This podcast is offered by the San Francisco Zen Center on the web at www.sfzc.org. Our public programs are made possible by donations from people like you. Well, today is the first full day of spring. Equinox was 2.58 yesterday afternoon. The full moon was something like 6.42 last night or something like that. And the sciency word for supermoon is perigee. It means the closest position of the moon to the earth. And it seems like it was a little cloudy. So, how are we doing? you know, with the fist thing, like, oh, okay, okay.

[01:09]

That's good. Yeah. Well, today I'm going to keep a promise that I made to Greg earlier in the practice period I'm going to talk about tardigrades. Greg, after one of my talks about something slimy, he said, could we hear about the dharma of tardigrades and humpback whales? Or humpback whales. If you don't know about tardigrades, this is your lucky moment. They're kind of the new black. They're a really important research animal right now for all kinds of interesting reasons. I've given all my grandchildren tardigrade stuffies.

[02:22]

You can get tardigrade stuffies. I have a stuffy malaria, but I'm not going to give them those until they're older. You can get stuffy syphilis and things like that. Ebola. Anyway, they all have stuffy tardigrades. So this is... So let's do the fist thing again. Okay. Never heard... Sort of heard, but quite no much. Really a big fan of tardigrades. Can I see? Oh, okay. Okay. We're all over. I once got on a dive boat. Actually, we were doing, I do research diving off the coast, and we were doing diving, a four-day trip off the Big Sur coast, and I got on the boat, and there was a

[03:28]

a woman with a tardigrade tattoo. I thought, now I want to get a tattoo. Never in my life did I want to get a tattoo, but now I want one. So tardigrades are microscopic animals. They're also called water bears and moss piglets. They like moss. They actually like everything, I guess, because they live all over the earth. They live on mountaintops, including in the Himalayas. They live in the deepest sea. They live in rainforests, the Antarctic. They live in hot springs. Tardigrade means slow steppers. So wherever they live, they're doing kin-hin.

[04:30]

They are their own phylum in the animal kingdom. Now, I'm going to have to say a little bit about classification of life on Earth. So, life on Earth by human beings, who as I've I've said before, we need things to get organized in order for us to even see them, let alone explore and understand them. So human scientists tend to put things in categories and then find similarities in categories. So one of the biggest categories is kingdom. So there's an animal kingdom and there's a plant kingdom. There's four other kingdoms. The next classification down or the next level down in the taxonomy is called phylum.

[05:37]

So to give you an example, in the animal kingdom, it keeps changing, but the last time I knew there was like 17 or 18 or 19 phyla. Like seven or eight of them are worms. whole phyla of worms. Now, to understand what that means, our phylum is chordata. That means all animals with backbones. That means we're in the same phylum as fish, including sharks, all the amphibians, all the reptiles, all the birds, and all the mammals. We're all in the same phylum. So that means that We are as different from a worm, because they belong to a different phylum, as the worms are from each other. And that's surprising, because we tend to think, worms, they're very low.

[06:44]

Well, anyway. That's just a bit about classification. And so tardigrades are their own phylum. They are closely related to animals, but they're not animals. They have some important differences. They have eight legs with little funny claws at the end of each kind of like foot. And they have puffy little bodies, kind of elongated. And they grow up to maybe about a half a millimeter. But there's 1,100 species. So there's a lot of variation in the world of tardigrades. They probably evolved. The earliest fossil dates them to 530 million years ago. So that's the Cambrian half a billion years ago.

[07:45]

So they've been around a long time. They're our true ancestors. So, you know, classification is an interesting exercise for scientists. And classification is constantly getting revised, especially with the field of genetics giving us whole bodies of new information. But the thing about classification is it's for us. It allows us to see. But it's just like... You know, the story that I told you, that very short story, white. You know, we make white. There is no white. You know, we mythologize white. We have white as the pure driven snow. We have snow white. We have white supremacists. I mean, white has a big kind of mythic meaning to us, but there's no such thing.

[08:52]

You can pull out your diffraction glasses to remind yourself of that. I have some extra if you've lost them. So likewise, classification of life on Earth is for our benefit, for human beings, because it's the way we roll. It's the way we see, it's the way we understand, it's the way we communicate. So when we classify life on Earth, scientists have to kind of hold it lightly like so far it looks like this group have some things in common and you know then it gets revised so when we when we look at you know when we look at like an animal and say well that's a predator so why is it eating that plant you know well from the animal's point of view, it never signed up for predator. It doesn't know that word.

[09:55]

It doesn't care. It is interested in survival. So life on Earth has a prior commitment to survival above everything else. So whether it likes, you know, whether it's a predator or whether it's a, you know, a filter feeder or whether it's, you know, a a scavenger. It's got, you know, the animals that have some different strategies are the ones that survive. So, back to tardigrades. They have survived for a half a billion years. One source that I looked at said they're in a new environment, tardigrades are among the first organisms to move in. And the thing about invertebrates, they're invertebrates, they don't have a backbone. when they move in, other invertebrates are attracted to the environment.

[10:55]

So then it turns into a little ecosystem. But the reason why scientists and people who might get tattoos in their arm of a tardigrade are so excited about them is because of what they can do. They can... They can survive extremes. Extreme conditions that would kill pretty much every known form of life on Earth. They can survive extreme temperatures. They can survive 304 degrees Fahrenheit temperature for a few minutes. And they can survive... negative 328 Fahrenheit degrees for a few days, which brings to mind the craft of science, like, aw, you know, I'm sorry they're testing the tardigrades and killing them off like that.

[12:07]

But they can withstand extreme pressure, both high and low pressure. They can survive a vacuum. They can survive 1,200 times atmospheric pressure. Some species, 6,000 times atmospheric pressure, which is six times the pressure of the deepest ocean. So, you know, I'm a scuba diver, so one of the little tricks that... when you first learn to dive, the dive master does is he'll take like a plastic water bottle that's empty down, you know, 30 feet or 40 or 50 feet and pull it out of his, you know, BC and say, look, and you'll see this plastic, you know, water bottle completely crushed, completely crushed because the pressure

[13:08]

there's one additional atmosphere of pressure every 30 or so feet. So by the time you get down to 30 feet, you have twice the atmospheric pressure on you. And since we're a watery bag, we don't feel it much. We feel it in our ears, and it affects the air spaces in our body, but we don't feel it in our watery bag part. But it's happening. We go down 30 feet, There's a lot of pressure. Go down 60 feet, a whole other atmospheric, a whole other atmosphere of pressure. So we're talking 6,000 times atmospheric pressure that some species of tardigrades can survive. They can survive air deprivation, solar radiation. They can survive in the vacuum of space for 10 days. dehydration, they can survive for 10 years in a desiccated state, which is handy because if you live in ice, like some of them live in layers of ice, if you live in the ice and the ice kind of melts and you're all puffed up with water and then you freeze, you might explode because, of course,

[14:35]

Ice expands when it freezes. Water expands when it freezes. So it's good to desiccate yourself if you're going to be surviving for 10 years or more in solid ice. So... This is a little passage, I think, from the Britannica or something like that. The most remarkable feature of the tardigrades is their ability to withstand extremely low temperatures and desiccation. Under unfavorable conditions, they go into a state of suspended animation called the ton state, T-U-N, in which the body dries out and appears as a lifeless ball. In this state, their metabolism may decline to as little as 1% of its normal rate. tardigrades can survive as tons for years, even decades, to wait out dry conditions. In addition, specimens kept for eight days in a vacuum, transferred for three days into helium gas at room temperature, and then exposed for several hours to a temperature of negative 458 degrees Fahrenheit, came to life when they were brought to normal room temperature.

[15:49]

61% of those specimens kept for 21 days in liquid air at a temperature of negative 310 degrees Fahrenheit, also revived. Tardigrades are easily distributed by wind and water while in the ton state. So they're probably all around us when the wind blows. We can imagine their conversations. Good morning, bears and piglets. Good morning. Time for radiation samadhi. Okay, this time ready for desiccation samadhi. Some of us won't make it out, but it's been real. So these animals have the ability to survive all kinds of conditions that would wipe us out.

[16:49]

These are among the animals that will survive on Earth through all kinds of cataclysmic, horrific events that either we create or are so-called natural events. And since they've They've been around for 530 million years. They have a legacy of strategies for survival. And as I said, in general, animals that survive over time have flexible strategies, or else they're extremely lucky. Gray whales and also humpbacks have recovered in large part from you know, in danger of extinction because they are opportunistic feeders.

[17:51]

So for gray whales, for example, they are, you know, they're the whales that migrate up and down the west coast regularly every year. They feed in the Alaskan waters. Turns out the cold waters of the Arctic and the Antarctic have the most food because of their extremely long days in the summertime. So all the whales of the world head for the poles during their summer to feed. So the gray whales go to the northern Alaskan waters to feed. And the way they feed, this was just discovered like in the last 30 years, is they open their giant mouths And they're like a plow. They run, they sort of run along the bottom of the ocean, scooping up a giant mouthful of mud and amphipods, which are little crustaceans that live in the mud.

[18:54]

And they come up and, you know, use their giant tongues to force the muddy water out through their baleen. And then they have a mouthful of amphipods. That's how they feed. You can imagine how many amphipods it takes, um... to feed a gray whale, which is about 35 to 45 feet long. Each of the whales kind of has their favorite way of feeding, and that's the gray whale's favorite. But they migrate from Alaska down to Baja, the bays of Baja to mate and give birth, and then they migrate north. So they migrate south in December, January, migrate north in March and April right now. And as they migrate, if they bump into a school of sardines, they're perfectly happy to eat them, or a school of krill.

[19:59]

So they're opportunistic feeders. They take advantage of the resource that they have. animals that can do that are likely to survive or more likely to survive. By doing that, by feeding on sardines and krill on their way down and their way up, they arrive home healthier, healthier babies, and they They're better equipped to handle the periodic fluctuations in amphipod population in the Alaskan waters. So if there's a bad amphipod year, they don't starve. They're not likely to starve. They have a backup plan. So that's one of the many examples that we can think of of life.

[21:03]

having a prior commitment to being alive so that our classification system never quite fits. Life is always kind of busting out of our classification system, including us. We're, don't forget, we're the wild ones. One interesting thing that I read once about tardigrades is that they can do all this crazy stuff, but they're not classified as extremophiles. They don't love extremes. Even though they can do all these extreme things, they don't really like it. They just really like stepping slowly in the mosses, taking naps, eating moss. They're kind of like hobbits.

[22:04]

And they're also kind of like Soto Zen Buddhists. And they're a lot like Joujo. They just do whatever needs, whatever is in front. Okay. Desiccation time. Bye, Moss. Is this a perfect segue to a discussion of how we hold hierarchy or what? So I've attempted several times to talk about hierarchy in a Dharma setting. And I'm going to attempt it again. I can't say that... I can't say that it's a good topic or that it's worked, but it's a perennial topic for us in a Zen Buddhist setting, and so I'm going to try again.

[23:17]

So if you look up hierarchy, all the definitions say it's a system in which people organize themselves or are organized in ranks. according to status or authority. So all the definitions seem to feature this. It's people that do this. And it's characterized by ranks, status, and authority. And sometimes one reads that hierarchy is natural, that we see it in nature. But I'm not, I don't think so, especially when we take a look at organisms like tardigrades. Our habit of imposing hierarchy and status and value judgments on nature, like the lion is the king of the forest, is how we miss things like tardigrades, which, who knows, there are

[24:32]

possibly the really high-status organisms, if we want to determine status that way, or possibly nematodes and bacteria. But really, when we look at nature, we can't see that status applies. Many of us probably came to this practice to find something authentic in our solitude, in our relationships, in our work. And here we are, enacting an ever-changing yet ancient hierarchy, sometimes getting tweaked and hurt and angry with each other. just by walking around and doing our jobs.

[25:34]

We know that we vow not to kill, and we know that we fail at that vow every day that we eat, every day that we walk on the ground. But we might forget the corollary to our vows, which is not to operate from an egocentric status position of either above or below another person, which we also fail at every day. And I vow not to judge others for what looks to me like operating from a status position of either above or below another person. And I fail at that too. I think we get pretty twisted up with this matter. So how do we do this practice together? How can we benefit ourselves and others from this practice of finding authenticity in our lives while enacting hierarchy?

[26:49]

How do we hold our roles firmly, firmly enough to do work that ensures health and harmony in the community, and lightly enough to allow authentic Dharma friendships to flourish? How do we fully engage our roles without seeking an identity in them? How do we practice the amoeba way from the inside out, touching our prior commitment to save all beings while we step in and out of different roles? at Tassajara or elsewhere. I have a story about me in this regard. I hope you like it. I'm glad it's over with. So I told the staff, the senior staff this story, also Leslie.

[27:58]

When we were at Tassajara years ago, I remember Philip was here and Keith was director. And there was food disappearing from the walk-in, like lots of food and also alcohol because we had some rum or something like that for the fruit cakes. And, you know, people were scratching our heads anyway. One thing and another, it turned out that I guess there was an escaped... prisoner from a psychiatric prison who had come to Tassajara. And he was kind of camping out somewhere and coming in in the night and taking food. And this was a little bit scary when we discovered this. And, you know, it was a little upsetting. And Keith was director and he wanted to call... the police to get the guy taken out.

[29:01]

And I was one of the people who was just opposed to that. No, no. We can help this guy. Here he is. There's only one of him and there's all of us. Let's, you know, let's talk to him. Let's, you know. So it was this, it was this, there was a real division in the sangha. But, excuse me, Keith did call the the police or whoever it was, and the man was taken away. So that happened. A couple of years later, when we were at Tassajara, no, when we were at Green Gulch, excuse me, I was Eno, so I was probably like 29 or something like that. I was Eno at Green Gulch, and at that time, That was when Green Gulch kind of imploded, exploded in 1983. And it was quite the scene, quite the scene.

[30:04]

And one thing and another, I ended up Eno and director, which was a bad choice, but there was kind of like no one, not too many people left standing. People had fled. So I was Eno and director. and, oh, I should go back, that Norman and I, while we were at Green Gulch, kind of became known as the people who would, like, you know, when you live in a religious community, especially Green Gulch, because it's like right off Highway 1, all kinds of people kind of come to the religious community in different states of disrepair, emotional, physical, and... every other way. So there's always all kinds of people that come, you know, the crazy people. But I apologize for using the word crazy.

[31:12]

I just learned the term is neurologically diverse. And that is a very good term because it kind of, it takes the fear factor out of why it is that most people, you know, respond to neurologically diverse others with, you know, like a lot of attitude and a lot of blocking. But anyway, we had some people that were at Green Gulch and that came to Green Gulch and, you know, Norman and I would always say, well, You know, she's really a nice person. Yeah, she likes to come on Saturday night and spend the night so that she can do this Sunday program. And yeah, she was running naked and screaming through the garden that one day. That's true. But, you know, and then she did it again. That's true, too. But, you know, how about if she comes to Green Galt, she comes to our house. We'll just sort of take her in, you know.

[32:12]

We can... Give her breakfast. The kids are having, we can all have breakfast. So we had this person that would come and visit us every week. And then there was a woman who was living at Green Gulch who somehow got into the habit of getting up at 2 in the morning, going and grabbing the wake-up bell and running all around Green Gulch screaming and ringing the wake-up bell. And so we said, no, she shouldn't have to leave. She's a good person. So we said, we'll take her on. And so one morning at 1.30, she came ringing the wake-up bell into our bedroom. You know, we lived up in the trailer. I don't know who lives up there now, but next to where Foo lives. Anyway, in Spring Valley, yeah. So she, one morning, you know, 1.30, I woke up and said, hi, Cheryl, it's really early. And she was ringing the wake-up bell, and our kids got up and said, why is she ringing the wake-up bell?

[33:21]

And, you know, we would say, well, she's upset. And the kids would say, oh, yeah, we get that. Like the time Jesse picked up that bucket of sand and dumped it on my head, kind of like that. Yeah, kind of like that, yeah. So anyway, Norman and I had these... you know, this little cadre of neurologically diverse people in our circle. So back to my being Eno and director. There was one week when we had three women residents at Green Gulch who were threatening suicide. First, there was one woman, and then there was another woman. And when the third woman threatened suicide, I hit a wall. I just hit a wall as director. I was like, no one is committing suicide on my watch.

[34:25]

Not going to happen. Not here. Nobody dies while I'm director. If I'm director and you want to commit suicide, you have to leave. I will drive you. I will drive you wherever you want to go. But, you know, it was like, no, not going to happen. It was the, you know, just the weight of the responsibility hit me like a ton of bricks. Like, oh, okay, we're talking suicide here. And then there was a day when... In that situation, Philip Whelan came to give the Sunday lecture at Green Gulch. And on that particular day, we had a wild and neurologically diverse person who was misbehaving badly come to the Sunday lecture. And I said, call the police. We're calling the police. Get him out of here. And Philip looked at me and said, Kathy, what's happened to you?

[35:29]

You were the person when we were at Tassajara who wanted to, you know, support that man who came to Tassajara. What's happened here, you know? And, you know, his asking me that question just helped me to realize, wow, I am just overburdened by the weight of this responsibility. It's... It's like too much. And I learned a lot in that situation about what it's like to step in and out of different roles with regard to each other, with regard to, you know, people in professional lives elsewhere. There are, we can't exactly understand someone else's personal sense of the responsibility or the responsibility itself. So... Anyway, that's my note to self.

[36:33]

Remember that other people are, you know, handling big responsibilities. So, I've been reading and thinking about this with regard to Dogen in the Shobogenzo, and there are two fascicles that I would... relates to this and I'd like to read to you from. One is Twining Vines and this is Twining Vines is a fascicle that Norman spoke from earlier in the practice period. Twining Vines is one of the fascicles that we read while studying Dharma transmission and since we've had dharma transmissions going on for the last several weeks, I thought I would share this with you again.

[37:34]

This part is about skin, flesh, bones, and marrow, if I can read it. Bodhidharma once said to his students, the time has come, can you express your understanding? Then one of the students, Daofu, said, my present view is that we should neither be attached to letters nor be apart from letters and allow the way to function freely. Thank you. Bodhidharma was saying to his students, the time has come. Can you express your understanding? Then one of the students, Daofu, said, my present view is that we should neither be attached to letters nor be apart from letters and allow the way to function freely. Bodhidharma said, you have attained my skin.

[38:35]

The Nung Dzong-chir said, my view is that it is like the joy of seeing Ashoka Ashum, Akshobya Buddhas. Akshyobha, Buddha's land just once and not again. Bodhidharma said, you have attained my flesh. Tao Yu said, the four great elements are originally empty and the five skandhas do not exist. Therefore, I see nothing to be attained. Bodhidharma said, you have attained my bones. Finally, Hui Ka bowed three times, stood up and returned to where he was. Bodhidharma said, you have attained my marrow. Thus he confirmed Hue Ka as the second ancestor and transmitted dharma and the robe to him. So reading on, it says, Dogen says, investigate these words of Bodhidharma.

[39:37]

You have attained my skin, flesh, bones, marrow. These are the ancestors' words. All four students had attained understanding. Each one's attainment and understanding is skin, flesh, bones, and marrow leaping out of body and mind. Skin, flesh, bones, and marrow dropping away body and mind. Do not see or hear the ancestor with a limited understanding of these statements. Otherwise, what was spoken... and heard will not be fully grasped. However, those who have not received authentic transmission think that Bodhidharma's words — skin, flesh, bones, and marrow — are not equal in depth. And because the views of the four students vary, one may seem to be closer than the others. They think that skin and flesh are not as close

[40:40]

as bones and marrow. They think that Hui Ka was acknowledged as attaining the marrow because his view was better than those of the others. People who speak in this way have not yet studied with Buddha ancestors and do not have transmission of the ancestor way. He goes on to say, don't reify these four things. Only the E-Note can operate this. Actually, I'm going to use it again. Should I just leave it on? Anyway, he goes on to say that there's nothing special about four things.

[41:44]

If there had been six students, he would have added some more, eyes and mind. If there had been a thousand students, he would have added some more things. It's not about the number of things. So there's nothing special about skin, flesh, bones, and marrow. This discussion... in the context of dharma transmission is very important because it says that true dharma transmission is not within the realm of hierarchy, rank, status, and so on. It's in the realm of relationship, of people knowing who they are in themselves while recognizing the beauty of others knowing themselves, but differently. This is something that we can all recognize and take heart in. That we can know this bag of bones located on earth in this specific way and recognize the beauty of each other as same and different is the Dharma transmission being spoken of here.

[42:59]

And it's... it's... It's in the public domain. It's not special. Another fascicle in Shobogenzo that addresses this matter from a slightly different angle is receiving the marrow by bowing. Dogen says, this particular fascicle, there's a lot of discussion about men and women. And Dogen has some lovely rants. If you like Dogen rants, this is a good one. Here he says, Shakyamuni Buddha said, In encountering teachers who expound unsurpassable enlightenment, do not consider their caste or facial appearance. Do not dislike their shortcomings or judge their activities.

[44:05]

Just value their prajna and feed them daily with 100 or 1,000 ounces of gold. Offer them celestial meals. Sprinkle celestial flowers for them. Bow and pay respect to them three times a day and do not arouse the mind of confusion. So I think Dogen, is saying don't get caught in status and hierarchy. Like, you know, don't believe the hype. When you meet a Dharma friend or a teacher that you can connect with, trust yourself and trust the connection. Don't let anything get in your way. Honor your prior commitment to saving all beings to love, to enlightenment. I like the line, don't dislike their shortcomings or judge their activities, because he's saying that there are likely to be shortcomings in Dharma friends and in teachers.

[45:19]

He goes on, about Zhaozhou. When Zhaozhou, who would later become great master Zheng Ji of the Tang Dynasty, aroused the aspiration for enlightenment and was about to begin a journey, he said to himself, I will ask about Dharma of anyone who surpasses me, even a seven-year-old. I will teach anyone who is behind me, even a hundred-year-old. When asking a seven-year-old about dharma, an old man like Zhao Zhou bows. It is an extraordinary aspiration, the mind art of an old Buddha. It is an excellent custom of study that when a nun has attained the way, attained dharma, and started to teach, monks who seek dharma and study, join her assembly, bow to her, and ask about the way.

[46:30]

It is just like finding water at the time of thirst. That is, one who truly seeks the Dharma is not stopped by distinctions, gender, ethnicity, or status. Meaning that on those moments, when we are true to ourselves, truly seeking Dharma. Not that some people are truly seeking Dharma and others are not. All of us, without exception, are both sometimes not and sometimes seeking Dharma. So those moments when we are true to ourselves are the moments when we can see our friends. and our teachers. So he goes on again.

[47:33]

This is part of his rant. Why are men special? Emptiness is emptiness. Four great elements are four great elements. Five skandhas are five skandhas. Women are just like that. Both men and women attain the way. You should honor attainment of the way. Do not discriminate between men and women. This is the most wondrous principle of the Buddha way. I have to read one rant in which he says, He clarifies something important. He makes a very important point in this rant. Those who are extremely stupid think that women are merely the objects of sexual desire and treat women in this way.

[48:40]

The Buddha's children should not be like this. If we discriminate against women because we see them merely as objects of sexual desire, do we also discriminate against all men for the same reason? For the cause of defilement, men can be the object. Women can be the object. Those who are neither men nor women can be the object. Phantoms and flowers of emptiness can be the object. There were those who were trapped by impure conduct while looking at images on water or gazing at the sun. Gods can be the objects. Demon can be the objects. We cannot finish counting all the causes of impure conduct. It is said that there are 84,000 objects. Do we not look at them or discard them all? So he's saying, don't blame it on the objects, you know, that we create a world in which there are objects, others, whether it's defilements or whether it's

[49:51]

tyrants or whether it's, you know, bosses in a hierarchical situation. It's our activity of creating self and other that cause that in our lives. So it doesn't take much imagination to see that the world of our exterior landscape, our habits, our relationships and such, resembles that of our interior landscape. In fact, it's all one continuous landscape. Going back to hierarchy, in our meditation practice, we can notice our own personal hierarchy. Maybe samadhi is high status, boredom and distraction is low status. Yet this whole thing is our ecosystem, all interacting and interrelated.

[50:59]

Maybe Samadhi is the lion of the forest. Maybe Samadhi is the tardigrades of the forest. We don't know. Maybe the whole thing, the whole thing is human. I want to close with the passage on from the fascicle receiving the marrow by bowing in honor of our new four brown robe women today Nuns stay in monasteries of great song. That means a Song dynasty in China. When the attainment of dharma by one of them is acknowledged and she is appointed abbess of a nunnery by the government, she ascends the teaching seat in the monastery where she is staying.

[52:07]

All monks, including the abbot, assemble, stand and listen to her dharma discourse. Some monks ask questions. This has been the custom since ancient times. One who has attained dharma is a true authentic Buddha and should not be regarded as the same as before. When we see the person, someone who is new and extraordinary sees us. When we see the person, today sees today. So... Anyway, it looks like there might be a couple minutes for comments or words anyway. Go ahead, Joe. I'm also wondering about when there's a place for accountability, and especially in Zen Buddhism, it seems like a lot of specifically male teachers have taken advantage of their status.

[53:49]

Yeah, where do we let ourselves judge? Well, we do judge. And there is, you know, in one of my talks before, I talked about all of our capacities. We can, rather than thinking of them as our identity, we can think of them as tools. So we pick them up, use them, and put them down. So one of those tools is judgment. That's one of our special, special tool. I mean, we use it a lot, probably use it too much, but there's definitely a time to say, you know, this has to stop, this can't happen, you know, this can't happen here. There's definitely a time to say that. And when it is time to say that, it's really difficult.

[54:55]

There's no easy way. and who you talk to and how you go about the process. I mean, you know, you can't even put a policy in place to anticipate and describe the process that you follow. All you can do is try to, okay, I'm not doing this out of anger. You know, we work with our own emotions and motivations in that situation and ask for the help from others. Does that answer you? Does that speak to your... You should feel anger. Yeah. And, you know, anger is, you know, anger is one of our tools.

[56:07]

It's a source of energy. But it's not a source of, you know, it's a source of courage, too. But it's not a source of love and wisdom. And so it's a tool that, you know, leaves something out. And so, you know, when we're overwhelmed with anger, that's when we can ask somebody, look, this is what's happening. I'm overwhelmed with anger. I could use a friend here, you know. Thank you, Kitchen. Yes. So basically, even tardigrades have limits to what they can endure, like pressure.

[57:14]

So maybe we shouldn't feel so bad when we feel like we're at our breaking point. And unlike tardigrades, a lot of times the pressure we're experiencing, we create ourselves. And that maybe when I feel like I am under enough pressure that it might break me. It's because I'm looking outside myself for the source of the pressure, when really I should be looking inside in order to find and address the real cause. That's a good statement. Yeah. Yeah, and a lot of times, I mean, I don't know in your case, but A lot of times we put pressure on ourselves in comparison to others. We sort of, we have some model of how we're supposed to be, some model of how this thing is supposed to go. And when it's not going that way, when I'm not being that way, then I start up with, you know, scolding myself and I do whatever I do, which amounts to a lot of extra pressure.

[58:30]

It's what we do. Could you speak a little louder? Yeah, sure. What I'm currently working with and examining is, of course we all know, well, I would say perhaps the dark sides of our, how certain people will act out certain frustrations or pressures on people who are either seen as or are functionally subordinate to them. And I think we've all seen it in corporations. Indian families, or however else it has to rise and function. Particularly in religious communities, as in Buddhism, we have people being sensitized every day on cushion and opening.

[59:34]

And not in these kind of moments of how we slip up in our roles, you know, and I've done it, and I think all this experience is wonderful. It's not always apparent to people who are like the teachers, because they're not necessarily being treated that way. They're not necessarily supported, so they don't see the way people behave in those situations. And that's one thing I've noticed, time and time again, that maybe some teachers will come in to address something, and they don't see how these people really function. And what's happening. Yeah. I mean, you know, as a classroom teacher, I mean, The classroom teacher, I walk into the classroom and my kids are not going to show me their worst side. Why? Because they want a good grade. They want something from me, so they're going to put their best face and behavior forward most of the time.

[60:35]

And as Joe was asking about the leaders of Buddhist and other religious communities, What happens to a leader in a religious community or a leader in probably most communities is that they don't get feedback. We don't get feedback. I mean, we're kind of walking around in a bubble. We're kind of like we walk into a situation and the situation changes. And we go, like, what? What just happened? But we're, because of our role, we are treated as though that's our identity, you know. And we're just as messed up as everybody else, you know. Trust me on that. And I mean literally we. So this, you know, the communication within a community is really important

[61:43]

it's really important to be considerate of each other and not to, like, pound each other with constant feedback and, you know, because people, as you say, are very sensitized in a practice period setting, in a practice setting. But to be, you know, at the same time, I think it's, from my experience living in a practice center, it's better to be fairly transparent than to be hidden. It's better to err on the side of transparency. I don't know if after I leave this room if I'll stand behind that statement, but at this moment I'm thinking, yeah, I kind of would rather deal with the stuff up front than the consequence of having people stuff it. I don't know if it's an either-or. But... But it's hard to do. It's really hard to do. You know?

[62:44]

Yes? Thank you. I've heard your stories about the neurologically diverse people in different communities, and I wondered how that fits in your discussion of hierarchy. Are you saying something? thought there was no need for any kind of hierarchy or stance of authority at all, and then you realized that there was a need for it. When you said these people, no, you have to go. What did that teach you about hierarchy? Well, what it taught me about hierarchy is that when one has responsibility, it's extremely consequential. It can be very consequential. I mean, when you are where the buck stops, it's not that—I mean, everyone is always—

[63:55]

everything that everybody does is always consequential. This is not to, like, make a hierarchy out of consequences. But when you have the, when it's your role to take big responsibility for the health and safety of the whole community as a kind of overview, then what happened to me at age 29 was that it was just like a ton of bricks. It just hit me like a ton of bricks. I've got three people who are... wanting to kill themselves here. And, you know, that's not acceptable to me. You know, that's just, you know. And yet I, you know, I am a person who actually enjoys and appreciates what we're calling neurological diversity, you know. And I'm not afraid of it. But in that particular situation, it was the weight of the role that just shook me.

[64:57]

Also, though, is there, I mean, you could have people in positions of authority. Absolutely. This is the same as hierarchy. I mean, you could have a setting that isn't particularly hierarchical, but still. And then somebody takes a turn, having, being the one to say, you know, This hasn't changed. You don't have to have every single side of that consensus. Right. So there's something in the case where everybody's enlightened, everybody's Buddha, everybody's of equal status at some level, and yet somebody like you has to very generously be willing to step into a position without abusing it somehow. Everyone has trouble stepping in and out of roles. Everyone does. When you're in the role of being in charge of something, whatever it is, there's things that you see that it's just not other people's job to see at that moment, unless they've been in the role themselves.

[66:12]

And there's certain details that you have to you have to keep track of in some way, you know. And I agree with you that I'm not advocating an anarchical system. I'm saying that here we have, I mean, we are enacting a traditional hierarchical monastic system to some extent. And how do we do this without hurting each other? Or how do we handle our hurt in a way that that supports Dharma friendship. You know, how do we handle the impact that we have on each other that supports Dharma friendship rather than, you know, rather than does harm to it? You know, we can all step into, you know, leadership roles of various kinds. And of course it has to do with our level of experience. Of course it does. Because for the community to work well,

[67:14]

the people whose job it is to take, you know, the overarching responsibility need to know how the community works. Otherwise, you know, there would just be a lot of mistakes, you know. Does that answer your question? Diana, you were next. I could hear your talk implications for my individual practice, for anybody's individual practice. And something that I've been wondering about has been, and not to say that hierarchy is only a sense of this, it's something that's in all organizations that I know of,

[68:16]

but I wondered how hierarchical system impacts the capacity for the diversity. Impacts the capacity for what? For diversity. Uh-huh, uh-huh. Yeah. Well, that's, you know, that's such an important question. That's such a, that question is so up for us as a whole society right now. And it's up for Zen Center right now. And how, you know, how we lift up that question together as a community and take a look and, you know, listen to each other on that subject. And, you know, the thing about Dharma friendship is when I talk to myself, I kind of mostly agree with myself, you know? But when I'm talking to another person and I talk, I hear myself in a whole different way.

[69:25]

They don't have to say a thing. They just kind of have to sit there and listen. And I hear myself and I think, did I just say that? That's obnoxious, you know. I really hear myself in a different way. And to me, that's that. And, you know, I always appreciate it when the person doesn't say anything back and say, Kathy, that's obnoxious, you know. But the relationships that we can have and speak out our heart at that moment and then hear ourselves in what we say and then hear other people be ready to listen to each other is, for me, you know, the craft of of lifting up an issue, say, like diversity in an organization like this. The craft is speaking and listening, really listening. And as for what the organization does, as you say, it depends on the organization.

[70:29]

It's very unique to the organization. Ami, did you have something? You just addressed it. sticking about thinking about hierarchy is that when I said, I'll listen to a seven-year-old, learn from a seven-year-old, and I'll teach a hundred-year-old. And it seems that what happened for you is you had someone who said, Kathy, what's going on here? You heard that. So that's one of the questions that you just kind of addressed, which is, How is it that when you have a hierarchy because it's different laws and laws and we get identified with them, that we continue to hear each other and hear different perspectives so that if you're a hundred-year-old, you're so willing to learn and if you're the

[71:35]

seven-year-old, you're willing to adhere the perspective of a person who has support experience. I do. And it's our responsibility. Whether we're in a role or not, it's our human dharma-seeking responsibility to do our best on each moment in that regard. And I just remembered that I forgot to read a passage. What time is it? Are we kind of Even seven-year-old girls who practice Buddha Dharma and express Buddha Dharma are guiding teachers of the four types of disciples, namely monks, nuns, laymen, and laywomen. They are compassionate parents of sentient beings. They are like dragon princesses who have attained Buddhahood.

[72:37]

You should make an offering and respect them just as you respect Buddha Tathagatas. This is an authentic custom of the Buddha way. Those who do not know this custom and do not receive it should be pitied. If you have spent any time with seven-year-old girls lately, you know how true this is. Just to go back to this idea of speaking and listening, and the responsibility of speaking and listening to each other, I think one of the things that I notice, particularly in religious communities, is that people who are lower on the hierarchy, who have less power, are very often self-censored. And it is very difficult to speak up. And so if that's the case, then it seems to me that it behooves

[73:39]

the leaders, the people who have power, to actively solicit and create a safe listening space, and to ask for that kind of feedback, rather than to expect people who are lower in the pecking order to just come forth and speak. Because, of course, none of us want to be adventurers. None of us want to be labelled as complainers. And so in order to sort of upset that, you know, sort of destabilize that hierarchical formation. It really, the responsibility lies, I think, with the people who are higher up on the second one. Yes, that's true. You know, I taught for 28 years and I probably worked for 10 different principals. And, you know, they were always, we could watch new teachers come in And basically, you know, they wanted to keep their jobs.

[74:41]

So they would volunteer for every committee that came down the pike, you know, every task. They would always show up with little smiley faces and cookies, you know. And it was sad, but it was, that's the deal. That was the deal. And that really was the deal. You know, it's not like some fantasy. So, I mean, there's something natural in a bad way about that behavior. And as for whose responsibility it is, I think in a sangha community, it's everybody's responsibility. And, you know, in a practice period, we don't really... I mean, you know, since we're here to do this practice in this way, we're not exactly featuring a lot of... conversation and exchange. It happens. It certainly happens and it should happen, but it's not like the feature of the practice period, better communication.

[75:46]

So I personally think that it's an important craft, but as for whose responsibility it is, I think it's everybody's. I think it's everybody's responsibility. And in a case like this, it's not like you're going to lose your job if you speak up. you know. Well, that may be true. I take that back. And, you know, the people whose job it is, like when I was 29 and I was in that role of taking responsibility, you know, I wasn't doing a good job by by, you know, like, I didn't have my eye on the quiet people in the corner. I had my eye on the screamers in the situation. And it was like, you know, I needed to take care of the screamers. And so in that particular setting, there were a lot of people who probably, you know, knew they didn't have the director's attention or the Eno's attention, and they had to find their own resources, and it probably wasn't a pretty picture, you know.

[77:06]

Yes. As far as speaking up is concerned. Speak up. Do. My question is, what are the systems for providing those kind of information? Individuals who are in the leadership positions now will not be in five years. And so the personal dynamics will always change. So do we have that are systems that will be in place five years from now so that people lower on the hierarchy will always have the opportunity to provide feedback and so on. so that it's not based on personality, but that leaders get what they need in a way that is helpful.

[78:14]

Well, I can't answer on behalf of Zen Center on what the system is, but what I do know is that the system at Zen Center changes over time, and it's responsive to the need for change. And the change might be slower than we want. But this is, over time, a responsive system. I mean, Norman and I are often talking about, wow, that's really different from what it was when we were here before, and so is that, and so is that. So, I mean, we've seen huge change. And when you're in Zen Center for five years or six years or seven years, you might not see, it might not look like much change. But, you know, what we have in place, what Zen Center has in place is everyone has a practice leader. Everyone relates to a person, and that person relates to a group of peers.

[79:19]

And so there's that sort of thing in place. And beyond that, I can't really speak to your question. Does that... Do you have more... Right. Yeah. I'm sure that, I mean, I don't know. I really can't speak for Zen Center, but if I were, if I took it to my practice leader and my practice leader wasn't hearing me, I would take it to another practice leader, you know. But that's just me. Yeah. Yeah, Travis.

[80:21]

I was just appreciating, I feel like I learned so much from what you said today about with diverse, neurologically diverse people and our welcoming or accessibility to those types of people, depending upon the ones that you actually accepted. Depending on what? people who are representative of Zen Center who do the actual acceptance. That's not the limitation of the neurologically diverse group by itself. It's a coming together of two limitations. The limitations of those who are in power meeting the limitations of those who are neurologically diverse. And it's not like one holds the cards, but it happens to be that one is in power. So where are their limitations? Like for instance, this is too many people saying they want to commit suicide at that point. Then at some point, I mean, I'd assume we probably have stopped letting as many people commit suicide into Zen Center.

[81:30]

And so like seeing it from that perspective, okay, we have just limitations that actually neurological diversity extends to the power. We're neurologically diverse people at Zen Center too. It's helpful for me. Because then I can say, oh yeah, like it makes a lot of sense. There's just a limitation on what we can accomplish here. But I know someone might have like PDs with certain people or discussions with teachers and they say, oh, this is where my limitation is on something where before I was like, I don't get why we can't change this. When they talk about their limitation, I can have like empathy for that and I can say, okay, I understand that. How can we move around? How can we like, add resources to work without limitation, which I mean goes to a general thing of like the more we're all vulnerable with each other in a safe way, the more we can like actually make change because it's like, ooh, we come together now. But I don't know, I really appreciate that you talked about the limitation that allows me to see what you're talking about, like hierarchical, more understanding of that. And then also, I wonder if there's a way we can, which we're doing, we're having more discussion about more

[82:36]

like this kind of thing where we're all talking about limitations there's a way we can introduce from the people who are in power more admittance of like here's where a limitation is that allows us not to like make a choice that everybody who doesn't understand the power piece like me can be I can have empathy for that and you say here's my limitations and they can't do that and sometimes it feels like we don't talk about that only if we talk about it more because it really helps me Thank you for saying that. Yeah, Ruth? I just have one follow-up thought, which is just to thank you for doing exactly what you've done, which is to open up this topic of conversation from the Dharma seat and to invite us to think about this together. This is exactly, I think, the kind of invitation that I was talking about from somebody in Paris.

[83:38]

Thank you. Welcome. Yes. I might butcher it, but Brad Warner had a really elegant take on the positions that various temples have, like Tenzo. It makes it easier for a group of people to do Zen practice together. If there is just one person who it's that's their job to decide what to feed everybody to make sure they're cooking goods done it's just easier that way than if everyone had to go out and get their own food every day right or it's just easier for to designate one person as like all right they're in charge of keeping track of the temple finances because if people just showed up it's like here's money it's like all right well what do we buy it's like all right well i think that needs to fix that's the thing i'm looking at you know so it's just makes it easier to have these officer positions. But beyond making it easier for the community to practice and be together, those positions have no existence.

[84:43]

In other words, I think we're conditioned to see hierarchy, and in many cases it's helpful to have hierarchy, but in terms of giving these positions authority or giving them some sort of elevated status, where it's okay for them to do things that it wouldn't be okay for other people to do outside the scope of their position as decision maker over some aspect of temple life, that that actually would be a really great practice for everybody to take up and looking at, all right, well, what did I just do that was outside of the scope of my role as this job? And then also Once that leaves, someone said, oh, so-and-so was this job now than this job, but that's a lower job than this job. How can that be? Community members will step in and out of these all the time. And it's a really beneficial practice to hold these roles as more than what they are and appreciate that it is difficult for people to

[85:56]

divest status both from the position of the subordinate and the position of an authority holder to divest this idea of status from the positions that they hold. And so I wanted to echo what we've said and thank you for bringing that up because I feel like no one ever talks about it. And it is, even in the best case scenario, disruptive or it can be disruptive to someone's ease, to someone's composure when we're trying to do this very vulnerable making practice if someone seems to take liberties with their role and act in a way that's actually kind of critical and presumptive. For me, the model of an ecosystem is much more useful than the model of, say, a human hierarchy because in an ecosystem, There is nothing optional. You know, like, or even skin, flesh, bones, and marrow.

[86:59]

Which one of those is more important? Like, how would you even, like, okay, can we lose one of those? No. Look at an ecosystem. Like, what are you going to remove? Well, we're dealing with the consequence of removing things from ecosystems all over the world, and we know... that it's, you know, disaster after disaster. So, you know, ecosystem in which every element interacts and has a very important role, a crucial role. You could look at any member of an ecosystem as the center and the king of that ecosystem. If you wanted, you could organize it that way, including the bacteria, especially the bacteria. And as for... As for a monastic setting, it is, as you say, there's a beauty to stepping in and out of roles with regard to each other and with regard to the work and promoting harmony and ease in the monastery.

[88:07]

And everyone has good and bad days, everybody. It's hard. if you've ever been in any kind of role of leadership, you know one thing that's hard is like the constant feedback, like whether it's complaints or compliments or suggestions, just fielding the constant thing can be really burdensome. It can max people out. And so I don't know. I mean, I don't know. Maybe there could be a way that there could be a a designated time and place and method for feedback. I don't know, you know, like the kitchen crew has, you know, an hour every whenever they can get to it to, you know, listen to each other's feedback and to process it. I mean, I don't know. That's just a thought that crosses my mind.

[89:09]

But I do know that the constant barrage of feedback and You know, after a while, it all might be really valuable, but it's just the barrage itself is too much, you know. So we have to be cognizant of that, especially with the people who are carrying responsibility. So there has to be a way, you know, in place that everybody understands and agrees to. And then there can be exchange. What do you say? Yes. Very, very quickly. Yes. I just want to give a shout out to the book, Thanks for the Feedback, that I'm reading right now with people in the community. And it's really awesome. And Norman has a mug that says, be the change you want to see in the world. And this is a way to be the change you want to see in the world and actually learn how to be responsible for your reactions to feedback and how you are responding to feedback.

[90:14]

And if you can be that person, then maybe someone else can be that person, too. Thank you for listening to this podcast offered by the San Francisco Zen Center. Our Dharma talks are offered free of charge and this is made possible by the donations we receive. Your financial support helps us to continue to offer the Dharma. For more information, Visit sfcc.org and click Giving.

[90:49]

@Transcribed_UNK
@Text_v005
@Score_91.38