Friends,
On June 2, 2011, the Board of The White Plum Asanga issued a statement that addressed in general terms certain unspoken shadow elements in the lineage of Maezumi Roshi, announced the resolve of the WPA to move to address such issues in the future more openly and resolutely, and distanced the WPA from the actions of its former President, Dennis Genpo Merzel, who had resigned from the WPA in early February of this year. That statement can be found at http://www.whiteplum.org/announcements.html. This statement was issued only after extensive and prolonged discussion within the WPA Board and the general membership, extensive communications with Genpo and with the board of the Kanzeon Zen Center (now Big Mind Center), and a meeting between Genpo and a designated group WPA members. As a member of the Board of the WPA and of the group that met with Genpo, I have participated in all these deliberations and joined in the statement of the Board. As a successor of Genpo's, and a friend, I feel a need to make my own position on all this known, without adding any fuel to what I hope is a dying fire.
These discussions, meetings, and actions have been difficult and painful for me. It is a daunting task to be in a position where you are must consider whether to censure a teacher, much less your own teacher. Yet this process has had positive consequences for me personally and, I think, for the WPA. I have had to face my own projections, my own tendency to idealize my teacher, and my own willingness to turn a blind eye to situations rife with ethical issues. I have also had to be willing to look at my teacher as a peer.
As for the WPA, the process now extending over four months has seen a gradual shift in tone. At the end, it was less about Genpo and more about the larger issues his situation represents for the WPA, about certain patterns going back decades within the lineage that have given rise to abuses of power by more than a few, abuses that have been treated as anomalies, rather than manifestations of deeper issues. The discussions over the past months have produced a new-found resolve within the WPA to work toward a consensus statement of core values to which all members can subscribe, and as well the establishment of processes for considering complaints about member teachers alleged to have departed from those values and to have caused harm.
These deliberations may take some time to reach fruition. The WPA is a voluntary membership affinity group, not a sanctioning or licensing organization. But the fact that the membership is engaging in these discussions is a positive step for the organization, the lineage, and for Zen in general. The acknowledgment that certain cultural and structural elements within the institutions of Zen in general, and within this lineage in particular, have permitted unhealthy patterns of behavior to repeatedly manifest in teachers, in students, and in sanghas, is important. And it is also important that the WPA membership is acting on these insights. If if this Zen lineage is to continue to grow and prosper, it must accomodate the political and psychological insights of the soil in which it has been planted. A consequence should be the development of a sangha culture and correlative governance structures that will be premised on a more sophisticated understanding of the psychological dynamics that tend to develop between teacher and student and sangha, and the perils of those dynamics.
As hard as this entire process has been, as painful as it has been for me personally because of my teacher's unfortunate role as a catalytic agent, I am heartened by what appears to be the consequent developing willingness of the WPA membership to take on these broader issues. And I am personally relieved to be able to move on with the development of our own sangha, hopefully alert to the challenges that it represents.
Warmly,
Mugaku
Friday, June 10, 2011
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Next book--Red Pine, "The Heart Sutra"
We discussed Chogam Trungpa's Myth of Freedom last night. Of course, you can't really discuss a book with that many valuable insights in one evening. So we had a discussion inspired by a small part of that book. This experience suggests to me that in the future, we should spend more than one evening on a book, perhaps using it to tee up discussions for several weeks.
The next book we will read is The Heart Sutra by Red Pine. We will discuss it first on June 21st. This is a lovely book, one filled with interesting scholarship for those interested in the evolution of Chan and Buddhism in China, and critical discussion of the essence of Zen.
-Mugaku
The next book we will read is The Heart Sutra by Red Pine. We will discuss it first on June 21st. This is a lovely book, one filled with interesting scholarship for those interested in the evolution of Chan and Buddhism in China, and critical discussion of the essence of Zen.
-Mugaku
Monday, April 18, 2011
Tuesday night class--change of Trungpa book to "Myth of Freedom"
Friends,
Those of you who are planning on reading the Chogam Trungpa book for the mid-May discussion should switch from "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism" to Trungpa's earlier book, "The Myth of Fredom". I apologize for the change, but after discussion with several veteran Vajriyana practitioners, I have concluded that "The Myth of Freedom" is a better choice. It is directed at the fundamental practice of meditation--a common ground of Vajriyana and Zen practice, and it was the assigned foundational book at Naropa Institute during Trungpa's life.
To compensate for changing the book, and for my being in Israel the week of May 2d and returning on May 9th, we'll push back the book discussion to May 17th.
I look forward to seeing you, and discussing this book.
Warmly,
Mugaku
Those of you who are planning on reading the Chogam Trungpa book for the mid-May discussion should switch from "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism" to Trungpa's earlier book, "The Myth of Fredom". I apologize for the change, but after discussion with several veteran Vajriyana practitioners, I have concluded that "The Myth of Freedom" is a better choice. It is directed at the fundamental practice of meditation--a common ground of Vajriyana and Zen practice, and it was the assigned foundational book at Naropa Institute during Trungpa's life.
To compensate for changing the book, and for my being in Israel the week of May 2d and returning on May 9th, we'll push back the book discussion to May 17th.
I look forward to seeing you, and discussing this book.
Warmly,
Mugaku
Sunday, March 27, 2011
The lay person and the sangha--Can I be valued if I don't seek transmission?
Friends,
As Diane (Musho) and I have opened our new City Center and welcomed an eclectic mix of visitors to the space, a question constantly stirring just below the surface is what should we build in this space? What will be the culture of this sangha? We have a space, but we have not in place a set of forms beyond simply lighting incense, sounding the gong, and sitting silently, with regular Dharma talks and occasional daisan. In effect, we have a blank sheet of paper and have drawn very little on it at present. There is a lot of open, white space. What should go there? What will the Dharma practice limned there look like?
In the three post-Ameland blogposts I put up in February, I sketched out what seems to me to be the imperatives for a healthy sangha. Those posts are very conceptual. They don't reflect any particularity. But our new space, in which people are coming to sit and to interact, demands the particular. So, how much should we emphasize ritual, what ritual, how much chanting, reciting and taking of vows, how important is it to offer Jukai, Shukke Tokudo, use Japanese language and terms, forms?
My aspiration for our City Center is that it becomes a place that is comfortable for lay people, for house- holders with jobs and children who are seeking a refuge, a place where they can work with the causes of the stress of their lives and with their existential dissatisfactions through Zen practice, primarily zazen augmented by koans. That refuge and workspace is what I sought when I came to the Kanzeon Zen Center as a widower and a single parent with a full lay life. I suspect that this is what many coming to the City Center will be seeking. It is not my aspiration that the City Center become a pale shadow of a monastery, a place oriented toward "monks" who have day jobs only to support their dharmic aspirations. Rather, I envision a place for people whose lay lives are honored and valued, and who want support for a practice that enhances the totality of their lives. I remain a lay person. I am a priest, a "monk", but fundamentally a lay person, a lawyer with an active law practice, who spends hours a day in the zendo and loves making it available to others. I know how Zen practice has enhanced my everyday life and has also softened, widened my sense of self so as to permit me to more honestly face my family, my life and my death. I want to make that available to others, to people who are committedly lay people.
To develop the welcoming and yet deep culture we envision will require consciously addressing what seems to be a relatively common but unspoken Zen center model in which a pseudo-monastic hierarchy unreflectingly mimics the rituals and practice environment in which our Asian predecessors were trained, one that implicitly values most those who have dedicated their career lives to the Dharma, often while turning away from secular life and even family. This may be an entirely natural model but I do not think it is one well-designed to accomodate most of the audience we seek at the City Center. Such a sangha culture has a high potential to make the center a place that actually denies support for lay practice, that has a climate that can make lay practitioners feel valued only to the extent they manifest an aspiration to become what the sangha culture inherently values--the overtly religious, ultimately the teacher. Instead of creating a psychological refuge, a place of safe questioning in the midst of a world of material and social wants, we create one more place where people feel somehow "not enough," judged, needing to adopt others preferences in order to be valued.
The challenge of building a welcoming lay sangha is how to minimize the emphasis on individual spiritual attainment, which can manifest as monastic mimicry that implicitly demeans lay life, while stressing the ways that practice leads to an awakening that eases attachments and the suffering which inevitably follows, an awakening that ripens into an equanimity that can be deployed in a daily lay world filled with preferences and that ultimately leads to a profound peace. This is our task and our opportunity.
With palms together,
Mugaku
As Diane (Musho) and I have opened our new City Center and welcomed an eclectic mix of visitors to the space, a question constantly stirring just below the surface is what should we build in this space? What will be the culture of this sangha? We have a space, but we have not in place a set of forms beyond simply lighting incense, sounding the gong, and sitting silently, with regular Dharma talks and occasional daisan. In effect, we have a blank sheet of paper and have drawn very little on it at present. There is a lot of open, white space. What should go there? What will the Dharma practice limned there look like?
In the three post-Ameland blogposts I put up in February, I sketched out what seems to me to be the imperatives for a healthy sangha. Those posts are very conceptual. They don't reflect any particularity. But our new space, in which people are coming to sit and to interact, demands the particular. So, how much should we emphasize ritual, what ritual, how much chanting, reciting and taking of vows, how important is it to offer Jukai, Shukke Tokudo, use Japanese language and terms, forms?
My aspiration for our City Center is that it becomes a place that is comfortable for lay people, for house- holders with jobs and children who are seeking a refuge, a place where they can work with the causes of the stress of their lives and with their existential dissatisfactions through Zen practice, primarily zazen augmented by koans. That refuge and workspace is what I sought when I came to the Kanzeon Zen Center as a widower and a single parent with a full lay life. I suspect that this is what many coming to the City Center will be seeking. It is not my aspiration that the City Center become a pale shadow of a monastery, a place oriented toward "monks" who have day jobs only to support their dharmic aspirations. Rather, I envision a place for people whose lay lives are honored and valued, and who want support for a practice that enhances the totality of their lives. I remain a lay person. I am a priest, a "monk", but fundamentally a lay person, a lawyer with an active law practice, who spends hours a day in the zendo and loves making it available to others. I know how Zen practice has enhanced my everyday life and has also softened, widened my sense of self so as to permit me to more honestly face my family, my life and my death. I want to make that available to others, to people who are committedly lay people.
To develop the welcoming and yet deep culture we envision will require consciously addressing what seems to be a relatively common but unspoken Zen center model in which a pseudo-monastic hierarchy unreflectingly mimics the rituals and practice environment in which our Asian predecessors were trained, one that implicitly values most those who have dedicated their career lives to the Dharma, often while turning away from secular life and even family. This may be an entirely natural model but I do not think it is one well-designed to accomodate most of the audience we seek at the City Center. Such a sangha culture has a high potential to make the center a place that actually denies support for lay practice, that has a climate that can make lay practitioners feel valued only to the extent they manifest an aspiration to become what the sangha culture inherently values--the overtly religious, ultimately the teacher. Instead of creating a psychological refuge, a place of safe questioning in the midst of a world of material and social wants, we create one more place where people feel somehow "not enough," judged, needing to adopt others preferences in order to be valued.
The challenge of building a welcoming lay sangha is how to minimize the emphasis on individual spiritual attainment, which can manifest as monastic mimicry that implicitly demeans lay life, while stressing the ways that practice leads to an awakening that eases attachments and the suffering which inevitably follows, an awakening that ripens into an equanimity that can be deployed in a daily lay world filled with preferences and that ultimately leads to a profound peace. This is our task and our opportunity.
With palms together,
Mugaku
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Maps and Terrain: Beliefs and the Wondering Mind.
The group discussed Stephen Batchelor's "Buddhism Without Beliefs". A wide-ranging discussion about beliefs, and how they serve us as guides, as maps, and how they have the potential to limit experience by freezing permissible perspectives on reality.
It seems to me that Batchelor's preference for what he refers to as "agnosticism" is motivated by his desire to eschew belief and to embrace a not-knowing that allows, no, requires that I keep a wondering mind. A wondering mind is one that he finds most open to an interaction with reality that eliminates the separation between the perceiver and the perceived, resulting only in perceiving. To use another metaphor, a map held agnostically, without attachment, has the potential to dissolve in the user's encounter with the terrain, leaving only the sacred encounter and its consequences.
Whatever the value of maps, of beliefs, it seems to me that Batchelor exquisitely touches the need for every map to have a large space marked "terra incognita", the unknown land, to remind us that maps need always to be held loosely if they are not to separate us from the terrain that is our lives.
It seems to me that Batchelor's preference for what he refers to as "agnosticism" is motivated by his desire to eschew belief and to embrace a not-knowing that allows, no, requires that I keep a wondering mind. A wondering mind is one that he finds most open to an interaction with reality that eliminates the separation between the perceiver and the perceived, resulting only in perceiving. To use another metaphor, a map held agnostically, without attachment, has the potential to dissolve in the user's encounter with the terrain, leaving only the sacred encounter and its consequences.
Whatever the value of maps, of beliefs, it seems to me that Batchelor exquisitely touches the need for every map to have a large space marked "terra incognita", the unknown land, to remind us that maps need always to be held loosely if they are not to separate us from the terrain that is our lives.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Future readings: "Instructions to the Cook" and "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism."
Friends:
In the Tuesday night group, we decided to pick two more books so that people could be reading ahead once they finished the current selection, "Buddhism Without Beliefs", set to be discussed on March 15th. So, the April selection will be Bernie Glassman's (Tetsugen Roshi's) book, "Instructions to the Cook", which brings us into touch with socially engaged Buddhism in America against the framework of Dogen Zenji's classic work by the same name. For May we will read Chogam Trungpa Rinpoche's book, "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism", which addresses the tendency to use spirituality as just one more thing to accomplish, to achieve, to attain.
As a note to those in the group: Musho Sensei suggested to me that rather than discussing a book on only one evening, it might make more sense to discuss sections of each book each week during the month it is assigned. It would change the nature of the Tuesday night group a bit, but it would also bring more depth to the discussions and more focus, while incentivizing everyone to be up to speed on the reading each week. Please consider this suggestion for next week's meeting.
Gassho to all for coming.
Mugaku
In the Tuesday night group, we decided to pick two more books so that people could be reading ahead once they finished the current selection, "Buddhism Without Beliefs", set to be discussed on March 15th. So, the April selection will be Bernie Glassman's (Tetsugen Roshi's) book, "Instructions to the Cook", which brings us into touch with socially engaged Buddhism in America against the framework of Dogen Zenji's classic work by the same name. For May we will read Chogam Trungpa Rinpoche's book, "Cutting Through Spiritual Materialism", which addresses the tendency to use spirituality as just one more thing to accomplish, to achieve, to attain.
As a note to those in the group: Musho Sensei suggested to me that rather than discussing a book on only one evening, it might make more sense to discuss sections of each book each week during the month it is assigned. It would change the nature of the Tuesday night group a bit, but it would also bring more depth to the discussions and more focus, while incentivizing everyone to be up to speed on the reading each week. Please consider this suggestion for next week's meeting.
Gassho to all for coming.
Mugaku
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
"Buddhism Without Beliefs"--a critique
For those reading Buddhism Without Beliefs for the Tuesday night group, I suggest these critiques. One presents a more traditional view of some of the issues discussed by Stephen Batchelor in his book, the other is more supportive of Batchelor and surveys several different critiques. These may be helpful to readers in considering the broader issues arising from the Dharma's coming into Western culture. http://www.darkzen.com/Articles/critiquez.htm; http://www.stephenbatchelor.org/msthesispreface.htm.
-Mugaku
-Mugaku
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)