| It is the reported date when some priests at a temple told some people that they were no longer members of the Sangha due to reported deviations away from the religious groups central tenants.
This was linked to a Lay Group which was seen as deviating away from the tenants.
Many still wonder at the exact events as the reporting has changed over so many years, facts (I use the term loosely) have apparently changed and there has even been mythology created around the whole event - or should I say incident?
What is the correct word to use to communicate this THING? Event? Incident? My Thesaurus, I find, is wanting of a suitable noun.
There is no doubt that for some it was a major "Incident".
For other's it was a sort of damp squib which really did not bother them.
For one group there is no doubt that the date has become highly significant and there is little doubt that they will be memorializing it.
20 years is just too good a number to miss. I fully expect a whole new round of Historical and even Hysterical story telling and yet more supposed Hysterical History to be bandied about.
For me, I recall shortly after Nov. 28, 1991 being told what a terrible thing had happened. The people holding these views were and never have been able to explain their views, the shock, the horror.
I remember the resultant uproar over the apparent mass slaughter of cherry trees and the demolition of a building - which I have to say was in my opinion was of the most dubious architectural quality.
I am aware that the building was viewed very differently by two groups.
The Priests at the temple referred to it as a Provisional Ordination Platform.
The Lay Organization insisted it was the Actual Ordination Platform.
There was some dispute about Prophecy, and the historical views of a monk called Nichiren, and when some form of ordination platform was to be built. It appeared that the 700 years between the prophecy and the ability to full-fill it had become an issue due to social change.
One group said it, The Ordination Platform, was to be built when the Emperor adopted Nichiren Buddhism, and Nichiren was of the view that The Ordination Plaform had to be created under a decree from the Ruler, be that Emperor, Shogun or Prime-minster. As such any building had to be Provisional until a decree was issued.
The other group were of the view that if you build it they will come, and apparently did not see the prophecy issue as relevant.
It seems that there was concern that the post World War II Japanese constitution required a separation of religion and state which made the required decree impossible.
There had been concern for some time that one group had entered into the political arena so that they could gain Political Control in the country and thereby have the awaited decree issued - even if the Country's Constitution made this impossible. Subsequent legislation required that the group be disallowed access to the political system, enforcing the secular basis of government.
Classic stalemate caused by social change and the passage of time.
There was then some debate about the use of the building to hold an antique plank of wood, where there was some concern about people having access to the plank. Doubts as to the planks origins were also raised.
The owners of the plank were of the view that they were legally allowed to decide who may look at it. The other group were of the view that they should be allowed. It was noted that this group failed to test this argument through the legal process. It has been a matter of conjecture that they did not mount a legal challenge as they had no legal right and were fully aware of this.
There also seems to have been some confusion as to the actual use of the building in question.
Mention of Lifeblood and it's control was rampant. The local authorities which govern the area where the building and plank were, have confirmed that no-one held a license for the operation of a blood bank. As far as they were aware no blood or blood products were stored or processed at the site.
There was also some concern as to who had responsibility for the Xerox machine. This resulted in a supposed shortage of facsimile copies of the plank of wood. This was apparently resolved when someone came up with the bright idea of acquiring a different Xerox supplier and copies of copies or facsimiles of facsimiles of the plank of wood were made and given to many people.
There was also then some argument over whether a facsimile of a facsimile of the plank of wood were valid copies of the plank of wood. Complex, convoluted and highly dubious argument was then produced to supposedly validate the Copies of copies of the plank of wood give to the Ex-communicated members of the Lay Organization.
Many were able to obtain various facsimiles of the plank of wood from multiple sources. This occasioned the owners of the new Xerox machine to mandate that only their copies were true facsimiles of facsimiles and that all other facsimiles were not accurate copies and had no power. There were even comments that the copying process had in some way caused mythical beings and supposed demonic influences to become embedded within any such facsimile.
Multiple manufacturers of systems that can be used to generate facsimiles have been unable to account for these claims. A Number have run extensive tests upon their own systems for quality control, reporting that nothing untoward, demonic or out with guarantee and service contract has been found.
Many have wondered at the events and the claims made. There has even been concern raised as to the Antique Plank Of Wood, A Rival Plank which has a claimed higher degree of authenticity has been uncovered.
However, this Rival Plank of wood is in the possession of a third group which neither of the first two groups is willing to speak to. The third group apparently has a contract with a third Xerox supplier and there are concerns that Contractual Confidentiality prevents any communication between all three parties.
All suppliers of Xerox type systems dispute that any provide such exclusive contracts which prevent communication.
I understand that in the intervening twenty years no planks of wood have been harmed, but many cherry trees have apparently been slaughtered.
The group who objected most loudly to this cheery tree holocaust have apparently replaced all of the lost cherry trees by having members of the group plant many replacements on a global scale.
Oddly the planting dates of these cherry trees are not memorialized or celebrated, as they were not individually planted by the leader of the lay organization. It appears that only Cherry trees planted by him have the capacity to affect world climate.
I have to wonder if this Anniversary, as some will no doubt view it, worthy of celebration.
I also have to wonder how some will celebrate it, and what form such celebration will take!
I have kept a quite eye on certain matters for some time, and having watched quietly I detect a shift in language - shifts in publicly available materials - and a quiet preparation for a shift around the twenty year way-point.
I have noted that there are no plans to plant any further cherry trees, which is odd given that the lay organization claims to be promoting world peace.
Environmental degradation is recognized as the single largest threat to peace on a global scale. More Cherry Trees could also be seen as a useful way to offset the groups carbon foot print, given the number of publications they print and the decimation of forests to supply the paper required.
Will this occasion - date - THING - be of interest to many, or will it pass many by?
Will this 20 year way-date be about the supposed millions of individuals Ex-communicated over concerns as to Provisional and Actual status of an architecturally dubious building - or will it somehow become all about one person? |
