HARMONIOUS COMMUNITIES – BALANCING TRADITIONAL AND MODERN APPROACHES
A Teaching for the IMI by Venerable Lozang Yonten– January 29 2024
My name is Yönten, and I’ve been a nun for a little more than 20 years. For about 80% of that time, I have been in a variety of communities. The first for some seven, eight years was at Chenrezig Institute, and then places like Thosamling, and places in New Zealand. Sometimes also in very tiny centers where there was maybe only one other monastic. Most recently, I’ve moved to Portland, where I’m the only monastic. When I lived in Israel half the year, I was also the only monastic. I’m just speaking from my experience of what’s worked and what hasn’t worked, my different areas of interest, because community is a special passion of mine. I highly value community and have found it one of the most frustrating and, at the same time, one of the most delightful experiences in my life. I’m very interested to collaborate with you on how to keep monastic life relevant in the 21st century, using all the traditional techniques, using the Vinaya as well as all the modern techniques we know about healthy communication, healthy family dynamics and other ways to support each other on the Dharma path.
Many of you have been monastics for a long time; a few of you are newer; maybe some people are considering monasticism so this talk will be a kind of community conversation. My idea is to present a few issues that I’ve noticed over time and then I’d like to hear from you about what you’ve found works and what doesn’t. Let’s work together to create the healthiest possible dynamic as well as to create the cause for the fourfold sangha to exist for ever.
About Sangha communities, I have always in mind the words from The King of Prayers:
May I practice constantly for eons to come,
Perfecting the activities of awakening,
Acting in harmony with the various dispositions of beings,
Showing the ways of a bodhisattva.
May I always have the friendship
Of those whose path is like mine,
And with body, words, and also mind,
May we practice together the same aspirations and activities.
When I look at those verses I think about: What is companionship? What is friendship? What is sangha? What is it to be in alignment?
When we’re together sometimes perhaps we begin to feel that community should be like a group of friends and, in my opinion, that could be where some of the problems happen because we have the expectation that there will be common rapport, easy ways of relating and communicating, that we will have things in common. Of course, what we have in common is the Dharma but sometimes there’s very little else. Even though we have this in common and we all love the Dharma, still our approach, our access to or our history with the Dharma has been very specific and unique to us as individuals. Here we are all together loving and practicing the Dharma, having similar teachers yet with a surprising number of differences between us that can make us feel not so connected with the people we are seeing all the time. When there’s an expectation of friendship, that can set us up for disappointment and attachment. To avoid this, perhaps we could think of the expectation as having more in common with how we feel about family. Some of our family members we hardly relate to at all and yet there’s a feeling of kinship, a sense of connection because you’ve “branded” them as family. There’s a basic assumption that you won’t give up on each other unless the situation becomes highly unethical or toxic. Yet, even then, perhaps you won’t actually give up on each other but just take your distance.
Over time, I have found that as soon as I begin to think of my fellow monastics as friends that’s where trouble begins. When I think of them as family there’s a sense of relaxation and my expectations are more in alignment with relative reality. I don’t know what your views are but I feel that what holds us together as community is shared experience. That doesn’t mean we’re all having the same experience but, rather, doing things together, like puja, classes, chores, keeping everything clean, well maintained and beautiful can help bind us together. Sometimes, this can be a simple checklist of who’s going to do what but doing these things together creates more and more time of shared experience which is actually some of the fundamental glue for community.
At Chenrezig, for a while I was the Gompa manager. My responsibility was to organize everyone to clean the Gompa and make it beautiful. Of course, immediately, everyone had preferences about what they wanted or felt able to do, as well as what they considered were their priorities. For example, someone might think study was more important than cleaning so they should study while others did the cleaning. Very quickly, these simple weekly tasks became an invitation for drama.
I was so surprised by this because, I was a baby nun, in my mid-twenties and prior to that I had done activist work in my community, grass roots organizing, working with non-profits. There, part of the fun was setting up for a conference or cleaning up after an event and that was where we could all relax, spend time together, joke, tell stories and remind each other of the good things that happened. That’s why it was surprising to me when these situations arose in Dharma communities and there was resistance to doing ordinary tasks. It’s perhaps understandable because we’re busy, perhaps we put pressure on ourselves to memorize, to achieve. There’s a strange form of worldly ambition that creeps into our Dharma life. A subtle, or not so subtle, competitiveness creeps in. It looks like entitlement. An attitude that says “I’m entitled to be different from my peers.” “I’m entitled to do superior work while other people do inferior work”. I think we need to challenge this premise because all work can be seen in the light of lacking inherent existence. Also, we know many stories from sutra of the ordinary monk sweeping the floor becoming enlightened before the monk who memorized all the texts. We all know these stories and yet, when we have to apply this to ourselves, we can still have the feeling that we’re a special case. There’s something rather precious in the way we see ourselves. This, of course, is driven by pride and insecurity. It’s very human but it’s what keeps us isolated and alienated and feeling separate from each other.
When living a monastic life, you could be surrounded by people wearing the same robes, having the same vows while at the same time feeling fundamentally disconnected from them. And then you wonder: why don’t they check on me, why don’t they reach out to me, wonder about me, ask questions about me? Instead of wondering in this way, why not try asking yourself am I finding opportunities for connection? Am I finding opportunities for shared experience? Am I really looking deeply at how magical it is to be a monastic? Because a lot of the surface minutiae, the surface details really don’t have to be so important when we all agree that the Dharma is what matters the most and how wonderful it is to have organized a lifestyle where, potentially, the Dharma could be our focus. How wonderful it is to be able to share space with people who feel the same.
But for me personally – and you have to ask yourself what works for you – one of the things that has helped me feel deep connection is just showing up, showing up again and again to the ordinary, boring things, to the things that I don’t yet relate to and to the events that wouldn’t be my preference as well as all that I find enriching, uplifting and invigorating. Showing up to the Gompa cleaning, sorting out handouts, rebuilding the deck, sanding the floors while at the same time not compromising my needs as an individual. So, if you have asthma don’t do the dusting, of course, but do find an alternative. Don’t simply refuse to do it because, in fact, the first detriment is to yourself. It lets down the group energy when people don’t show up but what happens is that you feel kind of guilty and defensive and full of justification. Then maybe you soothe yourself with excuses and quietly go to your corner all alone and one of the biggest things that makes us feel isolated is pride, thinking that we’re a little too good for ordinary activity. We’re too nervous at being caught out for not having the same abilities as other people. Perhaps this leads us not to attend a discussion group because we’re annoyed at other people’s discussions but, secretly, we’re worried that people will find out that we don’t know so much about a certain topic. Pride is going to kill connection. People who have lasted in monastic life have a beautiful combination of humility and confidence. Together, these seem to be a recipe for a sustainable monastic life. The confidence is coming from a deep belief in your Buddha nature, a deep belief in your ability to learn new things but it’s not about what you’ve achieved, it’s not about performing, it’s not about proving. You don’t boast about everything you’ve done or known or are. You don’t demand to be taken seriously. You don’t feel angry or lost or disempowered if that doesn’t happen. We don’t pretend that we are already perfect forgetting that our whole practice is working towards perfection. Of course, we’re not perfect and it’s so much easier to connect with other people when you have that type of vulnerability and humility combined with confidence.
I often think of His Holiness when he’s in one of those Mind and Life conferences surrounded by scientists who may have come up with a brilliant scientific discovery that Buddhism has known for thousands of years. They are so excited to share their breakthrough. His Holiness doesn’t ever say he – or Buddhism – already knows that. Rather, he acknowledges their brilliance very sincerely. He has nothing to prove; he doesn’t need to dominate the conversation with his intelligence or his realizations; he doesn’t have to prove that Buddhism is superior. He’s just happy that other people – scientists and so on – are coming to truth and he wants to support that.
When we’re with each other, we can adopt this attitude of celebrating others when that’s appropriate, when they’re coming to new ideas, realizations and connections without needing to prove that we know more or better.
The fact that pride kills connection is something I’ve observed to be true in every country or community I’ve lived in. It’s so much easier if you’re humble and confident.
(Venerable invites comment and questions from the audience. One participant asks for further comment on humility and confidence and how that can be kept in mind. Another person mentions a book she has been reading which says that in a group people tend to pay the most attention to those who are most confident. However, she stresses the danger of confidence arising from ego and, therefore, echoes the value of combining confidence with humility.)
Humility is fed by remembering dependent arising. This is because you can recognize that you have abilities, that, generally and from a worldly perspective, you are genuinely good at certain things. However, how and why? You learned all of that. It wasn’t magically given to you. Nor was it from some intrinsic characteristic in your being. It was a result of learning and circumstance, of conditions. So, you can feel happy about whatever it is you have the skills to do because those activities facilitate our work for sentient beings while at the same time recognizing that someone, directly or indirectly, deliberately or unknowingly, taught you and supported you, that circumstances enriched that learning.
We can rejoice in our valued achievements in this life while also holding in mind the infinite network of dependent arising that brought this about. Then, it will be impossible to feel arrogant or proud, to claim ownership of those achievements when you know that they lack inherent existence.
Let’s keep in mind that humility is fed by remembering dependent arising again and again and confidence is fed by remembering Buddha nature. If you remember that our potential is enlightenment, then whatever minor mistakes we may make or whatever previous learning we may forget, we can understand that none of this matters, because we are working towards enlightenment for the benefit of all sentient beings. Our mind lacks inherent existence and therefore it can develop.
We talk about identity-lessness or self-lessness but it can help to think – If there’s anywhere to place identity it’s on my Buddha nature even though my Buddha nature also does not inherently exist. If there was ever anywhere to land, it would be on that sense of potentiality which can bring the deepest kind of confidence because it’s nothing to do with achievement; it’s nothing to do with what you’ve already done but with a fundamental understanding that when you work at something you get better at it. This shows you the mind is trainable which reinforces the confidence that eventually we’ll get there. It doesn’t trigger pride because you know everyone else has the same nature too, you’re not special.
However, this can be complicated by the fact that not everyone else around you will be on the same page regarding this delicate dance between humility and confidence. They may well be blinded by their insecurity and arrogance and we have to find a way to work with them when they are in the throes of their negative states of mind. At those times they may not be logical or kind and then you may feel that they are an embarrassment in the community because they are reflecting poorly on the Dharma, on the monastic community and yet, here they are sitting beside you. What can we do then? And perhaps this behavior causes people outside the monastic community to form a negative impression of all monastics and to criticize them.
How do we handle this kind of situation where someone in the community is very toxic and who is pulling focus with anger and aggression. Or what if they have a mental illness and are unstable or fragile? They’re not working to develop their confidence and their humility but are just trying to stay on top of their negative states of mind in their coarsest form. Yet they have amazing imprints for monasticism. This may be more frequent in Western situations that in Asian communities because Westerners need to be more radical, more bold, in order to choose to have this lifestyle because it’s not held as well as it is in Asia. This means there will be more unique characters.
This can then lead to thinking that harmony is easier within myself and with others if I simply keep showing up to both ordinary and advanced activities at a sustainable and logical pace while continuing to work internally on my humility and confidence. But what to do about those ones who pull focus?
Vinaya has a good deal to say about conflict resolution but, because we don’t always have the opportunity to study those sections, I think it’s important to take away our assumptions about what is driving someone’s bad behavior. Instead of trying to work out why someone is “like that”, look at the behavior itself, remembering they are “like that” because of ignorance and suffering, because of disturbing emotions. The rest is detail and they came by it because of countless causes and conditions. We are then better able to decide if is it something that can be dealt with or not. So, you acknowledge that you feel a little uncomfortable when they engage in certain behaviors but you stand back from that in order to decide whether it’s harmful or not and whether it has a ripple effect of harm.
What can happen is that we become so used to Lo Jong, to thought transformation, that we can lose our own common sense. Consequently, instead of focusing on our own transformation of thought in the face of difficulties presented by such people, maybe we should look at the immediate problem which is that perhaps someone needs professional help. Are they using the Dharma Center or the monastic community as a safe place with kind people who won’t hurt them but they’re not actually getting any better because they don’t have the fundamental support they need in terms of their mental health? The community then needs to ask whether or not this is the right place to facilitate their healing. Most Dharma Centers don’t have on-site counselors or enough people to absorb folk with severe mental health issues. Sometimes it is possible. If the person is open to discussing their issues they can get better in community. In the case of generic depression or anxiety, if they have enough insight about their own situation, together with the love of the community, they can get better and they might not need professional help but if it’s a severe mental health issue like schizophrenia we have to state courageously that this person needs more help than we can give them and we need to make a strategy to really support them in the best, most collaborative and respectful way possible.
Another issue is that there could be repetitive toxic behavior, for example very unkind patterns of constant criticism and gossip. This is someone who is always critical of the Dharma center, of their fellow monastics, the organization, their cushion and so on. They have somehow adopted a habit of complaining with anger about even the most trivial details. It can happen to any of us and that’s because of deep sadness and grief but also because of attachment not getting what it wants. And when attachment doesn’t get what it wants anger is right on the heels. We’ve been taught this a million times. It’s not a mental health issue it’s a human issue. Nevertheless, do we let people get away with it or not? How much? When? These are vitally important questions because we don’t want to be constantly correcting each other. We’re adults, and all of us fall into patterns like this at various times in our life. It’s very embarrassing to called out and yet, what is the purpose of community if not to be mirrors for each other but showing a kind reflection? So, we need to apply skillful means. Some situations you don’t talk about in a big public meeting or in a little sangha meeting but their good friend needs to talk to them directly or a senior monastic might talk to them. That is the first step; but if that’s not working sometimes you need to open it to a community meeting. You state the behavior as observed, without naming names and suggest that this is a behavior all community members probably want to work on. In this way, no-one is shamed, accused or blamed. You’re simply saying: do we agree as a community that sometimes we’ve gotten a habit of criticism? Can we watch the way in which we do that and make sure it’s always about problem solving and working through our own practice and not about just picking at each other. In monastic meetings, it takes some courage because you’re opening yourself up for scrutiny. But you’re presenting it as something to work on, it becomes collaborative and doesn’t have that pressure of hierarchy or being scolded. Instead, there’s an energy of helping each other to be better.
(Venerable then asks participants, if there has been an issue in their community regarding communication or ethics or some situation that has produced tension, what has helped them initiate that conversation? What has helped them name the tension? Has it even been possible to do so?
One monk replies that they have recourse to the rules. The rule says we must do x therefore it’s obligatory. End of story. He further explains that this may work up to a point but since people’s feelings are not taken into account it isn’t a fully shared discussion. It can stir quiet resentment.
Venerable summarizes – “It makes everyone more polite on the surface”.)
How can we be honest about our emotional state without identifying with it? I felt this especially when I lived in Australia which has a strong British influence and they don’t talk about emotions very easily while I do. So, I would initiate a discussion about emotions and the Australians would be completely silent. I might share that I was feeling there was a little bit of tension before class because we aren’t sure whether to talk or stay silent and for how long but there would be absolutely no response. It almost felt that by naming the fact there was tension made the situation even more tense. There was great benefit to this eventually because I had to work more on my own mind and stop talking and processing endlessly as Americans tend to do. Nevertheless, I did miss being able to state, unapologetically, how I was at any moment without needing to explain or justify. I could say I was feeling grumpy without everyone immediately telling me that grumpiness is actually anger which is never justified because it’s the wish to harm and can kill all of your roots of virtue. It burns through eons of merit so you know that you really shouldn’t be grumpy. In such a case I wanted to say that I knew, I’d heard the teachings but I’m just having a bad day and so I’m trying not to identify with it. I’m sharing it with you, hopefully to make it last a shorter duration. I want to workshop it, to connect. If you just state what’s happening and then people give you the Dharma answer before acknowledging that it’s hard and that they recognize it because it happens to them too, it may well be harder to understand your own mind and work with what’s happening there. Although, in the West, as monastics we may be used to being around the lay community who look to us as an example or for advice, with fellow monastics we aren’t necessarily asking for advice. We want to connect, to be real and to share a human experience so being offered Dharma advice may not be what we need at all. We can relax a little with each other and that’s what facilitates connection.
(One participant shares that he heard a podcast with a psychologist who said that when hearing from a client he would ask – do you want advice, do you want me to listen or do you need a hug?)
Yes, it’s so practical. It can also help to remember why we’re doing this in the first place, why did we decide to become monastics? Then we can remember that, despite any differences in details, we all share this intention. Can we rest in that commonality?
Then, I was thinking about the different ways in which we are ordained in the West, some of us in community and some of us in isolation. There are pros and cons to both. There are two different ways of living in isolation – being literally, physically isolated and doing your meditation practice but also being the only monastic in a place.
We can feel rather unsettled meeting sangha communities after being alone for any length of time – either in retreat or in a situation where we’re the only monastic. There can be a tendency to become rigid about monastic practice and be convinced that our way of practice is the correct one. Alternatively, we become self-conscious, thinking that our “imperfect” way of practicing will be seen. Have you felt this kind of dissonance? Perhaps after retreat, or being the only monastic in a Dharma center or perhaps looking after your parents in a place without any sangha community. Then, when we reenter a monastic community there’s a feeling of awkwardness. I think that this can often stem from a fear of being judged or criticized. Perhaps we think we may not be up to the standard of whatever community we’re going into. Alternatively, we may feel we’re better than that community. Either way, it’s awkward and unsettling.
It’s easy when you’re in Dharmsala or Bodhgaya where there are hundreds of monastics and some of them are disheveled and unkempt while others are immaculate and there are many somewhere in between those two. There’s such a variety – that’s life and because there are so many of us, there’s less pressure. But with a smaller number sometimes the scrutiny is more intense. So, the best way is to soften your gaze both of yourself and of others on reentering community. Keep a sense of humor, remember there are many correct ways and we are never going to be perfect. Then you can laugh at yourself when you do something silly by mistake instead of being tense and defensive, thinking that any mistake is somehow a huge issue. So, we can instead, be aware of situations where we might feel tension arising and then pre-empt it for ourselves.
A useful way to build harmony is to ask yourself, “When do I get tense? When do I get awkward? When I am not feeling in sync with other monastics? What are ways for me to be the one to start creating the relaxed atmosphere? They may come along with me or not because everyone is on their own path but I don’t need to come in with my tension.” That’s a great offering to sentient beings, to manage your own tension before you go in, and to have that kind of spaciousness where you can laugh at yourself when corrected. There are benefits and disadvantages to isolation and reentry to community can be complicated but simply remembering that can help you have more space with the issues that may arise.
Some of us had that experience during the Covid lockdown. I was living with my parents in Montana for the first time in about 20 years during that period and people were not used to seeing monastics and were surprised by seeing me doing everyday things like going to the grocery store, driving a heavy truck and so on. I experienced the sensation of being “other” every day. Perhaps some of you live with that feeling all the time and there are days when you’ll be able to think: “I’m representing the Dharma; I’m going to be open and kind to everyone” Buth there will be other times when you just hope no-one notices you and your focus is to get on with your daily tasks. In those situations, there’s a danger that you begin to feel you’re the only person to feel this way whereas, in fact, there are hundreds of monastics who live this way and also experience that kind of isolation with all its pros and cons.
Then, we can remember the benefits and disadvantages of living in community. There are many points to consider here – living together, working together can be wonderful but we can also drive ourselves and each other crazy in community, However, we must always remember that the biggest advantage of living together is access to Dharma. When you are in community there’s more merit; there are more lamas, more teachings, more facilities and there is something indescribable about practice done together. There are many quotations in the sutras and from Lama Zopa Rinpoche explaining why the merit increases when practice is done together. Even five minutes of shamatha done in a group gives a different feeling of being held than if you do it alone, even though solitary practice is also valuable. Nevertheless, if you have a feeling of disconnect from community, it’s useful to remind yourself: “Friendship is a bonus but what I’m really here for is this sense of interdependence and connection that builds so much more merit than being by myself” Friendship is a wonderful bonus but there’s something so much deeper to be experienced when we practice together. Hopefully, this can make us more patient with each other on the less friendly days.
The Vinaya teaches four types of disputes and it can be helpful to remember that disputes have arisen in communities since the time of the Buddha and we are not really so very different now in our modern lives.
- Oral Disputes: These arise when monastics hold differing views regarding Dharma practice.
These are still frequent even now.
- Disputes arising from censure or severe disapproval
There has been an event when a mistake occurred and, although it’s been dealt with, people are still holding a grudge, looking down at the person who made the mistake and repeatedly making reference to it.
- Disputes arising from different views regarding offences
Here, there’s disagreement on how to deal with issues and disputes can arise from that.
- Disputes arising from the previous three.
It’s worth looking at this as a framework in the Vinaya and to explore ways in which it’s still relevant today.
Leading on from that is the question of when and how does seniority matter? Because seniority or the hierarchy is sometimes one of the reasons for disharmony. So, consider two different examples. At an informal lunch at a restaurant does seniority matter? No. At a formal teaching in the Gompa does seniority matter? In some ways, it does. Seniority is one of those things that can sometimes become a basis for conflict. Who is ordained first, who is ordained second, who is ordained third, who is fully ordained, who is a getsul or getsulma, who is a rabjung or rabjungma, who gave you your vows, how long were you Buddhist before you got ordained? All of these things come up when we’re feeling insecure. I think it’s vitally important to ask when and why it’s important and what type of seniority we are talking about. Seniority of ordination order is important in terms of receiving offerings at a puja but it’s probably not important to follow that same seniority when giving your order at a restaurant. There a division of opinion as to whether seniority should be followed when waiting to offer a katha to a Lama. It’s not the fact of following or not following ordination order that leads to disagreement; it’s the tension, the disagreement itself, that causes the conflict. My Vinaya teacher in Taiwan used to say the best rule is to consider what is the law of the land. If this Dharma Center says yes, then yes; if this Dharma Center says no, it’s no. There are so many correct ways but there are few things more important than harmony. So, go along with whatever is the policy on seniority in any given Dharma center. We need flexibility about that, especially when we’re used to one specific way. For newly ordained monastics or for those with limited experience of only a few Dharma centers, then take the example of where you are as the correct way. When I’m traveling my mantra is: there are many correct ways, there are many correct ways, there are many correct ways! As a result, I don’t feel bashful, embarrassed or ashamed if the way I learned is different from what they expect of me at this specific center. Otherwise, it can trigger defensiveness and we can begin to wonder whether the different way we learned is bad. Alternatively, we can become self-righteous and decide that our way is right and this center is wrong. Clearly, this is a recipe for afflictions but if you keep in mind that there are many correct ways then, as long as it’s ethical, you can simply let it go. It’s only in the case of something being unethical that you would need to stand your ground.
In the West, another issue around seniority can arise because most of us were ordained as adults so, in addition to the question of who took their vows first, there’s also the matter of who knows the technology or who knows the rituals or who has skill in facilitating meetings? These are different forms of seniority that can actually make a more harmonious community if we acknowledge them. It may happen, for example, that in a center it’s assumed the most senior monastic is always the one to lead the puja. But what if that person can’t sing, they don’t know how to chant and never learned the tune? On what criteria is the decision made? So, you can gently question something that isn’t working but if they feel it’s important, then accept it.
However, although you take into account in your communities the fact that there are different forms of seniority, the bottom line is that there’s a reason to respect everyone. It’s interesting to observe age in Dharma centers because the majority of members are probably over forty. When I was first ordained, I was twenty-one and it felt very normal to be the youngest person there. But now, I’m in my forties and I’m still the youngest one and that feels very strange. I think there’s something about how, as an organization, we hold seniority that can be slightly alienating to younger people because we’re not acknowledging their forms of seniority. There are certainly things that come with age, a wisdom that comes with age or with long-term Dharma practice but there’s also wisdom about the modern age, about technology and new ways of communication or of talking about politics or climate that the kids can show us if we allow them to do so and if we don’t assume that we know better. How are we going to have any new, young monks and nuns if they don’t feel as if they have anything to offer? Feeling that you have something to offer is a big part of wanting to join a community; feeling that you have a place and something valuable to share. But what can sometimes happen is that the young people may be asked only to revamp the website even though none of the older people really understand how the website works so the youngsters work hard at revamping the website as they were asked to do but then they get burned out or bored and they leave. They weren’t nourished or supported in their Dharma life and they’re not appreciated for all the fine tuning of the mechanisms of whatever technology they’re helping with so they leave. They may also see some of the outdated ways we have in terms of our policies. Perhaps matters relating to hierarchy, to our relationship with Tibetans, to patriarchy and the young people see the problematic pieces in our policy, they point them out but no-one listens because this is just how it’s always been and seniority equals better, which isn’t necessarily always true.
When we talk about harmony we need to take into account the concept of invitation, acceptance and encouragement because we don’t want the Dharma to die with us nor do we want the four-fold Sangha to die with us
(Venerable invites the participants to share thoughts on why they think there are not many younger people taking ordination, especially in the West. She suggests there may be a way we can think of our own seniority as more like mentorship and less like dominance.
One participant raises the important issue of finances.)
Venerable replies: It’s important to invest in the potential of people. It’s easier to extend a welcome to those with independent means who can decide where to live and what to eat, people who already have a retirement fund, a pension or money from a house they sold. We can offer those people free or discounted classes. That’s not a problem. But what about the young people who have none of those sources of income? It’s difficult to have the trust that you’ll be looked after when there’s no promise that that will happen. It’s big leap of faith as well as not necessarily good common sense. So, the matter of finance is huge but it’s hard to encourage lay people to support monastics they haven’t met yet or to support monastics that are too new in their path or in themselves to show anything for it externally. This is an important conversation to have in our communities because community members often express a wish for more teachers who speak their language or for teachers who are younger and this is because there’s little support for people in their early years of monasticism. They need the opportunities for their studies, for training, for being held and mentored in such a way that will facilitate their growth as skilled teachers when they’re older. So, this issue of investing in the potential of people is crucially important.
(One participant shares that he thinks that European cultures, or perhaps Western cultures generally, have become more secular and people are deriving their ideas of religion through the church. People usually view monasticism and specifically Buddhist monasticism through religious eyes and even if they do enter Buddhism, they have an opposition to becoming ordained because of seeing it from a principally Catholic perspective. This, together with judgement from their community, from their peers could also be a factor. They don’t see the benefit, in today’s world in the West of “not working”. This comes back to the point about finance)
Venerable replies: The secular side is an important point and His Holiness has been so skillful in keeping conversations with scientists and having conversations with psychologists and convening big forums that help Buddhism be more accessible to the secular world. I think that we need to follow his example in so many ways but specifically in the way of deciding what are the conversations that are relevant for the people of this day and age and what Buddhism has to say about that. Of course, Buddhism has something to say about almost anything which is relevant in the world or internally relevant to the individual. Buddhism can say something about any topic in today’s world. For example, where I live, young people are having conversations about identity and gender and Buddhism has many things to teach about identity as well as interesting details about Tara and why she manifested as female. There are many relevant points we could contribute to these conversations but perhaps we sometimes shy away from them because we think it may be too political. But, really, it’s just a conversation and if we can relax and engage in these discussions it helps people see that Buddhism remains relevant. Then, if they see monastics involved in such topics, they may realize that the monastics have a certain security and self-confidence within their identity-lessness and this could tweak their interest and curiosity. So, it’s important to have a certain small degree of awareness about the world and what is being talked about, without getting lost in it and starting to become like lay people. We won’t start scrolling endlessly or fall down the rabbit hole of the news but rather, keep one small finger on the pulse of what people are talking about and are concerned about. Then, in our community teachings and the public talks or online activities we probably all offer at our centers, we can deliberately mention current events and offer a Dharma perspective on these. I think it’s highly relevant to maintain a connection with the secular world. However, complications can arise if we assume that our fellow monastics have similar political views to our own but then discover that they don’t. It’s important to retain a light touch and flexibility, avoiding dogmatic opinions while at the same time offering the Buddhist view on ethics, non-harmfulness, compassion and how these can be applied to whatever situation is under discussion.
Finally, about the ways of ending disputes. The Vinaya invites us to look first at the causes, which, obviously, are the afflictions but also there are ways that are suggested for ending disputes. I’ll touch on these briefly before we close our session today. It’s discussed in the Vinaya but it’s something that we probably don’t talk about enough in community. When there’s a dispute, sometimes you resolve it in the assembly with the presence of the parties involved so you’re talking about it with everybody there. Sometimes disputes are resolved by remembering events so the person recalls their innocence or their guilt. They remember – “yes I did do that, or no I didn’t do that”. It’s so simple but frequently it actually cuts the tension; can we just remember what happened? Then often it’s as simple as saying “yes I did that but I was crazy due to insanity”. That can be true even if we don’t have a mental health issue particularly because of the nature of retreat and deep practice. Or if we if we suffer from lung. We get a little bit nuts and then we come back to ourselves and we can apologize, recognizing our unskillful behavior and committing to doing our best not to behave that way in the future. What we want is for people to admit their wrongdoing voluntarily rather than force them to confess. If they maintain a negative behavior and they’re not admitting to that, it becomes another issue. But so much is solved by the person just saying, “yes I did it” and everyone else saying “we understand”. Then the community can move on. The dispute is settled by a majority vote, the voters being those knowledgeable in Dharma. I think it’s worth thinking about this point. In some of the communities I’ve lived in we’ve tried to work by consensus, where everyone has to agree, but actually it seems to work better if it’s the majority vote that counts. This could be because there might be one person who’s deeply stuck in their afflictions and they try to co-opt the entire process if consensus is being applied. Then, the question arises as to who is permitted to vote. Here, the community needs to decide, in advance of any conflict, who will vote to resolve it. For example, when I lived in Chenrezig, there was a criterion that new members had probationary status for one year during which time they didn’t vote but after that year they were official members and could vote at meetings. One thing often emphasized in the Vinaya is the importance of letting go once the decision has been reached. When the matter is resolved, everyone should stop talking about it.
It can happen that a conflict is successfully resolved when evidence is presented and the “accused” can remember their mistake. If there’s a particularly long running dispute, it’s recommended to bring in an elder or a mediator for each side and this works exactly as conventional mediation as we think about it these days. It can be helpful to think about this if there seems to be an impasse and people are not managing to sort out issues. Might it help to bring in a mediator to advocate for each party? What I want to stress is that if problems are left to fester it can result in a dramatic, painful situation for the community or the monastic just quietly leaves the community, perhaps disrobes and feels deeply disillusioned. None of those scenarios is desirable – we don’t want community disruption nor do we want people to leave and to feel dejected.
One difficulty in some communities is that we can become paralyzed because we don’t know how to speak about tension. As a result, people can be left to deal with their tensions alone or they may turn to former friends and ways of being and acting and so lose the Dharma benefit of support and they can simply circle back to their old familiar ways because that’s where they felt some kind of love and connection. So, it’s really important to be brave enough, bold enough to try something to break through the impasse and suggest talking about whatever the issue may be; it could be attachment, anger, entitlement, not taking responsibility. It would be positive to frame this as a trap that all members of the community could potentially fall into. This is not singling anyone out specifically. Rather, a situation has arisen that is bringing the issue to light. The person has served as a mindfulness bell, waking us up to something we have not spoken about enough.
Recently, I’ve been asked to devise a training program for rabjungmas under the guidance of Yangsi Rinpoche, Geshe Ngawang Gendun’s tulku. So, I’ve been asking different people like Venerable Pema Chodron and my own teacher Geshe Tashi Tsering for advice. I was expecting some sort of monastic rules or some sort of guidelines, but all of them kept saying: remember compassion, remember Lo Jong, and have Community meetings where you can talk openly and safely with each other… yes, compassion, Lo Jong and talk! But talk in formats where it is only the monastics of that community and you are openly and boldly vulnerable with each other. You can hold the space so kindly and try to work out ways to be at ease with each other. It’s so important and much of what makes that possible, as I mentioned at the beginning, is just to keep showing up. On occasions, there may be valid reasons why you can’t but make it your base line assumptions that you will show up whenever you can. That may be to class, to cleaning the Gompa, doing essential maintenance tasks, raking leaves, it doesn’t matter what but I’m going to be there whenever I can. I won’t assume that I can’t or I won’t contribute in some way at a pace that’s manageable for me. I will keep turning up for myself, for my community and for my practice and it will get better.
Many of the materials I’ve presented come from “Choosing Simplicity,” a text about the Vinaya written by a senior Taiwanese nun (Venerable Bhikshuni Wu Yin) but there are many other beautiful books also available.
(A participant asks Venerable to talk a little more about the new project she mentioned – the potential, the building etc.)
Venerable replies: Yes, it’s called the Maitripa Rabjungma Community and what we have now is land and a little mobile home which is where I live and then there’s a big old farmhouse that’s 100 years old and needs a lot of maintenance. There’s also a big old barn which we’re intending to make into the Gompa. The vision is that we will have eight Rabjungmas starting from scratch and all being ordained at the same time. We’ll probably invite Jhado Rinpoche to ordain them. After that, for three years they will be receiving very intensive training while having only the Rabjung vows. This will give them an excellent foundation in how to teach (pedagogy), in the main Lo Jong texts, particularly the Seven Point Mind Training by Geshe Chekawa. They will receive a profound training in the Bodhisattva vows and they will also learn some basic principles of Tibetan Medicine to enable them to look after themselves, not necessarily to become practitioners of Tibetan Medicine but rather to take care of their own physical health. *There will also be training for community service activities, such as prayers at the time of death, spiritual care, counseling, mediation and so on. Yangsi Rinpoche will be looking after the program and inviting a variety of guest teachers to offer specialized training – for example on how to lead a puja, make a torma, details about Vinaya. I will be the day-to-day person helping to look after them. Our first event will be a 10-day summer retreat (2024) for people who may be interested. It’s early days yet. There’s a huge amount of work still to be done in order to have the structures in place for the nuns. We plan to have eight tiny huts with a communal kitchen but so far, we have the land, Yangsi Rinpoche, me and a barn!! Please pray for us and share any thoughts you may have with me via email.
Transcribed and edited by Cristiana Jampa Tsomo and Brenda Gilbert 2025.
*Update:
The Maitripa Rabjungma Community now a renovated room in the barn for a Gompa and a communal kitchen and bathroom and even has three real, live Rabjungmas! www.rabjungma.org
Bhikshuni Lozang Yönten (Chaplain and Senior Sangha) has been a nun since 2003. Buddhist since her teenage years, Ven. Yönten moved to Australia and studied extensively under Gyurmé Khensur Rinpoche Geshe Tashi Tsering (at Chenrezig Institute, AU) from 2002-2009 before moving to India to study at Thosamling Institute 2010-2011. In 2012, she became an accredited In-Depth Registered Teacher with FPMT and was requested to become the Resident Teacher at Kunsang Yeshe Retreat Centre in New South Wales, Australia where she remained for three years and frequently visited up until the pandemic.
From 2015 onwards, Ven. Yönten was mainly based in New Zealand at Mahamudra Centre. During that period, she divided her time between leading retreats in New Zealand and teaching Philosophy at Human Spirit: Buddhist Psychoanalytic Training Program in Israel, as well as offering classes and retreats in various parts of Europe, until she moved back to the USA in 2021.
Prior to joining Maitripa College, Yönten-la offered retreats and courses at Vajrapani Institute and Land of Medicine Buddha – both in California. She also has experience in hospice work and palliative care, as well as a deep commitment to social justice and a love of animals.
