AnonymousJanuary 25, 2016 at 2:33 AM
<<<<<<<<<<<<
What is the KYOGAKU-BU REPORT ("Study Department Report")?
Before the completion of Daiseido (Hall of Great Vow for Kosen-rufu) in November 2013, some of the Soka Gakkai's powerful executive leaders were working behind the scenes -- to imprudently change the teachings and to enact the new Soka Gakkai Charter and its Rules & Regulations.
The KYOGAKU-BU REPORT is the document that has recorded in detail how the Study Department opposed to stop their schemes and tried to denounce their mistakes. The writer of this Report has described the accurate dates and content of their speeches. It was written with composure, showing a full of a sense of justice and sincerity.
Schemes to Change Teachings Planned by Some Powerful Executive Leaders:
Upon completion of Daiseido they intended to totally depart from the Dai-Gohonzon that was inscribed in 1279 and that is located at the Nichiren Shoshu head temple. They tried to signify the wooden Gohonzon of the Soka Gakkai Headquarters (which was transcribed by Nichiren Shoshu's 64th High Priest Nissho) to replace it as the Dai-Gohonzon. In order to do so, they needed to firstly reject the position of the Dai-Gohonzon. They tried to make use of the Study Department to build up the grounds of the teachings to place the Nissho Gohonzon as the Dai-Gohonzon. However, the Study Department strongly opposed to proceed the hasty change of such an important teaching issue within a short period of time. The careless change may give rise to great confusion within the organization, at the same time, it will cause to contradict the history of the Three Founding Presidents.
The Study Department was fully aware that the Dai-Gohonzon issue should be solved and overcome in the future, but the risk to carelessly proceed the matter within a short period of time was too great to take. They also calmly judged that they could not construct the new teachings with an inconsistent idea to replace the Nissho Gohonzon as the Dai-Gohonzon. It was one of the reasons they opposed the executive leaders when they tried to enforce adoption of their idea. (There is a premise that all the Gohonzons are the transcription of the Dai-Gohonzon. When you consider it logically, It does not make any sense to choose the transcription "copy" and to deny the Dai-Gohonzon "original")
However, the top executive leaders applied great pressure on the Study Department who had been opposing them with reasons. They finally told them that "this is the will of President Ikeda" to enforce the change. Later, the Study Department discovered it was nothing but a false, make-up story.
There was another issue -- it was the start of a newly created organization, the "Nichiren World School Soka Gakkai" and to enact its Charter and its Rules and Regulations. Some of the top executive leaders planned to make the new organization which would come on top of the SGI's. They were proceeding to enact the "Charter" to control all the SGI's of the world under an absolute power of the top executive leaders by placing the president of the Soka Gakkai as the top (president) of this organization.
The plan to act on their own authority, even using the name of SGI President Ikeda, was brought to a standstill due to a strong resistance from the Study Department and some of the SGI general directors. So, they could not accomplish their plan for the November 18, 2013 Daiseido project. Thereafter, key leaders of the Study Department who were involved in this matter and some of the Soka Gakkai leaders who have supported the Study Department were reshuffled and ousted. Their plan had to be carried over to this year.
On the surface it seems to be the issue of the teachings; however, it deeply involves for Mr. Tanigawa, Chief Vice President, to take office as the next president of the Soka Gakkai. At the same time, it is strongly connected with the absolute power structure they intend to establish when and after SGI President Ikeda passes away.
This letter was written in 2014
The cannibalization of the Gakkai has begun.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that the Study Department didn't oppose the change of teaching outright just the hasty change that would 'create confusion', likewise they 'knew the problem had to be solved'.
ReplyDeleteBoiling frogs. Start with your happy frog in cold water at the temperature it likes so it stays put. Then turn on a very gentle heat so the water heats slowly enough for your frog not to notice. Later you can probably turn up the heat slightly at different stages in the boiling process and the frog wouldn't notice. Finally, when your frog has finally croaked, because it failed to notice it was being heated to death, you can go right ahead and apply full heat, there's no danger of it jumping out now. Poor frog :(( .
The gently, gently avoid confusion but change the teaching approach is every bit as gross.
In a way the hasty 'grab for the prize' is at least more honest but the frogs jump, don't they?
I'd almost disbelieve the sheer guile and calculation of such a strategy if I hadn't witnessed the scale of this stealth at work for myself. I was lucky, I was able to compare study department output from different periods and was fortuitously prompted to do so. I was thus able see the size and nature of the change that had taken place. And because I was able to do so, I left.
This frog jumped :) But others want to stay in their increasingly stupified smiling state in the warm pot even when the evidence is pointed out and reliably referenced :( Even those with the ability to, just don't want to read back and compare it with what's being served up nowadays. How sad...
Great analogy!
ReplyDelete