FREE Zen Newsletter!
100 years of Zen – More confusing than ever…
It has been 100 years since Zen was introduced to the West and people seem to be getting more confused every day!
One of the constant conditions I have experienced since being on the path of Zen is the misunderstanding and confusion that many people profess or demonstrate concerning Zen doctrines (one confusion being that Zen “does not have any doctrines”).
I am not talking about people that have never studied Buddhism or participated in Buddhist communities; I am talking about Buddhist “adherents” and Zen “practitioners” that have often been practicing for years. Nor am I talking about having a solid grasp of Bodhidharma’s “Entrances”, Linji’s “Positions of Guest and Host”, Tozan’s “Five Ranks”, or any of the other Zen “devices.” Forget the “1700″ koans of “The Five Houses” and “Seven Traditions”, I am talking about the basic Zen teachings on “Buddha nature”, “sudden enlightenment” (original enlightenment) and “gradual cultivation” (acquired enlightenment), “the three poisons”, “bodhicitta”, “samadhi”, “prajna” “bodhisattva”, etc.
Admittedly, Zen teachings (I mean its basic doctrines, not its realization) are not exactly easy to understand; indeed, they are often profoundly subtle and difficult to grasp. However, that is not unique to Zen; to achieve an accurate and reliable understanding of the doctrines of any of the worlds major religions, or spiritual traditions requires sustained, active investigation. Learning plumbing, carpentry, or puppeteering requires months (or years) of sustained effort; how could we expect to easily grasp the teachings on the essence and function of life and death?
Why? Reliable information on Zen does not seem to be in short supply.
There has been a vast increase of reliable translations from the classic Zen texts. Many of the more fundamental (and “universal”) Zen classics are even available from multiple translators, providing English readers with a variety of readings with which to “triangulate” their meaning. Publications of specialized scholarly studies, covering almost every aspect of Zen, have also seen a massive increase in recent years. It would seem reasonable to assume that the overall understanding of Zen in the West would be much greater than it was 30 or so years ago when the “Zen” section of the local bookstore had 9 books in it (4 by DT Suzuki, 2 by Alan Watts, 1 by Kaplau, 1 by “that Korean guy”, and 1 by that “other Suzuki”).
So, why all the confusion?
Perhaps the issue (or at least one of the issues) is this: these books are not being read by the majority of Zen practitioners. I can understand why many of the “scholarly studies” are relegated to the back shelves of academic institutions (the assumed prerequisites and technical jargon can make reading them a daunting task). I can even understand “passing” on some of the translations–some are very complicated, and some are just lousy–but for the most part, this seems a little harder to understand (more on this in a moment).
Here are a few observations:
1. Most of the English speaking teachers, and English language books offering interpretation, and/or commentary on Zen (Chinese: Chan, Korean: Soen, Vietnamese: Thien) are base their teachings solely on the authority of their own particular house, school, or sect (and of course, their own “enlightened” view).
2. With a few notable exceptions), these teachers rarely offer evidence (textual or otherwise) that comes close to the standards of scholarly works. Often, teachings, phrases, and even thoughts are offhandedly attributed to Zen ancestors without even mentioning a source (e.g. “Linji taught people not to seek enlightenment…”, “Bodhidharma said Zen was ‘not dependent on writings’…”, “Dogen was against taking koans to the cushion…”).
3. While the prolific Thich Nhat Hanh has managed to claim a fair portion of the library and bookstore “Zen” sections for (his version of) Vietnamese Zen, the majority of popular Zen books and teachers are associated with the competitive rivals of Japanese Rinzai and Soto sects. Attempting to obtain an accurate understanding of Zen through works by the representatives of sects and institutions that have been competing with one another for 800 years should only be done with extreme caution.
As Zen practitioners we are not talking about trivail matters–Ford or Chevy? Being an adherent of Zen means to trust it with whatever is most essential in our life and death.
Here is where my confusion comes in. How can Zen practitioners allow themselves to be convinced that the Zen teaching of “contemporary so-and-so” is truly a Zen teaching without studying the classic Buddhist texts and Zen records? In other words, how can someone commend their resolution of the ”great matter” of life and death to the authority of “Roshi Jim-Bob” (or “Roshi Betty-Sue”), while simply dispensing with studying the Awakening of Faith shastra, the Lotus, Avatamsaka, Diamond, and Vimalikirti sutras, or the classic records of Linji, Dongshan, Yunmen, Huineng, Chinul, Zongmi, Hongzhi, Matsu, Huangbo, Daie, Dogen, Ryokan, Hakuin, Bassui, Bankei, etc. etc.?
I find it very confusing…
Peace,
Ted
Hi Ted
I really don’t think you are confused, but are being polite.
The appropriate emotion here would be righteous indignation, transformed into the clear intent to tirelessly continue one’s efforts to liberate all beings. On the other hand, confusion entails a kind of paralysis born of frustration.
So what if everyone has drunk the Kool-Aid? It has always been thus. Dharma medicine has magical properties, including the ability to be transformed into poison.
So rare these days to find someone who, when asked, ” What is your religion” replies
“Religion belongs to no one.”
best
Pete
Easy, If Rosh Jim Bob has got the right stuff, you’ll know. If e is a fraud, you will know. People only get fooled when they want to be. Most people rather enjoy being fooled.
Good reflection, Ted.
I think one source of the problem arises from our giving, quite correctly, primary focus on practice. Sadly, a side-effect has been an anti-intellectual bias.
Our Zen teachers are trained to be good meditators, and frequently are competent guides to the discipline.
Too few are well read. Although it is my sense that has been shifting and our “younger” teachers and seniors are better read than their elders.
And we are just beginning to have scholar practitioners, folk like Taigen Leighton, Shohaku Okamura and Jeff Wilson.
So, personally, I’m more hopeful for our crowd going forward than one might get from the tone of yr post.
As to the hundred years. Just wondering, are you rounding down Soyen Shaku’s visit to Chicago?
“Oral Tradition” kills most things stone dead.
Hello Pete,
Thank you for your comments.
I certainly cannot find anything to disagree with you on here! Also, thank you for the excellent response to “What is your religion?” I will give it a try!
Peace,
Ted
Hello Jordan,
Thank you for your comments.
They are certainly worth giving some thought to… I can partly verify some of what you say in looking back over my own experience. There have been times when I “knew” (or thought I knew) that someone was a fraud. On the other hand, there were times when I initially thought someone “had the right stuff” only to find out later I had missed something… Fortunately, I was personally not exploited in a major way in these experiences.
I assume your comment that “most” people enjoy being fooled is hyperbolic and intended to indicate that most people seem to prefer delusion (living in a dream world), rather than tricked, conned, exploited, ripped off, abused, etc. If so, I can certainly find merit in that idea.
On the other hand, I doubt that most of the people that have been exploited by priests, clergyman, charlatans, quacksalvers, and others who prey on the vulnerabilities of beings suffering from fear, doubt, loss, etc. wanted it to happen, or “knew” it was going to happen. While emptying out the “sangha” bank account and running of with the “new girl” is not as severe as knowingly infecting multiple sangha members with HIV, they both fall into the same column (both of these examples actually occured). Perhaps some deep part of these victims “knew” what was coming, even “wanted” it in some way, but I would rather err to the other side of the line here–I guess I just feel safer blaming the “fraud.” I am afraid if I went the other way, I might not know where to draw any line at all…
I will continue to ponder it.
Thanks again Jordan! Wow, I think it has been about 3 years now since our first online meeting! How cool!
3 full bows Dharma brother!
Ted
Hello James,
Thank you for your comments.
Your thoughtful words here are encouraging.
Your observation that “our teachers” are good meditation guides (though, often not well read) seems like an accurate evaluation to me. I would only add that many of the classic masters insist that developing the ability to meditate, though absolutely essential, is only a first step, a kind of prerequisite that makes us familiar with our inherent ability to illumine the myriad dharmas–or, perhaps better, makes us aware of how the myriad dharmas illumine us (advance and confirm the self).
Dogen’s “moon in a dewdrop” treatment in Genjokoan illustrates this nicely. As he outlines the essence and function of practice-enlightenment he points out (although from here the ocean only looks round) each and every thing has infinite aspects, then he says that we see (illumine) as far as our eyes of practice-enlightenment have the ability to reach:
“As it is for the ocean, so it is for the many things. There are a multitude of qualities in the world of form and the world of the void, but you see and understand only as far as your eyes of practice and realization are able to reach.
If someone wants to know how the many things really are, they should remember that besides appearing square or round, the qualities of the oceans and qualities of the mountains are infinitely numerous; there are worlds in the four directions. Not only the periphery is like this; remember, the immediate present, and a single drop of water are also like this.”
(trans: Ted Biringer)
For me this is a marvelous illustration of the how and why of “endless practice-enlightenment” in a world of multiple dimensions (myriad dharmas). In the present example, it seems that developing the ability to meditate could be compared to becoming aware that the “ocean appears round.” However, learning to actualize the awareness that “there are worlds in the four directions” usually requires further instruction. If a “teacher” has not herself (or himself), realized this aspect of reality, they can hardly be expected to help others realize it. Thus, we often hear teachers who simply teach that “the ocean is round”, though they use terms like, “it is all one”, or “just this is it”, or “it is not special”, etc.
The point you make about “scholar practitioners” is certainly a bright morning star for modern students/practitioners. I for one have been repeatedly inspired by some of their bold statements of truth. This has been especially true of Taigen Dan Leighton’s work.
I got to spend some time with him at Green Gulch in 1993 or ’94. I had no idea who he was and did not know he was going to be there for that particular practice period. As we visited and enjoyed some tea (and fresh bread) together during a break and talked about Dogen. At some point we mentioned the books we were presently reading. I told him that I had only brought one book with me, “Cultivating The Empty Field”, by Taigen Leighton. Then he told me his name. Ha!
Since then, I have closely followed his work. Over time, I have seen a gradual, but significant shift in his views. Although they were a little more (liberal?, open?) in 1993 (or ’94) he still leaned heavily toward the contemporary Soto positions regarding Dogen’s teachings, especially those on Zazen, koans, enlightenment, and monastic/lay issues.
While he is still clearly within the Soto fold, his views on all of these have undergone a good deal of transformation. The shift is evidenced most clearly in his translation of the Eihei Koroku, “Dogen’s Extensive Record”, his study of Dogen and the Lotus sutra, “Visions of Awakening Space and Time”, and in his foreword to Hee-Jin Kim’s revised “Mystical Realist.”
In these (especially “Visions of Awakening), he has clearly demonstrated some balls! His courage to Stand Up and Speak Out in ways that undermine bogus assertions about Dogen and his teachings is all too rare among Soto insiders. True, much of this info has been long acknowledged by academic scholars, but few within the Soto “orthodoxy” have been willing to publicly acknowledge it.
Admittedly, he still seems to dance around some of the more controversial issues, like Dogen’s position on koan-introspection combined with Zazen – but even here he bucks the tide. I am eternally grateful for his refusal to sit down and be quiet while Dogen’s profound teachings on a vast array of Zen doctrines, their implications, and the variety of techniques for actualizing the Dharma are distorted and/or reduced to a few simple formulas.
I agree with you also on the importance of our giving “primary focus” to practice. However, I would qualify this a little. Using the term “practice” for something that causes (or has a side-effect of) bias (anti-intellectual or otherwise) could be misleading to some.
Perhaps it would be better to say, “learning to practice”? Everyone probably has some initial difficulty “learning” or “trying” to apply themselves to shikantaza, breath-counting, a koan, or other method. I assume that this is the kind of “practice” you were referring to. There is no doubt that this condition tends toward conceptualization (bias). As I understand it, when practice is truly practice, bias is inevitably absent. That is, practice, in Dogen’s terms, is “practice-enlightenment”, hence nondual (unbiased).
As for my reference to the one hundred years, yes, I was rounding it off to Soyen Shaku’s visit. Thank Buddha for that!
Thanks again James. Your comments are truly appreciated.
Peace,
Ted
Hello Mike,
Thank you for stopping in!
Mike wrote: ““Oral Tradition” kills most things stone dead.”
“Stone dead” does not sound like a good thing. However, a certain oral tradition has it that there are some ways to kill ALL things, and thus bring them to life for the first time…
Of course, Mike, I will understand if you flourish your sleeves and depart from here in disgust… still, I am certain you might know a little about that. Ha!
Peace my friend!
Ted
Ha! Indeed. Not all Oral traditions are toxic. Many are changing. The next gen may talk about a Google Tradition.
Thank you for this passionate post, Ted. I’m with Cowboy Pete: You’re being polite in describing your feelings as “confusion.”
As you know, I do dabble in the literature and am fairly non-discriminatory. I read the Pali Canon, the Chinese sutras, the Chinese masters, and some of those Korean and Japanese guys. I read articles by rinpoches and books by Krishnamurti. It’s all grist for the mill.
But after the grain has been transformed into flour, then what? How do we use this flour to nourish our lives?
Perhaps we might point to meditation practice as the oven in which we bake the flour into cakes. I suppose that’s the usual view.
But – to be truly honest – I don’t even know if any of this is valuable.
Because, when I’m deep into the fight with my wife, the sutras don’t come to my rescue. No mantra soothes the hurt. Samadhi is nowhere to be found. It’s just: FIGHT!
And the only way of dealing with the fight, as far as I know, is for me to touch base with my own mind. How is it, just now? What’s behind the fight (the sadness, the paranoia, the rage, the entitlement)?
This is work that I have to do *in the very moment* of violence. It can’t wait until I read Suzuki Roshi or Vimalikirti. I have to *come alive* right now.
So what value do teachers, the teaching, the kong-ans, and meditation bring to our lives. Are they simply tools we use to prepare the garden? I wonder enormously about this, because some of the wisest, most spacious people I’ve ever met have never spent time reading Dogen or sitting on cushions. They simply scour their mind, moment to moment, and respond fully to what life presents.
I think that’s enough for now. I don’t know that I’ve made any sense.
Hey Ted, I will give you another example from real life and another angle.
Marines are required to maintain pretty high standards of physical fitness.
Of course once you start getting older, and particularly among those with more sedentary careers, this gets harder and harder to do. Staying in peek physical condition takes time in the gym, and if you allow yourself to get out of standards you end up having to try and cram a lot of effort into a short amount of time. As a result people start looking for quick fixes. On that recently made Marine Corps news was hydroxicut. Turns out marines were using this to try and boost their performance and or get back into standard faster. Even though we all know that nothing takes the place of time and effort they want to believe in that fast fix. It ended up that the use of this “supplement” could cause liver failure and actually hurt some Marines. Now those guys might not have known that what they were doing could lead them to their death, but they did now that it was not the right way to do things.
Three years, we should celebrate by you coming down to Portland!
Several things came to mind upon reading your post.
1. The habit or social conditioning of capitulating to authority. The teacher is “supposed” to know therefore checking up on them is considered “rude”.
2. The common idea that study equates with intellectualism which further equates with egotism is prevalent and this misconception taken as a truism is not socially desirable in many quarters. Consider the term “Buddhist Geeks” for example as if this were some subset of cranially enhanced practitioners in contrast to (I suppose) Buddhist Ignoramuses.
3. Lack of direction on where to begin study. Some people pick up one of those scholarly tomes and are immediately turned off by the apparent complexity of it and don’t pick up another text. I think this is going to change however. Consider the Interdependence Project which is having a study group on texts. This is something that is happening increasingly for lay people in many religions including Christianity. In my parents day only the “preacher” did the studying and interpretation of texts.
4. Many people, even those with serious intent, are not always appreciative of history. Those who currently tend to espouse the “be here now” aspect of Zen teaching as they have received it, seem to be the ones most history averse.
5. Catch phrases and abbreviations of complex philosophical ideas are what is the most marketable even in terms of Buddhist oriented books. I am reading one right now by a meditation teacher that appears to have been written on Twitter (with uncredited quotes).
6. If they ever make a movie on the Tripitaka they should get Julie Taymor to direct it. (OK this one is just for me as her movie Titus from the Shakespeare play Titus Andronicus is one of my favorites-and I never read the play until I saw the movie)
7. (on a comment above) Roshi Jim-Bob’s right stuff may just be a massive ego massage that “feels right” but is way off the mark. Without some background by which to measure Jim-Bob’s stuff how would someone know?
8. (on a comment above) “I have to *come alive* right now.” Is this another way to say attend to the moment or is it another way to say grasp the moment with more force?
Hi Ted
You have either hit a nerve, or a home run, or both with this post! Now it’s cooking!
What strikes me as very odd is that the Mahayana and Vajrayana, Zen for sure, the Tibetans to a lesser degree, seem to be quite unmindful that the so called “lower path” Hinayana is a treasury of widsom regarding technique of attaining, and means of assessing meditational mind states.
I can’t think of anyone foolish enough to try and summit K9, for example,without first having done the preparation of learning what is known about previous attempts.
Yet many dare to teach the Dharma without any grounding in the experiences and collected wisdom of those who went before. We do indeed ‘stand on the shoulders of giants’and we ignore them at our peril.
Of course an awakened teacher can bypass this directly, however life is impermanent! Teacher dies, then what? In my opinion any teacher who claims that title equips his/her students with a full grounding in the Teaching, to take care of this eventuality, as well as equipping them to, themselves, teach at some later point.
My own view is that this whole thing you bring up is an example of “clinging to highs”. People love teachers that will show them how to get to states which are preferable ( in their opinion ) to the daily grind. One can adorn oneself with the mantle of ” I am elevated from the crowd, I am getting somewhere! I sat like a stone and got a buzz!)
Teachers that can respond with ” Knock it off! Don’t cling to that state” are too rare.
to Barry
What to do when you grind the literature into flour?
Eat it! Be aware! See the effect, or non effect!
Folks, I have to go away to renovate the burial memorial of my teacher, so I won’t be bothering you for a spell. But just in case I haven’t made my point clear above, here’s one more story that touches on the clinging to highs notion. In this case it’s probably some Hindu teacher, however you will recognize the type, even in Zen.
————————————-
Permission
Some loud mouth was promoting the virtues of a famous fella from the East. Don’t get me wrong, most of the time he was silent, but it was so forced that it screamed out ” Look at me, I am controlling myself, better than you can!”
After describing how his teacher could tie his body up in knots and do tricks such as telling the future, the spokesman got around to the man’s good points. “He is a holy man, who is always intoxicated by God.”
“Who gave him permission to take time off?” Pete called out.
The gurus’s agent was indignant, but was trying real hard to act nice. “ What do you mean by that remark?”
“I mean that your guy hasn’t finished the cure that’s what.”
“The cure?”
“Yup the cure. Y’know the illness that everybody has? They can’t see straight? They hurt themselves and others? They think they get it when they don’t? Your guy still has it.”
“But he’s a holy man, how can you say such things?’
“Easy. He’s still got some of the symptoms. Like you said, he’s running around like a drunk. Sure he probably impresses you with all the bliss he’s got goin on, but I surely hope he’ll snap out of it quick and get on with the rest of the cure.”
“ I’m speechless,” said guru’s advance man. For the first time his silence was real.
“Well, that’s a start at least,” said Pete. “ Way I see it, your guy is like a drunken cowboy, staring at the moon, who’s letting the herd run off.”
——————————————-
take care everyone
Pete
Hi Mike,
Thank you for your comments.
A Google Tradition would be great! I would simply hope that “Google Masters” would not insist on selling non-Google products labeled as “Google.” Ha!
Peace,
Ted
Hi Barry
Thank you very much for sharing your experiences and insight. Your straight-talk and sincerity are greatly appreciated!
In re-reading my initial post I think I should have been clearer about what I was trying to say. My post could be read as suggesting that all Zen Buddhists should apply themselves to intensive study, read widely and extensively, learn all the jargon, etc. etc. That was not my intention. True, I believe that people who proclaim themselves to be Zen “teachers” (especially if using lables implying Zen “master”– “roshi”, “dharma heir”, etc.) should deeply familiarize themselves with the Mahayana doctrines, and personally explore the Zen teachings and techniques recorded in the classic Chinese, Japanese, and Korean literature. In my view, this could ease narrow or biased views, and more importantly, furnish teachers with a wider array of upaya (expedient techniques), expanding their ability to recognize (and treat) the specific hindrances that effect students of various capacities and levels of spiritual maturity.
For the rest of us (non teachers), how much or how little we read or study should be left for each of us to work out for ourselves. Generally, I am of the view that our actualization (of practice-enlightenment) is either expanding, or contracting—there is no standing still. Thus, WHERE we are on the path is not nearly as important as WHICH WAY we are moving.
What you refer to as “dabbling” in the literature certainly seems (at least to me) to have made a significant (and positive) impact on the Buddha (the universe and everything in it). The variety of Buddhist literature, and your insights, ideas, and experiences on it that you share on your blogs (and others) has been informative and inspiring to me, and I am sure to many others. The fact that you do not personally proclaim to know and understand everything about the path you are following (much less presume to be an expert on other peoples paths) seems like a good sign to me.
Barry wrote: “But after the grain has been transformed into flour, then what?”
Shakyamuni Buddha has been transforming grain to flour for 2500 years, and he is only half-way done.
Barry wrote: “How do we use this flour to nourish our lives?”
Grinding, grinding, grinding—ah, the best kind of nourishment!
Barry wrote: “Perhaps we might point to meditation practice as the oven in which we bake the flour into cakes.”
And bread, and tortillas, and pasta. And cookies! Don’t forget the cookies!
Barry wrote: “But – to be truly honest – I don’t even know if any of this is valuable.”
As for me, I think it is nothing special, totally worthless, meaningless too. Also, it is the most sacred, the most valuable, and the most significant of all!
Barry wrote: “Because, when I’m deep into the fight with my wife, the sutras don’t come to my rescue. No mantra soothes the hurt. Samadhi is nowhere to be found. It’s just: FIGHT!… This is work that I have to do *in the very moment* of violence. It can’t wait until I read Suzuki Roshi or Vimalikirti. I have to *come alive* right now.”
Me too! Yet, for some reason, those fights are less frequent every year—Also, it seems she wins a lot more often than she used to, maybe that is why they also seem much shorter…?
Barry wrote: “So what value do teachers, the teaching, the kong-ans, and meditation bring to our lives. Are they simply tools we use to prepare the garden?”
One day, at work, me and a group of crew members (who were of one political party) were arguing with a group of of crew members (who were of another political party) about something (it could have been a cat). The parties could have been “Left” and “Right” (or the West Hall, and the East Hall). Nansen suddenly snatched it up (though I seemed to be the only one to see him) and challenged us to say something. Fortunately, Joshu removed my sandals, placed them on my head, and escorted me out of the room. I heard Nansen exclaim, “The cat is saved!”
Barry wrote: “I wonder enormously about this, because some of the wisest, most spacious people I’ve ever met have never spent time reading Dogen or sitting on cushions. They simply scour their mind, moment to moment, and respond fully to what life presents.”
Yes, me too! Some people simply seem to avoid screening reality off in the first place. I have also noticed that this seems to more often be true of women (men seem to have a greater need to get their mind around things, figure them out, analyize, and categorize, etc.). I think that all the names and lables I apply to things sometime block me off from the fact that reality is reality. An awakened “Buddhist” cannot be different than an awakened “Muslim.” The reality that Dogen experienced and tried to help others realize was not different from the reality that Black Elk (a Sioux holy man) experienced and revealed.”
Thanks again Barry! It is always good (and enlightening) to hear from you.
Peace,
Ted
Hello Jordan,
Thank you for this scary, but instructive example. Wow!
Portland? That sounds like a great idea.
Peace,
Ted
Hi NellaLou,
Thank you for sharing these insightful, and thought provoking comments. There is much to ponder here. I certainly want to give some thought to the Tripitaka movie idea…
I hope you continue to share here…
Peace,
Ted
Hi Pete
Thank you for your comments.
You seem to have covered the field well—and left little for me to add—but I have got to try, so how is this:
Pete wrote: “Teachers that can respond with ” Knock it off! Don’t cling to that state” are too rare.”
Ted added: Teachers that can acknowledge that there IS a state, and THAT is (or is not) it, are too rare.
Peace,
Ted
PS Thanks for the “Permission” anecdote; how true, and how hilarious! Ha!
Also, treasure your task, and return soon.
Ted – Thank you for baking up some cookies to satisfy my hunger! You’ve got a high-quality source of grain!
Hola Amigo,
Kudos to you for expressing your thoughts and feelings on such a potentially volatile topic. I wonder though if it is truly more confusing than ever. I think many of us have this romantic notion of spirituality, zen, guru’s, etc… We would like to believe there was a “golden age” of zen any other spiritual era. I have no way of knowing, but I would venture to say that those seeking the true mind ground have always been a select few. Even fewer who have realized it.
To compound this situation even further is how would one know a truly realized person. This is not like academia that you could read, assimilate, regurgitate and possibly expand upon a bunch of canon laws. Didactic knowledge is not the sole means through which realization, compassion, charity, etc.. is developed. If book knowledge and grand metaphysical premises are not to be relied upon, could one gauge the authenticity of a realized person by his samadhi or meditation powers. Could we acknowledge the depths of their realization by some physical means? I think we all know the answer to that.
There is no litmus test to gauge the authenticity or degree of realization of an adherent. There will always be signs that can help guide the seeker. If one is truly resolved to walking the path of realization, hopefully with a little common sense and intuition, one will realize that which they have always been seeking.
As an aside, I have met many teachers of zen and other “spiritual” disciplines. There are only two who seemed to be the genuine article. The first was such an unassuming, straight talking man that I wrote him off. The other will not even acknowledge he is a teacher. He dispenses his wisdom freely and keeps hammering away the nails day after day. In the end, “zen” is just as confusing as ever and it is the responsibility of each one of us to fully develop into compassionate and fully realized beings.
My two cents,
“Y”
Hi Barry,
You are welcome. Thank You!
Peace,
Ted
Hello Yamakoa,
Greetings my friend, thank you for your comments.
(and for playing Devil’s advocate–now I will play my hand).
I agree with much of what you say here. Indeed, I think that most of it is in accord with standard Buddhist teaching—while such truths may have been inherent, I wonder how you became aware of them. Do you think that some of it may have been evoked in you somehow? Perhaps through being in contact with Dharma?
Perhaps such teachings are clearly accessible to those fortunate beings that are endowed with the common sense, intuition, and emotional and intellectual intelligence to discern “the signs that can help to guide the seeker.” I wonder about those that may not be so fortunate, and how we might be able to recognize those who are “truly resolved to walking the path” and those that are not.
Do all beings have the ability to “see through” an intelligent, charismatic, “dharma heir” professing his earnest desire (and ability) to help ease their suffering? Can they all manage to see through it soon enough to get their life savings back? Soon enough to save their marriage? Soon enough to avoid becoming infected with HIV?
Speaking absolutely, it is certain that those who have sought true awakening have been few (exactly as many that have realized it– one). But even admitting that is saying too much! Above the heavens, below the heavens, only I alone and sacred.
Speaking relatively, however, is sure to differ. As you say, “I have no way of knowing…” Me niether! Thus, I try to err on the side of caution. It is as easy for me to act as if all beings are genuinely attracted to liberation, as it is that few are. Beings are numberless, I vow to save them… All.
As to gauging the authenticity of a genuine teacher, it is certainly a perplexing question. You are right, there is no litmus test. Nevertheless, I think it is a question worthy of our consideration, and discussion. I tried to indicate what I see as some possibilities worth exploring in the original post. Of course, I did restrict the question to the Zen tradition, basically saying, if we have a firm grasp on the classic Zen teachings, and we encounter a “teacher” that seems to diverge widely from those teachings, we might want to be wary.
Yet, I understand it is not that simple. It is complex, and has been a difficult aspect of Buddhism from very early on. From the second or third “Council of Elders”, people have differed various aspects of the teaching. Still, it seems important to mention that there is a big difference in trying to “con” people, and differing on the best possible way to save the many beings. Diversity is one thing. Exploitation is another. In our own day, of the words that the dying man, Shunryu Suzuki Roshi, said concerning his transmission to Richard Baker, Gary Snyder said that:
“Dick (Richard Baker) quoted that to me himself, not knowing what it meant.”
“I wasn’t going to think about what it meant,” says Richard. “I knew I didn’t have the capacity, but I just knew I was going to do it.”
Shoes Outside the Door, Michael Downing, p.34
He knew he didn’t have the capacity, but wasn’t going to think about it? Wow, thankfully Ananda did not do that.
Downing’s interview continued, Baker says:
“I had one thought–I will do it. That’s all.” He looks genuinely curious when he adds, “What could I do?”
Shoes Outside the Door, Michael Downing, p.34
What could I do?!! Are you kidding me? Remember that this is how Baker described it in 2001; 20 years after the fact! He still wonders what he could have done? Where is Nansen when a cat needs killing? Snyder continues:
“Look at what he did do that should have disaffected people,” says Gary. “Like having them all stand in rows and bow as he drove away from Tassajara (in his white, sangha puchased, BMW). Which he did… That offended me personally.”
Shoes Outside the Door, Michael Downing, p.34
Gary Snyder’s words here are, in my view, worth pondering–and yes, even discussing with others, Baker’s actions “…should have disaffected people.” Why didn’t they for so long? Why did so many people remain silent for so many years while they (and their dharma brothers and sisters) were humiliated, as well as sexually and financially exploited? Did they enjoy being victimized? Were they being “good Buddhists” by sitting down and shutting up when they saw their fellow students violated? Did they think it was “okay” because the students had “volunteered” and “must have known” that they were being duped?
Perhaps I am just too dull to see the truth, but I find it impossible to believe that victims are not really victims. I have, and do experience genuine suffering. I know for me, that intense suffering makes for extreme vulnerability, especially from those I seek out for help, like spiritual teachers.
On page xx of his Introduction, Michael Downing closed with these two lines:
Remember, I was told, it was a voluntary thing.
I can’t seem to forget.
Michael Downing, from the Introduction to: Shoes Outside the Door
Just four generations after Bodhidharma, some of the symptoms were described by Daoxin. He also believed that people could be genuinely be duped (deceived) by false teachers:
There are people who teach living beings for the sake of fame and profit, without comprehending the characteristics of the ultimate Dharma. They do not recognize relative degrees of depth and shallowness in [their pupils’] capacities and causal affinities.
They give their seal of approval to everyone, to people who seem enlightened but are otherwise. This is most painful! It is a great disaster!..
These people are gravely damaging the teaching of enlightenment: they are deceiving themselves and deceiving others.
Daoxin (The Fourth Ancestor of Zen in China) Transmission of The Lamp
About 800 years later, Dogen too acknowledged that “true practitioners” could be “misled” by false teachers:
Yet if there were any true practitioners who put the will to the truth first, being naturally unconcerned with fame and profit, they might be fruitlessly misled by false teachers and might needlessly throw a veil over right understanding. They might idly become drunk with self-deception, and sink forever into the state of delusion. How would they be able to promote the right seeds of prajna, or have the opportunity to attain the truth?
Dogen, Bendowa, Gudo Nishijima & Mike Cross
His disciple, Ejo, offers some of the same symptoms that Daoxin saw:
…countless abbots of monasteries from the sixth century even up until now have been mere ignoramuses, deficient in wisdom…
Some of them may wrongly give definitive approval to a temporary surge of energy, or it may happen that through a temporary inspiration they sit for a long time without lying down, so that the mind and consciousness are thoroughly fatigued, everything becomes the same to them, activity and function stop for a while, and thoughts quiet down; then they misunderstand this state, which resembles the solitary radiance of ethereal spirituality, misconstruing it to be the state where inside and outside become one, the original ground of the fundamental state of the essential self.
Taking this interpretation to Zen teachers who have no true perception, they present the view. Since the teachers have no eyes in perceive people, therefore they go along with the words of those who come to them, giving them worthless approval, so that they call themselves graduate Zen monks. Countless followers of the Wav with shallow consciousness and little learning fall into this poison. Truly, even as we say it is the age of dereliction of teaching, is it not all pathetic?
Ejo, Absorption in the Treasury of Light, Thomas Cleary
Okay buddy, your turn!
Peace,
Ted
Amigo,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. as usual your ideas are well thought out and clearly explained. I agree with your premise that at a minimum, a zen teacher should be well versed in the major Mahayana scriptures and nascent trends of said teacher’s era. I might even go further and suggest that the more well rounded a teachers experiential knowledge and didactic knowledge is, “could” allow him/her to being more effective in delivering the soteriological device that can be of use to the student. The ultimate function of a teacher is just that, providing the student with the appropriate means for him/her to realize their own true nature. That is why since time immemorial, zen teachers (and non`zen teachers) have referred students to other teachers.
While it is sad that persons in power abuse their privileges, and abuse those that vest their trust in them, it is by no means endemic to zen or any other religion. It is found in almost any position that humans occupy. Your mechanic, doctor, lawyer, clergy, politician, president, building contractor, etc… As long as humans are involved, one is bound to see someone trying to take advantage of a situation or another person. That is why I value buddhism so much. It not only provides moral and ethical guidelines, it gives you the sound reasoning as to why. In addition, it dissect the “human condition” with such precision and clarity that it resembles more of a science than what we in the west would term a religion.
The only contention that I still have is that while zen may be just as confusing as ever, I doubt that is more confusing than ever. I think your quotations point to that. Ejo goes so far as to say that (during his time) it is the age of dereliction of teachings. Wow. Who knows if “zen” will continue to flourish, but what I do know is that the truth will always be present and as long as people are willing to commit to uncovering and manifesting the truth, that to which “zen” points to, will be alive and well.
Gracias,
“Y”
Hello Yamakoa,
Thank you for your comments.
Come for breakfast! Come for tea!
Peace,
Ted