On Zen Training in Community
I have often wondered why I never managed to stick with one group or teacher or sect of Zen. I have often beaten myself up on this issue, thinking that perhaps I'm a bad student who lacks persistence and focus, or that I have some form of spiritual ADHD. However, I'm starting to appreciate it a little more.
In my time practicing Zen I have had the privilege of studying at 5 wonderful places which offer “Zen Training'' and in my honest assessment they are all teaching the true Dharma (I've also practised in other non-zen traditions but I'm leaving them out of this essay).
Having practiced in multiple places has given me a way to compare, contrast and study what was common amongst them and what was unique to them. It's also given me the ability to grok what formed the core of training from what was extra or added.
So what IS Zen training? Here is a list of things that I believe it encompasses:
Zazen/Kinhin (Seated/walking Meditation)
Sesshin/Zazenkai (Intensive Retreats)
Samu (Work Practice)
Teacher-Student Relationship
Chanting and Rituals
Study of Sutras and Texts
Observance of Precepts
Communal Living
Today I would like to focus on Communal Living as it is there that I find the most misunderstanding and friction. I also believe that this issue is of particular importance to Treeleaf as it needs to be very intentionally reproduced (dare I say simulated) due to its disembodied and digital nature.
Most of the places I practiced (which were all either open to westerners or were based in the West) had a soft form of hierarchy. It should be stated that this was much less hierarchical than is to be seen in Japanese training temples. However, hierarchy still exists and is usually related to length of time spent practising at a particular place.
There was also an often unexpressed but implied sense that those who were higher in the hierarchy were higher in their practice/realisation and nowhere was this more evident than the deference and respect given to senior practitioners and even more so to teachers. (I must admit, I do appreciate this grain of salt thing as long as those using the expression agree with its use)
Also, at many of the places I practiced there was an inner sanctum of sorts, often composed of senior monastics/priests or senior lay students who were in some cases were overtly referred to as “training” staff.
The role of training staff has often been a mystery to me. These are the people who decide on the schedule, who does what work, who works with who, what programs will be run, what chants will be chanted etc. There is also an unspoken assumption that these regular activities are also opportunities for “training”. For example, if someone is doing something wrong, it is necessary to correct them. If someone gets too comfortable or identifies too closely to a particular position, it may be necessary to move them to a different position. If someone is sick it may be necessary to give them time off. If there are conflicts that threaten the Sangha’s harmony they need to be resolved. An often used metaphor in Zen training is we are all like rough stones, rubbing and bumping up against each other, polishing each other until we shine.
This is all wonderful. But it seems a trifle artificial to me at times and nowhere is this more obvious than in a digital environment. Usually in Zen monasteries the day-to-day necessities of life caused the necessity of training. However, in a digital format it would seem that this needs to be “manufactured” or simulated probably because the sense of practising in community is perceived as being an important part of Zen training overall. But there is this underlying sense that people are trying to better you by controlling you. (my experience only perhaps and likely a distortion caused by my own programming) Some excuse this teaching method by suggesting this is occurring to teach people to break free from this passive victim situation which is nice except that means someone has judged your practice and found it wanting.
In some of the places I practised Zen training appeared to be a natural byproduct of living physically in community which brought with it it's ups and downs, petty rivalries and jealousies. People correcting each other and pointing fingers for breaking the rules. People deliberately breaking the rules to show how iconoclastic they were. People who measured the power of their and others practise by the people they could bully into doing what they wanted. And then there were even people who were just pretending to do these things because they thought it was funny. It often lead to a sense of being “messed with” and sometimes teachers were the worst offenders. However, I suppose sincere intention to help must count for something.
In any event, the fact is that most of us live outside of the formally defined Sangha. We already have this type of training in spades and so I openly question it's necessity (especially in its more contrived forms) especially as Zen evolves and sheds its monastic roots and even it's physical roots.
Sometimes I feel that Zen training is unnecessary and parallels the same issue in our zazen. If we are all already intrinsically enlightened, what need is there for practise?
_/\_
sat/ah
Matt
I have often wondered why I never managed to stick with one group or teacher or sect of Zen. I have often beaten myself up on this issue, thinking that perhaps I'm a bad student who lacks persistence and focus, or that I have some form of spiritual ADHD. However, I'm starting to appreciate it a little more.
In my time practicing Zen I have had the privilege of studying at 5 wonderful places which offer “Zen Training'' and in my honest assessment they are all teaching the true Dharma (I've also practised in other non-zen traditions but I'm leaving them out of this essay).
Having practiced in multiple places has given me a way to compare, contrast and study what was common amongst them and what was unique to them. It's also given me the ability to grok what formed the core of training from what was extra or added.
So what IS Zen training? Here is a list of things that I believe it encompasses:
Zazen/Kinhin (Seated/walking Meditation)
Sesshin/Zazenkai (Intensive Retreats)
Samu (Work Practice)
Teacher-Student Relationship
Chanting and Rituals
Study of Sutras and Texts
Observance of Precepts
Communal Living
Today I would like to focus on Communal Living as it is there that I find the most misunderstanding and friction. I also believe that this issue is of particular importance to Treeleaf as it needs to be very intentionally reproduced (dare I say simulated) due to its disembodied and digital nature.
Most of the places I practiced (which were all either open to westerners or were based in the West) had a soft form of hierarchy. It should be stated that this was much less hierarchical than is to be seen in Japanese training temples. However, hierarchy still exists and is usually related to length of time spent practising at a particular place.
There was also an often unexpressed but implied sense that those who were higher in the hierarchy were higher in their practice/realisation and nowhere was this more evident than the deference and respect given to senior practitioners and even more so to teachers. (I must admit, I do appreciate this grain of salt thing as long as those using the expression agree with its use)
Also, at many of the places I practiced there was an inner sanctum of sorts, often composed of senior monastics/priests or senior lay students who were in some cases were overtly referred to as “training” staff.
The role of training staff has often been a mystery to me. These are the people who decide on the schedule, who does what work, who works with who, what programs will be run, what chants will be chanted etc. There is also an unspoken assumption that these regular activities are also opportunities for “training”. For example, if someone is doing something wrong, it is necessary to correct them. If someone gets too comfortable or identifies too closely to a particular position, it may be necessary to move them to a different position. If someone is sick it may be necessary to give them time off. If there are conflicts that threaten the Sangha’s harmony they need to be resolved. An often used metaphor in Zen training is we are all like rough stones, rubbing and bumping up against each other, polishing each other until we shine.
This is all wonderful. But it seems a trifle artificial to me at times and nowhere is this more obvious than in a digital environment. Usually in Zen monasteries the day-to-day necessities of life caused the necessity of training. However, in a digital format it would seem that this needs to be “manufactured” or simulated probably because the sense of practising in community is perceived as being an important part of Zen training overall. But there is this underlying sense that people are trying to better you by controlling you. (my experience only perhaps and likely a distortion caused by my own programming) Some excuse this teaching method by suggesting this is occurring to teach people to break free from this passive victim situation which is nice except that means someone has judged your practice and found it wanting.
In some of the places I practised Zen training appeared to be a natural byproduct of living physically in community which brought with it it's ups and downs, petty rivalries and jealousies. People correcting each other and pointing fingers for breaking the rules. People deliberately breaking the rules to show how iconoclastic they were. People who measured the power of their and others practise by the people they could bully into doing what they wanted. And then there were even people who were just pretending to do these things because they thought it was funny. It often lead to a sense of being “messed with” and sometimes teachers were the worst offenders. However, I suppose sincere intention to help must count for something.
In any event, the fact is that most of us live outside of the formally defined Sangha. We already have this type of training in spades and so I openly question it's necessity (especially in its more contrived forms) especially as Zen evolves and sheds its monastic roots and even it's physical roots.
Sometimes I feel that Zen training is unnecessary and parallels the same issue in our zazen. If we are all already intrinsically enlightened, what need is there for practise?
_/\_
sat/ah
Matt
), learning something of our Zen history in greater detail (so that they can be helpful to people with questions), to manage our tiny budget, to receive training in ethics and responsible pastoral care, to keep out the "hijackers" who started attacking our Zoom sittings this week, and stuff like that. It is about as exciting as going to driving school.
Comment