Integrity of Transimission

[Hissho]

Reading Peter Haskel's Sword of Zen, on Takuan and his life and writings.

I was struck by this passage regarding Takuan's refusal to appoint a successor or give inka due to his view of the degradation of the Zen of the time and the unsuitability of students:

"The problem is, as Takuan suggests elsewhere, is that the integrity of Dharma transmission in the temples has been compromised. Students lack the self-motivation ad independence necessary in the quest for enlightenment, while teachers shamelessly cosset and promote their favorites. Takuan contrasts this to his own youth in the temples, when a Zen monk would spend years without a designated master, practicing alone and traveling on pilgrimage from one teacher and temple to the next till at least he was able to attain realization by dint of his own strenuous efforts. Only then did he receive acknowledgement from a qualified master, who by testifying to the student's experience became his teacher. Nowadays, Takuan laments, Zen monks no longer travel on pilgrimage or leave their home temples, in effect having become laymen with their heads shaved. Their teachers dote on them, arbitrarily declare their studies complete, and write out certificates of inka, making Dharma transmission a kind of charade and an increasingly incestuous transaction."

Further, Takuan goes on to note that all of Daitokuji's great teachers had come from other temples, and that they and even he would be excluded from the temple's ranks under the then current "parochial system."
(pp. 105-106)

Granted we are talking a long time ago, but seems to be some parallels with the transmission of martial traditions as well, starting back around the same time. Takuan was born 1573, and his youth would have been right at the dawn of the Edo period, which is when it seems things went south (thought later the book discusses how Ikkyu thought much the same thing some time earlier).

Thoughts vis-a-vis koryu? I think its telling that when you look at how many ryu, ryuha, splinters, and new ryu sprang up back in the same days - when exponents studied with, usually, several teachers then started their own schools or branch schools - something similar was going on.

[Kendoguy9]

I've thought about this a bit within the context of koryu and budo in general. I think we perceive previous generations as being superior. Right now koryu people are lamenting the passing of the WWII era teachers who understood true combat unlike us lazy 20th century folks. Before that teachers would talk about how the men of Meiji era were the real deal and much stronger than the Showa era teachers. During the Meiji era they would talk about how Bakumatsu era warriors and teachers understood actual combat. It goes on and on. I think there is a natural ebb and flow to a ryu, there is a certain romanticization of times past and I think we tend to venerate our teachers especially if they faced some trial or tribulation greater than we have faced. Sometimes it is well deserved and other times it isn't.

While I think there is some correlation between ability in koryu or budo and actual actual combatives they are really mutually exclusive. I've met guys who are very skilled with a sword but who couldn't apply budo outside of he dojo if their life depended on it. I've met guys who have some damn scary real world tales to tell who look like goobers trying to do the most basic of waza. That is the strength of the classical "ryu system" though.

If properly transmitted, even by a less skilled teacher, I think a ryu has the potential to create excellent practitioners in future generations. This is why mixing in new concepts that may or may not fit properly by those without full transmission is so silly. I don't mean to offend but I think Katori Shinto-ryu is a great example of this. We have multiple generations, multiple lineages and even multiple eras within a generation on film to compare. We can see first hand how a ryu can create great practitioners. While I am not a Katori swordsman nor do I know much about the inner secrets I know enough that when I see Otake and Draeger work together it forms the perfect storm. Each man pushes the other in context of the ryu. This is far more evident when you see older generations and younger generations that lack that mix of natural skill and deep devotion. But even those less skilled teachers and students (I say that as compared to two sword saints) have every tool to teach the ryu and create another Otake or anther Draeger. From what I've seen of older generations they were not as skilled as the swordsman they created in Otake sensei. From what I've seen not every one of Otake sensei's students is as skilled as Draeger was. These two men might be ones to live up to the hype of "last generation... those were real swordsmen!"

Just a few thoughts. Maybe I'm off topic a little.

[Hissho]

Chris I think that is the conventional approach, but what Takuan seems to be suggesting is that the very method of being prepped for transmission has changed dramatically.

Might Draeger be a better representation of Takuans approach than one in which his development was solely though the TSKSR tradition, which in turn invigorated the tradition?

[pgsmith]

I think it's a bit of apples and oranges though Kit.
In Takuan's case, it seems to me that he was lamenting changes that were brought about by the unifying of the nation and subsequent change of Zen priest from being a calling, to being just another civil service job. Without all of the warring factions, there were much fewer jobs to be had. In the case of the koryu though, it was that very change that was responsible for creating the versions of the ryuha that we see today in my opinion. It seems to me that the ways and means of transmission during the Sengoku Jidai would necessarily be much different than that during the Edo period.

Just my thoughts on it.

[mkrueger]

Others continued to see the same principle in degradation of transmission throughout the Edo period. In "The Purple Robe Incident and the Formation
of the Early Modern Sōtō Zen Institution" by Duncan Williams (https://nirc.nanzan-u.ac.jp/nfile/2978) he quotes Buyō Inshi 武陽隠士 (a pen name)'s late-Edo essay "Seji kenmonroku" 世事見聞録:

The clerical training includes a ceremony where clerics sit across from each other to hold a question-and-answer session regarding the Dharma. Even though difficult or unexpected questions might be asked, one is supposed to be able to give an appropriate reply. However, these days, the ceremony is conducted with the participants having previously agreed upon the contents of both the questions and the answers. Unlike the true Zen question-and-answer session, the ceremony today is like a preset performance of sword and spear techniques, rather than real combat….

[Hissho]

The political/cultural backdrop is interesting as well Paul - I guess I got focused more on the idea of the individual, through dint of his own efforts and influence of varios teachers and experiences, and achieves (whatever level) of mastery which is then certified by a recognized master teacher....very different idea from sitting at the feet of a single master teacher until given the keys to the kingdom.

It seems modern koryu, for historical, cultural, and political reasons, would rule the former out for the most part.

[Carina Reinhardt]

Alan Watts writes in the Way of Zen that a crucial problem arises when a spiritual institution becomes prosperous and powerful:the very human problem of competition of the position and who has the right to be master teacher is shown in The Transmission of the Lamp written by Shi Daoyuan around 1004, since one of the main objectives of this work is to establish a adequate "apostolic succession" of the Zen tradition, so that nobody can claim authority unless his satori is approved by someone who had been approved ... until the time of Buddha himself.

[Carina Reinhardt]

Also interesting is the transmission from Awa Kenzo to Eugen Herrigel who wrote "Zen in the Art of Archery" described by Yamada Shoji in The Myth of Zen in the Art of Archery.
At the time Herrigel began learning the skill, Awa was just beginning to formulate his own unique ideas based on personal spiritual experiences. Awa himself had no experience in Zen nor did he unconditionally approve of Zen. By contrast, Herrigel came to Japan in search of Zen and chose Japanese archery as a method through which to approach it. The essay goes on to critically analyze two important spiritual episodes in “Zen and the Art of Archery.” What becomes clear through this analysis is the serious language barrier existing between Awa and Herrigel. The testimony of the interpreter, as well as other evidence, supports the fact that the complex spiritual episodes related in the book occurred either when there was no interpreter present, or were misinterpreted by Herrigel via the interpreter’s intentionally liberal translations. Added to this phenomenon of misunderstanding, whether only coincidental or born out of mistaken interpretation, was the personal desire of Herrigel to pursue things Zen. Out of the above circumstances was born the myth of “Zen in the Art of Archery.”

http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthre...Art-of-Archery