Paper presented at the British Educational Research Association Annual Conference, University of Glamorgan, 14-17 September 2005

Tsunesaburo Makiguchi and Mahatma Gandhi: The Educational Relevance of Two Thinkers for 21st Century Society

Namrata Sharma, Institute of Education, University of London ()

Introduction

This paper is an engagement with the present use and relevance of two dissidents of the twentieth century – Tsunesaburo Makiguchi (1871-1944) of Japan, and Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, alias Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948) of India.

Makiguchi was an educationist in the Meiji era (1868-1912) and was imprisoned in 1943 due to his opposition to the Japanese nationalistic state. Meanwhile Gandhi, who is better known than Makiguchi, was a leader of the Indian National Congress and a key figure in the movement for Swaraj or the independence of India from the British Raj.

In my work Value Creators in Education (Sharma 1999) I had compared these two thinkers, and one of the reasons for my choice of comparison was that both Makiguchi and Gandhi were influenced by their religious beliefs. Although Makiguchi was a Buddhist and Gandhi a Hindu, they had a similar understanding of ‘truth’ as the law of the universe. This, I have argued, in turn influenced their respective values. The key educational ideas of Makiguchi are stated in his pedagogy titled ‘The System of Value Creating Education’ or Soka Kyoikugaku Taikei. Whereas central to Gandhi’s political struggle was the creative use of the value of ahimsa or non-violence.

It should be stated at the offset that Makiguchi’s ideas as compared to Gandhi, were not overtly concerned with politics but education, since he spent most of his life as a school teacher and principal. On the other hand, although Gandhi is more famous as a political leader, he was also actively involved in educating the inmates of his ashrams or communities, and later his ideas were formally considered by the Congress under the Wardha scheme of education. The first part of this paper briefly explores their aspirations that lead to their civic engagement.

Makiguchi and Gandhi’s Values and Civic Aspirations

Makiguchi’s ‘Value Creating Education’

The term Soka「創価」as Makiguchi used it, is taken from two words, so from sozo (創造 creation) and ka from kachi (価値 value). According to Makiguchi, it is in the creation of value for self and others that the purpose of human life and hence education lies. His main educational work Soka Kyoikugaku Taikei or the ‘System of Value Creating Education’ is a pragmatic theory of knowledge that for Makiguchi had implications for revitalising teaching strategies and education as a whole. Addressing this key concern Makiguchi states:

Education consists of finding value within the living environment, thereby discovering physical and psychological principles that govern our lives and eventually applying these newfound principles in real life to create new value. In sum, it is the guided acquisition of skills of observation, comprehension, and application.

(Makiguchi 1989: 168)

As a teacher Makiguchi carried out research conducted through “the scientist’s method of inducting findings from actual experience” (Makiguchi 1989: 8) despite the fact that the trend within educationists was to imitate foreign theories at home, and also in spite of the disadvantage Makiguchi faced in not being a highly qualified academic, but ‘only a school teacher’ in the extremely hierarchical society of early twentieth century Japan. Social acceptance of his educational work was important to Makiguchi, and he spared no efforts to form relations with eminent people in education and politics (such as Tsuyoshi Inukai, the prime minister of Japan from December 1931 to May 1932; Magoichi Tsuwara, minister of commerce and industry; and Itamu Takagi, professor of medicine at Tokyo Imperial University).

Makiguchi saw his role as an educator to extend beyond the boundaries of his own classroom, and was keen to have an impact on the Japanese education system as a whole.

In 1930 Makiguchi and his fellow school teacher Josei Toda (1900-1958) formed the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai or Value Creating Education Society, which was a Buddhist lay group comprising mostly of educators. This organisation drew educators as well as other members of society who were interested in both his value creation theory as well as Nichiren Buddhism. In 1943 Makiguchi and Toda were imprisoned for their statements denouncing the emperor and the Japanese war. On 18 November 1944, Makiguchi passed away in prison, suffering from age and malnutrition.

Gandhi’s ‘Satyagraha’

Gandhi’s satyagraha movement, or movement based on truth-force, aimed towards swaraj or the independence of the country that he formulated in South Africa and India, was also one that had a strong normative dimension. The basic common feature between the ideas of Makiguchi and Gandhi was that they both perceived the universe within a spiritual dimension of inter-dependence of all phenomena. At the same time both Makiguchi and Gandhi were professionals, Makiguchi was a teacher and educationist, and Gandhi was a lawyer.

Unlike Makiguchi, however, Gandhi was also a political leader, who had to respond to the changing socio-political scenario of his time, as well as the diverse communities of people within India. Arguably, Gandhi’s socio-political understanding was based on the concept of law that was understood by the Indian polity. Whereas he used civil laws such as writing petitions, he was also invoking the ‘common brotherhood’ of the disparate multicultural Indian community through appealing to their shared understanding of a ‘causal law’, that is even now expressed in popular terms such as fate, destiny, or the will of God (Bhagvan or Allah). Thereby Gandhi made use of both the notion of law that had come in from the West but also created an indigenous political understanding that took the causal law or satya (truth) as a peg, to which were added terms borrowed from the diverse communities, such as ahimsa (non-violence) from Jainism, dharma[1] from Hinduism, love from Christianity, and notions of equality from the Buddhist sangha (group).

The appeal his political creativity made to the popular culture was the greatest asset for Gandhi’s movement. But this can be misunderstood if we don’t look into the persona of Gandhi. There can be said to be two Gandhis. The first is Gandhi the person, for whom truth and non-violence was his creed. Then there was the Gandhi who had to play the role of the Mahatma, the moral leader and a nationalist, who had to work through the problematic intercultural issues. It is the latter that critics have often invoked, like Gandhi’s abstinence from using ahimsa or non-violence at all times. Such as, his consent for India’s participation in the Second World War as part of the British allied forces, the advice he gave to women to protect themselves in case of abuse, and his reluctant yet agreed support to maintain an Indian military force after independence. As I will argue later, there is a challenge of maintaining such ideals within the socio-political reality.

Gandhi however was able to have the impact within his country that Makiguchi had hoped for in Japan. One of the main reasons for this is that the ‘authorities’ that both faced were different in nature – the British were political occupiers of India, unlike the Japanese nationalistic government that was dictatorial in nature and therefore ruthless in their conduct to both the civilians as well as their enemies in the Cold War. Secondly, Gandhi unlike Makiguchi was a force to reckon with for three important reasons: First, he was spearheading the Indian National Congress; second, he had established his position as the moral leader of the Indian masses; and lastly, because of the efficacy of his movement.

The Successors of Makiguchi and Gandhi

However, here onwards I will argue that in the twenty-first century, the successors of Makiguchi and Gandhi in their respective countries have re-written the history of these thinkers. With the consolidation and growth of the Soka Gakkai under Josei Toda and the current President Daisaku Ikeda (1928- ), Makiguchi’s ideas have powerfully exerted itself within the socio-political and educational settings of contemporary Japan. The presence of Gandhi, on the other hand, is apparent within the Indian national policies. However, whereas some scholars contend that Gandhi is still relevant in modern India, critics find him as merely a picture hanging on the walls of government, police, and court buildings. Gandhism in the present day has developed a contextual meaning, by which I mean it is something almost anyone can invoke, use, and discard according to their context. Meanwhile, Gandhi’s Basic Education or Nai Talim[2] that proposed ‘education through a craft’ has not been seriously followed in independent India (see Sharma 1999: 29-48). Let us now consider some of the factors that have lead to the difference in their lineage.

To say a bit more about the ‘successors’ of Makiguchi, the post-war reconstruction of the Soka Kyoiku Gakkai or Value Creating Education Society established by Makiguchi took place under Josei Toda by the new name of Soka Gakkai or the ‘Value Creating Organisation’. This organisation is now registered as a non-government organisation with the United Nations, and aims to promote peace, culture and education through its centres and affiliated organisations in 190 countries and territories across the world. In recent years the President of the Soka Gakkai, Daisaku Ikeda has established kindergartens, schools and universities in Japan, U.S., Brazil, Singapore, Malaysia, India and other places. Ikeda himself is a recipient of over a hundred honorary doctorates and citizenships from across the world. Within Japan the Soka Gakkai provides political endorsement to the Komeito Political Party that is part of the ruling coalition government with the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). It has been argued by Fisker-Nielson that the Komeito’s involvement in politics has lead to a greater effort being put into welfare policies (Fisker-Nielsen 2005).

At the same time, one of the interesting contradictions that have arisen in the past few years is the tension between the ideals held by Soka Gakkai members within the recent political changes in Japan. As Fisker-Nielsen’s (2005) research on Religious Idealism and Political Reality shows, the Soka Gakkai has supported the ruling Komeito party as they believe it stands for its ideal of ‘world peace’. However, the Iraq war and the Japanese government’s role within it, has exposed significant dilemmas for Soka Gakkai members, such as, some members are unable to understand why the Komeito has not withdrawn its support from the ruling coalition in spite of the Liberal Democratic Party’s support for the Iraq war. While I agree that there are dilemmas posed for religious bodies when they participate in political activities, I will also argue that the ‘ religious idealism’ in this case is not entirely misplaced, because, even though the aim to achieve social transformation embedded in the Soka Gakkai seems to be idealistic or naïve in the face of the given political realities, the benefit of such ideals is not as much in the realisation of the goal (because society moves according to the dictates of other factors), but that in the process of working on their ideals the body politic obtain political literacy, that is, they are ‘educated’ in the broader sense of the term[3]. This is similar to the case of Gandhi’s satyagraha movement.

To explain briefly, Gandhi’s satyagraha movement was a political but also an educational movement in which the political literacy of the Indian masses was taking place. Such as, the Indians were taught to spin the charkha (wheel) so as to weave the khadi cloth. This was an important economic component in the movement to boycott British goods. It can be argued that whereas, for the Congress this non-violent movement was an effective policy, to Gandhi it was his creed that stemmed from his commitment to non-violence which he hoped would allow the Indians to see “the universal and all-pervading spirit of Truth leading to identification with everything that lives” (Gandhi 1957: 504). It can be argued that unlike the Congress Gandhi saw his movement as an educational one, in which the educator (himself in this case) was also a role model.

In fact, values such as ahimsa were able to generate an impact not only because it was pertinent, but due to the methods of application within the context of the Indian political movement. Within the non-violent movement of satyagraha (truth-force) the values of ahimsa, tolerance, love for humanity and other such values were associated with Gandhi- the man, his personality, symbols, and the entire movement.

Within the broader social and structural revolution that was taking place in India, Gandhi was able to educate the inmates of his ashrams or communities as well as give direction to the youth who were studying in national colleges to involve them in the national struggle. However, it can be argued that in post-independent India one of the main reasons for the lack of initiative to pursue Gandhi’s ideas was the change in India’s socio-political structure. The new constitution that was framed was based on Anglo-Saxon principles having a directly elected parliamentary government with a federal structure. This was in contrast to the Gandhian plan of decentralisation or panchayati raj, which under the new constitution was put under the directive principles. By not seriously considering Gandhi’s proposed socio-political structure the framers of the constitution also avoided the pertinence given to education by Gandhi who had insisted that “…for panchayats to be effective and efficient the level of education has to be considerably raised” (Harijan December 21, 1947). Education as envisaged by Gandhi was to educate the polity towards carrying out a broader role and responsibility of self governance starting from the local level.