| |
|
-
THE PRICE OF
ENLIGHTENMENT
-
-
Dāna
and the
question of charging for the spiritual teachings
|
MAHAYANA BUDDHISM
Zen and Chan
|
|
|
30.
ZUIKO REDDING
Zuiko
Redding
is a
Soto Zen
priest and the guiding teacher of Cedar Rapids Zen Center in Iowa.
Redding grew up in Texas where she encountered Zen as a university
student. She studied in Milwaukee with
Tozen Akiyama
and in Minneapolis with
Dainin Katagiri.
In 1992 she was ordained in Japan by
Tsugen Narasaki.
She remained to practice under his direction at
Zuioji
Monastery and its mountain training center,
Shogoji.
She received certification as a teacher in the Soto tradition from Rev.
Narasaki in 1996 and returned to the US in 1997. She has done monastic
practice at Hokyoji in southern Minnesota.
Zuiko
Redding is also a member of the
American Zen Teachers Association
and of the Association of Soto Zen Buddhists. |
INTERVIEW
Can you please tell me about your teacher and the way he/she taught? In essence,
did your teacher ask you for money as payment for the Zen teachings,
meditations, workshops and retreats or for any other services?
Zuiko
Redding: I received novice ordination and trained for full ordination in
Japan. My teacher is Tsugen Narasaki Roshi. ("Roshi" is an honorific title.)
He is the abbot of Zuioji, a Soto Zen training monastery in Niihama, Japan. As
is the tradition in Japan, he never asked me for payment for any of his
teaching. My payment was to train well and to open the dharma widely in
America.
I don't
know for sure, but I doubt Narasaki Roshi received any personal donations for
talks he gave or sesshins he led elsewhere. In Japan, people give to the
dharma, not the teacher, so donations were given to the monastery. He was
supported by the monastery as we all were. Receiving personal gifts was frowned
on for all of us. Donations were for the dharma, not for personal use, so we
shared whatever we received with the rest of the community. This did not mean
that one gave all one's wealth to the community but simply that, if one received
something - money, food or other gift - it was given to the community.
In
Japan, the teacher supports the person he/she has ordained and who is training
under her/him. Tsugen Roshi paid for my robes when I needed new ones for
special ceremonies, and the monastery paid my travel expenses in Japan when they
sent me from one temple to another.
My
teacher taught that we should give donations to the community rather than keep
them for ourselves. This is what I do here with donations for talks, sesshins
and such. I do not charge for anything I do. If someone really wishes to know
what they should give for my services for a wedding, for instance, I tell them
to ask around about the going price, then write the check to Cedar Rapids Zen
Center. I do ask for reimbursement of gasoline and associated costs when I
travel for the Center, and the Center provides me with housing and health
insurance. I previously received a small stipend, but we've discontinued that
since I now receive Social Security.
When you were ordained, was this to be a monk or a priest?
Zuiko
Redding: First, let's tackle ordination. Now, as was the case in the Buddha's
time, there are two stages of ordination. In the Buddha's time, someone joining
the sangha would have his or her head shaved and be given robes and a bowl and
be welcomed into the community as a novice. This meant that one always went out
with others when the 3-month rainy season retreat (vassa) ended. One could not
wander and teach on one's own. After doing vassa for five years, one would
receive permission to go out alone to teach. In modern Japan, one finds a
mentor. This person gives novice ordination and guides one's training. As in
ancient India, one has to have monastic training in order to receive final
ordination and permission to teach. The period is shorter now, perhaps because
so many temple teachers are needed. Teacher and trainee decide together when
the time is right for what's now called "dharma transmission".
Now,
let's deal with monk and priest. There is no clear distinction between the
two. In the Buddha's time there was no difference between these two. In the
earliest sangha, monks and nuns spent the 3-month rainy season retreat in a
monastery, then wandered the countryside begging and giving dharma instruction
until the next rainy season. This meant that they spend six months of each year
as monastics and six months as priests. In modern times in the Japanese
tradition we usually train in the monastery, then go to a temple to serve a
sangha. We may return to monastic life to deepen our practice, however. Many
temple teachers live essentially a monastic life in their temples. I do that
and I have a number of friends who do that in Japan. Theravadin temple teachers
in Thailand, Burma and Sri Lanka also do this. Also, there are lifelong monks
in Japan. My teacher is one of them. Many temple teachers return to the
monastery as teachers and monastics in their sixties and seventies when they
have successors to take over their temple duties.
So the short
answer is that I am both monk and priest.
Why is it that Zen
monks are not celibate, as is the case in some of the older Buddhist traditions?
Zuiko
Redding: In Japan the answer is historical. In the Meiji Era (after the
opening of Japan to trade with the West in the 19th century), the
government forced temple teachers to marry. Many lifelong monks and nuns were
forced from monasteries and made to marry. In those years Buddhism was
discriminated against and attempts were made to weaken and destroy it. Clergy
were not allowed to wear Buddhist clothing outside their temples. Shinto became
the state religion. Now that temple teachers are more free, many are opting not
to marry. Many who marry have wives who live nearly monastic lives with them.
The vast majority of married clergy in Japan live normal family lives, however.
In China, Zen (Ch'an) and Vietnam (Thien), Zen ordained people
are celibate. In Korea, I think, there are both married and celibate Zen (Son)
temple teachers.
What are your views on
teachers who have no ordination and no formal training, but go out there and
advertise themselves as "enlightened", "awakened”, and/or "Self realized" on
facebook and other media outlets and then ask for money for their teachings?
Some of them ask for up to 150 dolours per hour on Skype. They also charge for
satsangs (meetings), meditations and retreats.
Zuiko Redding: "Dolour" (I think you meant "dollars.") is an apt word - it
means "pain" in Latin. That's what these people often cause. Someone with
little practice experience and training to teach is totally unable to lead
others. To take their money and pretend to lead them is totally against the
practice they're pretending to teach. They often harm people by misleading them
about what practice really is and how we go about it. The can also be downright
dangerous if they deal with psychologically fragile people.
Yes, but they also say that
there is no authority in non-duality and no one to answer to since it’s all maya
(apparent reality) anyway? In essence, they say it doesn't matter what you do
because there is no karma or dharma?
Zuiko Redding: I'm not sure who "they" are, but they're no one I know. And
they could get into deep trouble if they go too far with this "no authority, no
one to answer to" thing when they get hauled over for speeding. :-)
To talk about maya is to see this world as it is – ever -changing according to
causes and conditions in which nothing has an inherent self-nature. In the
midst of this birds are hatched, birds sing and grow old, birds die. So do
we. Our practice and training is in walking with non-duality and duality
simultaneously. Non-duality says there is no one to be born and no one to die
but I'm a fool if I don't take care of this body and mind just as it is right
now - if I don't pay attention to the world of duality in the full knowledge
that its look of permanence and independence is just an illusion. In actuality,
our paying attention to duality, by having lunch, going to work, taking care of
our affairs is an expression of non-duality. It is us doing what needs to be
done at the moment to be a functioning part of this ever-changing, impermanent
dream. Peace lies in just doing the next thing in full realization of
impermanence, interdependence and no self-nature.
Answering to my teacher or my colleagues or my students is a manifestation of
non-duality. If I didn't take my teacher's advice, for instance, there would no
longer be the non-duality of our relationship. He can't be a teacher if I'm not
a student. And - yes - he's my teacher even now - 15 years after my dharma
transmission.
The Buddha taught that in this non-dual world we are all subject to cause and
effect. There's a Chinese story about an old teacher who was reborn 500 times
as a fox because he didn't feel he was subject to cause and effect. It's in the
Blue Cliff Record, I think. Just as you and I exist in non-duality, so do karma
and dharma.
What if someone has had a lot
of formal training with a Zen teacher, or perhaps is even a Roshi, who then
decides to leave the traditional sangha and set up their own kind of
not-for-profit sangha and charge or even trademark some aspects of the dharma?
What
authority do they have to answer to? And, is this setting a positive, a
negative, or a neutral example for others to follow suit?
Zuiko
Redding: I'm not sure I understand the part about "leave the traditional sangha
and set up their own kind of not-for-profit sangha". Does that mean the person
leaves the teaching as it is traditionally taught?
My
teacher expected me to leave the monastery and either found a new sangha or
become the teacher /clergyperson / monk for an existing Zen sangha. And I,
along with our sangha, indeed have set up a non-profit religious organization.
This follows the process that began in the Buddha's time and it is entirely
"traditional". In countries where it is not possible to provide for the temple
with donations, it's fine to charge in order to pay the mortgage and other bills
and support the teacher. While it's preferable to exist solely on donations, we
sometimes have to be realistic.
The
important thing - the mission of financial support - is to ensure the health of
the dharma. The source is not important as long as the funds are used in
service of providing a place for learning and practicing dharma and people to
teach it.
When
people attempt to "brand" their dharma with things like "Big Mind" or whatever,
or when people support expensive lifestyles with the fees they charge, I wonder
if the dharma is actually what is being taught. The vast majority of my
colleagues, I think, would also wonder. The dharma is for everyone. Adding
catch phrases is just something extra. Charging a lot of money does not make
the dharma available to all. Usually, it is the desire for rewards - fame,
profit, etc. - that is reflected here, not the dharma. This teacher is more
interested in personal gain than he or she is in the welfare of the people who
come or the welfare of the Buddha's teachings. In other words, this is a
business, not a dharma organization.
In
Japan, such people would answer to the Soto Zen national organization. In
America, we are setting up standards and guidelines that our teachers will
answer to. However, in neither country can someone be legally prevented from
teaching dharma that doesn't conform to some standard of teaching or ethics.
The only thing we can do is be very public about the fact that this teaching is
not in line with our ethical standards and practices.
END OF INTERVIEW
|
|
|