Lineages: not a new problem

When the sixth patriarch of Mahayana Buddhism, Eno of Huineng died, he was asked by his followers about the robe and bowl which the fifth patriarch had given him when he had named him as dharma successor. This bowl had been passed from patriarch to patriarch, all the way from Bodhidharma. So, the sixth patriarch was asked by his students, who gets the robe and bowl? In other words, who is the rightful dharma successor?

Eno was no fool, and refused to pass these items on to anybody. He knew that even then animosity had arisen between his own sangha and the prominent northern school of Zen Buddhism, led by his dharma brother and fellow student of the fifth patriarch. He asserted that all he knew he had stated in the Platform Sutra; "These were the true teaching and even if Buddha himself were here he would say the same things. Please practice and learn this teachings carefully. The dharma is transmissible, but the robe and bowl are sources of conflict".  

Even in Eno’s time there were five schools of Chan (Zen) Buddhism: Rinzai, Soto, Unmon, Hogen,  and Igyo. These he named the five petals of a flower. Eno refused to pass on the robe and bowl to any one, as this would have created a main lineage, to which all others would be secondary. Thus today we have the five schools. Even within those schools there is variation and difference between teachers.

The A\A\ is no different, being a lineal system dependent on transmission from generation to generation. Unlike the Zen traditions however, anybody who becomes even a Neophyte in A\A\ (and some say even a Probationer) can become a link in the chain, and one way or another, by hook or by crook, the Order continues. Some don't like this, and like Eno's students they ask, who has the robe and bowl? Wanting to know who is the 'real deal', they miss the point and fall into politics and controversy.

Does this mean that lineage has no value then? I don't think it has no value at all, but I do think it is besides the point. The A\A\ as an institution is no different than any other linage based religion, subject to the same conflicts of interest. However, like Buddhism, the dharma, the path itself, is open to anybody with the will to go through it, since the instructions are available to all. Having a lineage only demonstrates that you have been overseen by a person who presumably knows what they are doing. This does not necessarily mean much; Buddhist teachers have gone bad, misused their authority, with and without authentic lineage. During World War 2 there were Roshi (Zen Masters) who advocated the war in Asia, the invasion of China and the rest. The same is true of the Order, some have used it for their own gain, there have been bad eggs in the basket, while there are also good teachers, so in both instances it really depends on the individual. Telling the difference isn't always easy either.

This doesn't matter so much in the end, the key component is the aspirant. The path is open to all, the important thing is to begin, to work without lust of result, in earnest and self motivated dedication. Finding a teacher takes discernment, finding a good teacher might take more than a little luck, and lineage is no sure guide.

We would do well I think, to take a leaf out of the sixth patriarchs book, and recognise that Crowley left the teachings of the A\A\ available to all, and wrangling over who’s got the ‘robe and bowl’ leads only to conflict.