I see that people are discussing the training and qualification of leaders, and I think that is very important. I'd like to share my perspective (esp. since I just finished assisting and teaching at a Nichiren Order of North America Lay Leaders Workshop and attending a Ministers Workshop).
When I look for Buddhist teachers I am looking for several qualities, some professional and some personal.
On the professional level I am looking for people who really know what they are doing insofar as having a working knoweldge of the teachings and an ability to facilitate and lead Buddhist practice. I am looking for somone who has gone to a credible source, been trained by that source, and then given a stamp of approval by that source so to speak (teaching certificate, ordination, transmission - whatever). This does not guarantee that they will be the most knowledgeable person around or the most skilled or dediated practitioner and it certainly doesn't guarantee that they are enlightened or holy or anything like that. But it does mean that they at least made the effort to go through a training program, that they at least met certain standards and qualifications, and that they they have been vouched for by other teachers and practitioners that one respects or at least finds credible. I personally think it is even better if such a teacher continues to be responsible or answerable to the community as a whole and aren't just set up as independent autocratic authorities in their own right. On that path madness lies in my view.
Now I have sought out and found several teachers over the course of my life who were ordained as teachers by groups that I found credible and admirable (if not necessarily perfect in every respect). In fact, I have gone through such a training and qualification process myself with Nichiren Shu, so I can now speak as an insider about these things. So here's the deal from my side:
I have been checked to make sure I generally knew basic Buddhist doctrines and of course Nichiren Buddhist doctrines. In fact, I know quite a bit more than just the basics due to my own private studies - BUT no one has been in a position to vouch for that. If I want to receive a higher ranking in Nichiren Shu (i.e. recognition of that further knoweldge) I will have to take a formal test and prove to the satisfaction of Nichiren Shu that I do know more. This will hopefully happen one of these days when the advanced test and preparatory materials are translated into English (if I were fluent in Japanese I could have taken it some time ago).
I think to presume to set oneself up as a Buddhist teacher or "senior leader" or "minister" one should at least have basic knowledge of Buddhist teachings. In other words, let's say there is someone who is set up as a "Zen Master", someone that others will perceive as being a trustworthy source of Dharma teaching but it turns out that they make mistakes about the Dharma (hey, it happens), then those mistakes will get perpetuated with the authority of a "Zen Master." Such a person should, therefore, be very careful not to make mistakes and esp. when writing a book or article take the time to doublecheck their work or have someone more knowledgeable check their work.
Or suppose there are "senior leaders" in a Buddhist lay organization who are also set up as authority figures, but who don't know any Buddhism and make ridiculous claims about what is or is not in the sutras, even the Lotus Sutra, without having ever read any sutras for themselves - rather they are simply touting a party line. There is something seriously wrong there too.
So at the very least I expect a Buddhist teacher or leader to have some basic knowledge of Buddhism and the teachings of their own lineage. They don't have to be masters or experts or Ph.D.s Just a practical working knowledge will suffice. BUT they should also be the kind of people who can admit when they have reached the boundaries of their knowledge and are able to say to someone, "I don't know" or "I am not sure, let me get back to you on that." There is no disgrace in that, and it is infinitely better than making something up or taking a stance on ignorance.
As, or perhaps even more important, than being knowledgeable in Buddhist teachings as a Buddhist teacher, the teacher or leader should know how to facilitate practice. This of course presumes that they are proficient practitioners themselves. Proficient enough to know what works and what doesn't, and how the dynamic of practice (even a simple practice like chanting Odaimoku) can change over time. They should be able to model good practice, demonstrate good practice, point out pitfall in practice, encourage people to practice, and so on and so forth. If they can't do this - how can they possibly be a Dharma teacher?
It is important to note however that being a good practitioner doesn't necessarily mean that one is anymore enlightened or holy than anyone else. It just means one has a certain proficiency, skill, and experience in whatever practice methods the lineage they represent makes use of. And a leader or teacher doesn't necessarily need to know all the methods a lineage keeps in its treasury of practices - but they must at least know the basic primary and essential practice of that lineage. So for instance, I think I am at least fairly proficient in leading the chanting of Odaimoku, Shodaigyo meditation, and a Nichiren Shu service. Certainly I would not put myself on the level of those who are even more experience and able than myself - but I at least meet basic requirements and people seem to come away pleased with my efforts. However, there are several auxiliary practices I would not presume to put myself forward as a leader of, for instance the Hokke Sembo (a practice that I experience in Shingyo Dojo but which I haven't done since then and anyone interested will have to ask Rev. Faulconer or Rev. Barrett about). So again, a leader or teacher should know how to lead basic practice but should know and admit their limitations.
A leader (whether minister or lay leader) also needs to understand how to deal with basic group dynamics as facilitators of meetings and point people for building up a Sangha. They need to know how to handle difficult people who try to monopolize a groups time or dominate discussions or who bully others (hopefully not physically but I can imagine some crazy situations). One needs to be able to keep one's cool, have an even hand, be able to read people and situations, and respond in a firm and fair way in order to maintain not just harmony but good feelings in a group. This takes a certain amount of people skills and maturity. I am sure some basic techniques can be taught, but it really takes experience, maturity, and havng good examples to follow. At least that has been my experience at "learning" the art of facilitation. I am still learning of course and I have been doing it in different ways and capacities for 20 years now.
Now I have never been given training in pastoral counseling, but it is something that I really feel the lack of. I hope that someday I will have the time and money to attend a program and get whatever certifications one needs to get to do patoral counseling. Personally I think all ministers and perhaps even lay leaders should get this kind of training. But the fact is that at this point we don't, and I don't know of any Buddhist organizations in America where this is regularly provided much less made a requirement. And yet, we do end up or will eventually end up having to deal with things like divorce, substance abuse, mental illness, mental and physical abuse, sexual abuse, and of course the death of loved ones and other such tragedies. This is hard stuff. So we should try to read up on how to deal with these things, and perhaps do some volunteer work at clinics or hospices if we possibly can. But at the very least - what I expect a leader to do is do their level best to just be a good friend, to be a calm and compassionate presence, a good listener, and above all to avoid manipulating or being manipulated, and also to aboslutely avoid giving advice they are not qualified to give. A good leader MUST KNOW THEIR LIMITATIONS AND NOT PRESUME OR ASSUME EXPERTISE THEY DO NOT HAVE. A good leader MUST KNOW WHEN THEY ARE IN OVER THEIR HEADS AND KNOW HOW TO REFER TO THOSE WHO ARE CAPABLE OF HELPING. I say that in caps because this cannot be emphasized enough. Too much damage has been and continues to be done by people who presume or pretend that they know all the answers. What they really need is the maturity to admit that they don't know and must therefore refer to a hotline number when needed. They need to be a good friend and not a poser expert on everything with a magical spiritual silver bullet for every problem. It is the extremely immature and fanatical idealogues who presume to give advice when they should just be listening, who presume to have the magical solution when they should be referring someone to a counselor, a rehab or clinic, or perhaps calling the police or social workers.
So in a nutshell I exepct leaders to be vouched for by the other leaders of a credible community insofar as they have met certain basic standards and requirements (i.e. put in their time in training and done their homework) so that they can:
1. Present Buddhist teachings without making mistakes or going beyond what they know and presenting their ignorance and guesswork as the teachings.
2. Teach and lead Buddhist practice without setting themselves up as some kind of saint.
3. Facilitate group meetings without enthroning themselves as some kind of autocrat with unlimited authority over members.
4. Be a good friend and listener who can be there for others without presuming to have any answers they don't have and can refer people to the help they need when they need it instead of just resorting to wishful thinking or magical solutions.
5. All in all a leader should be someone with the maturity to confidently impart what they do know and know how to do with the maturity to admit their limitations.
6. A leader should also be open to learning more from the teachings and examples of those who are even more experienced, trained, educated, and mature than themselves; and in fact, they should also be open to learning from those they are leading who in some cases might have better qualities or experience or insight or caring than the leader.
As my sensei, the Ven. Ryusho Matsuda, likes to say, "Let us learn together."
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Michael,. I can't thank you enough for getting the ball rolling on this discussion. As you know, this is a huge area of concern for me.
I know that Myokei Lynda Caine-Barrett once mentioned that she was taking a pastoral counseling class, and I wonder if she can add anything to this discussion?
For years, I was trained in the SGI to "take members up the line for guidance", when the people I was taking them to may or may not have had any insight or expertise - they were just higher up in the hierarchy. Now, I am more or less completely disengaged from "the line" as a source of wisdom or advice on the practice, and I just sort of hang with my SGI friends and district - they are the people I chant with.
I wonder what, if any, role there is in this for "on the job training" as a religious leader? How should that work, if at all? I remember when a friend of mine lost her son to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, I was helped by a quote from Daisaku Ikeda to the effect that sometimes all we can do is stand with someone in the pouring rain and get wet with them. That's what I ended up doing - I couldn't really offer anything else besides just my presence.
Anyway, thanks for getting the discussion atarted. It is something which will continue to interest me.
Your friend, Byrd in LA
Posted by: Byrd in LA at February 25, 2008 01:16 PMMichael says.."I think to presume to set oneself up as a Buddhist teacher or "senior leader" or "minister" one should at least have basic knowledge of Buddhist teachings.."
Michael, the SGI does not believe that a senior leader has more 'knowledge' than others, just a bigger heart.
As Nichiren says, 'It is the haeart that matters most!'
Perhaps in the old NSA days, when degrees from freshman to post-doctorate in Nichiren Buddhism was the norm by the NSA, now, the average 'senior leader'; area/zone/region leaders; are not expected to 'know' more than any other member, just be prepared to support each member like a family member.
Getting guidance from senior leaders is not in any way getting educated or directed in the practice, but getting encouraged to practice to solve one's own pwoblems. Only you know what your problems are and how to correctly solve them, not others.
The SGI is not in the business of providing social services, or even counseling services; although I do personally know social worker and and counselor members within the SGI.
The SGI is in the business of helping people become happy on their own.
Just as Nichiren says, "your faith alone will determine these things."
Any SGI leader that thinks they can 'tell' anyone anything is simnply deluded.
The SGI is made up of adults that make up their own minds and possess an internal compass of their own.
Just like Nichiren says, 'Without study there is no buddhism.'
Depend on yourself and not your leaders is my motto.
I think this is what Sgakyamuni Buddha meant when he said to 'depend on the law and not upon persons.'
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at February 25, 2008 03:38 PMHi Byrd,
I can't take credit for getting this ball rolling - Nancy and Greg's entries were the one's that got me thinking about it.
And to Patrick,
Nichiren taught that without practice and study based on faith there is no Buddhism. That is in Shoho Jisso Sho. So who gets to lead study? If SGI wants to be an organization where there are no designated teachers and it is up to each person to come up with their own answers based on their own private reading of the gosho and Lotus Sutra that is perfectly fine with me. But that is not what I was looking for. When I sought answers in Buddism I wanted to find teachers who had been both trained in practice and educated in doctrine and the sutras and the teachings of their lineages founders and who had been vouched for by their teachers and their community. I succeeded in finding such teachers, and instead of getting into a situation of the blind leading the blind, I actually received extremely good mentoring from many find ministers and certified teachers. In the end, I paid my dues, did my homework, put in the hours, days, and months of practice under experienced and knowledgeable guidance and became recognized (ordained) as meeting the requirements to be a knowledgeable and proficient teacher myself. Now I can confidently guide other people in developing their own faith, study, and practice - and repay my debts of gratitude by passing on and sharing what was given to me. This is how Buddhism was passed on in Nichiren's time and how he passed it on to his disciples and lay leaders - like Nikko, Nichiji, and the others and Toki Jonin and others.
SGI has its own character and way of doing things. It has its own way of picking and qualifying leaders (or not), and its own way of teaching or not teaching. I long ago did not find that way very satisfactory and moved on. I found what I was looking for in traditional Buddhism and particularly in Nichiren Shu. Maybe other people will prefer the SGI way, and maybe others will prefer the Nichiren Shu way. Each person is free to investigate both and see which way seems to be more helpful, more illuminating, more encouraing, and more effective on the path of developing faith, practice, and study.
So some people may choose to have a Daisaku Ikeda as their mentor via SGI publications and the chain of command of SGI leadership. Others may prefer to come to a traditional Buddhist minister trained in practice and doctrine after a hands on apprenticeship and thereby share to whatever degree they wish to commit to in also benefiting from hands on training, study, and perhaps even an apprenticeship.
Ultimately, in the Nichiren Shu, we teach that the role of the mentor is to bring people to the Lotus Sutra - because it is directly from the rolls of the Lotus Sutra that we inherit the Wonderful Dharma (not the person or organization). A good mentor, an authentic mentor in Buddhism, should never try to be a middle-person but rather a pointer and finally a companion on the way who shares their own experiences and training to make it easier for others to find their own way as well.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Michael,
The SGI teaches the role of leaders is to lead people to the Gohonzon, or as Nichiren teaches his Lotus Sutra. Hence the guidance is always 'chant nam-myoho-renge-kyo to the Gohonzon until your problem is solved.'
A good teacher or a mentor is supposed to lead people to the Lotus Sutra. When I listen to Presaident Ikeda I hear him doing that, leading people to the Gohonzon/Lotus Sutra.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at February 26, 2008 10:18 AMWell Patrick you seem to think that all of this is about SGI, but it's not. Outside of the well of SGI a frog may hop out and discover that there are forests, plains, rivers, oceans, and not just a small circle of sky but a vast boundless heaven.
In this larger perspective there are many organizations and even many different types of Buddhist organizations. People are able to look around and find what best helps them. Some of us are looking for mentors who have actually mastered certain things - mentors who are deeply versed in the sutras and their meaning, who have been trained in traditional practices and have cultivated themselves with great dedication and discipline for many years. I have greatly benefited from this. They were able to offer me mentorship that wasn't available from those without such professional training. And it did not at all detract from my direct practice of the Lotus Sutra at all. In fact, there teachings and examples helped me immensely in encouraging me, clarifying the teachings, and deepending my own practice.
Now, I have just said that this is not about just SGI. In fact, my blog entry was addressing leadership in general and in particular my experience of leaders and leadership training in Nichiren Shu. In providing some critiques I didn't even name and names - but if the shoe fits.
However, I will here tell you my own personal experience. Back in the mid-80s with NSA I did get connected to the Odaimoku and the gosho. But I was discouraged from reading the Lotus Sutra. I was told that a whole lot of unecessary and in fact distorted Shoshu dogmatic baggage was also necessary. I was told in effect that the SGI was a necessary middle-person to connect to the practice. I was given gosho that had distorted readings between the lines attached. This was not guidance, it was the passing on of misguidance. I also soon discovered that behind the arrogant auhtoritarianism of many of these leaders who were setting up all these additional requirements and interpretations between myself and Namu Myoho Renge Kyo lay nothing authoritative at all. There was no depth of understanding or even education, and a practice that was often based on self-aggrandizement and not bodhicitta.
After parting ways with those leaders I entered into the wider world of Mahayana Buddhism and like the pilgrim Sumedha in the Flower Garland Sutra I embarked on a journey (both metaphorical and also very literal) that enabled me to meet many many truly good, empowering, and accomplished mentors face-to-face. Starting with Rev. Bokin Kim, Fr. Maurice Schepers, Dr. William Grosnick, Dr. Glenn Wallis, and later Taigen Dan Leighton (a Ph.D. and Zen Master, so academic and deep practitioner). They all helped me understand spirituality and Buddhism in general, but beyond them I found many good mentors of the Lotus Sutra and Nichiren Buddhism - my own essential path: beginning with Rev. Fujiwara former head minister of the LA Temple who introduced me to the most authentic form of Nichiren Buddhism I had yet to encounter way back in 1990, and then culminating in my sensei the Ven. Ryusho Matsuda from whom I am still learning and deepening my practice of Namu Myoho Renge Kyo.
This has been my own experience with mentors and mentorship: from those who passed on distorted teachings and who instead of empowering others were putting on them a glass ceiling so no one would rise above or beyond their limited and authoritarian interpretations to meetings with people who really had attained credible and even accredited levels of understanding and practice and on to those who have been able to really help me deepen my faith and practice and commitment to Namu Myoho Renge Kyo and to sowing the seeds of Odaimoku practice. This experience has really helped me appreciate why Nichiren himself expressed so much gratitude for his own mentor (in spite of that mentor's limitations) and the Sangha in general in Ho'on Sho (On Repaying Debts of Gratitude).
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
Hi, Michael - that was a very dignified response. I admire that.
I think it is important to have some sort of training or certification process,particularly for people who do counseling. I still remember with some anguish how embarassed I was when some family members asked me about the Gakkai's leadership and how they wer trained and chosen. I had to admit that I didn't know, and in my family, that's embarassing -- particularly if you're going to spend over 20 years of your life with a group. "Leaders have big hearts" just won't work with people who are judges and lawyers and elected representatives.
I'm glad that you made the point that this isn't just about the Gakkai, though - it's not. I guess the issue is "Wwo is an authentic leader or teacher?" Haven't Buddhists been going around the bush estabishing their authenticity for some time?
What are some of the processes that have worked and not worked in the past? I know Nichiren didn't like secret, esoteric processes, and I know he liked to stay close to the Sutras. Anything else?
Thanks, Byrd in LA
Posted by: Byrd in LA at February 26, 2008 05:33 PMMichael,
I do not know where all of that came from, I merely offered my view of a leader. I am well aware you are not an SGI participant.
My response was only meant to indicate I agreed with your assessment of what a leader does in basis regarding buddhism; lead people to the Lotus Sutra; as does the SGI which would appear that both of us were in agreement with your original statement regarding leaders.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at February 26, 2008 10:59 PMTo quote The Outlaw Josie Wales "a man's got to know his limitations". With regards to leadership or as I refer to it, "position of responsibility", sounds like common sense. Balance that with study and a desire to not only inform but to discover along with one's fellows reads like the nuances Ryuei, Byrd, and Patrick were all beyond alluding to. Hey, BALANCE. There you go. There is, however, an unfortunate funneling effect happening once again in the SGI regardless of stated positions or goals due to circumstances. I know I'll eventually blog about it as I have been thinking of nothing else, day and night, for
over three weeks. But before I publicly decry the issues, I owe it to those I respect to debate in house.
But I will comment on Patrick's statement : "Michael, the SGI
does not believe that a senior leader has more 'knowledge' than others, just a bigger heart.
As Nichiren says, 'It is the haeart that matters most!' "
I don't mean to insult you, and you seem to be speaking not necessarily for SGI but about it. I also am a member. There might be ways to express this idea using more words that remove the inadvertent tendency towards arrogance.
Posted by: joe at February 27, 2008 08:13 AMMichael,
If you noticed I never commented about your organization Nichiren Shu, just the SGI. However, you do not hesitate to condemn SGI at every opportunity, including how the SGI establishes leaders.
You are not within the SGI and those you dialogue with are not mainstream SGI either, yet you feel you are qualified to speak about the SGI but no one outside of NShu is qualified sot speak about NShu. Lacking equality in your mind.
I am well aware this blog si anyhitng but SGI oriented. I shared the SGI petrsepctive as I understand it, and no more,a s I am sure you shared the NShu position.
Perhaps you believe you are better than others that do mnot wear priestly robes, like myself and others that are not priestly trained, by other priests but by lay believers.
Lay believers also have brians to deeply understand Nichiren's Buddhism, Just like Shijo Kingo and Toki Jonin and others. We all do not have to be Dosen-bo, to be enlightened. All equal in the Budha's mind.
Byrd,
If you want trained leaders as Buddhist leaders, perhaps you never understood Nichiren regarding, buddhism is in no way seperate from daily life.
Training in life is buddhist training and not the other way around.
Changing the tennants you hold dear in your heart is what Nichiren teaches not becoming a great learned buddhist teacher.
The best teacher is life itself; Myoho-renge-Kyo, Thus Come One.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at February 29, 2008 02:03 PMHi Patrick,
Sorry, I can't help you with your defensiveness or inferiority complex. Maybe some other blog.
And hey, I never said people couldn't or shouldn't critique Nichiren Shu. But if they do they better prepared to say on what basis, and not just spread misinformation or innuendoes. And if they critique Nichiren Shu on our teachings or practice they better have the Lotus Sutra and gosho in hand - because I and other Nichiren Shu members and ministers certainly will.
As for my critiques of SGI - I call it as I see it and have experienced it and I make clear that I do so as an interested outside observer.
It is not my fault if the shoes I lay out on occasion fit those who come along and then take offense.
If you want us to admire your emperor's clothes, make sure he is actually wearing some.
Le't see - what other cliches can I cite? I think that will do anyway.
Namu Myoho Renge Kyo,
Ryuei
************************************************
Posted by: Ryuei at February 29, 2008 02:59 PMMichael,
no defensiveness here, just observing you.
Just so you know your experiences of SGI are dated.
Patrick
Posted by: Patrick at March 3, 2008 09:02 AMAnd speaking of Toki Jonin and priestly robes -- didn't Toki ordain himself after the Daishonin died?
The last time I checked, Michael was more than glad to deal with SGI leaders and members who are more "mainstream" than the Ankers and I. I think the hold-up is in Santa Monica.
But getting away from the SGI/non-SGI issue,I do think we're on the cutting edge of figuring out what a religious leader will look like in 21st Century Nichiren Buddhism. I think this entry was an important step in the right direction of opening up the discussion.
I wonder if anyone other than Patrick has any input on what they feel would be the qualities of a good Nichiren Buddhist leader, and what should be the appropriate training, if any?
I think that's a very good area for discussion.
Posted by: Byrd in LA at March 3, 2008 12:35 PMRyuei,
Thank you for your points. I am very glad you could discuss your topic on this blog.
I have to say that when I have personally thought about what makes a good Buddhist leader, it boils down to a few things:
1. Someone who has a solid working knowledge, both theoretical and empirical of basic foundational Buddhism. It doesn't have to be Ph.D. level. Otherwise, why call them a "Buddhist" leader?
2. Someone with maturity enough to know their limitations (as you noted) and with a mature enough understanding of the universe to understand that sometimes the most optimistic prayers and wishes simply don't happen, no matter how sincere a person is. It also helps if they can express this in a compassionate way that can help direct each person they work with back towards the Dharma, and buddhahood.
Ideally, this would include pastoral training, but the key point is knowing when to say, "I don't know". Perhaps there needs to be an "emergency first aid" kind of pastoral training for "first responders".... not the kind of education that yields a metaphorical full fledged emergency surgery doctor, but a first responder who knows how to not make it worse, and to keep the "patient" alive long enough to get to better help.
3. Someone who can facilitate a group is extraordinarily useful. It seems to me that every sangha is going to have at least a little friction once in a while, even the best sangha, and a good leader can help faciliate growth instead of self-destruction.
Anyway, that is my thought on the topic. I am very glad to see it raised online.
Gassho,
Kris