My Facebook page gets all kinds of goofy ads for just about any vaguely “eastern spirituality” related thing that advertises on Facebook. I often wonder how FB knows to target me with these ads. It’s kind of scary. I certainly didn’t call Mark Zuckerbeg and tell him I was into that stuff. The Facebook folks also seem to think I want to date younger women. But that’s a whole other subject.
Lately whenever something particularly silly appears on my page, I take a screen shot of it and post it with a comment. The other day I posted the ad you’re seeing now on this blog with the following comment:
“But can Reggie Ray help me stay in the Alpha state or can Omharmonics help me step more deeply into the river of my life? And can either of them get the gunk off my shoes?”
This upset some of the fans of Reggie Ray who subscribe to my FB page. They thought I was dissing their dude. But actually I had never even heard of Reggie Ray before this ad appeared. The only Reggie I know of is Archie’s rival from the Archie comic books. Maybe he got all spiritual when he grew up.
I really do not follow the Buddhist scene in America, or anywhere else for that matter. That seems to surprise people sometimes. But I honestly have pretty much zero interest in who’s who in the land of famous spiritual masters. Occasionally when some dill weed starts advertising that he can get you enlightened for more money than I’ve made in the past three years combined I might take notice.
But generally I don’t care about any of these people. Some of them are probably nice, well meaning guys. Others are clearly in it for the money. It’s like rock and roll or movies of any other form of mass entertainment. Most of what ends up being big is garbage calculated specifically to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Though on rare occasions something good breaks through. Spirituality in 21st century America is one more form of popular amusement.
In any case, I thought what I said was pretty clearly not a put down of Reggie Ray. It was just a comment on his ad and on the fact that it was paired with an ad for Omharmonics in such a way that they seemed to be competing with each other.
One of my FB friends said I ought to attend one of Reggie’s retreats because “he is a genuine dharma conduit.” Maybe so. But I’m over that stuff. Years ago I kept hearing about this particular Buddhist master who was supposed to be really great. So I went and saw one of his things. I was appalled. The guy was a master all right. A master of working the system. He was playing his followers like they were an accordion and he was Weird Al Yankovic. I couldn’t get out of there fast enough.
Maybe Reggie Ray isn’t like that. Maybe he really is great. I don’t know and I’m not all that interested in finding out. No disrespect to Mr. Ray intended. It’s just that I have a teacher. I don’t really feel any great need to find someone else or to sample all the flavors out there on the spiritual buffet table. I’m just not into that sort of thing.
One response I got to my FB post was, I think, pretty typical of what happens when I say absolutely anything about any other teacher. It went, “I’m forever grateful to you Brad for writing Hardcore Zen. It brought me to the practise. But you really seem close minded when it comes to any other teacher. Is it because of your dislike of the fakes out there that you’re skeptical? Or is it something else?”
It’s like what happened when I mentioned Thich Naht Hanh (did I get the spelling right this time? I honestly tried!) the other day. I knew that titling the article “Thich Naht Hanh is Wrong” was bound to cause some consternation. But read the article and you’ll see that it’s about a particular statement attributed to TNH and the way that statement was taken out of context and presented. Unfortunately, little soundbytes like that seem to be the way most people approach Buddhism or spirituality in general these days. They’re too busy to go into Buddhism or anything else in any kind of depth. So they look at a couple of Twitter postings and think they’ve got it down.
Be that as it may, I do not think all other spiritual teachers suck ass. On the other hand, I’m generally not terribly impressed with most of the people currently working in the area of “commercial spiritual teacher” — by that I mean spiritual teacher types who write books, who do lecture tours, who get movies made about them etc. like me, for example.
There is a whole other class of spiritual teacher who are entirely different from “commercial spiritual teachers” who I (generally) respect a lot more. These are people who work mostly anonymously, who nobody ever hears of, whose next door neighbors don’t even know what they do — whose next door neighbors are, in fact, many of the people who say, “There are no teachers near me! Why can’t I just do my Zen training on line?”
Anyway, those anonymous people are almost always better than anyone you’ve ever heard of who also does this “spiritual teacher” thing. The supposed superstars of the spiritual world and most especially me — though I’m a C-list spiritual celebrity at best — are no match for most of these anonymous humble teachers.
The idea that people sell spirituality as a commodity bugs me. I don’t mind people who sell books about spirituality. That’s fine. Or books about their own experience of a practice. Also great. But what a lot of these guys are selling is clearly not that. They advertise themselves as being able to grant you enlightenment, realization, peace of mind, or whatever, for a price. But they can’t do that. Nobody can do that. If someone really could, that would be great.
But you cannot buy that kind of thing. Just like you can’t buy genuine love. Even though you can buy a night with a very good prostitute, some of whom are adept at the “girlfriend experience” which means they can simulate genuine love. But that costs you extra. And a lot of what I see advertised sounds to me like a Zen version of the “girlfriend experience.” That’s what Genpo Roshi is selling with his personalized five-day retreats for only five people in a luxury hotel.
Also the idea that we must not question anyone as pure and lovely as Thich Naht Hanh or Reggie Ray or whoever worries me. When we lose our ability to be critical, we’re stepping into a very dangerous area. We’re no longer looking at things in a balanced way. That’s when trouble begins.
OMG!!!!
#1
?
Without sound bytes we don't have much going on. I'd like to pretend at least some of them are really haiku or koans but they're not. They're just sound bytes.
Commercial spirituality (great phrase!) is an all-American hobby. Apparently, everybody should have a religion or two, it makes them seem wholesome, even if they're not.
I'd like to blame George Bush but he's not really the perp in this case. Neither is Thich Nhat Hanh.
Oh brother here we go again…
Dear Brad,
I've read all your books and read your blog regularly and I feel like hugging and snuggling you because you have taken away so many illusions about masters and enlightenment from me. I feel very much relieved and I just want to say you are doing a great and important job and I thank you so very, very much !
Jürgen
DING DING SING NAILED IT BRAD. When I first got into "eastern spirituality" it was through the krishnas that would come with free food to all the local hardcore shows. Well that didn't quit click me but I liked some of there points. When I stumbled upon Buddhism I really liked the teachings but I was put off by all the new-age cheesiness. I like Osho cause he said we should chant "fuck it" as our morning mantra lol. That was punk. One day I googled "Buddhist hardcore" and found you and Noah Levine. Noah Levine is cool but still kinda cheesy. We like alot of the same bands. And then there's you. Hardcore Zen wasnt incredibly entertaining. But holy shit was it true. Everything you said made so much sense. But then after reading that and Sit Down & Shut Up, I began saying "there's no soto zen teachers here!". There's a little vietnamese zen temple down the street from me, so I went to check it out. Incredibly good teacher. The english sitting group only consists of about 8 of us total. It has nothing to do with soto zen or dogen or anything like that. Just reality. It just goes to show you that the underground will always be superior to the mainstream.
"But read the article and you'll see that it's about a particular statement attributed to TNH and the way that statement was taken out of context and presented."
Close, but not a match. The board goes back (as they used to say on "Concentration").
The difficulty for most teachers is that they don't quite have the science. Even if they did, the folks who are into religion are not usually into science; religion and philosophy majors usually have a very different psychological profile from math and science majors, for example.
So the teaching is a cross between Aesop's fables and the Wizard of Oz, and Brad's right, in the U.S.A. it's "enlightenment-light" for the busy supermarket spirituality householder.
Great stuff.
Give 'em hell, Brad, they all suck! The action that is zazen, how do we teach that without science; we hide it between the lines, right?
"Most of what ends up being big is garbage calculated specifically to appeal to the lowest common denominator."
But so many people got "it."
It being EST and the whole mining of people's 'ego' for lack of a better word. In one way or another, most of these movements (unlike my bowel movement) simply stroke egos. End ego stroking brings reward$.
I once had an EST graduate in my department – clearly a direct report and his favorite saying was: "I will work with you but not for you." He often came in late and left early. But those were the halcyon days and his errant ways were easily overlooked.
And I later worked for an EST graduate and his main problem was that he was an EST graduate.
EST provided thousands of PTSD clients for clinical psychologists around the country. Apple has done the same thing by abandoning the enterprise market.
These Huxters are selling no more than the old snake oil salesmen in the wild west. For a real reality check – from the 1960s, no less, see "Salesman."
It's a documentary about door-to-door bible salesmen. They are selling cathoholic bibles to impoverished cathiholics who filled out an 'interest card' at the local parish. (Hint: Mother Church got her split!) It's a wonderful movie – befitting our own times in the current Great Bush/Cheney Depression.
You should listen to the buddhist geeks podcast more brad, conversations are really interesting and you get educated on the big buddhist names, regardless of whether you like them or not (i know you AND genpo roshi were on it)
well said!!
There was "a (24 hour) film made about the est 6-Day Course." Yeah, in the early 1980s. I was on the crew – not as an est junkie but – as the senior ranking technician. The film was for a "pay per view" cable TV event that est threw 'only once.' (Hint: it was repeated after it brought in $3 or $4 million.)
The est people brought in a hundred + hours of videotape which – in the course of a few weeks – we cut down to the 'best 24 hours.' (Hint: the word 'best' is being used sarcastically) My garden was never so green…
I almost listed the editor (Jim), VTR operator (Milt), producer (Ziggy), and second unit cameraman (Scott) by full names – my bad.
Question: Did anybody here 'buy' the est pay-per-view?
sucker!David Hannum said it: "There's a sucker born every minute."
Just go to the local "Assemblies of God" megachurch – you'll see a belly full!
Svaha!
Very well said!!
Oh SNAP! Sweeping Zen has some words for ya Brad…
http://sweepingzen.com/2012/03/28/the-narrow-way-brad-warners-writing/
I’ll keep this very short.
Most of you probably already know Brad Warner’s Hardcore Zen blog, where Brad (a Soto Zen priest) writes about Zen and other stuff – typically the other stuff being his music. At the risk of calling the kettle black, I sometimes am left just shaking my head when I visit there. Everything is ‘just so’ and Brad has the inside scoop on Zen practice; HE is the Real McCoy. He constantly writes critically on subjects he admits he doesn’t know anything about in his writings. As a perfect example, check out Brad’s most recent piece on Reggie Ray.
In it, he writes, “I really do not follow the Buddhist scene in America, or anywhere else for that matter. That seems to surprise people sometimes. But I honestly have pretty much zero interest in who’s who in the land of famous spiritual masters.”
Why would it surprise people? See groupies for an explanation on who cares.
He then goes on to say, “But generally I don’t care about any of these people. Some of them are probably nice, well meaning guys. Others are clearly in it for the money. It’s like rock and roll or movies of any other form of mass entertainment. Most of what ends up being big is garbage calculated specifically to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Though on rare occasions something good breaks through. Spirituality in 21st century America is one more form of popular amusement.”
These quotes provide the perfect snapshot of my issue with Brad’s writing. First, note the most obvious inconsistancy. He doesn’t know who these people are or follow the “Buddhist scene in America,” but he constantly opines about said other teachers and the Buddhist scene in America. That to me doesn’t make a bit of sense.
I also note his self-assuredness. While the title of his piece “Why All Spiritual Teachers Other Than Me, Nishijima Roshi and Dogen SUCK ASS!!!!” is tongue-in-cheek, it also fairly accurately reflects Brad’s writings. He often does this, actually, where he’ll say one thing in jest to try and lessen the narrow-minded impact it has on the reader.
Brad writes later, “Maybe Reggie Ray isn’t like that. Maybe he really is great. I don’t know and I’m not all that interested in finding out. No disrespect to Mr. Ray intended. It’s just that I have a teacher. I don’t really feel any great need to find someone else or to sample all the flavors out there on the spiritual buffet table. I’m just not into that sort of thing.”
This is like Brad’s mantra. One needs only one teacher, and his is the only one he will listen to. Yikes! To my eyes, at any rate, isn’t this attitutde dismissive and narrow-minded? Just because you have a teacher doesn’t mean you shut your eyes and ears off to anything else. That’s just weird to me. What Brad calls a spiritual buffet is what most of us call being open and not knowing everything.
I’m just wary of anyone who sets themselves up as the guy who is authentic – the real Buddha dope. I think people should seek out all kinds teachers in life. To decide you’ve settled that matter, case-closed, strikes me as stagnant, arrogant and childish. Anyway, not sure why I felt like putting my foot in this but there it is.
A free mind is a terrible burden, that is why so many people are foolishly willing to give theirs up to "zen" teachers, a corporation or even the military.
That Sweeping Zen article is just silly. They claim to find Brad's "narrow way of writing" or his "narrow-mindedness" to be "weird," basically implying that they are somehow more "open-minded" than Brad. For this and on the basis of this they go on to ridicule Brad for not being like them in approaching life or Zen. Oh, here we go. This to me is the biggest hypocrisy. However, that is not the biggest problem. All people on some level are hypocrites — this is the usual thing. No, the worse issue is that they don't seem to even recognize that they themselves are hypocrites. Just like everyone is. That is the main insight that must be grasped. In essence, to use Carl Jung's idea, they don't seem to really understand or jive with the concept of "the shadow self" — otherwise, they would not have written what they have written.
It's a lot like that story Alan Watts once told of when some of the first Westerners got a whiff of Zen so they came to see a Zen master in Japan. They had many legends in their heads of what he would be like, so they were excited. However, when they met him, on the first day they found out he drank alcohol and slept in late sometimes. This bothered the Westerners — oh how "unholy"! — but they let it go. The next day they found out he smoked, and again they were bothered — really bothered by this one — but they let it go. Finally, on the last day of the week they found out he had a girlfriend. At that point the Westerners left in a fury, feeling that they had been duped. But the Zen master just laughed. They had really missed the point.
I think that is a lot of what is going on here. Oh, the puritan ethic that runs so deep to be 'perfect' in all ways runs so deep in our culture (and in many cultures), it is a bit sad how far and how thoroughly it permeates our thinking. Only with the greatest effort we can begin to become at least a little bit aware of it, I think, and not freak out as much.
In any case, great post, Brad. I myself enjoy your words and you seem to be a lot more in touch with yourself, which is what really counts, than lots of others out there in the same "field" — keep it up.
Rachel Ray is the little ho who has a cooking show on TV. I think it's pretty fucked up how you keep referring to her as 'Mr. Ray' when you know damn well that she is a woman and her name is not Reggie..
The idea that people sell spirituality as a commodity bugs me too. I don't mind people who sell books about it like you do. That's fine. But any other form of selling spirituality is fucked up.
BTW If you are interested in the "Girlfriend experience" of simulated genuine love, I can help you with that. All my girls are young and good looking too.
Wow, thanks for the warning Brad!
Rock on Brad!
"Also the idea that we must not question anyone as pure and lovely as Thich Naht Hanh or Reggie Ray or whoever worries me. When we lose our ability to be critical, we're stepping into a very dangerous area. We're no longer looking at things in a balanced way. That's when trouble begins."
To be clear, I wasn't arguing in my piece that we not be critical. But in the two examples provided, Brad has said in both posts that he doesn't know much (if anything) about either of them. So, that to me doesn't sounds like the dangerous area, really. That's where trouble can begin.
Typos! eh. I meant to say "that to me sounds like the dangerous area."
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
Thích Nh?t H?nh
How does one simulate genuine love?
By trying harder!
Genuine love is impossible to simulate. One either experiences genuine love or they don't experience it . If it's simulated then it's not genuine.
If you see the Buddha, kill him!
If you see the Buddha, you are deceiving yourself.
_You_ are Buddha. You do not see yourself in this realm of shadow and light. Even after having lived 300 lives as foxes, you do not see yourself (your true Budh nature). It is when you cease being reborn into this realm of shadow and light that you see there is neither 'self' nor 'other.'*
You are what you are
and not what you think.
To a blind horse a smile
is as good as a wink.
Give the blind horse a carrot, not a smile or a wink. Do something beneficial.
Pointing to the mote in your brother's eye _IS_ helpful. By cleansing his eye, he can help you remove the splinter from your eye.
Matthew 7:3, properly interpreted.
And, Brad's mote, when compared to "Big Hind, Big Fart®" Buddhism, is just mote – eye goo.
You only see your Budh nature when you have learned to stop looking. Perhaps, after living 300 lives as foxes, I will attain that state too. Wait and see…
It's only a matter of time.
What did the Buddhist Monk say to the Hot Dog vendor?
Try harder!
We should have a rule that each comment can be NO longer than three (3) sentences. If you can't express your idea that succinctly, then too bad. But that may just be the weed talkin'.
Khru, That was three sentences.
mysterion loves to hear himself talk. He's a wanker is what he is.
two sentences. A HCZ haiku
wasting my time here
why do I keep coming back?
don't have any friends 🙁
mysterion sucks.
why do I keep coming back?
mysterion sucks.
Adam said:
This is like Brad’s mantra. One needs only one teacher, and his is the only one he will listen to. Yikes! To my eyes, at any rate, isn’t this attitude dismissive and narrow-minded? Just because you have a teacher doesn’t mean you shut your eyes and ears off to anything else. That’s just weird to me. What Brad calls a spiritual buffet is what most of us call being open and not knowing everything.
I’m just wary of anyone who sets themselves up as the guy who is authentic – the real Buddha dope. I think people should seek out all kinds teachers in life. To decide you’ve settled that matter, case-closed, strikes me as stagnant, arrogant and childish.
I don't "shut my eyes and ears" to all other teachers. I chose to go very deeply into one specific lineage. This is really the only way to truly pursue Buddhist practice. Don't take my word for it. Look at what's been written about Buddhism for the past 2500 years.
One doesn't have to sample every dish on a buffet to know whether the buffet is good or not. Man! I went to a Chinese buffet restaurant off the highway down south once and I definitely did not need to sample every dish they had on offer!
I am definitely the real Buddha dope, though. They don't come much dopier than me!
Going deeply into a lineage is fine, as is having faith in the path you've chosen. But that's not what you said in the post. Someone suggested you might go hear what Ray has to say, and your response was, "It's just that I have a teacher. I don't really feel any great need to find someone else or to sample all the flavors out there on the spiritual buffet table."
What was suggested was one flavor, not all flavors. Now, I don't know Reggie Ray or much about him outside of what you know, for one. But yeah man, why not go check him out if the opportunity arose? Why would that be a competing force somehow with Nishijima, and why can't one have a favorite on the buffet while still trying new things? I think that's how we learn and grow as humans. Thank God I didn't have one teacher for all classes in school, because they would be strong in some areas and weak in others.
And, of course, the metaphor can only go so far. We're discussing human beings, not dishes on a buffet. If I'm in college and am going to write a dissertation on the philosophy of Plato, you bet I'll be pouring over what the dude put forward and such. Otherwise, I don't really have much of a dissertation to offer up and I don't much know what I'm talking about.
Your criticisms of Genpo were dead on because you provided examples, like quotes of how much he charged for retreats and the things he would promise folks. But, the examples are absent in these. The argument is that they should be fair game for criticism, but you don't really highlight what it is they are being criticized for (just that we should be able to criticize them). Sure, we should be able to – but on what grounds?
Three words… Retreats, Store, Colorado. I learn from the lies.
Anonymous ryozan 1/2 said…
"Three words… Retreats, Store, Colorado. I learn from the lies."
Crowd of 1
Richard Baker is just all right with me.
"And Hung Mung slapped his ass and cried, 'I don't Know! I don't know!"
Hail Eris -><-
Mainstream will always suck no matter what the subject matter is. And the majority will always argue that mainstream is good because "if it wasnt then how come its so popular". That's all there is to it.
And the mainstream will always claim that the underground is "close minded" for not accepting watered-down garbage.
Why in the seven layers of hell that is a Taco Bell crunch wrap is Thich Nhat Hanh's name so hard to spell?
The mainstream is loathe to accept that truth is not a popularity contest.
Hi Adam,
What was suggested to Brad was that he attend a Reggie Ray retreat. Attending a retreat is a pretty major commitment of time and money, even if the cost of the retreat itself is minimal: plane tickets or gas money.
Brad has been on the road for the past few years visiting various Buddhist centers, meeting other teachers. He's attended lots and lots of retreats.
There are so many schools of Buddhism in the West now, and so many teachers with a variety of approaches, which is wonderful. But this make it unreasonable to expect anyone to be thoroughly familiar with all of it. I think it is better to say "I don't know about that," than to learn a little and think you now know all about it.
Adam,
you wrote:
But yeah man, why not go check him out if the opportunity arose? Why would that be a competing force somehow with Nishijima, and why can't one have a favorite on the buffet while still trying new things? I think that's how we learn and grow as humans. Thank God I didn't have one teacher for all classes in school, because they would be strong in some areas and weak in others.
But Buddhism isn't about tourism. Buddhism is sticking to one teacher until you find her/him useless and find another. That's what all Buddhist figures have done through the history of Buddhism. Take Dogen for example: he studied Tendai, he studied Rinzai under Myozen, went to China and studied there Chan under Wuji Liaopai. But he didn't felt satisfied with them, so he tried to find another teacher again. And then he found Rujing and he felt Rujing was finally THE teacher he searched so long. Dogen wrote a lot about finding a good teacher and after finding, just sticking to him/her.
Now, you seem to suggest that it's a good thing to search other teachers AFTER you've found your teacher. You're even suggesting to Brad to try new things. But Buddhism is not about Buddhism. Why bother to go on and check other teachers if you're happy with your current? Of course, if you're not happy, then do just like Dogen did and keep on searching.
I have noticed that people who don't have a good teacher or who don't yet know if their teacher is good for them, keep on promoting tourism and searching other teachers. Perhaps this is your situation, Adam?
Buddhism is not about tourism. But don't believe me. There's a lot of Buddhist teachings about this principle.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Geez, another try:
I meant Buddhism is not about tourism. I wrote But Buddhism is not about Buddhism. But this is not a metaphysical bullshit discussion. This is practical. Buddhism is not about changing teachers like diapers, it's all about sticking to one teacher if you find your teacher to be YOUR teacher.
And oh Adam, I just checked your site and regarding to your bio, you're not a Buddhist? You're hosting your site and some virtual place, but you're not practicing Buddhism? Or at least there are no mentions about that. If you're not a Buddist, perhaps that can explain your opinions about Buddhist tourism?
And oh Adam, I just checked your site and regarding to your bio, you're not a Buddhist? You're hosting your site and some virtual place, but you're not practicing Buddhism? Or at least there are no mentions about that. If you're not a Buddist, perhaps that can explain your opinions about Buddhist tourism?
Uku,
I thought you were right the first time: "But Buddhism is not about Buddhism".
I hope that we reamin open to the possibility that we may just be wrong sometimes about 'Buddhism'. Certainty is such a cold bedfellow, although we court it so energetically it seems. And it's interesting how we people are so keen to portray history as consistant with our own current values… that old holy grail of 'lineage' which has always been prone to retrospective reinvention when it suits a purpose.
'True Buddhism', when it's a nest of opinion to hide in and shoot from, is the worst sort of shitty diaper. As a teacher we know of once said (he doens't 'put himself out there' much): 'Buddhism is characterised by doubt, not by faith'… how quick we are though to make ourselves closed circuits when we get a bit of insight, or confidence, or faith, or if we just think we're right.
If people trusted their practice more, and themselves more (the real source of authenticity), and their own spurious ideas and values less, I'd be inclined to agree that it was a matter of just 'one teacher', but that's not the case. It seems to me that strong opinions, and a need to project them, are more often about doubt, not faith, in our practice and our selves. Doubt about who and what? Such questions aren't commonly broached because we're too busy dissing what other people are doing to consider the real issue. We avoid it, and set up shit storms so as to avoid it… and/or we try unconsciously to work it out in other ways. Messy, often ineffective ways.
Yes, I think Brad is pretty dumb, because he's prone to shooting his mouth off before he brings his intelligence, and his practice, to bear on it. That's dumb because we're not getting the full extent of his dumbness, and, although I've met Brad only briefly, it really doesn't seem the sum total of who he is (I got the impression he had a lot to say, but he hadn't quite worked out how to say it yet, he just regurgitated what Gudo said). It'll always go down well 'round here' though, which is a slightly worrying situation, because it suggests an incentive for the Brand Warner line, with a gallery to play to. I think when Buddhism descends into groups of people who shore up each other's pathologies that it is no longer fit to purpose: And it doesn't matter if its a groups of tea party right wing nutjobs, or a group of edgy, neo punk rock shock jocks… its the same process. Is buddhism really that sort of effort? Pretty shitty model of 'freedom' if it is.
Besides, it was common practice in Old Japan for monks to go 'on tour' to avail of the teachings of other teachers, sometimes it was even insisted on by their teachers.
Rambled a bit there…
Regards,
Harry.
Harry,
I think the principle of sticking to one teacher is pretty practical: we all have to find our own path and we usually do it by searching and testing different teachers until we found a teacher that suits for us. Ain't it same like choosing a partner, flying from nest to nest until settling down? I think this clumsy analogy is valid for Buddhism too.
But I think it's different to suggest or even underline that it's a good thing to keep on searching and searching a teacher because that would also suggest that you don't have to trust to yourself. By sticking finally to one teacher you have tested her/him and you've saw it's a good teacher for you. For now. But because our practice is constantly doubting and testing ourselves and others, I think it becomes naturally to change teacher if necessary. Sometimes married people get divorced. Same goes for Buddhist student-teacher relationship too, I think. But underlining trying new things, like Adam suggested, it's kind of same like suggesting that if you're married, go on and fuck some other lassie/lad if you feel like it.
Uku,
If it wasn't the case that some of the Dogen Sangha posse are of the thoroughly 'right' opinion that, in having been given transmission or whatever, they have 'arrived' at True Buddhism (and so don't have to keep learning anything else, or enquire, or consider their practice from other perspectives, or enagage with people in different ways, or bring their practice to bear on areas of their life…etc etc etc) then I might agree.
At best, Dogen Sangha is a practical and apporachable introduction to the vast range of zen thought and practice as represented by Dogen Zengi in his writings.
At worst, it is a stripped down, simplified and distorted version of it devoid of its much fuller context that has been formed due to later day sectarian assumptions and perceptions and simple, absolutist dogmas
Uku, why wouldn't a person just go and visit another teacher… no big deal… what's the worst that could happen (we know what it is: we could start to doubt our 'certainties', well, in that case, maybe we ain't so certain). It's not like you have to convert to another religion, or initiate into a cult or something… it's just going and listening or, god forbid, talking a bit even. The koan literature is bursting with accounts of various masters interacting and testing each other in conversation. This is a much better model than people sitting around wallowing in their own, safe 'rightness' and 'certainties'.
What's so wrong with uncertainty? It points to a lack of maturity in practice if someone cannot take on board the views of others, and be uncertain. What is the worst that could happen in listening to someone else… would we challenge our indoctrination of 'True Buddhism'? Ooooooh, scary.
That's what I mean, people are taking refuge in the shifting sands of their very own values and opinions, they have no confidence in their practice. No 'faith' (zazen style). In seeing these 'others' as a threat to our beloved adopted principles we are exposing our lack of confidence in our practice. The only people we expose as 'phony' are ourselves, but we are the last to know about it.
There are flashes of doubt in Brad's writing, and he exposes it well. I wish he would continue to 'turn the light in' in this regards though, to turn it on his adoption of the calcified thinking of his teacher and expose the source of this 'True Buddhism' in a way that is consistent with the practice. As it is he's just going through the 'bad boy' motions in an unreflective way.
Regards,
Harry.
I think I agree with Harry that "Buddhism is not about Buddhism".
I also think that the "tour" thing should be the thing to do, especially here in France where the "proprietary dojo" thing reigns supreme (I mean, where the practicioners in one given dojo are supposed to be the personal and private pupils of the "referent" teacher of the dojo; dojos a recruiting places).
On the other hand, the mere fact that Brad often states to have met other teachers, to have exchanged with them, to have shared retreats with them, is also a telltale sign that he is not that close to other people as this argument might suggest.
But expressing oneself, even in person, is always a redoubtable task, since we tend to develop one string of thoughts, which tends to obscure other important strings of thought, and encourage confusion.