Volume 1, No. 6 (Part 2) November 18, 1991
The following speech was delivered by Soka Gakkai President Akiya at a joint commemorative general meeting of the university group and Tokyo′s Shibuya Ward held on Nov. 9 on the Soka University campus in Hachioji City. The meeting was also attended by SGI President Ikeda, who, quoting the Gosho and introducing the voices of various scholars, said that the Soka Gakkai, which has correctly inherited the spirit of Nichiren Daishonin, is now carrying out a’religious reformation,’ based on the Gohonzon and the Gosho, that responds to the needs and wishes of the people and to the times.
As you know, yesterday the priesthood sent us its document titled ‘Order for the Soka Gakkai to Disband.’ Upon reading it, however, we find that its content is quite meaningless. This leads us to further call into question the priesthood′s rational judgment.
No matter what happens, we in the Soka Gakkai will not change our course in the slightest. We will continue to forge ahead with dignity and confidence, in accord with the guidance of Honorary President Ikeda, to accomplish the great task of kosen-rufu which the Daishonin has entrusted to us.
Though this may sound presumptuous, I dare say that the priesthood′s attempt to use the threat of power and authority to disband, excommunicate or’cut off’ the Soka Gakkai is in a sense similar to Nichiren Daishonin′s persecution by the authorities at Tatsunokuchi. I am also convinced that we should assign it the same significance, and approach it with the same spirit, as the three believers who became martyrs during the Atsuhara Persecution. For the Soka Gakkai it is, in a sense, our opportunity to cast off our transient status and reveal our true identity (hosshaku kempon), and a springboard to launch us toward a new era. Nothing could give us greater joy.
In contrast, the priesthood is now stating that High Priest Nikken is’true’ while the founders of the sect, Nichiren Daishonin and Nikko Shonin, as well as the successive high priests before High Priest Nikken, are’transitory’ or’provisional.’ By propounding such doctrines, which in effect state that’High Priest Nikken is true while the Buddha is provisional,’ they are clearly trying to form a new and heretical sect.
The core of the priesthood′s dissolution order reflects a low level of scholarship and is so rambling in its presentation that one might wonder if it wasn’t written by a brand-new junior high school student. I would like to cite here a few examples of what I am talking about.
First, quoting the guidance of the 26th high priest, Nichikan Shonin, which states that the successive high priest inherits the’entity of the Law which embodies the one- ness of the Three Treasures,’ they insist that this means that each successive high priest embodies the ‘Treasure of the Priest’ in which, they say, in turn embodies the’Treasure of the Buddha,’ Nichiren Daishonin, and the ‘Treasure of the Law,’ the Dai-Gohonzon of the High Sanctuary of True Buddhism. This, however, is nothing but a fallacious manipulation of terms.
Nichikan Shonin states, in essence, that while the Three Treasures are intrinsically one and the same, from an external perspective they vary in terms of importance. In his guidance he states,’The Treasure of the Law (the Gohonzon) is enshrined in the center, while the treasure of the Buddha and the Treasure of the Priest are enshrined on the left and right respectively.’ (Here Nichikan Shonin refers to the traditional arrangement of carved images of Nichiren Daishonin and of Nikko Shonin on either side of the Gohonzon now enshrined in the Grand Reception Hall at the head temple, sym-bolizing the ‘Three Treasures’ of the Buddha, the Law and the Priest.) Whenever Nichikan Shonin refers to the ‘Treasure of the Priest’ in this guidance he is quite clearly speaking about the second high priest, Nikko Shonin, and not the successive high priests who followed him. The ‘oneness of the Three Treasures’ Nichikan Shonin speaks of means that the Dai-Gohonzon (the Treasure of the Law), the Daishonin (the Treasure of the Buddha) and Nikko Shonin (the Treasure of the Priest) are intrinsically one. One must make a clear distinction between this fundamental definition of the Three Treasures and [the application of the term to] the successive high priests of Nichiren Shoshu. The 66th high priest, Nittatsu Shonin, explained this point in the following way:’In our school, the Three Treasures correspond to the Gohonzon as the Treasure of the Law, the Daishonin as the Treasure of the Buddha, and Nikko Shonin as the Treasure of the Priest. In contrast, Nichimoku Shonin, the third high priest, was known as the’lord of the chair’ (zasu)… he and the subsequent high priests merely inherited and passed on the teachings like a container carrying water. In our school it is believed that Nichimoku Shonin will appear once againÊthat he will be reborn at the time of kosen-rufu. That is, it has been stated that Nichimoku Shonin will be reborn to again take the position of ′lord of the chair′ (high priest) at the time of kosen-rufu. Therefore, none of the successive high priests are equivalent to Nichiren Daishonin. If any of you erroneously writes that the high priest is Nichiren Daishonin himself, then this will be a great source of problems. Please be very clear on this point.’
Secondly, the document condemns the Soka Gakkai as ‘deviating from the significance of the Three Treasures and ignoring the correct lineage [of Nichiren Shoshu].’ But this, too, is an appalling distortion of the facts. The Soka Gakkai has never once denied the correct lineage of the successive high priests of Nichiren Shoshu. Rather, is it not the current priesthood and the present high priest whose corruption is now defiling the pure lineage of Nichiren Shoshu? The same holds true for the Three Treasures: By insisting that the high priest and the Dai-Gohonzon are ‘one and inseparable,’ the priesthood is placing the high priest above Nikko Shonin and on a status equal to the Daishonin himself. Furthermore, it recently has been claiming that the current high priest constitutes the’true’ while the Daishonin is ‘provisional,’ a purely heretical idea that destroys the teachings of Nichiren Shoshu itself. Thus, is it not the current priesthood who is ‘deviating from the significance of the Three Treasures’?
Furthermore, while the priesthood′s dissolution order attempts to impeach the Gakkai in various ways, not a single charge has any doctrinal basis. As a result, they next attempt to cite a couple of secular incidents that were sensationalized in the press in the past, in order to malign the entire Gakkai organization. Bringing up the so-called ‘Pen Monthly (magazine)’ incident, and the incident in which a Nichiren Shoshu priest was abducted by a Gakkai member [who was acting on his own], they state that’each time the Gakkai has been involved in such incidents, they have smeared mud on the pure 700-year tradition of this school and severely damaged the trust society has placed in Nichiren Shoshu, gravely hindering the progress of kosen-rufu of the True Law.’ Just what do they mean by ‘the trust society has placed in Nichiren Shoshu’? Are they joking? If such media events were damaging to the reputation of Nichiren Shoshu, then why did they not point this out at the time? Not a word has been mentioned about these incidents by the priesthood until now. Rather, Nittatsu Shonin, the high priest during the time [of the ‘Pen Monthly’ incident], resolutely protected and supported the Soka Gakkai.
To condemn the Gakkai on account of this incident now is to directly oppose their late teacher, Nittatsu Shonin. Additionally, if the priesthood has thought that the Soka Gakkai injured its reputation, then it should have stopped accepting contributions and offerings from the Soka Gakkai from that time on.
Instead, they have continued to take and take. To relentlessly seek and receive offerings from believers in this way, only to abruptly cut them off and toss them aside, cannot be called human. Herein lies the true nature of the’Nikken faction.’
Furthermore, they are completely off the mark in citing the ‘Pen Monthly’ incident at all. This was a case in which the Soka Gakkai sued for libel and the other side was found guilty. How could this have damaged the reputation of Nichiren Shoshu?
In addition, they cited the incident in which a Nichiren Shoshu priest was abducted in Oita Prefecture in Kyushu. The person found guilty of the crime happened to be a Gakkai member, but for them to condemn the Gakkai by stating’a Soka Gakkai member kidnapped a Nichiren Shoshu priest’ is a little odd.
The priesthood is always telling us that we are believers in Nichiren Shoshu first and foremost and Soka Gakkai members second. If this is the case, then wasn′t it a Nichiren Shoshu believer who abducted the priest? It is misplaced reasoning to shift all of the blame to the Soka Gakkai. Furthermore, when the incident occurred it was Soka Gakkai Vice President Takeiri who risked his life to rescue the priest.
Yet, did the priesthood offer even a word of thanks after the incident was resolved? Did the high priest send Mr. Takeiri even a small gift? There was not a single such token of appreciation. They do not even understand common courtesy in such matters, nor do they know what it means to repay a debt of gratitude. Is this the way human beings should behave?
The priesthood′s arguments, in which it attempts to make everything out of one or two insignificant events, are entirely invalid. How can it therefore state that the Gakkai has defiled the pure 700-year tradition of Nichiren Shoshu? This would rather describe what the high priest himself has done by erecting a tombstone for his ancestors on the grounds of a Zen temple, or by permitting his wife to indulge herself in exorbitant spending sprees, would it not?
Furthermore, I have heard that a representative of the priesthood’s public relations bureau stated in a recent press conference that’the honorary president should come to the head temple to discuss these matters with the high priest.’ This is a complete reversal on their part. Wasn’t it the priesthood who suddenly tried to threaten us with charges based on altered documents, without any kind of forewarning or discussion?
In addition, when I visited the head temple on New Year′s Day this year, it was the high priest himself who said, ‘Permission for an audience is denied,’ refusing to allow me to meet with him. And in a document released later, the priesthood stated that ‘you people do not deserve an audience’ with the high priest.
It has been the priesthood, particularly the high priest, who has denied our repeated requests for dialogue from the outset.
Yet, when they are criticized on this account by members of society, they suddenly reverse themselves and say that we should ‘come to the head temple and discuss these matters.’ This amounts to nothing more than high-handedness and insolence, and this is the tendency which lies at the root of the current problem.
Let us then join our fellow members around the world in calling for the immediate resignation of this high priest whose arrogance has led him to commit such grave slander of the Law.
Comments from Soka Gakkai Attorney Nobuyuki Tsukiji
The head temple mailed us the document titled’Order for the Soka Gakkai to Disband’ dated Nov. 7, 1991. It is 36 pages in length, but the main body, whose style can be characterized as crude at best, deals only haphazardly with the subject at hand.
This document states that not’following the high priest without question’ is a grave slander, and that from the standpoint of the lineage of Buddhism, there is a definite distinction between the priesthood and lay believersÊarguments that clearly contradict the essential spirit of Nichiren Daishonin’s teachings.
Moreover, it says that in the past, the head temple has recognized the Soka Gakkai, even though it is a new lay organization and not a branch of the Hokkeko society, based on the agreement that the Gakkai would follow three requests: 1) that anyone converted be required, as a believer, to join a local Nichiren Shoshu temple; 2) that the Soka Gakkai uphold the tenets of this school (Nichiren Shoshu), and 3) that the Soka Gakkai uphold and protect the Three Treasures (the Buddha, the Law, and the Priest). However, it purports that the Soka Gakkai has violated these conditions and is therefore ordering the Gakkai to disband.
Considering the legal status of the Soka Gakkai, I am puzzled why this order was issued at all. It′s clear that the priesthood simply isn’t acting rationally.
In the first place, the Soka Gakkai is an autonomous entity, and has been incorporated as an independent religious organization. Its lawful existence is strictly guaranteed by the Constitution. The priesthood, therefore, has no legal right to order the Gakkai to dissolve. Nichiren Shoshu′s rules in no way give the priesthood the prerogative to disband our organization. They are in no position to do what they are attempting to do.
Then what is the significance of this document? Frankly, it has none. It is meaningless and carries no substantive authority. No matter how forcefully the priesthood tells the Gakkai to disband, nothing will come of it. We need do nothing but view this high-handed and basely motivated action with disdain.
Why, then, did the priesthood initiate this thoroughly banal action? If the head temple was at all predisposed to rational behavior, it would have openly undertaken comprehensive discussions with us on the points in question before acting.
But why didn′t it? The answer is obvious. The priesthood chose not to hold a dialogue because it is guilt-ridden and has much to hide.
If this wasn′t the case, the impetuous and meaningless nature of the dissolution order would be hard to explain. Does it fear being challenged with a lawsuit, or is it ashamed about something it has done?
I feel that rather than engage in useless sophistry, the head temple should sincerely consider what the Gakkai has to say in accordance with Nichiren Shoshu guidelines. It should deal with us straight on, by walking through our front doors and engaging in serious dialogue.
Although the main portion of the dissolution order contains many ambiguous and vaguely stated points, the gist of the 36-page document conveys only the priesthood′s contention that’priests are superior to lay believers,”the High Priest is great,’ and ‘those who fail to obey him will fall into hell.’ In other words, I don′t think it′s too much to say that this document employs irrational and pointless arguments to threaten Gakkai members. I can’t imagine the sorrow the Daishonin would feel were he to see it.
At any rate, the Soka Gakkai has not destroyed the Three Treasures nor disobeyed the tenets of Nichiren Shoshu in any way. Quite to the contrary, it is the priesthood led by High Priest Nikken that is committing these grave offenses.
There is a basic idea in legal thought called the ‘clean hands doctrine. ‘This entails that those whose hands are soiled have no right to attack others. Applied to the present situation, this notion would dictate that a person who has committed the offense of erecting a tombstone at a Zen temple has no right to accuse others of slander. Someone who has told his subordinates to intimidate and terrorize Gakkai members must not be permitted to pass judgment on the Soka Gakkai.
Moreover, a priest who exploits members’ financial contributions to pursue an extravagant lifestyle and allows his wife to lead a spendthrift existence is in no position to be entrusted with the lineage of Nichiren Shoshu. I cannot help but speak frankly on these matters.
It follows that there′s absolutely no need to pay attention to the priesthood′s dissolution order which was issued to deflect attention from their wrongdoings. I think we can conclude that in addition to committing’the eleven grave slanders, ‘High Priest Nikken has managed to commit a twelfth by producing the disbandment order and making Nichiren Shoshu the laughingstock of society.
The head temple has unfairly pre-judged the Soka Gakkai as a slanderous organization that has attempted to destroy the Three Treasures and alter the traditions of Nichiren Shoshu, therefore warranting disbandment. However, justice cannot be suppressed. I have a document here titled ‘The Operation to Cut Off the Soka Gakkai (′Operation C′)’ which is four-typed pages long and was delivered to us by an individual associated with the head temple. Until now we had not seen this document in its entirety. Interestingly, the priesthood never denied the existence of this strategy. It responded to our inquiries stating,’The issues at hand have ′Operation C′ as their basis,’ and,’There is something called ′Operation C′ in which even the high priest is involved.’
If this strategy does in fact exist, as it obviously appears, then the true purpose of the various intermediate steps taken by the priesthood since last winter has been completely exposed. I often wondered why the head temple didn′t repudiate the existence of ‘Operation C’ in response to our charges. Recent developments explain why.
This document proves that the head temple began plotting to abandon and to destroy the Soka Gakkai as early as the summer of 1990. It states, ‘The strategic objectives of this operation are to dismiss Honorary President Ikeda as the head of all Nichiren Shoshu lay organizations, to announce to the general public that Nichiren Shoshu is a religious body that has no links whatsoever to the Soka Gakkai, to completely destroy the Soka Gakkai, and to construct a temple-based organization that upholds genuine faith.’
Then, it states the need to first, ‘change the rules of Nichiren Shoshu as necessary [to facilitate the operation], ‘ at a special session of the Nichiren Shoshu Council; second, ‘to dismiss Honorary President Ikeda as the head of all Nichiren Shoshu lay organizations and notify Soka Gakkai leaders of our orders’; and third, ‘after announcing that the Soka Gakkai is a group that has nothing to do with Nichiren Shoshu,’ to hold a press conference and attempt to convey through the media the supposed legitimacy of the priesthood′s position.
Furthermore, the plan calls for asking Gakkai members to register at local temples and to renounce membership in the Soka Gakkai. These developments are to be explained in a series of advertisements to be run in major national newspapers as the Asahi Shimbun (the budget for this is 120 million Yen, roughly U.S.$923,000 at Š130/U.S.$1). In addition, the document goes on to detail other aspects of ‘Operation C.’
All of this makes clear that the head temple’s unreasonable actions, including the dissolution order, are based on this strategy. The fact that this plot was formulated under the supervision of the high priest reveals again the priesthood′s sinister nature.
In any case, it is now apparent that the priesthood intended to sever ties with the Soka Gakkai from the very beginning. The claim that the Gakkai is destroying the Three Treasures or is slanderous is no more than a pretext and a fabrication. The priesthood made a conscious effort to garner as much financial support from Gakkai members as possible, and when it became inconvenient to continue the association, it abandoned us, its largest benefactor. Can we permit such an injustice to occur?
We won′t be fooled again. Let′s cheerfully and wisely battle against the evil forces of tyranny and oppression.
Soka Gakkai President Einosuke Akiya′s speech at the Soka Gakkai’s Central Executive Conference on Nov. 6.
It is now widely acknowledged that the priesthood has recently been propounding erroneous concepts such as the’oneness of the high priest and the Gohonzon’ and the idea that the ‘Gosho contains only a portion of the Daishonin’s teachings [and that only the high priest understands the remainder of those teachings].’ But as this insanity within the priesthood escalates, the priesthood is now equating the current high priest with the essence of things (hon) and Nichiren Daishonin with the transient or provisional (shaku). [These terms are the same as those applied to the distinction between the essential teaching of the Lotus Sutra (honmon) and the theoretical teaching (shakumon).]
This is an astounding maneuver that can clearly be labeled heresy. To state that Nikken Shonin, nothing more than one of the successive high priests of Nichiren Shoshu, is ‘essential’ or’true’ and Nichiren Daishonin, the original Buddha, is ‘provisional’ or’transient’ is to assert that the Daishonin is not the true Buddha but a provisional Buddha. This is on par with the slanderous doctrine called shinpon busshaku (that Japanese Shinto deities are ‘true’ or fundamental while the Buddha or Buddhism is provisional or transitory) espoused by the priest Jimon Ogasawara during World War II. Some are now referring to the priesthood′s new doctrine as kenpon busshaku (a play on words from shinpon busshaku mentioned above), indicating’Nikken is true and the Buddha is provisional.’
Who is it putting forth this teaching, so fallacious that no other priest of Nichiren Shoshu could possibly conceive of it? It is the former secretary, Kido Fukuda, of the Administrative Office. He is the priest who disclosed the existence of ‘Operation C’ and who delivered the high priest′s message to General Director Williams of the United States, inviting him to leave the SGI. Once this incident was uncovered, Fukuda was censured, taking the fall for the high priest.
Former secretary Fukuda first announced his theory of ‘the Daishonin as a provisional Buddha’ in August of this year during a lecture delivered to a practice and study training meeting for new priests. That he made a speech at this meeting while supposedly under censure shows that the censure itself was merely a ploy, intended to fool the believers into thinking that Fukuda was being punished for his misdeeds.
During the lecture, Fukuda, a trusted aide and confidant of the high priest, essentially said the following:’In his ′One Hundred Six Comparisons′ Nichiren Daishonin stated, ‘Like the rising waves or the blowing wind, everything can be divided into the essential and the provisional, and everything should be discerned in terms of relative superiority′ (Gosho Zenshu, p. 869). Here the Daishonin means that one should discern all phenomena in terms of what is essential and what is transitory, what is superior and what is inferior. Waves rise and then disappear one after another. The wave that appears now is ′essential′ while the one that has gone is ′provisional.′ Therefore, the founder, Nichiren Daishonin, the second high priest, Nikko Shonin, and all of the successive high priests until today are ′provisional′ because they exist in the past, while the present high priest, Nikken, is essential or true. In addition, among Nikken′s guidance, the older is ′provisional′ compared to the newer, which is ′essential.′ If his guidance in the past is provisional, then it is most correct to follow his most recent guidance.’
Previous erroneous doctrines such as the ‘oneness of the high priest and the Gohonzon’ and ‘the high priest embodies the Treasure of the Priest’ tried to assert that High Priest Nikken is superior to Nikko Shonin and equal to Nichiren Daishonin. But this new interpretation by former secretary Fukuda is in a whole new league. In comparing the true Buddha, Nichiren Daishonin, with High Priest Nikken, Fukuda asserts that High Priest Nikken is the’true’ or ‘fundamental’ while Nichiren Daishonin is ‘provisional’ or ‘transient.’ Nothing could be more distorted. This is the sort of haphazard and miscreant reasoning Fukuda put forth in his lecture during the’practice and study training course,’ a formal event where new priests who will shoulder the future of Nichiren Shoshu were present.
It is impossible to believe that the content of Fukuda′s lecture did not reach the ears of the high priest, and we must therefore conclude that the priesthood has either given official or tacit approval to his viewpoint. One can only imagine that those priests who were happy with theories like ‘the high priest is the true Buddha’ or’the Gosho is only a part,’ or who applauded the theory of the ‘absoluteness of the high priest,’ must be truly overwhelmed with joy at this new doctrine. The strategy of trying to establish the primacy or absoluteness of the high priest reflects a distorted attitude that attempts to destroy the original doctrines of Nichiren Shoshu and disrupt its lineage. We thus cannot help labeling Nikken Shonin as ‘the high priest who is bent on destroying the Law.’
High Priest Nikken once quoted the following passage from the Gosho ‘On Flowers and Seeds,”It is said that if a master has a good disciple, both will attain Buddhahood, but if a master fosters a bad disciple, both will fall into hell’ (The Major Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, vol. 2, p. 217). He continued, ‘The important point here is that when a master has a bad disciple, if the master fails to correct the disciple′s bad points and instead leaves him as he is, or if the master refuses to take responsibility for his disciple′s transgressions, then due to the oneness of master and disciple, the sins of that disciple will also accrue to the master and both master and disciple will fall into hell together’ (Dec. 12, 1981, at the completion ceremony for Noeizan Honkyu-ji temple).
In light of his own guidance, High Priest Nikken’s failure to correct this grave slander by his disciple, Fukuda, and his neglect in taking him to task on the matter, surely make the high priest guilty of the same offense as his disciple.
In addition, the study material distributed during Fukuda′s lecture contained the following quote from the Gosho: ‘Thus faith is the basic requirement for entering the way of the Buddha’ (MW-3, 5), to which Fukuda offers this bizarre interpretation: ‘In the faith espoused by the Head Temple Taiseki-ji of Nichiren Shoshu, Nichiren Daishonin is regarded and revered in a general sense as the original Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law. However, in a specific sense, we believe in the Dai-Gohonzon that embodies the life of the Daishonin, and we profoundly believe in and devote ourselves to the lineage of high priests beginning with the second high priest, Nikko Shonin, down through the current high priest, Nikken.’
Thus, according to Fukuda, belief in the Daishonin is assigned to the category of ‘general’ and faith in the successive high priests to that of ‘specific.’ Such a thing has never been heard of before and, needless to say, reflects Fukuda′s own prejudiced and erroneous views.
While in general this usage means the commonplace or usual, specific means the essence or heart of things. If we compare general with specific in this sense, specific is superior to general. Thus Fukuda seems here to be stating that believing in the high priest is superior to believing in Nichiren Daishonin, the true Buddha of the Latter Day of the Law.
In the Gosho ‘Admonitions Against Slander’ Nichiren Daishonin states,’If you confuse the general with the specific even in the slightest, you will never be able to attain enlightenment and will wander through endless lifetimes of suffering’ (MW-1, 164). As this passage suggests, the priesthood has now begun to expound a doctrine which will insure they will’never be able to attain enlightenment.’
It is clear to everyone that Fukuda’s assertions comprise the ultimate depravity, and that it is the members of the priesthood themselves who are destroying the Buddhism of Nichiren Daishonin from within Nichiren Shoshu. One can only conclude that this current insanity within the priesthood is in no way connected to the institution of Nichiren Shoshu itself but is a working of the’Nikken sect’ that is now destroying it.
A person related to someone within the priesthood said: ‘Once the priesthood proclaimed the doctrine of shinpon busshaku (that the Shinto deities are superior to the Buddha). Now they have come to espouse the doctrine of kenpon busshaku (that High Priest Nikken is superior to the Buddha). How foolish and arrogant they are! It’s disgusting. The Gakkai and the laity have good reason to be angry. As Nittatsu Shonin stated, those who harass Soka Gakkai members, who more than anyone have struggled to contribute to the priesthood′s current welfare and prosperity, are clearly none other than devils. I hope that the Gakkai will now fight resolutely to protect the priesthood in the truest sense.’
A believer who is a scholar of the sociology of religion lamented: ‘Due to this fundamental error of doctrine, even in this one area, I cannot help thinking of Nichiren Shoshu as an erroneous or ‘heretical’ teaching. Furthermore, the correct lineage of Nichiren Shoshu now exists in the Soka Gakkai, for they are the ones who are practicing as Nichikan Shonin [the 26th high priest, known as a restorer of the Daishonin’s teachings] taught. For the most part, everything the high priest has been doing, from building a family tomb at a Zen temple to claiming the oneness of the high priest and the Gohonzon constitutes slander. But this latest assertion is a most extreme slander of all.’
Nichiren Daishonin states, ‘If one should forget the original teacher who brought him the water of wisdom from the great ocean of the Lotus Sutra and instead follows another, he is sure to sink into the endless sufferings of life and death’ (MW-1, 164-5). To us, the ‘original teacher’ means none other than the original Buddha, Nichiren Daishonin. There is no reason that justifies calling the high priest ‘original.’ Yet the current priesthood now ignores any clear reasoning and makes light of even Nichiren Daishonin by assigning him the status of ‘provisional.’ Thus they are now committing a slander of unprecedented seriousness.
Under such circumstances, the members of the priesthood are certain to fall into the three evil paths and ‘sink into the endless sufferings of life and death,’ just as the Daishonin admonishes. Thus we are sure to witness with our own eyes what the ‘harsh judge’ of causality has in store.