Sunday, November 4, 2012

on not-learning the precepts

.
Looking back, I can say that one of the parts of Zen Buddhist training I am most grateful for is this: In all of the years when I was busy being 'determined' about practice, I cannot remember a single time that anyone mentioned the precepts in a formal setting. Not once. And if there was any mention of "enlightenment," I don't remember that either.

The precepts in Zen Buddhism are pretty much what the Ten Commandments are in Christianity: Don't kill, don't steal, don't lie, don't abuse sexual relationships, etc. There are more and fewer precepts for monks and laymen respectively, but basically they boil down to the ethical behavior that might be encouraged outside a spiritual setting.

As I look around me today, I can see/hear people encouraging their children or others to act ethically, perhaps in a Christian mode. Ethics are better than a lack of ethics, so the encouragement is warranted in a social sense.

But no one ever said that to me in Zen Buddhism and I am grateful.

Why? Because with attentive practice, the precepts grow up without any assistance or insistence whatsoever. It turns out that ethical behavior is not encouraged because it is 'good,' but rather because it simply works better and is more conducive to a peaceful life... or anyway, that's my take.

I'm grateful no one ever told me that.
.

4 comments:

  1. I do agree with you that there is a symbiotic relationship between practice and ethical behavior, at least in my life.

    That's why I am so fascinated with certain Zen teachers and the road to hell they create for themselves and others. What happened?

    I honestly believe that there is some kind of personality flaw that leads people to want to become teachers to begin with. I think this is a person who craves attention, enjoys a certain amount of power over people, and actually likes being "worshipped" on some level. I've had 4 different Zen teachers in the NYC area, and all 4 have these issues.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dear "Anonymous" -- I don't know how to address the broader issue you bring up. I do know that when I asked my teacher how he felt about students who came to him, he said, approximately, "I teach them for zazen. That's all."

    "For zazen" to me means teaching what will help the student be clear in his or her own life ... so that s/he too can 'teach' others. It does not mean teaching something called "Zen Buddhism."

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sounds like you had a decent teacher.

    Well, I guess I just had some bad luck. My last teacher was Shimano, so you have to realize where I am coming from.

    Two others were Maezumi people, so I they have there own issues, trust me.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous,
    I am sympathetic to your statement about the "personality flaw" among Zen teachers. I am researching the subject with a view to publishing something for a wider audience and would be very interested to know more about your own experience and observations if you would care to share them with me. I can be reached at patricia.i.ivanATgmail.com

    Genkaku,
    I appreciate your blog very much and share many of your opinions, including the one you express above about ethics. My first mentor (Robert Misrahi, a French philosopher) used to make a distinction between ethics as a way of life and morality as following dogma or precepts. One cannot become ethical by being "good"!

    ReplyDelete