I've done better than merely argue the case, I've shown evidence.
But okay, I reason that because an apparent sociopath (someone without a conscience or sense of responsibility for other beings) can be a transmitted and realized master of Zen, that therefor conscience and a sense of social responsibility is superfluous in Zen. A Zen master can do pretty much whatever they like and still be considered a realized Zen master. Shimano, for example, is still considered a realized master of Zen.
Evidence would be if you could show in the canonised scriptures of Zen that it denies ethical behaviour.
According to Bodhidharma (first Chinese patriarch) Zen follows a "special transmission outside scriptures" which "did not stand upon words". Does not stand upon words
, Astus. But perhaps you know better than Bodhidharma.
Incidentally, Bodhidharma is credited with the physical training of the Shaolin monks...
Not to suggest it's unethical to practice fighting. But should the need for violence arise, well, they were ready to kick ass.
What you gave evidence to is that there can be individuals who act unethically,...
As explained I did more than that. These "individuals," as you tellingly refer to them, do not stand alone. In fact they ARE the tradition. They are the "special transmission outside the scriptures."
... however, that does not discredit the entire tradition.
The topic is not about credit, the topic is about whether or not Zen has ethics. I've shown that in effect the "special transmission outside the scriptures" doesn't need to have a conscience. Indeed, some in Zen go so far as to suggest that overriding conscience is necessary, or even indispensable.
You are giving lot of credit to the status of Japanese Zen priest. Such words as "transmitted" and "realised" have meaning only in a modern Western Zen context.
So Bodhidharma is a meaningless legend? If he's a meaningless legend what else in Zen is a meaningless legend? What "canonised scriptures of Zen" are true and which are false?
It is quite unimaginable if a Chinese abbot behaved unseemly who wouldn't be shortly removed from his position and banished from the monastery.
That might actually be true, or it may not be. Shall I see what a google search will dig up? Perhaps that thought stirs your imagination.