Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Another Zen Roshi, 105, Investigated For Career-Long Sexual Misconduct
Dakini
Veteran
According to an investigation, Japanese Zen master Joshu Sasaki, now 105, "groped and sexually harassed female students for decades", after arriving in Los Angeles in 1962 to teach Zen. According to an article in the NY TImes, "such charges have become more frequent in Zen Buddhism." The article mentions the scandals surrounding Eido Shimano. "Critics and victims have pointed to a Zen culture of secrecy, patriarchy and sexism, and to the quasi-religious worship of the Zen master, who can easily abuse his status." Female students were told that being groped by the master was part of his teaching to abandon ego.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/world/asia/zen-buddhists-roiled-by-accusations-against-teacher.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/12/world/asia/zen-buddhists-roiled-by-accusations-against-teacher.html
0
Comments
Common sense, the responsibility of anyone with or without genatalia . . .
Monks and Roshi, Nuns and dakini all have to protect themself from seductive laity, which I have heard of and witnessed. Once we focus on the source of behaviour, ourselves, these examples stop being any surprise.
It is no surprise when average people succumb to temptation and bad behaviour, but these guys are supposed to set some kind of example of what a life time of practice should look like.
Why bother if defilement cannot be overcome by those most dedicated ones.
The point I was making is that authentic and genuine renunciates are far more often tested by innapropriate behaviour from laity. It is not easy to be a renunciate and our behaviour and consideration should reflect and not abuse their position.
However, you might look at the article again to check for an anti-Buddhist or Zen bias. That statement, "such charges have become more frequent in Zen Buddhism." is technically true, but misleading. That statement gives the impression sexual abuse is widespread in the Zen Buddhist community. There were absolutely no charges before a few years ago, so even the several bad apples we're identifying now is "more frequent".
What is happening is, Western Zen and Western Buddhism in general is struggling to become more open and deal with a problem that in the East was traditionally ignored or hushed up. The Zen centers like Kwan Um Zen that quickly transitioned away from the heavily authoritarian (and heavily male dominated) Eastern model is discovering an engaged laity that can actually be trusted to act like adults.
If you step back and look at the idealized model of Zen and Buddhism we inherited, it is disfunctional. The Dharma transmission is treated like some dangerous secret that normal people are not capable of handling or comprehending. In fact, every one of you who belong to a traditional Buddhist temple or center are being treated like children. You think that you have some insight or understanding of the Dharma that might be valid? Oh, isn't that cute. The Teacher will quickly tell you how wrong you are, of course, but since you don't have a robe and title all you can do is sit back down and do the classwork like a good little student.
Comprehending human nature is a big chunk of the Dharma, and human nature is, people try to defend their position and authority. Even Enlightened Roshis need to feel they have earned their position through long, hard effort and feel challenged by any hint that they are not absolutely necessary for someone to "get it". It's the way they were taught, after all. The system produced them, so the system must be working and correct.
Doesn't mean there isn't a role for either Roshis or the the established Temples and centers. But, you're not children and you can stand up and insist you stop being treated like children. I think that would be the healthiest thing to come out of Western Zen.
The point I was making is that authentic and genuine renunciates are far more often tested by innapropriate behaviour from laity. It is not easy to be a renunciate and our behaviour and consideration should reflect and not abuse their position.
@Lobster...I am shocked at your comments!
I'll let the lay I know how hard it is for the renunciates, and
that they need to stop being teases and trying to snag these guys.
...'Our behavior should not abuse THEIR position...'??
:eek:
Why?
You think all people become virtuous, ethical and non sexual just through meditation and chanting? Quite often the dharma attracts the unbalanced, wounded, power mad, repressed . . . or maybe that is just me?
I will not point fingers, without being equally judgemental about circumstances I know of or in different circumstances could easily succumb to.
The majority of teachers and laity are sincere and dedicated. We should develop a sense of balance.
I think the main issue again is that of people giving too much power to a person(sounds very cultish) and people feeling powerless to do anything about it, which is really something we are supposed to be getting away from with a buddhist practice.
im not sure if this guy is lay or a bhikkhu, but also this is why monastics should strictly follow the Vinaya on these matters.. they may seem sexist or out dated.. but if I become a monk you wont find me within 10 feet of a woman alone and behind closed doors, not gonna happen. This way not even charges of impropriety can be brought forth.
No, it's not just you.
What I do think is, don't renunciate and stay that way if when
you 'succumb', the other person becomes part of your blame game.
Be a lay, if you don't/can't give up sexual activity.
Maybe renunciation is too hard. Maybe the succumbing
is the problem. Go figure. hahaha
Women have been dealing with this since the
beginning of time....nothing new. Men in powerful
positions.
Ladies...stop throwing yourselves at the monks.
They can't handle it.
lolololol
as for the ladies throwing themselves at monks, in that book " blistered feet, blissful mind" they have part of the story where the monks are on Tudong and a half naked woman tries to seduce the monk lol. I think there may be some women out there who would find that exciting and I'm sure that does happen, but overall I would say situations like this are much more cultish(think david koresh/jim jones) in nature then seductress in nature lol.
in this case, he is at fault
Women who honestly believe that groping, sexual abuse is acceptable behaviour from any man, woman or enlightened dog are clearly lady gaga. You would not put up with it I hope. People are vulnerable, gullible and not all able to defend against predators.
the point which I will make again, is I have heard of more cases of laity acting inappropriately, I do not believe this happened in this Roshi case.
let me give you an example:
a Theravadin monastery where a woman literally asked two novice monks to meet her for 'a discussion'. She had sex with both of them, 'confessed' to the Abbot. Both novices were asked to leave the same day. Clearly the woman had issues.
These sorts of situations also happen and are not reported.
As people have mentioned, power structures and rules, expectations and greed for flesh or enlightenment . . . All dukkha . . .
Why did they meet her?
She didn't have sex with him/them,
people have sex with each other.
Nevermind.
Have a good day. Im off to work.
@Vastminds
(warning; a little sarcasm and snark is afoot)
Oh come on now, do we really need to explain the eeeeviiiils of females?
Do we really need to remind you of the fact that women are " damned if they do- damned if they don't " when it comes to sexual encounters of nearly all kinds?
The female is the Temptress.
Adam could not resist Eve's charms and persuasions... so - of course- how could a simple, sheltered, Buddhist monk?
I'm with you on this @vastminds- it takes two to engage in sexual encounters. Those monks could have and should have simply refused The Evil Temptress' advances and walked out the door.
And besides, it appears we only know THEIR side of the story, now, doesn't it? What else could they say to defend themselves once confronted on their behavior?
The Devil Made 'Em Do It. Woman = Devil.
The list of abusive Zen-teachers is long. With "abusive" I mean that they combine student/teacher relationship with sexual relationship. You can’t do that. As a teacher you meet people who turn to you for help. They are willing to cross borders in order to break the chains of samsara. When -as a teacher – in this situation you propose to break those chains in your bedroom you are a piece of scum. And obviously as a student, when you fall for that you are naïve. But we are supposed to trust our teachers. Are they not living Buddhas?
So I think we have to look seriously at the problem and find ways of preventing this kind of nonsense from happening in the future.
I also would be very hesitant to ever even think any living teacher is enlightened.. That's dangerous for your own ego let alone there.
I think about who I consider my teachers, who I have high respect for, I guess Ajahn Brahm and Bhante G. I listen to dhamma from them because I've seen from my own experience that what they teach is beneficial. If it's not beneficial then I don't use it. For instance even though bhante g teaches slow walking meditation, I don't practice that because I've seen in my practice that normal pace works best for me. I don't think " well bhante g says this so I better only ever do what he says"
The dhamma should be our teacher.. Any humans who know dhamma can be a help, but it's up to the person to take responsibility for their own practice and take the wheel of the car, not be a passive passenger.
The article didn't say whether the Roshi in question was celibate. Many are not, yet they take advantage of their position of authority, anyway. Eido Shimano is married, for example, and there have been charges against him for decades. Charges of sexual misconduct in Zen are far from a recent phenomenon.
This type of case points to the need for:
1. Accountability in the system. There needs to be a way to sanction teachers who behave unethically, and to remove them if they don't respond to any kind disciplinary procedures or warnings.
2. Raising awareness of the issue and fostering compassion on the part of members of the sanga towards victims or complainants, who sometimes end up either shunned, excommunicated or accused of "dividing the sangha".
3. Organizing sanghas so that there's a structure in place for receiving and investigating complaints, such as having designated ombudsmen for members with grievances to report to. Sangha boards need to be organized in such a way that they're not beholden to the teacher, i.e. members should not be appointed by the teacher.
4. There should be a sexual harassment policy stated by the sangha and any oversight organization (like the Zen Studies Society, for example), so that students know that they should not tolerate any sexual behavior or talk on the part of teachers.
5. Sanghas can (and some do) require teachers to sign contracts that specify that fiscal or sexual malfeasance will result in dismissal.
I highly recommend the book "Sex and the Spiritual Teacher: Why It Happens, When It's a Problem, and What We All Can Do", by Scott Edelstein, a student of Zen for 35 years.
http://www.amazon.com/Sex-Spiritual-Teacher-Happens-Problem/dp/0861715969/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1360788465&sr=8-1&keywords=Sex+and+the+Spiritual+Teacher
in this case, he is at fault
Women who honestly believe that groping, sexual abuse is acceptable behaviour from any man, woman or enlightened dog are clearly lady gaga. You would not put up with it I hope. People are vulnerable, gullible and not all able to defend against predators.
the point which I will make again, is I have heard of more cases of laity acting inappropriately, I do not believe this happened in this Roshi case.
let me give you an example:
a Theravadin monastery where a woman literally asked two novice monks to meet her for 'a discussion'. She had sex with both of them, 'confessed' to the Abbot. Both novices were asked to leave the same day. Clearly the woman had issues.
These sorts of situations also happen and are not reported.
As people have mentioned, power structures and rules, expectations and greed for flesh or enlightenment . . . All dukkha . . .
I don't doubt that laity have seduced monks, I was just saying that it seems inappropriate to bring it up when this is so clearly not the case.
Sorry, I clearly have a personal issue with this sort of topic. It's not a belief. It's more complicated than the black and white issue you seem to paint. Sexual abuse/assault is a very complicated thing and believe me, there are so many days that I asked myself, "Why did it take me so long to scream out 'stop'?" Why did I just close my eyes and hope it would go away? Why indeed.
I struggle with this issue with nearly every man I meet. My general kindness and compassion is a beacon that screams out victim to abusers. They can see me, so I have had to learn to identify abusers and to cut them out before they can influence me, because when they act inappropriately, I shut down. It's as if time stops in a weird and horrible way. I wish I could explain it better, but I can't even make sense of it myself.
One year ago, I was being sexually harassed at my work by a coworker and yet, I felt helpless to do anything about it. I still never did. I just left. I wish I could say I found my voice, but I'm sorry to say this battle will have to be won the next time I encounter this unfortunate issue that seems to follow me around.
It was actually a member on this forum who had gone through something similar who taught me to identify the warning signs in men. Now, every man I meet, I have to categorize. I have to analyze his actions and words to figure out how close I can get to him... how likely he is to try and take advantage of me. This is the sad truth, but it keeps me safe. The only other option is to not trust anyone.
Abusive people are very secretive and sneaky about it, they bring you in and pretend to be a friend and typically know how far they can go to test you... They make you think, "Oh, he's just joking around." "He doesn't really mean that..." But things always get worse. Once you trust them, they start out small to see how you react, and then they escalate...
I remember when I posted on this forum about the sexual harassment, I kept saying that I thought he was a friend of mine and I was actually shocked by the responses of other members. How they tried to convince me that he wasn't my friend and that I was being used. It's hard to see what's inappropriate when you've been taken advantage of so often before. But I am getting better. I just want you to know that in these cases, it's not a rational decision. Many women WOULD say, "Wtf? Get away from me!" but more typically, the abuser has learned to identify the damaged women, like me. Because the damaged women are so much less likely to find their words.
Mr. Mammoser said he first became aware of allegations against Mr. Sasaki in the 1980s. “There have been efforts in the past to address this with him,” Mr. Mammoser said. “Basically, they haven’t been able to go anywhere.”
He added: “What’s important and is overlooked is that, besides this aspect, Roshi was a commanding and inspiring figure using Buddhist practice to help thousands find more peace, clarity and happiness in their own lives. It seems to be the kind of thing that, you get the person as a whole, good and bad, just like you marry somebody and you get their strengths and wonderful qualities as well as their weaknesses.”
So Mr. Mammoser justifies his inaction. He justified it then and now. It's sad. If the accusations are true, and since this insider admits this was happening and they tried to "address this with him" then was the price of "helping thousands" worth the dozens of women he robbed of this "peace, clarity and happiness" along the way?
Here is the corruption of false Zen on display. If true, Mr. Sasaki was an old fraud, and his Zen stunk like spoiled meat if the people he taught such as this Mr. Mammoser have so little self-knowledge of their own illusions. It's sad.
Looking back on the twentieth century, we'll probably see this as a flawed version of Zen that otherwise well meaning people mistook for the quest for clear mind.
In other words, @Jayantha, be a light unto yourself? A strong belief in that principle though, I think, would not preclude being able to spot a real avatar or Buddha if one came along.
.????
I've sort of found myself in a dhamma teaching role in the last year or so and I'm still kind of uncomfortable with it. I always reiterate to people who listen to me to take charge of their own practice, to see for themselves what is beneficial and to take whatever dhamma I say with the discerning mind to observe if it is beneficial to them. Even when/if I become a monk I will continue with this. I would not feel very good otherwise.
on a lighter note , I think I may need some education.. for me an avatar is a video game character or a blue alien lol. What is an Avatar in the buddhist sense?
and as for the spotting a buddha/avatar. My comment on that means that the ego really loves it when their teacher is "the best" , so you see a lot of this " my teacher is enlightened" type of bs, most monastics and masters laugh at this which is good, some outright claim to be arahants(oi!)... all dangerous stuff. What is more important is how manage your own practice.. and that you practice in the first place... so many questions answer themselves through the insight of practice.. not the answer of a master, all we need is patience.
Not only that, it seems to have absorbed a lot of Chinese Imperial practices for the Aristocrats, practices that are close to deifying the Gurus and recognising them as Aristocrats, ...above the rest of us peasants! So very sad, that it is carried on from the Tibet of yesteryears and exported to the West.
Even today there are numerous of these Gurus that while they do expound on the Dharma quite well, their behaviour leaves much to be desired. A case of not practicing what they preach. Alas, their flock consists of newer adherents to Buddhism who are easily led to believe the unbelievable. Some of them gain considerable fame, for whatever reasons.
There is one such in Malaysia, that the older Vajrayana crowd steer well clear off, and he is actually quite notorious within the Tibetan community. Even visiting TB monks know of his indiscretions and warn us off. Sigh.
Power corrupts, absolutely.
Other lineages, such as Mahayana and Theravada, do occasionally have problems but these are of a different scale and we hear so much less of them, anyway they are usually uncovered and disrobed not long after.
So, this issue will always be around, as long as gullible converts put their gurus on a pedestal. This is definitely NOT a Budhhist practice but a cultural one.
So in essence, i think that only the students of that particular teacher would know what happened or did not happen. If we are not the students, we should not judge either way.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/americanbuddhist/2012/10/from-scandal-like-to-just-plain-ugly.html
My impression is Patricia Ivan is describing events with honesty and integrity and Ken Mcleod is trying to sweep events under the cushion. Seems that way.
Should we wash Buddhisms dirty linen in public? Yes.
Buddhism is about integrity, truth, honesty and accountability, otherwise we might as well apply to be Papal devotees . . .
“We feel that most people, when provided with the right training and guidance, will naturally seek to create environments in which they can transform conceptual understanding of spiritual teaching into experiential knowing, and thus resolve their deepest questions about how to make freedom, compassion and awareness alive and active in their lives.”
Quick, what did the man just say? You have to read it several times, pausing to translate it into common english, don't you? And it's padded to look impressive. What's the difference between training and guidance? He doesn't change people, he "transforms" and when's the last time you said, "I'm in the mood to change an environment"?
That's Western "business-speak", my friend. It's the CEO certified mission statement full of buzzwords designed to impress while actually saying nothing. It's the bullshit language used by businesses everywhere to sound impressive. Mister Mcleod is, in fact, trying to use the American business model of the outside consulting firm of effeciency experts to teach Buddhism. Nothing wrong with that, since the old style inherited from the East was built by retired military generals and resemble boot camps more than learning centers. So this is an experiment in a form of Western Buddhism.
But every system has its faults. So instead of Master-student we have Manager-trainee. Mostly, people in business start believing their own press releases and that mask they present to the world becomes who they are. So in this case, the CEO Ken Mcleod gets into a scandal by not keeping his pants up and failing to treat his "employee" in a professional manner. So what does a business do? What his organization did in this case: protect the CEO at all costs. Have the lawyers send threatening letters to the people who are publishing the dirt, threatening lawsuits and pointing out they have much deeper pockets even if they end up in court.
You know, even in the business world it isn't that hard to keep your hands off your coworkers and especially the people you manage and supervise. I've worked with lots of good looking women and never once lost control and tried to plant a big kiss on their lips or tried to talk them into meeting somewhere later. I taught meditation classes and quickly learned how to spot the students that were lonely and vulnerable to someone with some confidence and smooth talk. If anything, that made me even more hesitant to engage them on anything but a professional level. So I don't have a lot of sympathy for the Zen teachers who abused their position, even if it was concensual. I still have compassion, because I know human nature. It's not the mistake I focus on, because that's not the true test of character. It's how we deal with the mistakes when they come back to bite us on the ass that tell the world who we are.
I blame the guru but I recognize that a road to positive action is to make the followers aware of this shit and hopefully not put up with corruption. So the blame is not the followers but the responsibility is. At least in the sense of 'where can we go from here'? 'How can it be improved'?
Also speak to visiting Lamas, there are loads of them, gather info from that quarter as well. Ask them about the rinpoches in Malaysia, give them some names and get feedback. They know who are the good and not so good ones. They come from all schools
There is a wealth of knowledge out there.
Personally I am very annoyed by rumors like this. We should be spending our time promoting Dharma, knowing that nothing is perfect instead of leveraging on imperfections and engage in idel gossip.
"A Rinpoche in Malaysia"? Wow, thats rich.
And Patr, I assume posts in the spirit of the Dalai Lama's warning to thoroughly check out one's teacher, "to spy" on your teacher (meaning talking to current and former students, and keeping an ear to the ground for gossip) has brought some fresh ideas to this process. Most students of TB or Zen would probably be reluctant to walk up to a teacher and begin asking about another teacher's qualifications or reputation, but apparently, it's possible. The situation may be a little different in Zen. I'm not sure teachers would be open to sharing information about other teachers. Does anyone here have experience with this?
I've wondered about the lamas who don't cut their hair; I've noticed it's mainly some Kagyu who don't shave their heads, and I'm told that those who have their hair are yogis, not celibate monks. Yogis are supposed to differentiate themselves from the others with a white skirt or white stripe on their robe, so people will know who they're dealing with. But maybe these days the hair is the mark.
In view of how serious the situation in a sangha can become, and how unexpectedly things can spin out of hand, I think it's good to do research and ask questions before one takes the leap of making a full commitment to the sangha, taking refuge, etc. One can sometimes. get a feel for the general atmosphere by attending, talking to other members, observing how the teacher handles questions and how the members react to the teacher. In the meantime, one might contact friends in other Zen or TB centers to see if they're heard anything about Roshi so-and-so. Or search the internet, our Western equivalent of hanging out in the teahouses in Dharamsala.
The problem is, those who are new to Buddhism don't have many, if any, resources for checking out their local center and the local gurus. But at least they're aware of the issues, if they read these threads.
I met Lama Zopa about 15 years ago and he also mentioned that it is the right thing to not talk negatively about sangha. I did ask but what if the sangha member was behaving inappropriately. Is it not better to let others know? But he was adamant about it, saying that is the proper way.
In the case of this Zen master who had sexual misconduct, and many other cases, i still cannot reconcile what is the best policy if we cannot say negative things about the teacher even though it may be harmful to current and future students. However, as i do have a teacher, i will follow his advice to just keep my own counsel.
I don't have an actual teacher, so maybe it's easier for me to say. But it just doesn't seem responsible to me not to attempt to protect fellow sangha members. Perhaps this is a bit of a cultural thing on the part of some teachers? That would make sense if it was, but if so, it's a bit of culture that doesn't need to be imported.
Teachers should be respected, but they also need to behave in a manner worthy of that respect. They are human too and there for not infallible. In the end we have to make our own decisions and try and do what's best.
It can be done within the precepts and the Theravada's have got it down to a T.
Those with devotional leanings usually find full disclosure a difficult pill to swallow as it brings their very practise into question.
There are armchair quarterbacks and those with life long careers at stake.
There are terrible stories unfolding and others being actively squashed.
One school I know engaged in questionable practises, backed up with 40 years of shunning until the Internet gave those disaffected isolated voices a place to explain the reasons they left. Some accountability & monastic chest beating resulted with marginal enthusiasm until life long habits reasserted themselves with depressing predictability.
The main saving grace I saw with a public laundry display is that new folks who research potential training centres can now hear about the complaints to watch out for before entering.
More than anything, though, it is this attitude on the part of the Masters and Monks that allowed abuse to fester (including child abuse in Tibet and other Sanghas that admit children). Just understand that this philosophy of "Sangha Masters are sacred and not to be criticized no matter what" has its real dangers and follow your own conscious.
The Teacher is NOT the Sangha. The Sangha is the community of Buddhists including, perhaps most importantly, the students. Without the students there would be no Sangha for the next generation. It is the Sangha that is sacred. If these Masters and Monks would police themselves, that would be great. Human nature. Comprehend Zen, and you see why that won't happen.
This zen Roshi obviously was sexually abusing his students because there are many women claiming the same thing, so it can be said to be substantiated. However, having heard rumours about my own teacher which are not true, especially by people who have never even met him or visited our centre, I find it rather incomprehensible and unfair.