Thank you. The afternoon session, if you looked on your program, deals with something called the future of Zen in the West, which I suppose, I don't know how many of us will want to venture predictions on the future of Zen in the West. It may also be what you might call normative remarks, that is to say where it then ought to go as well as where it might go. I was trying not to get too close to this guy, but maybe I did the opposite. Is that better? Yeah. OK. So we have four speakers this afternoon, and we'll go again in alphabetical order, which means that Norman Fisher will lead us off. Norman is the founder and spiritual director of the Everyday Zen Foundation, an organization that adapts Zen Buddhist teachings to Western culture. For many years, he taught at the San Francisco Zen Center, where he was co-abbot from 1995 to 2000, and is presently a senior Dharma teacher.

[01:03]

His chief interests include adaptation of Zen meditation and understanding to business, law, and conflict resolution, interreligious dialogue, and care of the dying. Norm? Can you hear? No? No? Yes? Hi, everybody. And thank you, Carl. Lew and I apparently had the same plan. Not having much time to think about this, I decided, and I think Lew might have done the same thing, to take the list of phrases that appear in the program that describe what it is we're going to talk about and just repeat those phrases and say a little bit about each one.

[02:06]

This way I didn't have to think creatively about what to say and so on and so forth. So I don't really have an organized thesis, but I'm just going to react in writing to these phrases. Challenges facing Zen teachers and practitioners. That's the first phrase. It's a challenge to keep on practicing with all the effort that it takes to establish groups and do what it takes to keep them going. It's a challenge to keep up your daily practice and keep your heart open and keep going every day with your own development. It's a challenge to remember what your life is actually about and not get swept up into a life that is overcome with selfishness and fear, which is normal in our society. So there are challenges. On the other hand, I have always considered it a much greater challenge not to practice than to practice.

[03:14]

So in that sense, it's quite easy. One is motivated to keep it up. The sustainability of Zen as a movement. Don't get me started. As Wendy said yesterday, the trouble is that we get into this for reasons that have nothing to do with money and power, but then it ends up that those things are inevitably a part of what it takes to make a movement sustainable. And to me, it is essentially a tragic thing that you have to professionalize something if you want it to survive, because everything in the end gets professionalized, even though you're perfectly aware that professionalization, which is survival, is also a kind of death, the death of the original spirit that was complete, as we heard yesterday, we heard a lot about that original spirit that is completely based on faith, on impossible hope, and on a kind of effort that is inherently unsustainable.

[04:23]

So my problem right now, and this is what I'm thinking about a lot now, and I know others of us are too, is how can Zen priests and lay teachers sustain themselves economically in the West? And this kind of goes to, I'm glad John brought up the whole issue of the economy on many levels. And just on a very small level in my own little sphere, this concerns me quite a bit. When you consider how much money is spent on building casinos, water parks and supplying the U.S. Army with a minimum amount of hardware, and you take that dollar amount and you compare it to the amount of money that is spent on building meditation halls and sustaining Buddhist institutions, well, it's a very sad situation. And I think that Asian Buddhists and Christians throughout the periods preceding this one were exactly right. that building temples and cathedrals and supporting monasteries is fundamentally good for the nation.

[05:31]

They were actually right about that. And so we need now to translate this into postmodern terms and recognize that money to promote meditation practice and humane teaching is money well spent socially. It promotes national sanity and clarity, and these things seem to be in seriously short supply. So we need to make an investment in those qualities, and I think a good investment would be to support meditation halls and other kinds of humane religious institutions. And we have to stop thinking about religion in 19th century terms. In other words, my exclusive version of truth versus your exclusion version of truth, and see religion for what it actually is and what it's always been, a function of the human heart, which, when exercised properly, promotes a sense of meaning, sanity, cooperation, and love.

[06:35]

And it seems very clear to me that our society, which has such a huge need for healing and wisdom, for just simply being able to stand looking at what's really going on accurately, and on the one hand, that need that society has, and on the other hand, the fact that The community, on the whole, the community of Buddhist practitioners, Zen practitioners, and other Buddhist practitioners, and practitioners of other religions as well, many of them, especially I'm talking about people who have a nuts and bolts practice, whose religious life is not based on enthusiastic belief, but based on a path away. These people have What can answer that need? But there seems to be no dialogue, no concept in the society that connects these two things together.

[07:39]

This is a source of great sadness to me. In other words, there are thousands of practitioners who could be addressing these needs that the society has, but there's no connect between those needs and these individuals. And there's no flow of resources or any institutional support for that. I'm talking about the sustainability of the Zen movement and particularly the livelihood for Zen priests and other religious professionals. If this need was ever connected, there would be no problem with that. And then the Zen movement and other Buddhist and other religious movements would sustain themselves easily. If this connection is not made, And maybe it won't be made. I think the Zen movement will still sustain itself, but it will be more of what it's been, kind of a slog to be raising funds, you know, dollar by dollar by dollar, day by day by day, and all the work that that takes. The lineage transmission, next phrase. The lineage transmission and whether it is meaningful to Americans.

[08:43]

Shiho ceremony in Soto Zen. is a tremendous process, a transformative and thorough ritual which is inherently esoteric. And I don't know anyone who's ever been through it who hasn't increased in love and respect for the human spirit, who doesn't have some capacity to appreciate that and communicate this appreciation to others. And this is, to me, one of the rare human treasures and, you know, religious treasures. Although in normal American cultural terms it's a little over the top, it makes no sense, I realize nevertheless it is a workable treasure. And it needs to be preserved. And as far as I can tell, there is a strong commitment in the Soto Zen movement in Japan, in America, and elsewhere to preserve this really powerful transmission ritual.

[09:52]

But, again, it's definitely a lot of work. It's highly labor-intensive, especially if you're a priest who transmits the Dharma to a number of disciples over a lifetime. This is like a very huge undertaking, very labor-intensive. The purpose of Zen practice, the purpose Zen practice and teaching fulfill. So we all have this phrase that we use, I got to get a life. People say, I've got to get a life. What do we mean by got to get a life? We mean you better get a job, a spouse if possible, and a bank account. So, yes, we all got to get a life one way or the other, but I think that we should expand a little bit the concept of what it means to get a life. Maybe we should include that in addition to those things we got to get some real courage for our lives, we got to get some real patience, we got to get some understanding, we got to get some wisdom, we got to get a bigger heart.

[10:59]

maybe we got to get a life ought to include those things too. And I think that's the purpose of Zen practice and not only Zen practice but Buddhist practice and religion in general. And it's got to be real. I was very moved yesterday. I was thinking, you know, I know some of you were there yesterday and I always I always love to hear Ed Brown talk. It always is very moving to me. Ed spoke yesterday in a very moving way about how Zen practice is real. He was looking as a young person for something real, and that's why he went to Zen practice. And I was thinking to myself, I wonder if Ed were speaking today, if he could have said that, and we could have heard him say that, in this room, as opposed to that room over at the city center. It's an interesting, strikes me as an interesting question, which is sort of germane to this whole conversation. Anyway, he did say that, and I think that's what we need. We need a life that feels real to us.

[12:02]

And because what happens, I think, when your life doesn't feel real to you, is you start doing stupid and extreme things. And collectively we have been doing stupid and extreme things for some time now. So I think we should get real. That's my opinion. The best way to offer Dharma. A few months ago or years ago I was on a panel for Buddhadharma magazine about Dharma in the next generation. And I'm thinking of, what's his name? Daigaku, the young man who, is this Daigaku's name? Curtis, Curtis. I was thinking of Curtis's remarks today and also yesterday. This is a panel about dharma in the coming generation for younger people and why I was on that I really don't know. I was the only one on there who was not a young person.

[13:04]

So I mostly listened. It was an interesting conversation. Probably the conversation is online and was published in the magazine. Anyway, in the light of that conversation, I will say, the best way to offer Dharma, the answer to that question is, there is no best way to offer Dharma. There are traditions, there are precepts, rituals, teachings, interpretations, hierarchies, we've all been talking about that. And those are obviously important and necessary to preserve. But I think what it comes down to is, everybody, needs to find his or her own way within that and make use of that stuff in a way that answers the personal karmic need and condition. If you say it's got to be this way or that way because this is the best way and this is the second best way and this is how you have to do it, it's going to really be not going to go that well because people are who they are and they need to be met where they are, not told that this is the only way you can find your heart, your soul, what's real for you.

[14:12]

It's got to be this way and no other way. So there is no best way, I think. And as teachers and leaders, the challenge is to be open, to be curious, to be sensitive, to listen, and to be humble. The last phrase, a vision for the future. I don't have a vision for the future. I have a plan. My plan is to go on as I am, as best I can, for as long as possible, and then wish the others who will go on past me well. Congratulations. Please continue. You have my blessings. So that's my vision for the future. That's my plan. So now it just so happens that I have a poem that I'm going to read for you. that is actually pretty much, I think, even though the other speakers haven't spoken yet, will, I think, sum up everything that has been, all the questions that have been raised in this conference.

[15:21]

So I'll deliver that poem and then I'll be finished. And the poem is called Questions. And keep in mind all these issues of historicity and the past and the present and the future and where we're going and where we've been and what happened and what matters and so on. That's what this poem is about. Why is today not yesterday? Why am I I and you you? Why is here not elsewhere? Why does a period end a sentence and would a sentence end otherwise or would it roll on endlessly? Is it rolling on still? Why does a pond ripple in the wind? Why does a dog bark? Why is music moving? Why born? Why die? Why live another day? Where come from? Where going? Why and what for? Does anything mean anything?

[16:23]

A word? A deed? A life? What is meaning? And who means it? And why? Why do flies suddenly appear from nowhere? And do flies think? How? And about what? About other flies? About food? About sex? Can they be bored? Large trout hovering gracefully facing upstream, waiting. Do they think of a fly? Thinking of a fly? Why does the water oozle twitch? Does it want something? Does it know what or why? Can bacteria, phytoplankton, amoeba, mites want or know or move or intend, speak or see, decide or taste? What does measure measure? Is small smaller than large?

[17:28]

Is large, is larger, is larger, larger than large? Which makes large small by comparison? So large is small and small is large? And what is large, larger than? What could small or large refer to beyond each other? And wouldn't that cancel out all scale? And where would we be without scale? Could we compare anything? And if we can't compare, is there anything? Why are you and I both me to ourselves, though we refer to different people? How is it we don't get mixed up about this? Or are we mixed up about it? But we don't know we are. And if we don't know, are we?

[18:30]

Does this matter? To whom? To you? To me? Which you? Which me? Do numbers exist anywhere? Where? Do things? Does language? What is language? Does it do anything? What? Where does it come from? Why have we got it? Are we the only ones? Is language an organ, like a nose, but without flesh? Without language, does anything ever happen? By chance, by design? Whose design? If design, must there be a designer? What is design? A word? What is a word? Is there anything but design? Is there anything but words?

[19:35]

If there's anything, is there, by that fact, already a design? Already a word? If not, then what? If so, what problems have we solved? What problems have we created? Are there ever no problems? What is a problem? Is everything a problem? Every word? If we define a problem, have we eliminated it? So that knowing a problem is solving it, but not knowing a problem is having a problem. A problem we didn't know we had, other than the problem of our not knowing whether there were a problem. And is that a problem? For whom? For you? For me? For someone? Which someone? Is someone anyone? Is no one? How could there be no one anyway? And why? Anyway. What way would that be?

[20:38]

Everything must be some way. Never any way. If something can't be, Why can't it be said? If it's said, is it being by being said? Like a chicken with lips or a Catholic rabbi? Or a word without letters or sounds? And where does household dirt come from anyway? And where does dead skin go? And who is holding past moments, which appear to be nowhere right now, but have existed before? And where are the past moments kept? And how do we set them free so they can reappear as they once were?

[21:43]

And we could be now as we were then. And would we want that? And how can we say that? And how can we say it's impossible? If the past were released from wherever it's kept, temporarily in its own present, would it interfere with the present moment or prevent it from taking its rightful place in a past that does not yet exist or does exist, vacated temporarily from the past that takes its place in the present, which is now the past. Can we say such things? Can we think them? If so, does this make them so? Or are we just expecting too much? And why does water more or less freeze at 32 degrees Fahrenheit regardless of what nation in the world you're in?

[22:55]

Why not 20 degrees, say, or 70? Can we ask questions? Is someone gonna answer? Who? And how will we know if the answer's correct? And what is correct anyway? If we know what is correct, will we know what is not correct? And what is not? And is it even possible to ask something like that? And if I can't ask about not, can I ask about anything? And if I can ask, what does the question really mean? in German, in Chinese, in Japanese? Would it be the same? Would it be different? What's the difference between same and different?

[24:00]

Is it like large and small? And what is death? Is it the same as life? That is, if we could solve the problem of same or the problem of problem. And why do they call a loom a loom? Why not a spoke? What is the smallest thing possible? Whatever it is, why can't there be something smaller? How much difference is there between a fish eye and my eye? Does a fish see what I see? Do you see what I see? And who are you anyway? And who am I? And why am I I and you you?

[25:02]

And why is today not yesterday? And when today becomes yesterday, what happened? Thank you. Hi, Karen. Our second speaker is Victor Sogan-Horty. He is Associate Professor of Japanese Religion at McGill University. He received his PhD in 1976 from Stanford University. He's the author of Zen Sand, the Book of Capping Phrases for Zen Koan Practice. His research interests are Zen Buddhism, Buddhism in the West, the Kyoto School of Philosophy, and comparative ethics.

[26:06]

Dr. Hori ordained as a Buddhist priest in 1976 at Yoko Inn, a sub-temple of Daitoku-ji in Kyoto. Hello. Thank you. Thank you, Carl. I'd like to thank the organizers of this conference, especially the San Francisco Zen Center for inviting me. I don't have any formal connection with the San Francisco Zen Center, so I guess I'm supposed to be the outsider here. I have to say that I've been treated very nicely, and that surprises me. If you go to an academic conference, people ignore you. They stare at your name card, trying to figure out where you came from, but they studiously ignore interacting with you.

[27:11]

At the San Francisco Zen Center, people bow to you and talk to you. How unusual. Okay. I have a presentation on transmitting Dharma in America. I first made this presentation for an event at the University of Syracuse several months ago. I had a much longer period of time in which to deliver it, so I have a lot of information here which I will not be able to go into in detail. I'm going to skim through it fairly quickly in order to get through this in about 20 or 25 minutes. This talk has two parts. Part one deals with Dharma transmission in Asia and is basically a summary of recent academic research on the concept of Dharma transmission. This research aims at, number one, describing, identifying the elements of the theory of dharma transmission, and it tries to explain why this set of ideas, dharma transmission, came into being what function it serves.

[28:15]

I'm not presenting anything new here. This is just a summary of recent research. Part two will deal with Dharma transmission in America. And here I have some lineage charts to show you that illustrate how the Dharma is being transmitted through the various different Zen schools in North America. This is still incomplete research. The notion of Dharma transmission starts here with this incident. The world under one holds up a flower. This incident is taken up as a koan in the collection Mumonkan. It's case six. And some of you, most of you I'm sure are familiar with the background story. One day Shakyamuni Buddha sat down to give his usual lecture. He was immediately surrounded by his disciples. Instead of giving a lecture, Śakamuni Buddha held up a flower and he sat in silence. The disciples looked at each other in confusion, not understanding what was going on. Only Mahākāśapa, the first disciple of Śakamuni, smiled.

[29:19]

Because Śakamuni Buddha saw Mahākāśapa smile, he said to him, I have the all-pervading true dharma, incomparable nirvana, the exquisite teaching of formless form. It does not rely on letters and is transmitted outside scripture. I now give it to Mahakasyapa." This is the first dharma transmission. From this you see why we have the vocabulary that we do for describing Dharma transmission. First of all, we have some terms for Dharma transmission itself. Shiho and Denpo. Shiho is used more in Soto, Denpo in Rinzai. At least that's my impression. The Dharma itself cannot be described in words, cannot be expressed in words. It is beyond language. And because of that, it is said to be a separate transmission outside teachings. Because it cannot be explained to you in words, you cannot understand it cognitively, rationally, the transmission must therefore be mind-to-mind, Isin Denshin. This transmission turns out to be merely one link in a vast chain of transmissions.

[30:28]

All of you people who are at the San Francisco Zen Center are familiar with this sutra, the Teidai Tenpo Bussanomyogo, the names of the ancestor Buddhas who transmitted the Dharma across the generations. In this list, you see that Shakyamuni Buddha, who transmitted the Dharma of Mahakasyapa, is the seventh link in the list of Dharma transmissions. The first transmissions started with the six Buddhas in the past, Vibhashi Buddha, Shikhi Buddha, Bhishapu Buddha, Kurasong Buddha, until the transmission came to Shakyamuni Buddha. Shakyamuni Buddha in our lifetime. And then Shakyamuni Buddha, in the Indian transmission, transmitted the Dharma through 28 generations until it came down to Bodhidharma. And then Bodhidharma brought the Dharma to China. And through the Chinese Buddha ancestors, he transmitted the Dharma to Kido Chigusenji.

[31:36]

These are all Japanese pronunciations. Oh, incidentally, because I was presenting to the University of Syracuse, there are many people in the audience who are from the New York Zen, the Shoboji, or related affiliates. And so the Teidai Denpo, the lineage of Buddhist transmission here I'm using, is the one that leads to Shoboji. There would be a different one if I were dealing with the San Francisco Zen Center here. In the Japanese transmission, the transmission starts with Nampa Jomyo Zenji, Let's see. Nampo Jomyo Zenji, who transmits to his disciple Shuho Myocho. And this finally comes down to Genpo Giyu Zenji, who is Yamamoto Genpo Roshi. Some of you may know the name. And his disciple, Soen Genju Zenji. That's Nakagawa Soen. And the next name that would be here would be Edo Shimano Roshi, who is the present Roshi of Shoboji, the New York Zendo.

[32:40]

This transmission, this line, the Japanese line, is often referred to as the Ōtōkan line. The Ōtōkan comes from the names of the first three patriarchs in this lineage, Nanpo Jōmyō, Shuho Myōchō, and Kanzan Eigen. Nampo-jo-myo received an honorific title from the emperor, Dai-o-kokushi. Shu-ho-myo-cho also received an imperial title, Dai-to-kokushi. And the o from Dai-o, the to from Dai-to, and the kan from Kanzan have been combined together to give you the o-to-kan line. Sometimes this line is referred to as the Oto-Kam-Paku line because the name Hakuin is inserted in there. Haku gets pronounced Paku, Oto-Kam-Paku line. Let's just pass on this, we can't talk about this. Where did the idea of Dharma transmission come from and what function does it serve? Let's, let me make this, and I'll repeat the statement.

[33:43]

Dharma transmission is not part of original Buddhism. Let me repeat that statement. Dharma transmission is not part of original Buddhism. That's an important statement. Dharma transmission is not a part of original Buddhism. In the Mahāparinibbāna-sutta, the last days of the Buddha, we have a very different story presented here. A monk asked Shakyamuni, who was very weak and in the last days of his life, he asked Shakyamuni Buddha, who is going to lead the Sangha after you die? Who is going to be our leader? And the Blessed One answered him saying, I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine. Whosoever may think that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus or that the community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give last instructions respecting them. But Ananda, the Tathagata, that is to say the Buddha, that is to say I,

[34:46]

The Tathagata has no such idea that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus or that the community depends upon him. So what instructions should he have to give respecting the community of bhikkhus? Therefore, Ananda, be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourself, seeking no external refuge with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge seeking no other refuge. Where does Ancestor Ritual, sorry, where does Dharma Transmission come from? Well, it's pretty much agreed now upon scholars that it comes from Ancestor Ritual, Ancestor Worship imposed upon Buddhism. Shakyamuni Buddha is treated as if he's the first ancestor in a distinguished family. And all his descendants are the heads of the household in succeeding generations. This family structure, this template, is imposed upon Buddhism. In the 4th century, Dao even went so far as to suggest that Buddhist monks should have a surname.

[35:48]

The surname is Sher. This character Sher is the first character of Sher-ja-mo-ni, the Chinese pronunciation of Shaka-mo-ni. This shows you quite clearly the family template that is being imposed upon the Buddhist Sangha here. In ancestor worship, the virtue of the first ancestor is always supposed to be transmitted to the later generations. So if the first ancestor of your family was a great warrior, then succeeding generations were also expected to be a great warrior. If the first ancestor was a great scholar, then succeeding generations were also expected to be great scholars. And if the first ancestor is Shakyamuni Buddha with the mind of enlightenment, then succeeding generations are also supposed to transmit the mind of enlightenment. Ancestor ritual, family relations, filial piety, elder brother, younger brother, finding an heir, all the ritual apparatus of ancestor worship was imposed upon Zen. Why?

[36:50]

Because, number one, it gave the Zen clan, the Zen sect an identity. Number one, an identity. It also gave them legitimacy. By claiming to be directly descended from Shakyamuni Buddha, the Zen sect could say, we are genuine Buddhism. In the case of the individual monk, each individual monk established his own identity and legitimacy by showing his place in the lineage chart. If you couldn't point to your own place in the lineage chart, then you didn't have a Buddhist identity and you didn't have legitimacy. Let's move on. I can't talk about this. Finding an heir. The first obligation of any head of household was to find someone to carry on the household in the next generation. This too had its Buddhist counterpart. In the Rinzai Roku you find this statement, one whose insight is the same as his teacher's lacks half of his teacher's power.

[37:54]

Only one whose insight surpasses his teacher's is worthy to be his heir. From a statement like this you get the impression that transmission of Zen maintained the quality of the first enlightenment. I've heard this image used. Dharma transmission from one generation to the next generation is like taking a glass of water and pouring it into a second glass without losing a drop. That's the image. However, in Chinese culture in general, Success transmission in a family was usually thought to be degeneration, gradual corruption. A family's wealth does not last three generations is an extremely common Chinese proverb. Chinese histories are organized as if they're dynasties, organized according to dynasties, the Xia dynasty, Zhou dynasty, Han dynasty, Tang dynasty. In the story, the official history of these dynasties is that the dynasty begins with a virtuous founder, a great hero, and that every generation after that is slightly less virtuous, slightly less virtuous and more degenerate, slightly more degenerate and more corrupt, until finally

[39:09]

The dynasty comes to an end with the last emperor who is so corrupt that a great virtuous hero rises up and overthrows the throne. And then the story starts over again. This picture of the degeneracy of transmission is behind this Zen saying, ikko hanko. A Zen master, wanting to pass on his dharma to his disciples, looks over his disciples and sees only nitwits and numbskulls. And he despairs. Give me only one good monk, even half a monk, and I will be satisfied. I can transmit my dharma and die in peace. One! A half! Okay, there are three things that I want to talk about, and they could get confused together. One of the things I want to do is keep these separate. There's two kinds of transmission that are usually referred to as transmission of the Dharma, and then there's also passing on the temple, and these three things get tied together.

[40:14]

I'm using some research here from Morton Schluter, and he tells us that in the Song period, Dharma transmission was sometimes used to refer only to ordination. When a person becomes a monk or a nun, he leaves, she leaves the blood family and enters into the Sangha. That's ordination. When you do that, you enter into a new family, sometimes referred to as the Tonsure family. Tonsure is shaving the head, so Tonsure family is the family you enter into when you get ordained. The monk, the priest who gives you ordination is your father in the Tantra family. All monks have to do this. Every monk has to do this because that is the ceremony by which they become monks. At ordination, you get an ordination certificate that proves that you are a legitimate monk. And on that ordination certificate is the name of your Tantra father. However, of the hundreds, thousands of monks

[41:18]

there are only a very small number who, through their training, practice, and attachment to a great teacher, finally achieve full awakening, achieve the marvelous mind of nirvana. And when that happens, then that monk gets recognized by his teacher. His teacher is himself a person who is recognized as having awakened mind. When that monk gets recognized by his teacher, then he joins another family. This is his Dharma transmission family, let's call it that. This clearly involves only an elite of the hundreds, thousands of people who become monks and nuns, only a small, small number will attain full awakening. And in that case too, they get a Dharma inheritance certificate. Let's just pass over this. Now, these two kinds of Dharma transmission are confused together when it comes to succession and who takes over the temple.

[42:30]

In the Song Dynasty and later, there were both private temples and public monasteries. In the private temples, when the old abbot died, passed on to his ordination disciple. That is to say, the temple remained in the hands of the ordination family. but ordination family. So these two things are tied together extremely closely. Ordination succession and ownership of the temple. If you think that this is history, take this into account. This is pretty much the situation as it happens in Soto Zen today. Griff Fulk, a scholar who has studied these issues, tells us, the usual practice is for a Soto monk to be given Dharma transmission by the priest who ordained him, in most cases his own father, after he returns from his minimum period of monastery training. Because Dharma transmission is a prerequisite to becoming the head priest of a Soto branch temple, virtually all Soto priests meet this ritual requirement at a relatively early stage in their careers.

[43:36]

That's what happens in the case of private temples. But in the case of the large public monasteries, just because they're public, all kinds of officials had a say in who became the next abbot. So they do a search. They do a search for somebody who teaches the Dharma. He's an excellent teacher of the Dharma. Somebody who's also educated, can read and write. Because only the elite can read and write, this abbot is somebody who must have been raised in an elite family. In addition, this person is supposed to have great administrative skills. Public monasteries, sometimes huge parcels of land containing whole villages. Sometimes these temples, monasteries, carried on businesses. So a person who was head of a public monastery needed to be able to have those kinds of management skills. The abbot of a public monastery also had to have good political instincts, knew how to schmooze with government officials in order to forward the agenda of the public monastery. And again, if you think that this is just history, let me tell you an interesting story.

[44:40]

At Syracuse University, when I was giving this talk, I was talking about the qualities required of the abbot of a public monastery. And as I was talking, somebody blurted out Richard Baker. These three points I want to make. Keep distinguished ordination lineage, enlightenment lineage, and the inheritance of a temple. Okay, I can't go into this. Let's talk about Dharma transmission in America. We all know this. I'm going to skip over this very clearly. The first generation of Japanese Zen teachers who came to the West, Nyogen Senzaki, Sokeian Sazaki, Taizan Maezumi, Shunryu Suzuki, Joshu Sazaki, and Shimano Eido. And arguably, the name D.T. Suzuki should be in this list, which shows you that if your name is Suzuki or Sazaki, you must be a great Zen master.

[45:41]

The first generation of Western teachers included Philip Kaplow, Jew Kenneth, Robert Aitken. Jew Kenneth is not mentioned here, but she's an important figure in the history of Zen coming to the West. And you know all these people, no explanation is necessary. Can you explain who was the first who was denied translation? I'll talk about that. Here's a short history of the San Francisco Zen Center. You all know this, so this doesn't need any kind of explanation. Here's the Suzuki Shunryu lineage. I have lineage charts for most of the Zen lines in North America, and this is extremely interesting. This is extremely interesting for several different reasons. Number one, the sheer number of successors in the Suzuki Shinryu lineage, and all these lineages. Incidentally, would somebody keep track of the numbers here? I have these different lineages with the successors, and I haven't totaled it up, and I would like to know what the total is.

[46:45]

This one has 47 successors in two lines. There's a Richard Baker line. And then there's a Suzuki Hoitsu line. And these lines indicate lines of dharma transmission. You might ask yourself, what kind of dharma transmission are we talking about in these two lines? I've already been told that Richard Baker, this chart is incorrect. Richard Baker has another lineage successor, maybe two or three or four. Yeah, OK. I've been working at this chart for quite a while. I made additions yesterday. And nevertheless, I know I'm still out of date. This is one of those little projects where it's hard to get a hold of complete factual information. OK. Number one, the sheer number of successors is an important part of what we're trying to study here, the two lines of succession.

[47:49]

the fact that there are several generations of successors already. It's not just one generation of successors. We now have two, and in some other cases, three and four. Here's the Philip Kaplow lineage, and there are 12 successors in it. You'll notice that there isn't a line between Yasutani Hakun and Philip Kaplow, and that's because, as we all know, Yasutani Roshi refused to give Dharma transmission to Philip Kaplow. That didn't stop Philip Kaplow, though. Even though Philip Kaplow said that he was not a Roshi, nevertheless, people treated him as if he were a Roshi, and he acted as if he were a Roshi. Even though he himself had never received transmission of the Dharma, he transmitted the Dharma. He transmitted the Dharma to his disciples. The main one in this case is Boden Kohit. who is now the head of the Rochester Zen Center. Bowdoin himself has transmitted the Dharma to further disciples. Now, as you know, because Philip Keppel never completed the Koan curriculum with Yasutani Hakun, he was not able to teach a complete Koan curriculum to his own students, such as Bowdoin.

[49:02]

And Bowdoin is quite aware of this deficiency in his Dharma track record. And so what he has done, sorry, Why does this keep moving? And so what he has done is that, number one, he has transmitted the Dharma to a couple of his students who have gone on to work with people in the Aitken lineage. And in the Aitken lineage, these disciples have completed the koans, which they could not do with Bowdoin or with Philip Kaplow. And then they have come back to the Rochester Zen Center, and Bowdoin Kohit has done koans with his own disciples so that he can complete. He can claim to have completed the entire koan curriculum. So the koan curriculum that Bowdoin Kohit teaches these days is combined Kaplow and Aitken lineage coin curriculum. Very interesting. The Kaplow lineage is also noteworthy because Tony Packer, who was Kaplow's lead student, walked out on him and set up her own dharma center.

[50:10]

Albert Low, an important disciple, also went independent in 1986. So refusing to transmit the dharma is part of the dharma that's being transmitted in this particular Zen center. And there's a similar kind of problem here with Richard Clarke who claims that Kaplow gave him transmission, but Kaplow says that he didn't give him transmission. Here's the Mayazumi lineage. When Mayazumi Roshi died in 1995, he left behind 12 direct disciples. In the 14 years since he died, The disciples themselves have transmitted the Dharma to their own disciples so that there is a total of 88 transmissions in this line in 14 years. All of these people are supposed to be valid lineage holders, Zen masters.

[51:14]

The most prolific person is Bernard Glassman, who has 45 successors. These 45 successors include more than one generation so that there's a successor of a successor and I think in one case a successor of a successor of a successor. Most of the disciples of Maezumi have formed an organization called the White Plum Asanga. And the White Plum Asanga is, shall we say, a kind of official body. It's not an accrediting body, but it's an official body that speaks on behalf of these disciples. But some people in the lineage do not want to belong to the White Plum Asanga, so they maintain their independence. Nevertheless, they still are, sorry, nevertheless, they still are legitimate members of the Maezumi lineage. Don't do that. Okay. Again, this is one of those places where I'm not sure of my figures. I've been trying to collect data, but it's not possible to get the full story of all these lineages, and I'm quite prepared to admit that there may be more than 88 transmissions.

[52:22]

Here's the Joshu Sazaki lineage zero. Sazaki Joshu is 102 years old and is the oldest teaching roshi in the world. He is continually giving seshin and sanzen, and you would expect a man who has devoted so many years of his life, so much of every year to teaching Zen that he would have an army of Dharma successors. He has not one. He has refused to name even one person as a Dharma successor. However, he has many, many senior students, and these senior students he names as Osho. and the Osho goes off and becomes the leader of a Zen center in some other part of the country. The Osho have formed an Osho Council, but that is the most effort that you can see in the development of any notion of Dharma successorship. Sezaki Joshu is 102 years old, and nobody would be surprised to find out if he died today.

[53:28]

But if he dies today, then it's completely unclear who succeeds him. Here's the Edo Shimano lineage. Right at this point, there are six successors. Soen Nakagawa is the person who gave Dharma transmission to Edo Roshi. And then over the years, since 1972 to now, he has named only five successors, and one of them has named successor to successor. I'm still working on this. This is the Katagiri lineage. And again, when Katagiri died in 1990, he left behind 12 disciples. You will notice that his 12 disciples, most of them received the Dharma in 1989. It looks like Katagiri Roshi... Yes. It looks like the motivation was he knew that he was dying and so needed to pass on the Dharma before his death.

[54:36]

And then his, sorry, and then his disciples have been naming their own successors. One obvious gap here is I don't have a chart of the Aitken lineage that's coming up. Please come back next year. We'll do this again. Okay. There are new developments, things that you haven't heard of, for example, in the Japanese case. There are now organizations that have a Dharma Transmission Committee. It's not clear to me what this Dharma Transmission Committee is, but it seems to me that part of it talks about what should be taught to Dharma successors and what ought to be the standards for Dharma transmission. There's now talk about priest training and teacher training courses, I think, to answer the same kind of question. And there are informal or formal organizations, like the Soto Zen Buddhist Association, in which leaders of different Zen centers can come together to talk about their mutual problems.

[55:41]

Okay, sorry, I'll finish up. Three questions. Is there too much Dharma transmission in America? What do these terms mean? Sensei, teacher, Roshi, Dharma successor, lineage holder, Inca, and what is it that gets transmitted? And finally, is Dharma transmission necessary? I leave you with this verse. The wild geese do not intend to leave any trace. The water has no mind to absorb their image. If you are thinking, I am going to transmit my dharma to you, you are not transmitting dharma. Similarly, if you are the recipient, I am about to receive my master's dharma, that's not receiving the master's dharma. Thank you. Perhaps we can try to squeeze in one more and then take a break if that's... I'm sure.

[56:47]

Okay. I anticipated this moment. Okay. Well, we all know the Richmond we saw him yesterday. Go for it, Luke. Well, first of all, I want to compliment my colleague, Victor, for getting through all that material in the time that you did. That was rather heroic. So I prepared rather short remarks, and I'm going to keep it short. That's OK. As I say to Carl, I anticipated this moment. I noticed that since I noticed that my name Our Linux chart had a question mark. I'll fill that in for you right now. I actually wrote out my remarks, which is a little unusual for me, so I'm going to read them. But of course, I cannot help but elaborate. So I started out by saying I'm speaking today as a Zen teacher who's been teaching off and on in various venues and contexts for 30 years.

[57:54]

One of those contexts was the San Francisco Zen Center. And to your chart, I was offered dharma transmission by Richard Baker in 1983, and I refused. I received dharma transmission in 2002 from Mel Weitzman. So I'm a refusenik. You can add me in. I currently lead a small sangha in Mill Valley called the Vimala Sangha, which is named after Vimalakirti, the householder Buddha of sutra and legend. As Norman said, I told Norman last night, I'm just going to answer the questions, and so I'm going to do what he did, but they're going to be my answers. Challenges. Some of the challenges facing Zen teachers are common to all three meditation traditions in America, Zen, Vajrayana, and Vipassana. I'd like to share some of both.

[58:55]

In terms of common problems, reaching the younger generation is a major one and one that all Dharma teachers I talk to are thinking about. Most Dharma centers are filled with gray-haired, aging baby boomers with a smattering of younger people. This is not true. There are a few younger centers now, but this is more normative. I have a theory that there are two times in the human life cycle when a person is most open to the Dharma. during post-adolescent angst when the young person asks, who am I? What am I going to do? What is this all about? And then in what used to be called midlife crisis in the 40s or 50s when those same questions arise in the context of aging. I think the 60s counterculture, as Jeff and Grace discussed this morning, are we doing OK with the feedback here? Further away?

[59:59]

Oh, I see. Closer. All right. I think the 60s counterculture was a society-wide example of the first kind of dharma. Gage and many of those same baby boomers are still with us, still asking the same questions they asked 30 or 40 years ago. The young people are there, and some in larger centers like Spirit Rock, Green Gulch, And some of the forward-looking Vajrayana centers are definitely attracting younger people, but perhaps not for the same reasons and not in the same numbers as in the 60s. So how can the traditional teachings speak to the questions that this generation of young people are asking? This generation is not interested in dropping out, for the most part, or living an alternative religious lifestyle. They are interested, I think, in engagement in world problems, in livelihood and survival, actually, economic survival, to the point this morning. So that is a major challenge. Lineage.

[61:03]

I want to insert some remarks about the mothership image. I personally do not think of Japan as the mothership. It is my teacher, Suzuki Roshi, ordained me as a Soto priest, and I certainly think of Japan as a very important source of authenticity and practice forms. But I don't think that it's the mothership of Zen, because Zen was not invented there. Zen is all over Asia. There's Korean Zen, there's Vietnamese Zen, there's Chinese Zen. And to your point about the first transmission, you could say there's Shakyamuni Zen even. So my own bias, you might say, or my own ecumenical position is that the mothership is Buddha mind itself.

[62:09]

and we receive authentic teachings wherever they might be found. Speaking very personally, when I first met Thich Nhat Hanh, a Vietnamese monk with a Zen lineage, but also because Vietnam has a Theravada or Southeast Asian lineage, there's a fusion there, I felt I had met somebody from the mother ship, and that was a big influence on me. And since that time, I have made it my practice and my continued training to investigate as thoroughly as I can the teachings of all three of these traditions. And I've had strong collegial relationships and really teachers in Vajrayana and Vipassana as well as Zen. So as far as lineage is concerned, I'm not at all sure that lineage transmission is as important to the next generation of practitioners, as is teaching that actually has relevance to their concerns and teachers who seem to know something about the real world and its challenges.

[63:21]

In terms of lineage transmission, I think that it's instructive what's happening in these three traditions. In the Vipassana tradition, Vipassana, as Victor said, really doesn't have transmission in the way that we think of in Zen. But when Norman talked about transmission or Victor as the she-host ceremony, I chose to take this question as more like a living teacher and the authentic conveyance of actual dharma directly in an intimate connection with a teacher, with a mature, authentic teacher. That's what I think of. And the Vajrayana lineage There are many Vajrayana lineages, but in America, Vajrayana is still pretty much the preserve of Tibetan teachers. There aren't that many Westerners who've been fully empowered, very few really. So in looking at that whole American landscape and all the different lineages, I also think that our story in Zen is rather different than the story of

[64:36]

The other two in the Vipassana. Vipassana is similar to Zen in that the founders that Victor put up on the board there are mostly long gone. And I was interested to hear from Jeff this morning that there have continued to be teachers from Japan coming here. But by and large, I think that if you look at that chart, most of us in Zen are on our own. as Western teachers, we're not overwhelmed as the Tibetan scene is with a complete plethora of really the whole culture and all that goes with it, with the Tibetan lamas and Rinpoches. We also don't have a rock star like the Dalai Lama either, which is actually pretty important, I mean, for the culture. It hasn't been mentioned yet, but the Dalai Lama is Buddhism for an awful lot of people. all over the world, and particularly here. He speaks for Buddhism in a way that really nobody else does. Maybe Thich Nhat Hanh to some extent, but not nearly as much. Just one note that I made with respect to money.

[65:46]

I commented to Jeff at lunch, and Jeff confirmed this. that a lot of Dogen's activity that we think of as extremely profound, like writing fascicles for the Shobo Genzo, had a strong fundraising component. Many of those essays in the Shobo Genzo were written as letters to Daimyo, who had the capacity to give him land, money, and property. And Jeff also said something, and maybe you want to speak later. He was very definitive. He said, there's one factor that determines whether a religious movement succeeds or fails, and that's whether it can attract patrons. That's just how it is. So sad or not sad, without patrons, without money, without resources, we don't survive. Oh, I want to read this sentence here. I stopped reading. In spite of all that I've said, I actually think that lineage transmission, in whatever form it comes, is a treasure because it acknowledges the importance of oral teaching and intimate relationship of teacher and student.

[66:58]

In other words, you can't get everything you need from books. I don't think there will ever be an online transmission. I very seriously doubt it. Sustainability. As a movement, by any measure, in my view, Zen is running somewhat third behind Vipassana and Vajrayana, both in number of centers, number of adherents and members, and possibly integration into the mainstream culture. I'm sure many of you would argue with me about this. Just allow me to make the point. Zen was the it girl in the 50s and 60s. We were the only game going and we had all the marbles. It's not that way anymore. I'd say if anybody has the marbles right now, it's the Vajrayana. They have their superstar. They have really many, many teachers who are very eminent, extremely well trained and have big centers. I don't know if that's really the true measure of how we're doing. I'm just saying that this seems to be how it is. And also Vipassana has, Gil can say, but you know,

[68:02]

over 100 centers, not just in America, but around the world, coming out of that movement. It seems to me that, and Daigaku, you visited 80 centers, I think most of them are pretty small. He's nodding, they are. On the other hand, and this has been well plumbed already this morning, Zen is a brand. Maybe Richard is right, because it starts with a Z and it's short. Zen, Zen, Zen. This goes back a long way, I think even to the 30s, certainly to the 50s. Jack Kerouac on the road, Zen beats Zen, square Zen, whatever. Zen flesh, Zen bones. Zen is part of the regular vocabulary and it really is amazing, but they're now talking about our president as the first Zen master president, whatever that means. I think it means that he's cool. I mean, like, he doesn't get excited. So if that's what Zen is, the culture implicitly understands it.

[69:05]

I mean, it's on mainstream media. Brian Williams, I think, said it, or somebody like that. So we definitely got an extremely strong penetration brand-wise. What's behind it, I really am not sure. I think Zen has fallen behind for a couple of reasons. First, this is obvious, the practice is fairly demanding and isn't easy to do if you have a job and family, though in our household or sangha, we try. Even in Japan, Pure Land practice of Nembutsu is a lot more popular than Zen for the same reason. Second, Zen is what you might call a low-technology practice. We have really one primary practice. In contrast, Vajrayana has hundreds of practices, and Vipassana has a well-worked-out curriculum of mindfulness meditations and metta. The third, and this is my particular drum that I beat, I really think that we have a deficit in the Zen that we've gotten in comparison to the other traditions because in two areas, I think that there's a real deficit of the divine feminine in Zen with the associated practices that go with that, which I would say would be meta, practice of friendliness and loving kindness, the actual practice

[70:23]

and prayer of compassion, which is very strong in the Vipassana tradition, and extremely strong in Vajrayana. I mean, Vajrayana does have Dzogchen Mahamudra, which is very similar to Zen, but it's integrated very strongly with compassion visualizations, prayers, constant prayers for the well-being, sending and receiving, using the breath to radiate compassion and breathe in suffering, which is a very popular yoga of compassion. I just look at all of that, and I've studied all of that, and I think, you know, we need that. I'm casting the net wider than just the issue of women. I'm talking about something wider than that. I think that in the present day Buddhist scene that makes us seem, I think to a lot of people, a little narrow. The fourth deficit, which depends, I mean some people are very well trained, is I think one of the reasons the Tibetan Lamas are so formidable is they are really well trained.

[71:30]

I mean they not only have read the whole Tripitaka, all the commentaries, lots of Majamaka, lots of Yogacara, lots of Tantra. They memorize stuff. They're tested. They have a rigorous doctoral program. The Dalai Lama said that somebody asked him, what was the most frightening thing in your whole life? And he said, passing my Geshe exam. You know, he may be the Dalai Lama, but he still had to pass the tests. They're really well trained. They know their Buddhism. And I think that, I say here in my remarks, maybe we still believe a little too much in a special transmission outside the scriptures. There's also a transmission inside the scriptures that we maybe need to know more about. As for vision, I'm winding up, Carl. Finally, as for Suzuki Roshi's vision, I'm not at all sure that his vision was a Zen vision in a sectarian sense. He often said that he wasn't really teaching Zen, and certainly not the Soto Zen sect of Japan, but original Buddhism, or what Steve has referred to as the original undivided teaching of the Buddha.

[72:31]

So in that sense, his vision has already succeeded, I think. Buddhism is everywhere in the culture, has penetrated particularly in the areas that have been mentioned earlier by Jeff and others, death and dying and hospice, which I think Zen has been very strong in. pain management, Jon Kabat-Zinn and the medical model of using mindfulness. The therapeutic community has integrated Buddhism a lot and really informs, and a lot of therapists have become Buddhist teachers. And also stress reduction. You can read about Buddhist mindfulness practices on the airplane. Some of the airlines actually have sections where you can do some stress reduction yoga as the plane takes off. So whether that is the kind of penetration Suzuki Roshi had in mind, I don't know. But every time Buddhism enters a new culture, it finds new hooks. Finally, I end on a light note. I remember reading, I think it was in one of Holmes Welch's books, that when Indian monks first brought Buddhism to the Chinese aristocracy, the aristocrats already had Confucianism.

[73:36]

They had Taoism. They had Chinese culture. And the name for China is the middle of the world, center of the world. That's what China called itself. They weren't all that impressed until the Indian monks confided that Buddhist practice would allow them to fly. And they liked that. Thank you. I suggest we take a few minutes break before we hear the final. 15 seconds.

[74:17]

@Text_v004
@Score_JJ