I have been thinking about the glacial movement of change in practice.

One change that is noteworthy has been the loosening of sectarian lines in practice. Of course, one might say that the true practice has always been non-sectarian (never mind the five houses of Chan, the distinctions we make between Tibetan practice and Theravadan and Mahayana). That’s not my point. My point is that in the tradition in which I was trained….. to just sit…. one sees among fellow teachers Theravadan teachings seeping into zen. For example, guided meditations? For example, the citation and explanations drawn from Bhiku Bodhi. Just noticing. As the sectarian lines soften… what then then to say about, for example, Dogen’s commentary which often bordered on a strict sectarian lines.

A second change that is noteworthy has been the cult of textual expertise in zen. I do not mean historical contextual expertise but simply textual expertise. One sees this manifest most often in dharma talks….. citing texts, based on texts, and so on. PP are oriented to texts. We move from one text to another. As a person who has been on and off the dais, I have wondered if we are promoting, perhaps unwittingly, the cult of knowledge, sometimes at the expense of just doing regular meditation.

I once asked Katherine what should I study? And she shrugged. “Maybe just sit.”