Authority in Zen

Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes…

Henry David Thoreau

One of my favorite blogs is Wild Fox Zen written by Zen teacher Dosho Port. I really admire him for lots of reasons. Not least of which is how obviously he has genuine insight into the fundamental matter. His most recent posts have been about power, and more specifically about power as authority in Zen. This is something I’ve also given some thought to and here I’d like to share some of that thinking.

Mostly provisional, of course…

As Dosho has pointed out authority in Zen has just about always been “vertical.” I said it. Do it… Now, it has worked swimmingly for many people for ages and ages. And it has always been subject to abuse. In our contemporary West we’ve seen that abuse take various shapes. Largely this has had to do with sex. But it has included other things such as financial dealings and various forms of involvement in student’s lives such as suggesting marriages or career choices. Well, not suggesting, more like directing…

If Zen teachers were omniscient I guess this would be okay. But I’ve never met a Zen teacher who was. And the whole deal of Zen is about becoming “ordinary,” so, why would one even want such a thing? Omniscience would be too special, by half. (Please picture me spitting on the ground here…)

Dosho’s series addresses a bit the problematic nature of the vertical relationship. He then suggests many Zen communities in the West have opted for a more horizontal system, which he characterizes as ultimately just putting the inmates in charge of the asylum. At first here I suggested there were scant few experiments in horizontal leadership patterns in Western Zen, but Al Billings blew that assertion out of the water by mentioning the San Francisco Zen Center, which definitely has introduced a much flatter leadership pattern than has been traditional. And as they are the second largest Zen organization after the Kwan Um School, which itself has a more broadly distributed leadership structure than in more traditional Zen organizations, I have to acknowledge that there is a strong horizontal, or at least a flatter organizational structure (or structures) in the West than exists in Asia. There are at the same time many more traditionally hierarchical organizations. And by the count of various organizations, I’m inclined to think more are obviously hierarchical than flat, even if more Zen practitioners study within flatter organizations than not.

But before advocating for a more although not completely horizontal model of Zen teaching I need to note how Dosho goes on to describe and advocate a post-modern model of Zen authority. I’ve never been all that scholarly and frankly I don’t quite get what he was describing. It struck me as an appeal to the authority of non-authority, all very Zen (really. it is very Zen, in its deepest sense. Remember, he is a real Zen teacher…), but I also noticed short on specifics and he seemed to ignore the thorny issues of ongoing relationships that involve more than pushing the student to their deepest insight. Even a post-modern Zen teacher is going to find herself being offered things she wants by her students, but which wouldn’t be good for the student, or the community, or most likely, any of the participants…

Okay, now, my premises.

First there is such a thing as awakening. My understanding of this is how a person may come to a place where “self and other” both fall away. I believe this is some natural thing. I also believe nearly everyone has had at least a fleeting moment of this experience, often described as being “one” with nature. Mostly we’ve had tiny tastes, but occasionally we’ve gulped the whole ocean. Whether shallow or deep this experience (actually experience isn’t quite suitable for what happens, nor is “one” or oneness a completely satisfactory term for what happens, but I’ll use that term as a placeholder) shifts how we see the world. And, at least potentially, it shifts how we act in the world.

Zen offers two things on this way of awakening. It offers what I think are the best practices associated with cultivating a place to stand where awakening happens more often than not: shiktantaza and koan introspection. I’ve described these elsewhere as have many others.

And, Zen offers teachers. Teachers are guides on the way of awakening.

The myth of Zen is that Zen teachers have had their awakening confirmed and their ability to teach acknowledged by their teacher who was authorized by his or her teacher, so on, right back to Gautama Siddhartha himself, the original Awakened One.

Of course, they’re not.

By this I don’t mean they’ve not experienced the falling away of self and other. And I’m not saying they’re not schooled in the disciplines of Zen. And I’m not saying they weren’t confirmed by a real human being with a name and a history.

There is in the modern West an interesting subset of people who claim to be Zen teachers but who do not or will not name their teachers. They may have had awakening experiences, they may even have skills as guides; but they are not Zen teachers who must, to be “Zen teachers,” have been authorized by that real human being who was authorized by that real human being.

(While I feel a need to acknowledge self-described Zen teachers may have real skills, in fact I think there is something profoundly creepy about people who could just as easily say they’re self-awakened, or that they practice and teach in a Zen style, but who instead pretend to belong to the family. It is exactly like someone who says they’re a Roman Catholic priest, but who cannot name their bishop or religious superior. Interestingly, such people exist, as well…)

But that authority, while the sin qua non of Zen teaching authority isn’t as magical as I wish it were. Lineages are real enough. They start in early Medieval China, probably as part of the legitimization of the Chinese style of Buddhist practice we call Zen. And, frankly, there have been breaks along the way, at least here and there. But, in addition to this “vertical” line, there is a “horizontal” one, a fraternity and sorority of Zen teachers that tends to heal the breaks. A very interesting example to my mind is the “Rochester” Zen lineage, started by Philip Kapleau. Kapleau was a very senior student and had permission to teach. But there was a break between he and his teacher before he received Dharma transmission, the formal and public acknowledgment that makes a “Zen teacher.” However, over the years his Dharma heirs have come to be accepted as “real” Zen teachers by their peers who hold more traditional acknowledgments. I suggest this horizontal transmission is very important. And hints at broader possibilities as well as suggests the importance of sangha as spiritual community…

For me a Zen teacher is someone who is first and foremost trained in at least shikantaza and ideally koan introspection and has under the guidance of a teacher become experienced as a spiritual director. And that ability has been authorized by someone who stands in a commonly acknowledged Zen lineage…

Zen is also a school of Buddhism. In China, Korea and Vietnam, most Zen teachers are also monks or nuns. In Japan a peculiar ordination model emerged creating what I think are best called priests. Here is a statement that is not well understood about Zen in the west. With the exception of Japanese-derived Soto Zen, there is no necessary association between ordination and authorization as a teacher. In Soto Zen there has been a collapsing of these two different authorizations so with a couple of exceptions in our contemporary West, one cannot receive Soto Dharma transmission without also being ordained a priest. While there is no necessary association I need to quickly add that outside the modern West authorized lay teachers are only slightly less rare than hen’s teeth…

While I believe Zen can be practiced profitably without being Buddhist I also believe it is best practiced within a clearly Buddhist context. I particularly think the Bodhisattva precepts of Japanese-derived Zen Buddhism to be critically important for the furtherance of Zen, for its deepening, and for its fullest expression. For me, when we stand in the place of awakening, the precepts are the expression of our awakening and when we are confused they are boundaries and guides for us all, student and teacher.

So, I think on balance this association between Buddhist ordination models and the practices of Zen has been a good thing. Not absolutely necessary, but on balance, a good thing.

I also think sangha is of incredible importance. It is one thing to have a private experience. It is often quite another to have to manifest it with others. Without community, without sangha, I am increasingly inclined to question the value of Zen practice. But I think I need to simply assert here and promise I’ll reflect more deeply on this question later…

Okay, back to the premises. Zen is about awakening. Zen is fostered by its teachers who are almost always Buddhist clerics. And these teachers are, at best, well trained, and authorized by people and institutions (that sangha thing). But these Zen teachers are not perfect masters.

It is not about magic. It is not about special wondrous abilities, well, other than those magical events of eating and sleeping and visiting the toilet…

Awakening does not by itself make us more moral or incline us to one political philosophy over another.

Although, recalling those precepts, I do think awakening is the basis, upon reflection, and further discipline, of a powerful moral stance predicated upon the twin truths that we are all individuals never to be replicated, and all are woven out of each other, that is we belong to one family. (Darn, that one thing, again. Perhaps it is better to say we all belong to that not one, not two family…) I believe we could spend a thousand years unpacking the moral consequences of these observations. And should… (And again, hints at the importance of sangha in all all this…)

But, my major concern here is how we relate to each other, those of us who wish to awaken and those of us who have had that taste and who have been authorized to guide others on the way.

That vertical model, as I said, has done a good job, on balance.

And, it is unlikely it will appeal to as many people as can profit from the disciplines of the Zen way and its guides.

So, all this boils down to a few straight forward suggestions.

One let teachers teach.

And two, don’t get confused as to what the teacher is about.

And, three, remember we really are all in this together, and we all have awakening as our common heritage.

I think there can be many possible organizations that can foster this great work. A traditional monastic model. A temple with an authoritarian leader. A small and intimate gathering, such as I think I understand Dosho speaks for, with a serious guide and a couple of serious students. A vastly more horizontal organization is also possible, where decisions about money and property are not the responsibility of the teacher, and where there is a place for everyone at every moment on the great way.

Of course, all this, again, takes us to considerations of community, of broader relationships, of ongoing relationships, of sangha…

And every word said with, of course, a caution.

Chanted every evening during a Zen retreat…

Life and Death is a grave matter,
all things pass quickly away,
each of you must be completely alert,
never neglectful, never indulgent.

Awaken.

Awaken…