Content deleted Content added
Line 377: Jacqueline I Stone's paper in Steven Heine, Charles S. Prebish (eds.) [https://books.google.com/books?id=LZkfUGhV_FwC&pg=PA198 ''From "Buddhism in the Modern World:Adaptations of an Ancient Tradition,''] p.198 is very, ''very'' authoritative, John. He rejected the extremism. As for nationalism, every one is a nationalist, in the sense that they wish for the good of their own countries. compared to the hotheads thick on the ground and all around him, there seems to be no evidence that political nationalism of the kind Tanaka and Ishiwara Kanji preached would have evoked anything but distaste in the poet.[[User:Nishidani|Nishidani]] ([[User talk:Nishidani|talk]]) 19:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC) ::No disagreement that he rejected it in time. Does it specifically say ''when'' he rejected the extremism, however? I admit I haven't checked everything myself, yet, and that includes both the encyclopedia I listed above and the .pdfs I was sent by Resource Exchange. The questions here aren't really about the "nationalism" per se, but about his ties to Kukochukai or however it is spelled, and when perhaps the group became strongly nationalist, particularly as it relates to his acceptance or rejection of it. I have a feeling, although I am clearly not an expert, that we might really benefit from a maybe more detailed article or group of articles on [[Japanese nationalism]], which doesn't seem to cover the nationalist tendencies of the post-war period very well. Admittedly, it probably isn't the top priority of the related WikiProjects. I know how damn many central articles on religious traditions are still missing in wikipedia, and I imagine the same weakness of broad topical coverage exists in Japan related content as well. The two questions I guess are (1) how long should this article ultimately be and (2) proportionally, how much coverage to his religious opinions and his involvement in Kokuchukai and whatever else. Personally, I've always held that we shouldn't be longer than the longest overview on the same topic, but I dunno what that might be yet. The length of the lede would be dependent on the first of those points. The apparent point of dispute, at present, seems to be how to describe his beliefs, and how important to place the nationalism of Kokuchukai in the description of those beliefs, particularly in the lede. I am in no way going to cast an at this point ill-founded opinion on that, but I have to say if his ties to the group were one of the issues which caused him to be a writer, a description of his religiosity in some form merits some mention in the lede. [[User:John Carter|John Carter]] ([[User talk:John Carter|talk]]) 19:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC) == The lede issue == I waited quite a while before I would post anything about this issue. * It was established not to call Kenji a nationalist *It is also an established fact though he was a member Kokuchūkai *His affiliation with Kokuchūkai is the only known with Nichiren Buddbism. Although Kokuchūkai is on the very fringe of Nichiren Buddhism it is never the less in some ways based on the Lotus Sutra. *Kenji’s Family were adherents of Pure Land Buddhism NOT based on the Lotus Sutra. From all what was said and done in this article to call the man a “devout” Buddhist is a peacock term as the only devotion that can be accounted for is the one towards named organisation. An alternative lede would be ''“Kenji Miyazawa (宮沢 賢治 Miyazawa Kenji?, 27 August 1896 – 21 September 1933) was a Japanese poet and author of children's literature in the early Shōwa period. He was also known as a Buddhist and member of Kokuchūkai, vegetarian, and social activist.”'' I do agree as this issue has been dragging on for months now to call the guy a nationalist may be disputable. What is undisputable however is his affiliation with Kokuchūkai as the only religious affiliation to be accounted for. Kokuchūkai may or may not be nationalist today it surely was then back in the days he joined – excuses like saying “I did not know what I was doing back then” are an well established excuse in the country I reside in. If some would like to use Wikipedia to establish revisionist tendencies they just might go ahead but have to live with opposition.--[[User:Catflap08|Catflap08]] ([[User talk:Catflap08|talk]]) 20:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC) | |||