Ethics and Conflict Resolution Policy

Summary

​PART I Introduces the Ethics Policy and the Sixteen Bodhisattva Precepts upon which it is based.  Although they are central to our practice, the Precepts do not provide detailed instruction about actions to be avoided or remedies when problematic actions or conflict take place.

​PART II 
Introduces the concept of “Restorative Justice,” in lieu of traditional discipline and punishment, as the preferred means of dealing with problematic action or conflict.

Ethics and Reconciliation (E. A. R.) Committee:
Bios & contact

Shoryu Bradley

Contact Shoryu

Shoryu Bradley was ordained as a Soto Zen priest in 2002 by Seirin Barbara Kohn at Austin Zen Center. In 2004 he moved to Bloomington, IN to study with Shohaku Okumura Roshi and Sanshin Zen Community. He also trained at Tassajara Zen Mountain Center, studying with teachers such as Tenshin Reb Anderson Roshi, Jiko Linda Cutts, Setsuan Gaelyn Godwin, Zenkei Blanche Hartman Roshi, Myo Denis Lahey, and Kosho McCall. During Sotoshu International Training Monastery angos held in the US and Japan, he studied with Gengo Akiba Roshi and Hokan Saito Roshi. In 2010 Shoryu received dharma transmission from Okumura Roshi. He holds a B.S. in psychology from Texas A&M University, an M.Ed. in Rehabilitation Counseling from the University of Texas at Austin, and he has lived and practiced at Gyobutsuji since founding it in December 2011.

Dennis Mccarty

Contact Dennis

​The Rev. Dennis McCarty is a science fiction writer and former minister and Minister Emeritus at the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Columbus, Indiana. He was part of the U.S. contingent at the Theological Symposium of the International Council of Unitarians and Universalists in Kolozsvár, Romania, in 2006.

Over the decades he has written well-received novels, plays, and songs, worked in heavy construction, and taught English overseas. He entered Unitarian Universalist ministry in 1998. Though retired from parish ministry, he still speaks at churches around the country. He has, on occasion, also presented a one-person version of his play, Servetus: The Radical Reformed Musical.

He has two accomplished adult daughters, Erin and Colleen, and two grandchildren. He lives in Bloomington, Indiana with his life partner, Kate, and a pampered cat.

​

Sonia "Sunny" leerkamp

Contact Sonia

​Sonia graduated from Indiana University with an AB degree in Slavic Languages and Literature. She attended IU Indianapolis School of Law and graduated in 1975 with a Juris Doctor degree and went on to pass the Indiana Bar Exam.

Leerkamp’s dedication to public service flourished during her tenure in the Hamilton County Prosecutor's Office, where she was instrumental in developing innovative programs, including initiatives to address mental health in the justice system and to improve the prosecution of domestic violence. She established the Child Protection Team and the Child First Training Program in Indiana. Today, she serves as a Senior Prosecutor/Special Prosecutor on several cases in several Indiana counties.

As one of the founders of Chaucie’s Place, a not-for-profit Hamilton County, Indiana child advocacy center, Leerkamp has demonstrated a strong commitment to serving vulnerable populations. Her dedication extends internationally through her leadership and service to Horizon International, Inc., a not-for-profit organization that supports orphans in four African countries. She is currently the Board President, sponsors six children and has participated in ten short-term mission trips to South Africa and Zambia. She is also the Vice President of Women of Worth International, an organization she helped found. The organization sponsors short-term mission trips to Africa and India, where it hosts women’s conferences focused on supporting their spiritual, physical, and mental health.

Locally, Sonia continues to make an impact as Vice President of the Brown County Indiana League of Women Voters, where her work with the Indiana Citizens Redistricting Commission earned her Volunteer of the Year in 2022. She is also an active member of the Brown County Community Foundation, the Brown County Schools Ambassador Program, and the Cordry Sweetwater Conservancy District.

PART III 
Specifies ethical behaviors: the “do’s” and “don’t’s” expected of all practitioners at Sanshin Zen Community. In sequence, they are: Avoid Harming Others; Maintain Appropriate Behavior; Maintain Confidentiality and Mindful Speech, including the difference between confidentiality and secrecy; Practice Healthy Relationships and Boundaries,
including sexual boundaries; Treatment of Newcomers and the Teacher-Student Relationship; Avoid Misuse of Intoxicants.

PART IV 
Specifies the sangha’s policies of Nondiscrimination and avoiding Conflicts of Interest, including avoiding potential Professional Conflicts that may arise for certain professions who practice here.

PART V 
Enlarges upon the practice of restorative justice as a means of Conflict Resolution when harm occurs or conflicts arise. It specifies, in sequence, steps to be taken to restore right relations between individuals, or between an individual and the sangha.

PART VI 
Provides for the establishment of an Ethics and Resolution (E.A.R.) Committee and a more formal Grievance Procedure, should previous, less formal, restorative justice steps prove insufficiently effective. It specifies the powers and parameters for the E.A.R. Committee’s work, and an option for appeal of an E.A.R. Committee decision, should a party consider that necessary.

PART I: Intent of these policies and their grounding in the sixteen Bodhisattva Precepts

Sanshin Zen Community is committed to providing an environment that is free from physical violence, harassment (whether sexual, verbal, mental or physical), disparaging or discriminatory treatment, dishonesty, and substance abuse.  These behaviors are incompatible with the core values and goals of this sangha.   [For the purposes of this document, Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary defines “substance abuse” as: “. . .pathological use of alcohol or drugs, characterized by. . . inability to reduce consumption and impairment in social or occupational functioning.”] ​

There is a general expectation in the world of Western Soto Zen that temples and centers will have an official ethics policy and, preferably, standard procedures for dealing with inevitable human missteps. Practitioners should be able to be confident that the temple is a safe place in which to do the work of letting go of self-concepts. An ethics policy is even more important in a place like Sanshin that offers residential practice opportunities. People living and practicing together in close quarters need a shared understanding of acceptable behavior.

The Board of Directors has adopted the following ethics policy and conflict resolution procedures. All those participating in activities at Sanshin Zen Community, including those living in its dormitory spaces, are required to abide by them. Those serving in a leadership capacity, such as dharma teachers, Board members, and officers, temple officers, clergy and activity coordinator, are subject to meticulous accountability in keeping with their greater responsibility and authority.

Sanshin’s ethics policy helps us to act with integrity and compassion, the roots of which lie in non-separation—integrating the realities of the individual self and universal self. The policy both arises from and is a manifestation of the wisdom and compassion that come with seeing reality clearly. It recognizes that individuals take action within the sangha and community based on their particular circumstances, and that those actions are part of the total dynamic functioning of the sangha, temple, and universe as a whole. The policy links Sanshin’s mission and practice vision with the day-to-day operations that carry them out, providing a basis for decision making at all levels.

This section of the policy is provided for context about the precepts at Sanshin and their relationship with the ethics policy. Okumura Roshi has written:

Unlike the Vinaya precepts, the Bodhisattva precepts of the Soto Zen tradition are not a collection of the Buddha’s admonitions to the monks who made mistakes and prohibitions against making the same errors again. They are the ten ethical aspects of the Dharma to which Buddha awakened and their basis is the reality of all beings: impermanence, egolessness, and interdependent origination. When we awaken to the reality that we ourselves and all other things are impermanent and have no fixed self-nature, we see that we cannot cling to anything. We are then released from attachment to ourselves, our possessions, and all other objects. When we awaken to the fact that each thing is interconnected to every other thing, we see that we are supported by everything and live together with everything. We can exist only in relationship with others, and that reality is the source of the precepts. When we see the interconnectedness of all beings, we
can only try to be helpful to them and avoiding being harmful to them.

The Bodhisattva precepts are also called zen-kai (Zen precepts) because our zazen and the precepts are one. In our zazen practice, we put our entire being on the ground of the true reality of all beings instead of the picture of the world that is a creation of our minds. By striving to keep the precepts in our daily lives, we strive to live being guided by our zazen. [Shohaku Okumura, in an e-mail instruction. Additional context from Okumura Roshi on ethics and the precepts can be found here. 

Sanshin Zen Community is a religious organization, and our ethical policy begins with the ethical framework of our religion. Our precepts point to our own foundation and orients our ethical policy toward a vision of who we are and what we expect. It reminds us of our vows. The sixteen Bodhisattva Precepts are the most fundamental guidelines to our actions and relationships.

THE SIXTEEN BODHISATTVA PRECEPTS

The Three Refuges:
I take refuge in the Buddha.
I take refuge in the Dharma.
I take refuge in the sangha.

The Three Pure Precepts
I vow to embrace moral codes.
I vow to embrace good dharmas.
I vow to embrace all living beings.

The ten Grave Precepts
Not killing
Not stealing
Not indulging in sexual greed
Not speaking falsehood
Not selling intoxicating liquor
Not talking of the faults of others
Not praising oneself nor slandering others
Not begrudging the dharma or materials
Not being angry
Not slandering the Three Treasures

Previous boards have assumed that the precepts alone were enough to ensure organizational health and have been dismayed to find that this was not the case. Simply taking precepts, even when ordaining as clergy, does not guarantee wholesome behavior or the understanding of appropriate conduct, much less does it indemnify anyone from misunderstandings, mistakes, or the need for ongoing learning. In fairness to everyone, some basic standards and procedures need to be spelled out so that all Sanshin practitioners have a shared understanding.

 PART II: “RESTORATIVE JUSTICE” EXPLAINED

While they provide the basis for understanding wholesome living, the precepts do not provide specific guidelines and instructions for our day-to-day activities. They don’t inform us what breaking them looks like or what consequences should follow. For instance, helping oneself to a pencil from the office or a cookie from the kitchen is not the same as embezzling thousands of dollars. Though it may not be easily discerned at first, there is a point where innocent joking becomes sexual harassment or bullying. An ethics policy is necessary to provide guidance for the healthy functioning of the fallible human beings who form the sangha.

A principle of “restorative justice” is in keeping with the letter and spirit of the precepts.  Such a principle examines the nature of an act, means by which damage may be mended, and ways to move past notions of guilt, blame, and victimhood, and toward more functional goals of learning, trust, and awakening.

In the examples cited above, it may be that the pencils were there to be used as needed, or the cookies were put there to be eaten by whomever should want one. In that case, there would be no harm to begin with. On the other hand, perhaps pencils are in short supply or the cookies were intended for a special event: so that there is harm. Under the principle of restorative justice, the emphasis is not on the guilt of the party who took the pencil or ate the cookie, but on that individual’s learning and awakening, and on repairing the harm done. This requires willingness to work together on the part of the person who took the pencil or ate the cookie, as well as the person impacted and tasked with explaining the harm. Perhaps the person who took the pencil could replace it or buy more for the sangha. The person who ate the cookie, likewise, might replace it by making/buying more, or might need to apologize to the gathering for whom the cookies were originally intended. The person harmed needs to share their insight on what the harm was and what it feels like. The other person needs to be willing to be thus enlightened. Mending the harm, then, becomes an act of discipline and means of learning: awakening.  

On the other hand, the embezzlement of thousands of dollars would be a more serious matter, likely to engage the local and/or state legal system. While the embezzler could agree to return the money, that might or might not satisfy legal requirements, which extend beyond the sangha.  Likewise, in an increasingly complex and diverse society, what seems a harmless act or comment to the person doing or saying it might, in fact, be hurtful or distressing to the person on the receiving end. For example, among most people in the United States, a “pat on the back” is a friendly gesture, generally acknowledged by a smile. In some Asian cultures, however, it is seen as disrespectful, even insulting, to place one’s hand on the back, particularly, of an older male.  While no harm may be intended, an apology would be called for.

 PART III SPECIFIC ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS

Society is beginning to learn that undesired flirtation or comments about a person’s size, shape, skin hue, etc., can be upsetting or degrading, and even cause for legal action. Under the principle of restorative justice, both the actor and the person acted upon have a role to play—explaining how the comment made the other person feel, for example. A discipline of early response and receptiveness to feedback is important to resolve issues, wherever possible, before repetition festers to the point of calling for mediation, formal discipline, or even legal action.

Avoid harming others
Physical violence and abusive behavior (including but not limited to physical threats, extreme displays of anger and maliciousness) are unacceptable at Sanshin Zen Community. In keeping with the aspiration of harmlessness, all firearms and other weapons designed principally for causing physical harm are not to be brought into Sanshin practice places.

Maintain appropriate behavior
Inappropriate behavior is harmful to others and to ourselves. We try to create an environment at Sanshin Zen Community where we can cultivate conscious and compassionate relationships and where members are supported to focus on practice, free from harsh or manipulative speech or actions, harassment and unwanted sexual or romantic attention.

Maintain confidentiality and practice mindful speech
Being mindful of our speech, we refrain from harsh speech and gossip. Cynicism and sarcasm, for example, can kill our enthusiasm, our faith and the spirit of practice. Instead we seek to cultivate open and honest inquiry into the self and this life.

Information shared during study groups and in other contexts must be treated with respect.  People in such sessions sometimes disclose personal details, which should not be shared heedlessly or without permission. We should also refrain from talking irreverently or disrespectfully about the content of our private interviews with a teacher.

The teacher owes the student support and wisdom, while the student owes the teacher respect.  Thus, wisdom imparted by the teacher at dokusan or similar interviews, may be shared by the student for the awakening of others. Confidential (private) disclosures by the student should not be shared by the teacher, except as required for consultation regarding practice and well-being of the sangha. Personal details disclosed during interviews that are not relevant to practice or the well-being of the sangha may not be shared.

As a matter of law, the State of Indiana requires authorities to be notified of all child abuse or neglect, as well as abuse or neglect of “endangered adults.” [www.in.gov defines “endangered adult” as “an individual [more than eighteen years old] who is: ...incapable by reason of mental illness, mental retardation, dementia, or other physical or mental incapacity of managing or directing the management of the individual's property or providing or directing the provision of self-care.”]

A teacher who becomes aware of any criminal activity by a student is governed by legal codes, the welfare of the sangha and his or her conscience as to where/with whom to share such information. No practitioner at any level should feel obliged to keep secret any ethical breach or unlawful activity within the sangha.

Practitioners should keep in mind that confidentiality and secrecy are two different things, and one should neither keep secrets while calling it “confidentiality,” nor share privileged, possibly hurtful information under the pretense of “avoiding secrets.” As a general guideline, we can apply confidentiality to information that is merely embarrassing, unpleasant, or otherwise desired to be held in private by an individual—but does not involve present or future harm to others. As one example, in our culture, a gay, lesbian, or transgender person deserves sole control over with whom information about their sexuality may be shared. Because of the possibility of real physical danger to that person, it is unethical to heedlessly share their personal information.

Secrecy applies to the concealment of malfeasance or ongoing, potential or future harm. The Mennonite Church USA’s website goes into this distinction in more detail, provides further sources, and explains how secret-keeping is harmful to a religious organization.

Practice healthy relationships and boundaries
Desire, and the up-and-down cycles of samsara which it produces, is innate to the human condition. Overcoming desires is the work of a lifetime. One of the strongest desires is that for sexual gratification. Healthy sexuality is a gift which creates and affirms life, but misused sexuality, whether deliberate or due to carelessness, produces division and suffering. Everyone who comes to Sanshin Zen Community has the right to be free from sexual harassment. Sexual harassment may consist of unwelcome or offensive sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature which is unwelcome.
Continued expression of unwelcome sexual interest, directed at another sangha member or visitor, is a misuse of sexuality.

The sangha preserves the teachings and practices of the Buddhas and ancestors and provides support and guidance for practitioners. While “dating” is not forbidden, neither is it the primary reason we gather. To persist in romantic advances, when those advances are not reciprocated or encouraged, is a form of harassment that has no place here.

This is of particular concern when one person has some form of power or authority over another.  If one person is a teacher, leader, clergy, instructor, or holds a position of formal authority such as board member, board officer, or temple officer, it becomes increasingly difficult for the object of sexual desire to reject unwanted advances, or for a harassed/abused/bullied person to deal with such harassment, abuse, or bullying. Due to this fact, authority carries greater responsibility—in equal measure to that authority—not to misuse or abuse either one’s authority or sexuality.  It is considered a misuse of sexuality for an adult within Sanshin Zen Community to engage in sexual behavior with anyone at Sanshin who is a minor. Full responsibility for avoiding such relationships lies with the adult. Sexual advances or even activity that violates a previous commitment can cause harm to others and are also considered misuse. When they include deception, this breaks additional precepts. When others are drawn into the deception, it creates
disharmony in the community.

Newcomers and the teacher-student relationship
Particular care must be taken with newcomers. As the foundation of a practice is formed in the first weeks and months, it can be seriously undermined or distorted through the lens of a romantic relationship. Because this area is so sensitive, the role of teachers and leaders is to assist new practitioners to develop their practice. To use this time as a romantic opportunity is destructive to the newcomer, the mission of the sangha and the work of the leader.

The most delicate and profound relationship is that between teacher and student. Feelings of trust and respect which develop in the teacher-student relationship can produce a sense of intimacy which approaches—and can foster—sexual attraction. Abundant experience across multiple religious traditions teaches us the personal and institutional harm that can result if such sexual feelings are acted upon.  As the Rev. Dr. Marie Fortune states in FaithTrust Institute’s F.A.Q. on clergy sexual abuse:

What should I do if I am sexually attracted to my religious leader?
There is nothing wrong with you or your feelings. Your religious leader may be a very attractive, sensitive, caring person. Should you choose to share your feelings of attraction with your religious leader, it is his or her professional responsibility to help you to understand that to preserve the integrity of the ministerial relationship, he or she cannot reciprocate your interest in an intimate relationship. 

Outside the sangha, clergy in all capacities are expected to uphold the highest standards of integrity in all personal relationships.

Avoid misuse of intoxicants
No illegal drugs shall be brought onto Sanshin premises. Alcohol or drug intoxication at Sanshin, including coming to practice events under the influence (except for medication as prescribed) is inappropriate.

 PART IV: NONDISCRIMINATION AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Nondiscrimination policy
Any disrespectful, discriminatory, or preferential treatment of others on the basis of race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, marital status, age, disability, income, political views, religion, ethnicity, or national origin is a violation of Sanshin Zen Community ethical guidelines.

Conflicts of interest
Teachers and leaders have a responsibility to anticipate and avoid potential conflicts of interest.  Matters of a financial nature among members of the sangha should be engaged in with open hearts and clear heads. Leaders, by the ethical nature of their position as well as by Indiana law,  have a fiduciary duty toward Sanshin Zen Community. They must perform their responsibilities on behalf of Sanshin Zen Community and administer its finances in a responsible manner, without personal gain, without taking for one’s self an opportunity or resource that belongs to Sanshin Zen Community, and without exploitation, in any manner, the resources or participants of Sanshin Zen Community.

Professional conflicts
Mental health professionals and those in the helping professions are asked to be sensitive to the possible complexity of dual relationships that may arise when both provider and client practice at Sanshin Zen Community. Teachers, psychotherapists, social workers, legal counsellors, physicians, and clergy are expected to abide by the ethical codes of their professions.

 PART V: CONFLICT RESOLUTION PROCEDURES

Historically, when one person trespasses against another or when individuals are in serious disagreement, the American (and Western) legal justice system has focused on adversarial process and retribution. By its very nature, this creates division. Over the past two generations, victims’ rights advocates, criminologists, sociologists and multiple religious traditions have drawn on non-Western and historical indigenous practices of justice to develop an alternative approach, known as “restorative justice.” The relational nature of restorative justice is in keeping with the mission and vision of Sanshin Zen Center.  [Howard Zehr: Changing Lenses: Restorative Justice for our Times, 25th edition: Herald Press, Harrisonburg, VA: 2015.]  It is beyond the scope of this document to go into detailed analysis of the theory and practice of restorative justice; however, it informs the procedures that follow.

Sometimes the actions of one person or group produce harm, hurt or feelings of harm in another person or group. For the educational purpose of these guidelines, when such occurs, rather than “perpetrator(s)” and “victim(s),” we will use the terms “actor(s)” and “person(s) acted upon.” Particularly given the increasing diversity of our society, the complex uniqueness of every human being presents a real challenge to the vision and practice of interconnectedness.  Disagreements, conflicts, misunderstandings and unethical behavior may occur in the course of sangha activities. This may not even be intentional, referencing the example of the American who mortally insults an older Asian by giving him a “pat on the back.” Or it may be intentional, born out of thoughtlessness or ignorance of the social/ethical proprieties of interaction.  In either case, sangha members are strongly encouraged to approach one another to discuss feelings of hurt, conflicts, and ethical concerns. This should be looked on as an opportunity for learning and awakening. It will likely require humility and courage on the part of all concerned. It is possible, even likely, that the “actor” will not even realize they have produced harm or feelings of harm in the “person acted upon,” Debating or proving the objective reality of the harm is not the point of the conversation. The point is for the “actor” to gain understanding of the sensitivities and feelings of the “person acted upon,” and to take appropriate action—as respectfully expressed by the “person acted upon”—to repair the sense of harm. Most often, this will simply require listening, acknowledging the harm, expression of apology, and if there has been material loss/damage, replacement/repair of the affected goods. Thus, do we deepen community and advance toward awakening.

It is also possible that the “person acted upon” may not feel safe approaching the “actor,” possibly because the “actor” is a person of authority in the sangha; or that the “actor” may become defensive and deny that there has been harm. In this case, the “person acted upon” may enlist a support person to accompany them in conversation with the “actor.” (The Board of Directors may, but is not required to, designate a person(s) to serve institutionally in that role.)

 PART VI: FORMAL GRIEVANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURE

The process thus far has been to produce mutual understanding rather than to establish guilt or designate punishment. However, continued lack of success at reconciliation and restoration may require the sangha to step in, in a more formal and traditional way.  The Board of Directors will establish a standing Ethics and Reconciliation (EAR) Committee in such a manner as it deems most appropriate, as a standing committee to assist in resolving conflicts, clarifying ethical issues, and responding to allegations of misconduct. Members of the EAR Committee are appointed by consensus. Tenure is for one year and may be renewed for up to three years. After an absence from the EAR Committee for a year, a person may be reappointed. Members of the Board of Directors may not be members of the EAR Committee.  The names of the EAR Committee members will be posted on the sangha’s website and in the lobby of the building. In the event that a matter involves either: (i) an allegation that a member of the EAR Committee has acted inappropriately or in violation of these guidelines, or (ii) an allegation brought by a member of the EAR Committee, any such member(s) shall be recused from any meetings of the EAR Committee involving such allegation and shall not influence, or attempt to influence, the outcome of such hearing. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any such member of the EAR Committee may address the EAR Committee at the request of the EAR Committee or, if bringing an allegation, as part of the normal process for pursuing such allegation.

If direct discussions, as outlined in the previous section, are not successful in producing reconciliation and restoration, either or both parties may request that the EAR Committee assist in resolving the conflict. The object shall be to produce restoration, reconciliation, and learning.  However, particularly in cases involving actual violation of local, state, or federal law, the EAR Committee shall use its best judgment in determining whether a restorative, disciplinary, or legal solution is most appropriate.

Any member of the sangha is encouraged to bring unresolved ethical concerns or interpersonal conflicts to a member of the EAR Committee for consultation, support, and advice. A member who expresses such concern shall not suffer loss of standing within the sangha for doing so. The EAR Committee shall then deal with the concern as it deems best. The EAR Committee may request additional information, and shall have sole discretion whether to register the concern as a formal complaint. A formal complaint and related documents will be retained by the EAR Committee for such period as it considers appropriate. The EAR Committee may meet with the sangha members directly involved in the matter giving rise to the complaint, either separately or together, as it deems best, as well as other persons who may be able to provide information regarding the matter.

In appearing before the EAR Committee, a person who is the subject of a formal complaint is allowed to be accompanied by a support person, whom he/she shall select from among the Sanshin Zen Community membership, if he/she wishes to do so.

If possible, the object, as expressed above, will be to produce restoration, reconciliation, and progress toward awakening. However, the EAR Committee is under no obligation to refrain from formal disciplinary or legal action, should, in the Committee’s sole judgment, restoration and reconciliation prove impractical.

The EAR Committee should respond to the person who has registered the complaint in writing within a month after receipt of the complaint, if reasonably possible, with a statement of its decision and the reason(s) for the decision.  The possible responses include, but are not limited to, one of the following: a finding of no breach, suggesting further mediated attempts at a restorative resolution, a limited finding acknowledging some breach and forwarding this to an appropriate second party, a reversal of an administrative decision or action, a private and mediated apology, a private reprimand, follow-up meetings with affected parties, a public apology, public censure, reparation when possible, a recommendation for psychological counseling or similar program, a period of probation, suspension or dismissal.

Certain ethical transgressions may result in sanctions that involve the individual’s spiritual path.  While the EAR Committee may recommend such sanctions, the decision regarding whether such sanctions are to be imposed rests solely with the individual’s teacher. These sanctions are: I. retaking of the precepts, with appropriate accompanying repentance practice, and 2. For persons with priest ordinations, relinquishment of the ordination and okesa. In each case, the teacher responsible for giving the precepts or ordaining the individual would be solely responsible for determining whether such a sanction is warranted. In situations where there has been a breach of local, state, or federal law, however, Sanshin Zen Community shall not make itself party to illegal activity, nor render itself an accessory after the fact by concealing such activity.

Anyone may appeal the EAR Committee’s decision to the Board of Directors. However, the Board is expected to work from an assumption that the EAR Committee has acted in good faith and with due diligence, and should not lightly overturn the findings of the EAR Committee. The right of appeal does not apply if the EAR Committee has already involved the Board in the decision-making process.

As a non-profit entity under Indiana state law, Sanshin Zen Community is bound by local, state, and federal statutes. In cases of possible violation of such statutes, nothing herein shall be deemed as prohibiting practitioners, staff, officers, or clergy from retaining legal representation at their own expense. In legal actions directly involving Sanshin Zen Community, or sangha personnel in the authorized and proper performance of their duties, the Board of Directors shall be empowered to authorize payment out of Sanshin Zen Community funds.​