Some years ago in NCF No. 12 John suggested the possibility of establishing an organisation based on the work at and attenders of Maenllwyd. My initial reaction, and I suspect also that of many others, was something like "well, it could be all right, but I don't like the idea of the formalities and organisation and committees etc." It seemed a bit unnecessary as everything seemed to work out fine as at it was. I expressed an interest to John to be kept informed, but didn't feel any great excitement about it all.
Quite a while later John called a meeting at Maenllwyd of some people whom he thought may be interested in exploring this further; mostly those who were regular or long term attenders at Maenllwyd. The proceedings of that "First Assembly" were reported in NCF No. 14. I think that after meeting we all felt more interested in the possibilities that we discussed: developing fellowship amongst the "sangha" (something that has been lacking for Maenllwyd retreatants unless they live near one of the local groups), charitable registration for fund-raising and further developments, establishing an organisation that can continue to provide Chan training even as John grows older, etc. But even so we were drifting somewhat. We left without any definite plans for future progression of the ideas, we had no method of communicating with each other, and in fact I did not feel that we were a cohesive group. Clearly John knew everyone there, but we did not all know each other. Whilst I had been attending Maenllwyd regularly for about fifteen years, and some others had been doing so for longer, there were some that I had never met and others that I had met but only under retreat conditions of silence.
A while later I received the minutes of the Bristol Chan Group committee meeting, and it was noted that John was concerned that he was pushing something that nobody really wanted. This set me thinking. We had come round to understanding what John was proposing, and feeling support for the idea, but we were not cohesive and organised enough to further it ourselves. The only common point between us all was John himself. So whilst it was true that he was pushing the idea it was also appropriate that he should be the leader and "pusher" at this point. I decided to gather these points into a letter and write to the other attenders at the first assembly. However, I didn't have everybody's address! In fact I had a rather old copy of the NCF mailing list, and I had some more recent addresses from when I had been distributing Reb Anderson's retreat tapes, but I could only contact about half of the group. I later obtained more addresses and was eventually able to write to everyone, and later John called a "Second Assembly" for February 1997.
Whilst John was "pushing" it nevertheless seemed that I/we should do what we could to progress things. I found that the Charity Commission provide a good selection of leaflets on their rules, model constitutions etc. and I obtained and sent a copy of these to John. John Senior produced the constitution of another Buddhist organisation that we could refer to as a model. I think that the Bristol Chan Group had further discussions. No doubt others made other contributions that I do not know about.
John Crook meantime had contacted Chris Jones (who is a solicitor who has attended retreats at Maenllwyd) and they had discussions on structures and constitutions. John by now seemed more comfortable with the idea that it was appropriate for him to be leading and pushing the enterprise at this point. He first invited applications for certain roles and then later (perhaps there had been little response) contacted some people to ask if they would be willing to take on certain roles in the organisation. He asked me if I was prepared to be secretary (subject of course to the vote of the others at the meeting).
The Second Assembly was much more purposive right from the beginning. We had background reading material from the Charity Commission, and Chris Jones provided us with a summary of these and an explanation of the different forms of organisation that we could choose e.g. company, trust, or association. The trust had the advantage of being a more rigid structure which could protect us against corruption of our original aims if there were unanticipated developments in the future. However it might not be flexible enough to respond to necessary change (e.g. removing a disgraced teacher). An association had the advantage of allowing democratic input but had risks. For example that the organisation could be taken over by "entryism" with the newcomers outnumbering the original members and voting to sack a satisfactory teacher and to change the nature of the organisation (perhaps to gain control of valuable property or cash reserves).
If we wished to register with the Charity Commission to gain the potential benefits of being a charity, principally tax relief on donations and fund raising, then it was required that we have a formal written constitution or trust deed, and there were certain requirements as to the contents of that document. Could we design an organisation that was accountable and democratic, but avoided the risks of a standard association?
Chris and John had prepared a draft constitution based on the Charity Commission model for an association, with some safeguards against alteration in the future (e.g. extensions to the standard clauses that could not be altered without the permission of the Charity Commissioners, and careful drafting of definitions). We discussed this line by line and considered the implications of each point particularly in relation to the overall structure of checks and balances.
At the end of the second assembly we felt much clearer about our intentions and how it was possible to achieve them. We decided to regard the Western Chan Fellowship (WCF) as founded from this point, based on the draft constitution as amended, but subject to tidying up and clarification of the details of the constitution by the committee. The committee found considerable further amendments were necessary, not to the overall intentions or structure of the WCF but to ensure that our constitution was effective in meeting our requirements regarding the checks and balances. The flowchart below shows some of these checks and balances built into the constitution. We have subsequently presented the final version of the constitution to the "founder members" for ratification, and this is now the official constitution of the WCF.
Well that was the easy part, what happens now that WCF is formally established? We have applied to the Charity Commission for registration, and it seems that they will accept the constitution subject to some minor modifications. Soon the Fellowship can gradually take over some of the administration from John (e.g. retreat advertising/bookings) whilst retaining and employing John as teacher. As we are now a more cohesive group there can be more fruitful developments which have arisen from our discussions e.g. different kinds of gatherings such as the forthcoming two week Chan retreat (one week formal retreat and one week of community living after retreat) and the possibility of other events and group activities which can develop the sense of sangha.
For myself I already feel much more that I am part of a larger world than previously when I just visited Maenllwyd occasionally for retreats. I have met my fellow practitioners more outside of silence, both on my attendances at meetings and at short retreats, I have stayed at other's houses when travelling, I have attended a weekend retreat in Bristol for the first time, and on a couple of occasions others have travelled considerable distances to attend day retreats of the group that I lead in Bury. I have had telephone, letter, and email contact with practitioners whom previously I have not met or who have only been silent faces on retreat. Already the expressed intention to develop a sense of sangha and fellowship has become a reality for me, and hopefully will do so for others as the WCF becomes more established and grows. Whilst John intends to be active for at least as long as Master Hsu-Yun (who continued teaching to the age of 119) there will come a time when John is not able to take such a large part. Hopefully our organisation will be mature enough and effective enough by then to ensure that Chan training, and particularly our distinctive flavour of Chan and Western Zen Retreats, can continue to be made available to serious seekers even when John is no longer able to take a part in the activities.
