lindama wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 18, 2019 5:04 am
clyde wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 18, 2019 3:38 am
desert_woodworker wrote: ↑
Mon Feb 18, 2019 1:31 am
I don't think there should be such a topic or thread here. It's all covered elsewhere ad infinitum
, and ad nauseum
Joe; As I said in my original OP and follow-up post, this topic is about the general principle for handling such matters, not any particular event/teacher.
If your (general) point is “Let's let dead dogs lie”; i.e., there should be some time limit on controversies, then how do you propose it should work?
But your post seems to be about John Tarrant Roshi. Please, for another example, look at the Edward Espe Brown topic (https://www.zen1.space/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=573
). I initiated the topic with some background on Ed and a link to my favorite Ed talk, but the very next post was from Linda about a recent minor controversy, a controversy I was aware of. Should I have not posted about Ed? Should I have deleted Linda’s post about the controversy (or your subsequent post)?
Re-read what Linda wrote about the event and making it known. Does any of this make you think differently about the general principle of allowing facts to stand or about how to handle the John Tarrant Roshi matter?
to be clear, I posted in defense of Ed Brown.... it was all over the internet. It was not some minor conflict, he was barred unjustly by any standard. People who were close said it was politics. Somebody didn't like what he said in public. I regret doing it now that it is being conflated with the current situation. I mistakenly thought that I could neutralize gossip and judgement. Perhaps you should have deleted it.
I agree with Joe and was relieved that he provided an articulate response. Asking for general principles has not been fruitful or necessary. It's also not fruitful to ask what kind of time limits there should be to let sleeping dogs lie. It is nothing short of ridiculous in my mind. Is this The Scarlet Letter? A discussion about koans went south. It seemed to be aimed at discrediting and dismissing a body of koan work based on dead dogs.. Let's get real, this is over 20 years old, no one is going to be saved, tipped off or otherwise escape some potential danger. Generalizing the question and thus the answer just won't work.
Joe is right: muckraking. As I said, there is a 20 year gap that no one is acknowledging. No one is in harms way, here or there. This is far from a white wash. In all the 3-4 years of Eido discussion on ZFI, nothing was accomplished except perhaps people worked through their own emotional turmoil.
I'd suggest you are responsible for this decision. We have made ourselves clear. As we have seen with forms, rules don't cut it in this situation. do not look to rules on this one. Controversial teachers have already been banned from this forum. Dosho Port just published an article in Patheos on Kensho/Makyo today. I'd say the title is only a hint of what he has to say relative to just sitting, awakening, makyo and koans. I couldn't help but think it explained where Jundo was coming from.
As I said first thing, if I have learned one thing, there is nothing to hold on to. That is the practice. It is key to understanding koans as more than riddles. It is key to finding peace in this dangerous world we live in.
Thank you Clyde for being the lightening rod on this. Mama said there'd be days like this.
[I drafted this last night, but make it a practice not to post late at night. Obviously there’s more to consider this morning, but I’m posting this to show my thinking . . . as of last night.]
Linda; Yes, you were clear in your posts about Ed that you were defending him (and I agreed with you). My point was that the controversy was raised, members wrote a few posts about it . . . and it was over. And look at the John Tarrant Roshi topic. Members wrote a few posts about it, including noting that is was “old news” (20 years) . . . and it was over.
My question about time limits was ridiculous. It was meant to show that public facts, including uncomfortable facts, remain facts. We change over time, but “I am the owner of my actions, heir of my actions, . . .”
I vaguely remember the Eido Shimano topic at ZFI, but I agree with your characterization that “In all the 3-4 years of Eido discussion on ZFI, nothing was accomplished except perhaps people worked through their own emotional turmoil
.” (emphasis added) Actually, that’s an accomplishment. Personally, I appreciated having the links to publicly available source materials, so I could be as informed as I wanted to be; but I don’t remember having much to add to any discussion.
It’s here, this topic, where I asked for members views on “What to do about Zen teachers and controversial behavior”, where all the ‘heat’ is.
Yes, I’m responsible for the decision. Yes, you and others have made yourselves clear. I’m inclined to let the posts in both Ed’s and John’s topics stand. And because “rules don't cut it in this situation,” I’m open to further discussion and reconsideration, now or whenever.
p.s: I read Dosho Port’s article, https://www.patheos.com/blogs/wildfoxze ... makyo.html
. Thank you. It was an interesting read and if you have anything to say about it, you could start a new topic. But I don’t see how it relates to this topic.
“Enlightenment means to see what harm you are involved in and to renounce it.” David Brazier, The New Buddhism
“The most straightforward advice on awakening enlightened mind is this: practice not causing harm to anyone—yourself or others—and every day, do what you can to be helpful.” Pema Chodron, “What to Do When the Going Gets Rough”