity-god, whose mission was to save mankind from destruction.
  • To receive revelations from this deity-god, which were recorded using automatic writing.
  • To be the person to return mankind to a state of spiritual purity by using a healing/cleaning energy administered from the hand.
  • That Japan was the spiritual origin of humankind.

[edit] Tenrikyo

Tenrikyo was founded by Miki Nakayama (1798–1886). Its name means “Heavenly Wisdom” ("tenri" means heavenly wisdom and "kyo" means teaching or religion). During a healing ceremony, Miki reportedly entered a trance and said, “I am the True and Original God. I have been predestined to reside here. I have descended from Heaven to save all human beings, and I want to take Miki as the Shrine of God and the mediatrix between God and men.”

[edit] Konkokyo

Konkokyo, which may be translated as “Golden Light,” was founded by Bunjiro Kawate (1814–1883) in 1859. "[Kawate] found Parent of all men, the Parent-God of the Universe, who revealed himself ... as Tenchi-Kane-no-kami. It was on November the 15th of 1859 that the words of God came upon the Founder, calling him to the sacred mission of saving men, and revealing at the same time that the prosperity of mankind is the ultimate purpose of the Parent-God of the Universe, and that without the realization of that purpose God Himself is morally imperfect."[12]

[edit] Oomoto

Oomoto, which means “The Teaching of the Great Origin,” was founded in 1892 by Nao Deguchi (1836–1918). She claimed she had a visitation of a supernatural entity bestowing a mission on her to save humankind, that the origin was one, that mankind must return to that origin, and that humankind faced a great upheaval. Oomoto was promoted as the catalyst to unite all religions. Deguchi claimed to receive revelations from her god-deity, which she wrote down as the Ofudesaki, "From the Tip of the Brush," and used a healing method called Miteshiro (honorable hand-substitute) to drive out possessing spirits.

[edit] Sekai Kyūsei Kyō

Sekai Kyūsei Kyō (世界救世教 – Church of World Messianity) was founded by Mokichi Okada (1882–1955). In June 1920, he joined Oomoto. Okada was a teacher in an Oomoto church in Tokyo in 1934 when he started using a process different from the official Oomoto healing method and was expelled.
Okada claimed he received revelations from his god-deity in 1926 but kept them hidden. Due to the political climate in Japan at the time, he destroyed the written revelations and rewrote some from memory years later. In 1945, with the conclusion of World War II, Okada moved his base of operations from Tokyo to Hakone and Atami, and launched his full-scale activities. His devotees called him Meishu-sama, which could be translated as 'Master of Light.' In the words of a devotee, "It is also fitting here because the phrase, 'the light from the east,' steeped in the antiquity of western civilization aptly describes Okada’s birth and life of activity in Japan, which has traditionally been considered as the most eastern part of 'The East.' "
Yoshikazu Okada (岡田 良一) (1901–1974) joined Sekai Kyūsei Kyō following the end of World War Two, in the late 1940s. He became a minister in the group for a brief period, but was expelled under allegations of sexual misconduct and harassment of female members.[citation needed]
Some of the practices practiced by devotees of Sekai Kyūsei Kyō are very similar to those practiced by Mahikari members. For example, the practise of Johrei (Purification of the Spirit), the imagined energy radiating from the hand, is similar to Mahikari no waza (True Light), and the Ohikari, the pendant worn around the neck by members of Sekai Kyusei Kyo, is similar in concept to the Omitama pendant worn around the neck by Mahikari members.[13]

[edit] Other Influences upon Yoshikazu Okada

[edit] Hikari wa tōhō yori (Light from the East)

"In a collection of [Okada's] sermons we find a chapter entitled “Light from the East,” which explains that the founders of the world’s great religions realized their teachings could not reveal the ultimate truth, and knew that such the truth would eventually come from the East. He further says that Moses and Jesus, among others, came to Japan to undergo spiritual training in preparation for their missions, and that they later died in Japan. For him their careers are further proof that their teachings are only transient and that ultimate salvation will come from the East, that is to say from Mahikari and/or Japan (SEIÕ 1973, pp. 82–106)." [14]
"Where one does find stories of this type, detailing how the teachers of the world’s great religions trained in Japan and eventually returned there to die, is in a book entitled Hikari wa tōhō yori [Light from the East] (YAMANE 1988), first published in 1937. In the postscript to the latest edition the author’s son mentions that parts of this book were republished in a journal that functioned as the more or less official journal of an organization called the Taiko Kenkyukai (Group for the study of the ancient past). One of the contributors to this journal was none other than Sekiguchi Sakae, Okada’s close companion for many years and his successor as Oshienushi (and who later served as head of the Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan following the separation from Sukyo Mahikari). Under these circumstances there can be little doubt as to what Okada’s real sources were, at least for certain parts of his teachings." [15]

[edit] Lost continent of Mu

"On a quite different plane, we must also remember that Okada was influenced by ideas about the lost continent of Mu. According to Okada, Japan forms the last surviving portion of this continent, once the home of a superb, sun-worshipping culture. The people of this continent were builders of pyramids, a fact reflected in the activities of the lost continent’s last survivors, the Mayas, Egyptians, and, of course, the Japanese. We might thus conclude that Mahikari’s teachings comprise a collection of esoteric knowledge of various origin, some from published material and some from Okada’s earlier experiences as leader in another religious group, the Sekai Kyuseikyo (Church of World Messianity), whose cosmology and rituals bear many resemblances to Mahikari’s." [15]

[edit] Takenouchi Documents

"Many of the ideas Okada wove into Churchward's account of Mu were taken from the Takenouchi Documents, said to be preserved by the Takenouchi family in a shrine in Ibaraki Prefecture. This information has been set forth by Yamane Kiku in a book called The Authentic History of the World Secreted Away in Japan. It is from this book – which the Saviour (Okada) regarded as the last word on ancient history – that we learn that Jesus died in Japan, and that nearly all the other saints and holy men of the world at least visited the country." [16]
"The originals of this (Takenouchi) document and the "sacred treasures" were confiscated by government authorities and later lost in air raids during World War II. As a result, it is impossible to confirm or deny the authenticity of any of these items. For documentary criticism of the "Takeuchi Document" and its alleged copies, see Jindai hishi shiryô shûse, appendix "Kaidai" [Explanatory notes] by Ôuchi Yoshisato, and Kanô Ryôkichi,, "Amatsukyô komonjo no hihan" [Criticism of the Amatsukyô document], Shisô (June, 1936), 983–1027." [17]
Kiku Yamane's grandson, Ichiro Yamane, Assistant Professor of Social Psychology, Nagoya, states on his web site; In his opinion the Takenouchi Document (also known as the Takeuchi Document) is so nonsensical that the danger of its ideas tends to be overlooked. It is necessary to closely examine that aspect. He states, In his opinion it was created by an extraordinary braggart right around the time that the Japanese military had an ambition to march out to the continent. It provided the myths to justify the Japanese Emperor ruling the world under the same logic that the Emperor ruled Japan at that time.[18]

[edit] Kojiki, Records of Ancient Matters

"Much earlier Mahikari mythology is attributed to the Kojiki, Records of Ancient Matters, which was written circa 712 CE. Though the Kojiki is a depository of Shinto myths, it is well known to scholars as a “late compilation in which political considerations and specifically Chinese conceptions intrude themselves almost everywhere.” Mahikari utilizes many of the mythological deities found in the Kojiki but focuses on the Su god who personally chose Okada as his savior." [19]

[edit] Mahikari organizations

The following organizations (listed in order of establishment date) are Shinshūkyō that were influenced by the world-view and practices of Yoshikazu Okada:
  • 1959 : "L.H. Yokoshi Tomo no Kai" (Company of Sun Light Children) – name later changed to Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan
  • 1963 : "Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan" – nominal membership – 50,000 to 100,000 worldwide (2007)
  • 1974 : "Shin Yu Gen Kyu Sei Mahikari Kyodan"
  • 1978 : "Sukyo Mahikari" (Japan) – nominal membership – 1,000,000+ worldwide (2009)
  • 1978–1979 : "The Light Center" (Belgium)
  • 1980 : "Suhikari Koha Sekai Shindan" – nominal membership – 4,500 (2007)

[edit] Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan

Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan (World Divine Light Organization) is the name of an independent organization originally founded by Yoshikazu Okada in 1959 as "Yokoshi Tomo no Kai" (L.H. Company of Sun Light Children). Okada was the organization's first "Holy Master" (Holy name: Seio, Kotama). After Okada's death on June 23, 1974, the Reverend Seiho Sakae Sekiguchi (1909–1994) became the second "Holy Master" of the organization by "divine degree". During his leadership, the organization established the "Su-za World Main Shrine" in Mount Amagi on the Izu Peninsula on August 23, 1987. On January 3, 1994, the Reverend Seisho (Katsutoshi Sekiguchi (1939–) became the third "Holy Master" of the organization, also by "divine degree".

[edit] Sukyo Mahikari

Sukyo Mahikari (崇教真光) is the name of an independent organization originally founded by Yoshikazu Okada in 1959. The name Sukyo Mahikari was established by Keishu Okada in 1978, the adopted daughter of Yoshikazu Okada, following his death and the subsequent legal dispute over leadership of Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan. The Sukyo Mahikari World headquarters is located at the "World Shrine" to its Su-God, which was completed in Takayama City, Gifu Prefecture, in 1984. The Takayama site also includes the Hikaru Memorial Hall, a museum opened in 1999 that depicts the life and world-view of Mr. Okada and the Sukyo Mahikari organization.
The succession dispute that led to the foundation of Sukyo Mahikari started following the death of Yoshikazu Okada in June 1974. Sakae Sekaguchi and Keishu Okada each claimed the right to leadership of Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan. Ms. Okada's claim to leadership was based, in part, on Okada's last revelation before his death.[20] The parties pursued the dispute in legal proceedings. In 1982 the Tokyo High Court had decided it did not have the jurisdiction to settle the dispute, leaving the parties in their current position as leaders of independent organizations. Mr Sekaguchi’s group retained the original name of Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan and published their view of this matter on their web site.[21] A Japanese journalist gave an independent account of the legal proceedings in 1996.[22]
Sukyo Mahikari members also practice mahikari no waza, which they claim has been practiced by over eight hundred thousand people since 1959.[23] Sukyo Mahikari members believe that the practice purifies the cloudiness in the soul and pollution of the body (toxins) permitting them to help themselves and others and thereby improve society.[24] To become a practitioner of this art, one attends a three day lecture course and receives a sacred locket called an Omitama.[25]

[edit] Suhikari Kōha Sekai Shindan

Suhikari Kōha Sekai Shindan was founded in 1980 by the spiritualist and manga artist Kuroda Minoru (1928– ).[26] Kuroda had been a follower of Yoshikazu Okada and Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyōdan. After Okada's death, Kuroda left that organization and, after receiving a revelation, established the "Shūkyō Dantai Kōrin" in 1980, registering the group as an independent religious body under the Religious Corporations Law (Shūkyō Hōjinhō). In 1984 the group assumed its current name. Its headquarters are in Hachiōji City, Tokyo.
Doctrines of Suhikari Kōha Sekai Shindan emphasize spirit possession, and core practices focus on the ritual of tekazashi (raising the hand and emitting spiritual light) as a means of purifying such possessing spirits. In its central focus on the deity Sunokami, the style of the movement's shrine, and the form of the pendant worn by devotees, resemblances can be seen to the practices of Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyōdan. Unlike the latter group, however, the practice of tekazashi is not called mahikari no waza, but rather honō no waza (lit., "practice of the flame"), and has been changed from using one hand to using both hands. Otherwise, the movement follows Mahikari's worldview and ideas about spirits.[27]

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ Yasaka 1999, p. 25
  2. ^ Cornille, Catherine 1991, p. 265
  3. ^ McVeigh, Brian 1992, p. 41
  4. ^ {{[1]}} Official website of World Diving Light Organization based in US
  5. ^ Young, Richard Fox 1988, p. 263. "Having chosen Okada to be the savior (sukuinushi), Su-God, the True God of Light (whence the organizational name, Mahikari [True Light], is derived), declared his intention of bathing the world in a Baptism of Fire (hi no senrei), a healing light for the seed-people (tanebito) who respond to it, but a burning and destructive light to those who hide themselves from it. If the imbalance between good and evil in the world cannot be corrected, Su-God will incinerate the world. 2000 A.D. is said to be the deadline...."
  6. ^ Davis 1982, p. ?."A photographer with Japan's Yomiuri newspaper happened to take a picture of Mount Fuji that by chance caught in it the face of the god Kunitorozu Tsukurinushi, leader of the forty-eight fire deities spread out over the side of the mountain. A specialist at the Sophia University, a Catholic University in Tokyo, allegedly identified this as the face of Yahweh himself, obviously a strict deity. The Saviour took this as sure proof that the Eschaton, the Age of the Baptism by fire, had begun."
  7. ^ Okada 1982, p. ?. Among Okada's predictions was a noticeable disorder in established weather patterns, general and steady increase in global atmospheric temperatures, the eventual melting of the global ice caps, and increasing problems due to rain with a high acidity. Okada said an increase in what he called the spiritual energy of fire would result in increased phenomena of fire, but that because this same fire energy moves water energy, phenomena such as flooding, cold snaps, and the like would increase. At the same time, potable water would become increasingly scarce, and he said humankind needed to work hastily to develop techniques of removing the salinity of sea water.<
  8. ^ Okada 1982, p. ?."Today God does not need those souls who cannot keep up with the progress of the divine plan and who are useless for the construction of the new Spiritual Civilization (Do not be conceited just because you are Japanese or Jewish.) It is the divine will that such useless souls will be erased from existence by the baptism with fire. The divine plan is that only the souls who have been sufficiently purified will be permitted to remain on earth as tanebito (seed people)."
  9. ^ McVeigh, Brian 1992, p. 41,"The Mahikari cosmos forms a multi-layered hierarchy with positive associations of high spirituality, purity, power, brightness, and warmth positioned toward the top, culminating with the Divine Source, Su God. Moving toward the bottom we find negative associations of low spirituality, impurity, lack of power, darkness, and coldness, ending in an ocean of mud."
  10. ^ a b Okada 1982, p. ?
  11. ^ Knecht, Peter 1995, p. 321."Kamimuki Sanji Kaisetsu is regarded as the most authoritative exposition of Mahikari's fundamental teachings, although it is hardly systematic. The Sekai Mahikari Bunmai Koyodan informed me that it contains Okada's fundamental teachings."
  12. ^ Thomsen 1963, p. 70.
  13. ^ McVeigh, Brian 1992, p. 41. "The notion of a divine energy administered through the hand can be found in other New Religions. In Omoto there is the belief in shinki / reiki (divine spirit) that is radiated in a ritual called miteshiro (divine hand-substitute). Sekai Kyiiseikyb's hikari (light) is given in a ritual called jorei (spirit cleaning). Jorei is very similar to Mahikari's okijome, as is Omoto's miteshiro."
  14. ^ Knecht, Peter 1995, p. 337
  15. ^ a b Knecht, Peter 1995, p. 338
  16. ^ Davis 1982, p. 70
  17. ^ Tsushima, Michihito et al. 19179, p. ?
  18. ^ Yamane,Ichiro
  19. ^ Weston, Erin Leigh 2002, p. 45
  20. ^ Yasaka 1999, p. 29.This revelation detailed the urgency of completing the World Shrine to the Creator God (considered the Noah’s Ark of this age) and entrusted the leadership of the Mahikari Organisation to his foremost disciple, his adopted daughter, Ms. Keishu Okada.
  21. ^ [2] Sekai Mahikari Bunmei Kyodan Homepage
  22. ^ Tebecis 2004, p. 79
  23. ^ Yasaka 1999, p. 63
  24. ^ Yasaka 1999, p. 28
  25. ^ Tebecis 2004, p. 29
  26. ^ Inoue, Nobutaka 1991 Kuroda is a known for his themes of ghost stories or the curses of spirits. His cartoons are popular especially among junior and senior high school girls. Since initiating his religious activities, Kuroda has used his cartoon drawings as a medium of missionary activities. He is also engaged in counseling young people.
  27. ^ Tsushiro Hirofumi 2006

[edit] See also

[edit] References

[edit] External links