Caught in the Net of Ideas & Opinions

When you throw a net into the sea, fish will be caught, but the water is never caught. Do not become a person who is like a fish. Instead, become a person who is like water.

-Zen Master Daehaeng

My concept of “I”, “me” and “mine” give me a false sense of comfort and security.

The degree to which I suffer is proportionate to how solid a sense of “me” I’m working with at any given time.

The more rigid my ideas about other people are, the more likely I am to feel separate from them.

When I ease up on my concepts and ideas about things, I allow for stuff to happen that otherwise might not have happened.

When I catch myself trying to form and solidify some kind of notion about a person or thing, I try to take notice and remind myself that I’m only seeing one small part of that person or thing.

Instead of being led around by my thoughts, I try to work with them and view them as a means of gauging where my mind is at rather than mistaking them for reality.

We don’t have to be caught in the trap of our mental constructs, our limiting ideas, our opinions, our feelings. When we let go of all that we think we know and keep a mind that’s pliable and vast like the ocean, we’re less likely to get stuck in the shadow cast by our projections and fears and concepts.

Rather than feeling beaten over the head by our moment-to-moment experience, we can pass through it the way water passes through a net.

Pema Chodron on Friendship with One's Self

When One Door Closes...

...another one opens.

In the midst of my recent seminary turmoil, I was invited to be ordained as a Buddhist Minister by the Los Angeles Buddhist Union/International Order of Buddhist Ministers.

This came about quite unexpectedly (I had applied for ordination about a year and a half ago before I even heard of the Taego order and had assumed it just wouldn't happen.)

I was notified about this within days of my decision to withdraw from the Taego Order seminary program. This took me and my fellow ordainees by surprise, but somehow we all got it together and traveled from different parts of the country to make this happen.

The timing was oddly auspicious. Had I been invited just a month earlier I would've passed on the opportunity since I hadn't yet decided to leave the Taego Order seminary program.

I was ordained this past Saturday and I am very grateful for the opportunity to serve in this capacity. I still aspire to be a lay priest or monk one day and am currently considering what opportunities I may have to do so at some point in the future.

(Pictured above are Rev. Danny Fisher and me).

The Rocky Transition of Asian Buddhist Traditions into Western Culture

I recently blogged about my recent withdrawal from a Zen seminary program with the Korean Zen Taego Order due to their recently revealed discriminatory policies and double standards with regard to women, gay & lesbian people, people over 55 and the physically challenged.

Being gay has always been really weird for me. The gay part in and of itself isn’t the weird part, but the reactions it elicits from people are kind of mind-blowing and something I’ve never quite gotten used to since I came out at the age of 15.

Until recently I was led to believe that openly gay people were welcome for ordination within the Taego Order, as were women. However, it was recently revealed that this wasn’t the case after all. During a seminary retreat in April, the issue of “no openly gay” clergy was brought up out of the blue after I thought this was a non-issue for the past 9 months of my training.

When I pressed for clarification I was told that I could ordain as a monk but that the Korean headquarters hierarchy would not recognize the ordination if they were to find out about me. So the compromise created by the overseas Bishop was that I could definitely ordain as a monk, but when in my gray robes I must never “engage in behavior that suggests I am either practicing or promoting gay/lesbian relationships” (whatever that means). If I did so I could be immediately expelled by the Overseas Disciplinary Board.

This “compromise” was described to me as a “middle path” chosen by the Overseas Bishop and I was told that I should (quoting an email here): be happy, be thrilled that you are now part of an authentic 1600 year old tradition...

Straight male monks are free to express affection to their partners or spouses however, and I assume they can promote heterosexual relationships. (Whatever that means).

Oh, and everyone was recently informed that female monks in this order have to commit to a life of celibacy. Not male monks, just the female ones. Yes, I’m serious.

I just found this out last week as did several females who were already in the seminary program.

I also recently discovered that no one over the age of 55 may ordain, and physically challenged people need not even apply in the first place.

The responses I’ve received to my recent blog post from people involved with this order have been overwhelmingly supportive, but most have refrained from making their opinions known to the powers that be due to fear of reprisal.

Those that don’t agree with my withdrawing from the Taego seminary have presented me with the following arguments:

Given the current culture and years of tradition with regard to these issues in Korea, I should consider this “progress.”

Pissing on certain groups of people instead of crapping on them is not a sign of progress. Human rights and Buddha Nature are unequivocal. Discrimination under the guise of religion or tradition is still discrimination. They can gussy it up all they want but it’s still wrong and has nothing to do with the dharma.

-I should work for change from within. After all, if I have a problem with the unequal treatment of women and gay people, why don’t I leave America and live in a country where gay marriage is legal?

Do I really have to respond to this one?

* * * * * * * *

A lot of Zen people get caught up in the idea of “authenticity” and love to geek out about lineages and Zen Masters and Inka and who’s recognized and who’s not.

Frankly, I don’t recognize any order (Buddhist or otherwise) that not only enforces discriminatory policies but also fails to make them clear from the beginning of one’s involvement.

I don’t care how old any particular lineage is. I do care about what that order or lineage teaches and what kind of ethics it promotes. Just because something originates in a foreign culture and has been around for a long time doesn’t make it superior to newer lineages, organizations or dharma centers.

As Western Buddhists we’re at a very interesting crossroads where we need to find a way to present the dharma in a way that makes sense to who and where we are right now. Trying to assimilate certain Eastern Buddhist traditions along with their accompanying cultural biases will only serve to further alienate people from any kind of spiritual practice.

We need a form of Buddhism that is inclusive and appeals to people’s best instincts rather than their worst.

IDP is a model for how Buddhism has to be presented and practiced in this country if there is any hope of it surviving and even eventually thriving. I feel very grateful to be part of a community that offers a secular, non-religious, non-moralistic and diverse opportunity for study and practice.

I don’t think that the Buddha had a religion in mind when he traveled around teaching for all of those years.

While I’m being accused by some within the Taego Order of trying to smear their reputation by speaking out, my intention here is to highlight the issues raised by my personal experience so that fewer people have to go through what I just did. There is a larger issue here that needs to be discussed and resolved.

Some people are now suggesting that I’m “too attached to my gayness” which is a complete cop out. What I’m attached to is fair and equal treatment for all beings. That’s one form of attachment that can potentially end suffering and not cause it.

* * * * * *

Fortunately when one door closes, another one opens

Why I Would Never Ordain as a Taego Monk

Below is a copy of a Facebook note and email I recently sent out to the entire Taego Order Overseas email list:

I am deeply concerned about the role of women, gay and lesbian clergy, those over the age of 55, and physically challenged people within the Taego Order and IBS.

When I first inquired last year about entering the IBS seminary program, I was told that openly gay people are welcome to be ordained as monks in this lineage. However, during the protocol retreat at Muddy Water Zen Center in Michigan last April, Bishop Jongmae Park made some statements about this issue that left me confused. When I asked Hae Doh Sunim for clarification via email, I was informed of the following points (some of them extracted and copied below):

The Taego Order hierarchy will not recognize the ordination of gay & lesbian monks, and, in fact, if they discover practicing gay/lesbian full monks, they'll most certainly expel said monk(s) immediately. 

In order to protect the growth and development of our parish it is mandated that when in public and wearing grays (informal or formal grays) there will be no behavior suggesting that said monk (samanera, samaneri, bhikkhu or bhikkhuni) is either practicing or promoting gay/lesbian relationships.

If it becomes known in whatever way that a monk is engaging openly in sexual identity behavior while in 'uniform', it then becomes necessary that the Overseas Parish Disciplinary Board will admonish and, possibly, expel said monk, even before headquarters hears of such things.

Bishop Jongmae has chosen a middle path that allows complete participation of practicing gays and lesbians as full monks in the clergy sangha while at the same time necessitating they maintain a cautious boundary in order to protect this allowance

Reading this was extremely upsetting, especially in light of the fact that these same rules do not apply to male heterosexual monks. The parallels between this issue and the U.S. military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy are very clear.

Recently I’ve also been made aware that while men may ordain as monks and lead a non-celibate life, women who wish to ordain as monks must be celibate. In addition to this, no one over the age of 55 is eligible for ordination, as well as people who are physically challenged.

To his credit, Bishop Park is trying his best to change most if not all of these rules, but progress often happens all too slowly and with much resistance due to cultural and religious biases.

Imagine how devastating it is to know that at any time your dharma family, your temple, your career, your relationships with other parish members, your status as a monk, and all of the time and money you invested in training, practicing, learning, and being ordained in Korea could be instantly stripped away from you simply for being who you are.

In a state of partial denial, I initially brushed off what I learned about the policy with regard to gay and lesbian people. I really tried to forget about it since my calling to serve others as a monk has been very strong for quite some time, and I viewed the Taego Order as a unique and rare opportunity in which I could honor this calling.

So I tried to continue with my seminary studies despite my reservations. However I’ve come to the conclusion that I cannot condone such policies by being part of an institution that enforces them. Therefore I have decided to end my seminary training with the Taego Order at this time.

As the founding Director of Open Sky Sangha in New York City (which has a predominantly gay membership), it’s my responsibility to model behavior to sangha members that encourages dignity, equality, fairness, and self-worth.

Most of you reading this have taken the precepts and have vowed not to lie or cause harm to any living beings, yourselves included. Living under the oppressive weight of such policies is harmful to people emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually. Anyone in a less than wholesome state cannot be a positive force in the lives of others, which is the underlying motivation that informs our Zen training and Buddhist studies.

Buddha nature is unequivocal, as are human rights. There is no “middle path” when it comes to such matters. Just over 50 years ago, African Americans and women in this country were treated egregiously until we collectively realized as a society just how incredibly wrong that was.

Things have changed significantly since then but none of this came about easily--it happened only through dissent, disobedience, protest, and political action. Progress is never made by accepting and condoning discriminatory rules in the hopes that equality will eventually be attained because the people in power feel it’s time to be fair. Injustice is only vanquished when it is recognized, labeled, and resisted.

While I appreciate the fact that some allowances have been made thanks to the efforts of Bishop Park, one can hardly consider it “progress” to allow a woman to ordain as monk but require that she be celibate while a male need not be. It is not “progress” to allow a gay or lesbian person to ordain but to make sure they don’t express affection to their partner while their straight counterparts are free to do so. There is nothing progressive about restricting ordination to those under the age of 55, nor is it ok to tell a physically challenged person that they need not even apply in the first place.

Discrimination, even when cloaked within the trappings of tradition, is still discrimination.

I believe that Bishop Park wishes to include gay and lesbian people into this order because he knows it’s the right thing to do, and in our culture it’s becoming less and less acceptable to do otherwise. However, the compromises he has agreed to with regard to the restrictions on gay and lesbian clergy encourages llying, hiding, and paranoia. I am no way accusing Bishop Park of any kind of malice or ill will--in fact, I think his efforts here have been quite commendable. However, these policies need to be explained clearly to any prospective student from the start to avoid any kind of misunderstanding such as this one.

The Overseas Parish needs to decide whether it ordains openly gay and lesbian people or not. The current position is very murky and rife with inconsistencies. It also needs to consider the consequences of its discriminatory rules with regard to the celibacy requirement for women, it’s exclusion of physically challenged people, and the cut off age of 55. One’s gender, marital status, age, sexual orientation, or physical ability has no bearing on how effective she or he could serve as a monk.

If prospective students are not made clear about these policies from the outset, the parish runs the risk of spending a lot of their time, energy and resources training people who may eventually demand a refund of their tuition. These unfair rules will eventually lead to a negative reputation for the Taego Order within the Western Buddhist community at large. All of the eligibility requirements and behavioral regulations with regard to ordained gay and lesbian clergy, the age limit, the celibacy requirement for women, and the restriction on physically challenged people ought to be stated very clearly up front. A prospective student deserves to know this before they commit their time, enthusiasm, and money to this training. It’s only reasonable and fair to do so.

If there is any hesitation to put these eligibility requirements and behavioral restrictions in writing for all to see on the Overseas Taego Order web site, then that speaks volumes about the very nature of those rules.

A person has the right to be very clear about what they are getting into before they're already in it.

It is our responsibility to move Buddhism full steam ahead into this new century by making the dharma accessible, inclusive, accurate, and relevant to the world we now live in. This is being done brilliantly by the likes of the Interdependence Project here in New York City, the Five Mountain Buddhist Seminary, the Maitreya Buddhist Seminary and many other inclusive, modern dharma centers and schools around the United States. Hopefully the Taego Order will eventually be able to follow their lead.

Many people these days are resistant to any form of spiritual practice because institutional religion has left such a bad taste in our collective mouths. So when things like this crop up, it only serves to reinforce people’s negative views about religion and/or spirituality in general. We need to find a way to move past this and offer people a system of spiritual and ethical practice that makes sense for today’s world; one that is inclusive rather than discriminatory.

As Buddhists, we can and must do better.

I will continue to pursue a path leading to my eventual ordination as a monk or priest so that I may help others in the capacity that resonates so strongly in my heart. I will also continue to speak out against any form of injustice when I see it arise since I truly believe that all beings are deserving of love, compassion, mutual joy, and equanimity. I encourage everyone reading this to do the same.

Lawrence Grecco

De-Bitching Karma: Cause and Effect vs Reward and Punishment

It took me quite some time to discard the concept that everything I do is being rated and tallied up somewhere up there, and once I die I’ll either go to Heaven, Hell or that in-between Limbo place where I’ll have to endure some vague form of suffering until I burn off my sins the way someone on a diet burns calories.

The word karma gets thrown around a lot by people who hold the narrow view that it’s nothing more than the ultimate form of payback or punishment.

“Karma’s a bitch!” is an often used phrase that seems to offer an odd sense of solace to those who feel wronged or slightly in some way.

It’s often seen as the Buddhist version of Hell, the fickle finger of fate, or one’s cross to bear. It gets reduced to a static result rather than a dynamic action from which present and future results manifest.

It’s a mistake to limit our view of karma as a much-deserved result rather than a dynamic and empowering sequence of intentions, emotions, actions, and fruition. As I see it, the former view breeds complacency and indifference, the latter view inspires mindfulness and responsibility.

I’m no karmologist but in trying to sum up what karma means to me, I came up with a few things I thought I’d share here:


Viewing Karma without compassion is foolish and harmful

Simply labeling someone’s difficult circumstances as “ their karma” doesn’t let us off the hook and give us the green light to be indifferent, cold, or judgmental. When we see someone in an unfortunate situation and shrug our shoulders, thinking, “that must be her karma” we give ourselves and others permission to ignore their suffering. We rationalize it as their punishment for doing something wrong at some point or another, thinking they must deserve it on some level, so why the hell bother helping them out? Perhaps that person begging for change on the street was Hitler in a past life, we speculate, so it serves them right. Instead of trying to assess what may or may not have brought about someone else’s current situation, we’d be wise to consider the consequences of how we choose to respond to their current situation.

Viewing Karma as an excuse to indulge in harmful behavior is lazy

Karma is not just an unchangeable and negative result but rather a complex and interdependent series of intentions, actions and results. Each moment offers us the opportunity to apply some awareness and intentionality to our thoughts and behaviors that have an impact on our current circumstances as well as what we will experience later. We aren’t simply “stuck” with our situation, we can actually work with it. We can’t always choose for things to be different than they are right now, but we can make the best possible use of whatever we have right now in a way that is productive rather than self-defeating.

Viewing Karma as “good” or “bad” is a dicey undertaking

We can look at a wealthy person and label their fortunate circumstances as “good karma.” We can see a paraplegic as suffering from “bad karma.” However, millionaires can be miserable and physically challenged people can be happy. Someone with heaps of money can be stingy both emotionally and materially, while a wheelchair-bound person can have a highly developed sense of compassion and caring for others based on their alleged disability. So who is suffering from “bad” karma and who is reaping the “good?”

In the end, ideas of good and bad originate in our minds alone, and getting fixated on words like these have a way of encouraging narrow judgments instead of compassionate action.

Ten Ways to Extend Lovingkindness to a...Difficult Person

After an intensive day of Metta practice, I’ve become increasingly intrigued by the idea of what it means to extend lovingkindess to everyone, even if I think they’re a bastard. Doing this is an essential part of Lovingkindness meditation and what I consider to be the most challenging. So I came up with this list of ways that might make this more manageable, both on and off the cushion:

1. Start with the basics: remember that all beings possess the same fundamentally good and complete nature. No matter how egregiously some people behave or how rotten they may appear to be, they have the same Buddha nature/basic goodness that you have.

2. Remind yourself that just like you, they too want to be happy. Seriously. Even when the object of your disdain is acting assholey, they’re doing it because on some level they really believe that their behavior will bring about happiness, or at least some temporary relief.

3. Brainstorm and arrive at 2 plausible reasons that could possibly explain their negative behavior, no matter how far-fetched they may seem. At the very least, doing so serves as a reminder that there are always reasons why people act the way they do, even if they’re hard to see or understand.

4. Consider that the basis for what constitutes happiness in your life could be something other than a string of pleasurable sensations. Rather, reinterpret happiness as a state where you are always learning about yourself and other people. It’s much harder to be disappointed when this is our reference point.

5. Come up with just one positive quality about the “difficult person” that you can appreciate on some level. Even if it’s something really minor and shallow. (“He’s a mean son of a bitch, but check out those shoes!”) Try to keep in mind that we’re all more than just our behavior at any given moment.

6. Sometimes we learn about what happiness is by observing what it is not. If someone is acting like a miserable %$&#^*@#!, have some gratitude that you don’t feel the same way they do at that moment and extend a silent wish that they find some peace of mind. And offer that not just for them but to all of the other people they will eventually come into contact with and have an impact on.

7. Ask yourself if everyone else in the world would share your negative opinion of them or not. Someone, somewhere might find them tolerable or even lovable, even if it’s just their mother.

8. Pay attention to the thoughts and feelings you experience every time you have contact with this difficult person and be grateful to them for offering you the opportunity to practice with challenging emotions.

9. When appropriate, pay deep attention to this person, listening and observing closely enough so that you can at least get a glimpse of what’s going on beneath the surface. More often than not, what someone is carrying on about is not the thing that they’re truly struggling with.

10. Imagine what that person might have been like just after they were born and what they might be like at the moment just before their death. The reality of birth and death has a way of shifting our perspective and reprioritizing things. These two events are the great equalizers: we’ve all been born and we’ll all eventually die and it’s up to us to try and make the most of what happens in between.


The Parable of the Saw (an excerpt):

"Monks, even if bandits were to savagely sever you, limb by limb, with a double-handled saw, even then, whoever of you harbors ill will at heart would not be upholding my Teaching. Monks, even in such a situation you should train yourselves thus: 'Neither shall our minds be affected by this, nor for this matter shall we give vent to evil words, but we shall remain full of concern and pity, with a mind of love, and we shall not give in to hatred. On the contrary, we shall live projecting thoughts of universal love to those very persons, making them as well as the whole world the object of our thoughts of universal love — thoughts that have grown great, exalted and measureless. We shall dwell radiating these thoughts which are void of hostility and ill will.' It is in this way, monks, that you should train yourselves.

"Monks, if you should keep this instruction on the Parable of the Saw constantly in mind, do you see any mode of speech, subtle or gross, that you could not endure?"

"No, Lord."

"Therefore, monks, you should keep this instruction on the Parable of the Saw constantly in mind. That will conduce to your well-being and happiness for long indeed."

Osama bin Laden is Dead. Now What?

When I learned late last night that Osama bin Laden had been murdered by a United States special forces operation, I really wasn’t sure how I felt. I wasn’t inspired to go downtown and join the throngs of people celebrating the death of a man who caused so much death and suffering for others. I didn’t feel much like celebrating anything at the same site where so many people had the worst of possible choices during the final moments of their lives: should I die by jumping out of this window in front of me or just stand here and be burned to death by the approaching fire?

Yet somehow I understood the sense of joy and relief felt by so many people everywhere around the world, and when I was able to locate and touch just a trace of that feeling within myself I had to cringe. Yep, still human.

As practitioners we’re called upon to look more closely at things and consider things not just as isolated and unrelated events, but rather like links on a very long and twisted chain. It’s easy to be fooled by the appearance of things and it’s very tempting and even understandable to want to take some pleasure from what would otherwise be considered a pretty gruesome event. It would be wonderful to consider this the “end of the war or terror” as one political pundit put it on CNN last night. But nothing is simply an “end”; all things are both a result and a cause that lead to other results.

I could view the murder of Osama Bin Laden as the ultimate form of justice. After all, he was responsible for the death of so many people, and his actions contributed to a chain of events that we are all still paying for dearly today: several wars, billions of dollars, increased security at the risk of privacy and freedom, more fear, a sagging economy, record high unemployment and a damaged national spirit.

At the same, our country has contributed to the circumstances and conditions from which Osama bin Laden was able to thrive enough so that he could recruit people who felt so angry at us that they were willing to die in order to harm us.

If we were able to peer into a time machine and look forward several years, would we be rejoicing if we realized that the killing of bin Laden resulted in the reenergizing of Al Quaeda? That his death reignited their mission and fueled their determination more so than ever before?

It’s not “wrong” to take pleasure in bin Laden’s death. I can’t say I’m not happy he’s gone, and I realize there is a chance that this could at least disrupt and possibly even cripple Al Quaeda both organizationally and otherwise, but I can’t be sure. Time will tell as it always does.

Before waving our flags in victory however, it’s useful to consider a few questions:

Do the teachings of interdependence no longer apply when it comes to a person who commits heinous acts?

Are we really separate from Osama bin Laden and the causes and conditions that enabled him to do the things he did?

Does karma have a “beginning” and “ending” point?

What are the possible ramifications of his death?

Do wars and murder really ever lead to peace?

From the Dhammapada:

For hatred can never put an end to hatred;
Love alone can. This is an unalterable law.