Ladder of the West, 9th Day of Summer, 525 M.E. (Electra): Zen Master Dogen said that a good teacher, whether male or female, should be strong, should be ineffable, and should possess excellent knowledge and the spirit of a wild fox.
I think most 21st Century, western readers will take "spirit of a wild fox" to mean cunning, to be sly, and to have the mental agility to employ skillful means as necessary to bring their students to an awakening. But to the feudal Japanese, foxes were not the charismatic creatures we consider them today. In Asia, foxes were considered loathsome and low. They lived in dirty burrows dug into the ground. They were thieves who stole chickens, eggs, and other foods to eat in their dank, sunless holes. They were held in the same low regard modern urban people hold rats, but foxes were even bigger and bolder.
I think western people thought much the same way in ancient times, at least until the Greek fabulist Aesop wrote his parables ironically praising the fox for its ingenuity and the intelligence of its thievery. Even up until the early 20th Century, the Irish despised foxes and considered them graverobbers that dug up family burial sites. In James Joyce's Ulysses, a metaphorical fox buries its grandmother under a holly bush, and then "on a heath beneath winking stars, a fox red reek of rapine in his fur, with merciless bright eyes scraped in the earth, listened, scraped up the earth, listened, scraped, and scraped."
But it's Aesop's sly fox that has caught the western popular imagination and that image has been Disney-fied into acceptability and even respectability. Back in the Year of the Plague 2020 during the covid lockdown, I was thrilled to discover that a mother fox chose the old shed behind my house to give birth to a litter of cubs, and I enjoyed watching them play and explore in my backyard.
To Dogen, the defining qualities of a fox, its spirit, wasn't cunning and intelligence, but loathsomeness. He wasn't saying, however, that a good teacher should be loathsome. I believe he was making a reference to the koan of Baizhang's Fox, and by "spirit" he didn't mean the defining characteristic qualities of a fox, he meant "ghost." A good teacher should be the ghost of a fox.
Huh?
Baizhang's Fox is an unusually long, shaggy-dog of a koan and I won't go through the whole story here. If you're unfamiliar and curious, you can read the whole thing here. But the premise is that whenever Baizhang gave a talk, there was always an old man listening in the back of the room, but as soon as Baizhang stopped talking, he vanished. One day, though, Baizhang caught up with him and asked who he was.
The old man said, “It’s true, I am not a human being. Many, many years ago, I was a priest living on this mountain. A student asked me, ‘Is an enlightened person subject to cause and effect or not?’ I replied, ‘An enlightened person does not fall into cause and effect.’ Because of this, I have been reborn as a fox for five hundred lives."
That the old priest was reincarnated 500 times as a wild fox as punishment for the sin of telling a wrong answer should give one an idea of the disdain held for foxes. But here's the thing - his answer wasn't wrong. He was completely correct in stating that upon enlightenment, a person is no longer subject to cause and effect (karma) and its endless cycle of birth and death.
A monk's practice in Theravada Buddhism, which was far and away the dominant school prior to Baizhang's time, is to follow the Buddha's eightfold path to improve one's karma and for a happier rebirth (note: I'm not now nor ever have been a Theravada Buddhist, so sincere apologies if I get anything here wrong). Through successive cycles of birth and death, one gradually improves one's karma until reaching perfection, nirvana, and is no longer subject to rebirth. They even have a whole system of terms to describe the various stages, from the srotāpanna (stream-enterer) who has just started the process, to sakdāgāmin (one more lifetime to go), to anāgāmin (the non-returner), and finally the arhat (the ultimate state, one who has overcome all hindrances and who needs to learn nothing more).
So the old priest's answer that an enlightened person does not fall into cause and effect is completely in agreement with Theravada and what the Buddha taught, so why was he was punished with 500 lifetimes as a loathsome wild fox?
I think this koan functions, among many other things, as a pointer away from Theravada and toward the later Mahayana schools of Buddhism, which include Zen. Some 500 or so years after the life of Buddha, some began to notice that while Theravada was producing many pure and pious, saint-like men and women, there weren't a whole lot of arhats or enlightened Buddhas to show for five centuries of practice. Some scholars and thinkers at the time, primarily the Indian philosopher Nāgārjuna, conjectured that one of the problems is that everyone was trying to achieve their own, personal salvation, their own escape from the cycle of karma, which was essentially a selfish, ego-driven process. They developed the concept of the bodhisattva, the person who foregoes nirvana and their own escape from the cycle of birth and death in order to bring about the enlightenment of others. This became the Mahayana school that includes Zen.
So to the Chan (Chinese Zen) teacher Baizhang, the old priest's answer that an enlightened person could achieve escape from cause and effect (nirvana) was not incorrect, but was misleading as the goal wasn't to attain a personal nirvana but to be a bodhisattva. The 500 rebirths as a wild fox was an example of the bodhisattva. The ghost of a wild fox, then, refers to a bodhisattva, a person foregoing their own enlightenment through lifetime after lifetime for the sake of others.
To suck all the poetry out of Dogen's words, a most unfortunate act, a good teacher, whether male or female, should be strong, should be ineffable, should possess excellent knowledge, and be a bodhisattva.
But what do I know? I'm a contemplative stoic and not a Zen Buddhist.