Below is my response to Brad Warner who posed the above question in a recent blog post he published on his website, Hardcore Zen:
Brad,
Thank you for clarifying your position in response to Adam
Fisher. Of course the onus for abuse lies
on the teacher and not on the student.
You say, “I don’t blame the victim” while you claim that “blind
obedience” is the culprit. But who
obeys? It still sounds like you are
pointing to the student. Moreover, in
all these cases of abuse, even when itcomes to Sasaki or Shimano, nobody ever issued an “order”
to which anybody ever “obeyed”.
Brad, are you sure that the student’s (pathological) obedience
to the teacher is the issue, as opposed to the teacher’s abuse of the student’s
(healthy) trust? Even your well-meaning piece
of advice “Be careful out there,” while probably intended to empower students, makes
it look like you think that the abuse of authority is due to students’ lacking vigilance
as opposed to their not knowing what to look for.
While I appreciate that you are trying to deconstruct the “myth
of the fully enlightened master”, I do not think that this will ever prevent
abuse. That is because the potential for
abuse lies not in some wingy projection of perfection on the part of the
student, but in the very natural power differential that occurs when one person
seeks guidance from another who occupies a position of trust and authority. There is a necessary polarization that
occurs in the roles of teacher/student, just as there is a necessary polarization
in the roles of doctor/patient. In itself, this polarization is not abusive. Still, that is where the
potential for abuse lies: power can be misused.
To prevent abuse, students need to be not only aware of the normal
power differential between them and their teachers, but helped to recognize the signs
of its misuse. I frequently cite Chris
Hamacher’s list of behaviors to watch out for in one’s teacher (from his article
Zen has No Morals):
- becoming
angry and/or defensive when confronted with criticism
- having a
penchant for formality or extravagance
- blaming the
student's own ego to deflect personal criticism
- not practicing what he preaches (is a
hypocrite)
- manipulating
the group to adopt an us/them attitude
- controlling the
flow of information to students, with teachings emphasizing self-published
works
- considering
himself special or exceptional, the rules do not apply to him
- adopting a non-democratic method of institutional
control (at the level of the board and overall organization of the institution)
Finally, I think that what is missing from Buddhist organizations
is an ongoing review of power structures and relationships within the organizations
where everyone, not just teachers and other leaders, is invited to openly
discuss their experiences and criticisms before situations get out of
hand.
Everyone is discussing Shimano and Sasaki now, mostly due to the
efforts of Kobutsu Malone to document their misdeeds, but there are hundreds of
situations where people are being harmed in relationships to their teachers. It always seems like, until gross abuse can
be proved, the benefit of doubt is always given to the teacher. That is another form of blindness enabling
the teacher and it does not necessarily come from the abused student.