HHDL petition
haya...@my-deja.com
feel it would do little good,or they have made efforts in the past and
feel frustrated or jaded. Yet others seem content to sit back on their
cushions and attempt to ignore this and other issues. Centuries of the
negative kind of mind control and propaganda coming from the Tibetan
theocractic structure has seemed to take root over here quite well. We
need to understand that this kind of stuff was the underbelly of
Tibetan culture that got them in karmic trouble in the first place.
What kind of Bodhisattva turns their back on suffering if they have a
chance to circumvent it? I have never read anything by the Buddha
saying to ignore suffering and never to take social action of any kind.
Anyhow, I put forward a notion. Some like the idea. I wonder how
many would be willing to invest some of their precious spare or
cushion/TV time to help reduce the suffering of others by applying some
of their skillful means towards such a project. I certainly wouldn't do
it on my own, nor do I possess the knowledge to spearhead such an
effort. This needs to be a collaboration of a good size group of folks.
We'll see who comes forth......
In article <7q4ktj$h2f$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hello again.
>
> I really wasn't planning to post again, but
> today I changed my mind. I decided to write
> one final letter to this news group.
>
> My experience is very sincere and honest, and I'm
> a real person. My letter, which I posted on the
> 23rd, was not intended to *disillusion* any one
> about Tibetan Buddhism. I think Buddhism is
> a wonderful religion. As every Buddhist knows
> in the world, the religion is one of insight,
> understanding, and caring. In Tibetan
> Buddhism, there are many wonderful teachers
> out there, including many Tibetan Lamas, Tibetan
> Tulkus, Tibetan Khenpos, monks, nuns, and so on.
>
> I think for the non believers in this group, they
> cannot possible understand the suffering that
> this ex-monk has caused both my family and me,
> because they have never experienced a similar
> situation. I am not concerned about those who
> don't believe my experience, but I wish them well.
>
> I am not a person who argues, and I totally
> believe in understanding, compassion, and
> maintaining a good heart. Please understand,
> friends, Buddhism is not about arguing. I
> will not carry on an argument in this Tibetan
> Buddhist news group. I will carry on only in
> peace. In Buddhism, we can have many friends,
> but we don't need enemies.
>
> A person recently wrote to this news group suggesting
> that a petition should be sent to the Dalai
> Lama stating that there would be no sexual
> misconduct with any person by any clergy. If
> the petition were to exist, this would be wonderful.
>
> Even after sexual abuse, from any kind of
> spiritual teacher, the affects of the sexual
> abuse are still there, even after years passed.
> It takes much healing to recover from any kind
> of sexual abuse or other abuse, as I learned
> from my experience with the ex-monk. I
> personally feel the person who has suffered the
> sexual abuse should not be blamed in any way,
> as this is not being fair. In any kind of sexual
> abuse, it takes much healing and time to
> reach spiritual growth.
>
> I wish everyone well on their path, and I wish
> peace to all.
>
> May others carry on in this news group - in
> peace - not argumentative. Let other people
> learn more clearly, especially to dismiss the
> ignorance that exists on this planet. Each person
> is entitled to their own opinion, but it's best
> not to argue about so many things in this Tibetan
> Buddhist news group. A person needs to find out
> for himself or herself the truth, whatever form
> it may come.
>
> As I understand, Buddha taught, "Life is
> suffering," and why should one cause distressing
> arguments in a Buddhist news group? Life
> is a journey, on a road, we all must travel.
>
> On the bodhisattva path, it is important to help
> others. It's more important to have insight
> and understand oneself openly and honestly, without
> trace of egoism. Isn't that what Buddhism is
> all about?
>
> Peace to all,
>
> Sincerely in dharma,
> Miss K. Lhamo
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Evelyn Ruut
haya...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7q5hij$5dh$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Thanks so much for the vote of support for a petition. Many seem to
>feel it would do little good,or they have made efforts in the past and
>feel frustrated or jaded. Yet others seem content to sit back on their
>cushions and attempt to ignore this and other issues. Centuries of the
>negative kind of mind control and propaganda coming from the Tibetan
>theocractic structure has seemed to take root over here quite well. We
>need to understand that this kind of stuff was the underbelly of
>Tibetan culture that got them in karmic trouble in the first place.
>What kind of Bodhisattva turns their back on suffering if they have a
>chance to circumvent it? I have never read anything by the Buddha
>saying to ignore suffering and never to take social action of any kind.
> Anyhow, I put forward a notion. Some like the idea. I wonder how
>many would be willing to invest some of their precious spare or
>cushion/TV time to help reduce the suffering of others by applying some
>of their skillful means towards such a project. I certainly wouldn't do
>it on my own, nor do I possess the knowledge to spearhead such an
>effort. This needs to be a collaboration of a good size group of folks.
>We'll see who comes forth......
I agree that the issue needs to be addressed. It is how it is address that
is the question. Look what happened when HH Dalai Lama spoke against a
practice he genuinely believes is harmful to its proponents? I know for a
fact that HH knows about some of these abuse issues, because one person who
posts to this newsgroup actually spoke with him about it. He suggested
these abusive people be exposed in no uncertain terms. But he also said
that WE have the power to unseat them. If you have a guru or tulku who
nobody pays attention to because they have behaved badly, then what sort of
power can they wield? None!
If I have the time today I will post some of the highlights of Pema
Chodron's talk on teacher student relationships. BETTER yet! buy the
doggone magazine. It is the new issue of Tricycle that just came out.
Everyone should read that.
In a hurry this morning or I would say more on this interesting subject that
definitely needs some action, I am just not sure what action would be best.
I think we need to expose and boycott teachers who abuse their power, better
not to give them power to abuse in the first place. Only YOU can decide
that.
Regards,
Evelyn
RickFinney
the other day I suddenly remembered that His Holiness the Dalai Lama has
already given very clear advice on how to deal with corrupt and exploitive
lamas: He said to expose them and publicize their wrongdoing, even if it means
going to the newspapers. This should obviously be handled very carefully,
though, and only if there's proof of the abusive behavior.
No one should be terribly worried that this will "hurt the Dharma," either.
There are a lot of good teachers out there, and the Dharma can speak for
itself. The Buddha's teachings will never be limited or defined by the
misbehavior of a few charlatan "gurus" who wrap themselves in the cloak of
vajra mastery in order to gratify themselves at others' expense.
- Rick Finney
Alex Wilding
>Thanks so much for the vote of support for a petition. Many seem to
>feel it would do little good,or they have made efforts in the past and
>feel frustrated or jaded.
is, in my opinion, possibly rather unskilful.
>Yet others seem content to sit back on their
>cushions and attempt to ignore this and other issues.
A cheap shot, and a tired old one too, if I may say so.
>Anyhow, I put forward a notion. Some like the idea. I wonder how
>many would be willing to invest some of their precious spare or
>cushion/TV time to help reduce the suffering of others by applying some
>of their skillful means towards such a project.
There are, to my knowledge, those who indeed invest *much* of their
"precious spare or cushion/TV time to help reduce the suffering of others by
applying some of their skillful means towards" a variety of projects
designed directly to alleviate suffering in social, medical and nutritional
fields both inside and outside of the context of their formal Buddhism.
Whether many of them read newsgroups, and whether they would consider that
getting involved in some net-based scheme is more valuable than some of
their other activites - well, I don't know, but you will see.
Alex W
Steven Lightfoot
wrote:
I am always suspecious of people who only seem to be interested in
gratifying their Net Persona's thirst for attention when they claim to
have actual evidence of wrongdoing and will no go forward with it and
work towards allieviating the problem in the real world sense of
things.
>
>
Steven Lightfoot
>Evelyn makes some very good points here, and as I was thinking about this issue
>the other day I suddenly remembered that His Holiness the Dalai Lama has
>already given very clear advice on how to deal with corrupt and exploitive
>lamas: He said to expose them and publicize their wrongdoing, even if it means
>going to the newspapers. This should obviously be handled very carefully,
>though, and only if there's proof of the abusive behavior.
I anyone has any concrete evidence that can be taken out into the real
world to expose wrongdoers, I believe they have no choice but to do
so, if they are at all sincere and serious about cleaning up this
problem.
haya...@my-deja.com
> I don't think it is a bad idea in principle, but to do it via the
Internet
> is, in my opinion, possibly rather unskilful.
Good time to ask then, How would such a task as this be skillfully
approached/
>
> >Yet others seem content to sit back on their
> >cushions and attempt to ignore this and other issues.
> A cheap shot, and a tired old one too, if I may say so.
Agreed, it must be tired and old, since the best it can do is elicit
same.
>
> >Anyhow, I put forward a notion. Some like the idea. I wonder how
> >many would be willing to invest some of their precious spare or
> >cushion/TV time to help reduce the suffering of others by applying
some
> >of their skillful means towards such a project.
> There are, to my knowledge, those who indeed invest *much* of their
> "precious spare or cushion/TV time to help reduce the suffering of
others by
> applying some of their skillful means towards" a variety of projects
> designed directly to alleviate suffering in social, medical and
nutritional
> fields both inside and outside of the context of their formal
Buddhism.
> Whether many of them read newsgroups, and whether they would consider
that
> getting involved in some net-based scheme is more valuable than some
of
> their other activites - well, I don't know, but you will see.
I don't know if I would denigrate this concept to the level of "net-
based scheme" as of yet. I didn't post here to joust with the regulars,
however, so lets try to stay on a positive track. It's just too easy to
minimize thru sarcasm, don't you agree? Your positive input would be
much appreciated!
>
> Alex W
Mary Finnigan
not unusual on arbt. I will attempt a pull-together.
The idea for a petition to HHDL was floated by Hayagriva. At first it
fell pretty much on sightless eyes/deaf ears. Then I gave the plates a
spin and a few people responded. Sylva and Kunukia backed off from
direct action. Alex W and DT were sceptical about anything of this
nature being effective on/from the net. Ev, Rick, K. Lhamo, I and
others (but not many) supported it. If you set that against the number
of people who probably read the thread, the favourable response is
minuscule. So the questions arise:
1)Is it worth the effort?
2) If the effort were made, would it be effective?
3)How should the effort be made?
I have no experience of internet petitions, beyond the Afghan women's
one, which has been doing the rounds for a long time and, I am told,
does not work because when you attempt to access the collection address,
messages bounce.
So what alternatives could be considered? Someone suggested a mail out
to dharma centres. IMO, this would not work because dharma centres are
controlled by Tibetan lamas, who would strangle the idea at birth.
And, in the light of the small response here, how many people would sign
a petition of this nature?
Although there has been a significant attitude shift on the subject of
sexual misconduct by Tibetan lamas over the past two years, in my view
it is still a topic which few practitioners are willing to address pro-
actively. More people are discussing the issue. More people are
recognising that it exists. More people are aware that it needs
attention. But how many people feel strongly enough about it to risk the
disapproval of their teachers? I suspect that even today, post-Trungpa,
post-Thomas Rich, post-Sogyal and post many other sad stories that have
emerged, the broader sangha still shies away from grasping this complex,
challenging, intimate nettle. There has been much theorising around the
guru-disciple relationship. There have been many cries of pain and
confusion from people suffering the after-effects of abusive
relationships. There has been a lawsuit, which failed to curtail the
activities of Sogyal Lakar, the accused lama, because only one woman was
brave enough to offer her support to the plaintiff and face the ordeal
of cross-examination in open court. But even today, people like myself
and Hayagriva are very thin on the ground. People who care about the
long term survival of Tibetan Buddhism. People who care about the well
being of the western sangha. People who do not duck away from difficult
issues. People who do not confuse guru devotion with blind faith. People
who do not fall into category error.
Regretfully, I think that a petition is an idea whose time has not yet
come. IMO, this is a pity, but the convoy cannot move faster than the
speed of the slowest ship. Optimistically, I see that the convoy is
moving and that sooner or later the adjustments that must be made if TB
is to continue to flourish in the west, will happen. Perhaps only a
really big crisis will bring this issue into unavoidable focus. It is
hard to envisage one bigger than two neophytes being infected with HIV
as a result of the hubris of Thomas Rich. But that happened at a time
when the culture of containment and denial within TB was much more
dominant than it is today. And it happened pre-internet. If something of
this nature happened today, it would be all over every newspaper in the
western world -- which is precisely what HHDL said should happen. But he
said it to a small audience at an obscure conference which did not
attract media attention.
Mary
DharmaTroll
Mary Finnigan <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Hello to all who have contributed to this thread.
> It has bifurcated -- not unusual on arbt.
> I will attempt a pull-together.
>
> The idea for a petition to HHDL was floated by Hayagriva. At first it
> fell pretty much on sightless eyes/deaf ears. Then I gave the plates
> a spin and a few people responded. Sylva and Kunukia backed off from
> direct action. Alex W and DT were sceptical about anything of this
> nature being effective on/from the net. Ev, Rick, K. Lhamo, I and
> others (but not many) supported it. If you set that against the
> number of people who probably read the thread, the favourable
> response is minuscule. So the questions arise:
>
> 1) Is it worth the effort?
> 2) If the effort were made, would it be effective?
Though I still don't predict that it will do much, it may do some good
or it could trigger something larger and you have to start somewhere.
So it may be worth the effort. But don't expect too much at first.
And it needs to be done in conjunction with other actions as well
for it to be effective, I suspect.
> 3) How should the effort be made?
That's a good question. Are there any other examples of this in the
past and if so, what efforts were made and were any effective?
> I have no experience of internet petitions, beyond the Afghan women's
> one, which has been doing the rounds for a long time and, I am told,
> does not work because when you attempt to access the collection
> address, messages bounce.
>
> So what alternatives could be considered? Someone suggested a mail out
> to dharma centres. IMO, this would not work because dharma centres are
> controlled by Tibetan lamas, who would strangle the idea at birth.
Many of the dharma centres are more community-based, and not all lamas
are going to turn their backs. Each will have an individual response.
If all Tibetan lamas are so politically corrupt, then Buddhism is in
bad shape. Also, don't limit it to Tibetan centres: hit them all, the
Zen ones and everyone else. In America, there is a connection among
different sects, and the commonalities outweigh the differences.
Except, of course, on the internet.
> And, in the light of the small response here, how many people would
> sign a petition of this nature?
If you actually wrote it, and it sounded good and fair, at that point
a lot of people might go for it who would otherwise be turned off by
the mere abstract idea of writing it, as they might have pictured
something else. So I think that you can't predict what the response
will be until you post something tangible for people to mull over.
Even a rough draft.
> Although there has been a significant attitude shift on the subject of
> sexual misconduct by Tibetan lamas over the past two years, in my view
> it is still a topic which few practitioners are willing to address
> pro-actively. More people are discussing the issue. More people are
> recognising that it exists. More people are aware that it needs
> attention. But how many people feel strongly enough about it to risk
> the disapproval of their teachers?
Mary, you write as if the Tibetan community are a bunch of sheep.
The community is what counts the most to a lot of folks, not the
obedience to some authority or teacher. It is the presense of a
community of spiritual friends that means more to a lot of us.
Get the community to discuss the issues, and it will be the lamas
who will be worrying about whether they are going to lose their
following unless they get real on social and community issues.
> I suspect that even today, post-Trungpa, post-Thomas Rich,
> post-Sogyal and post many other sad stories that have emerged,
> the broader sangha still shies away from grasping this complex,
> challenging, intimate nettle. There has been much theorising
> around the guru-disciple relationship. There have been many cries
> of pain and confusion from people suffering the after-effects of
> abusive relationships. There has been a lawsuit, which failed to
> curtail the activities of Sogyal Lakar, the accused lama, because
> only one woman was brave enough to offer her support to the
> plaintiff and face the ordeal of cross-examination in open court.
Again, a strong community of practitioners wouldn't let that happen.
I remember when studying the Moonies, reading about how they were
taught only to have vertical (hierarchical) relationships with the
leaders and were forbidden to have horizontal friendships with other
Moonies like themselves. This kept them isolated and polarised toward
the authority figure. If the Buddhist communities get stronger, then
people will speak out more and tell their stories and support each
other. So one thing to do is to strengthen the communities and not
focus on an authority figure.
> But even today, people like myself and Hayagriva are very thin on
> the ground. People who care about the long term survival of Tibetan
> Buddhism. People who care about the well being of the western sangha.
> People who do not duck away from difficult issues. People who do not
> confuse guru devotion with blind faith. People who do not fall into
> category error.
Sure, they're hard to find on this ng, but they are out there.
I've met tons of them. Less in Tibetan Buddhist circles than in other
Buddhist ones, but they are out there. How do Christian groups handle
these situations, btw? They are the most established in this culture,
so we should turn to them to see examples of this. How are priests
and ministers dealt with? How often is action taken?
> Regretfully, I think that a petition is an idea whose time has not yet
> come. IMO, this is a pity, but the convoy cannot move faster than the
> speed of the slowest ship. Optimistically, I see that the convoy is
> moving and that sooner or later the adjustments that must be made if
> TB is to continue to flourish in the west, will happen. Perhaps only a
> really big crisis will bring this issue into unavoidable focus. It is
> hard to envisage one bigger than two neophytes being infected with HIV
> as a result of the hubris of Thomas Rich. But that happened at a time
> when the culture of containment and denial within TB was much more
> dominant than it is today. And it happened pre-internet. If something
> of this nature happened today, it would be all over every newspaper
> in the western world -- which is precisely what HHDL said should
> happen. But he said it to a small audience at an obscure conference
> which did not attract media attention.
>
> Mary
Mary, have you done any research in other cases of this outside of TB
but in similar religious environments? For instance, check out the
pop-psychotherapy-religion Re-evaluation Counceling. The guru and
founder, Harvey Jackins, exploited and screwed over 100 of the females
in the organisation. Many of the community members in one city got
together and protested and their whole community was ex-communicated
from the group. There was an unsuccessful lawsuit from a 16-year-old
client whom Jackins had seduced. Anyway, the whole thing is documented
and what is interesting is the actions by community members and denial
by others. The group is very large and strong in the U.S., and at the
higher levels, the leaders are forbidden to discuss the topic.
Anyway, it's an interesting story, and certainly gives one perspective
on the phenomenon of guru-abuse in America today. Some excellent
articles, as well as petitions and letters about the incidents, can
be found at:
< http://home.stlnet.com/~rcinfo/html/articles.html >
See especially the Lyons article, "Sex, Lies, and Co-Counseling".
Some of the other articles there are excellent, and it is a really
good collection of articles about abuse of power in a religious
group and the attempts of members and victims to stand up to it.
That might help in terms of getting ideas about what actions to take.
--Dharmakaya Trollpa
pat_...@hotmail.com
I don't think YOU should "strangle the idea at birth" - don't be so
dispondant! :-)
I see a couple of issues - the first being the technical implementation
of the "petition"... a chain letter will do no good - it only gets
corrupted and impossible to control / measure. A simpler (but more
techie) idea would be to build a web-site that people could visit
and "sign" (I don't know if "comments" would be good - see my reasons
below). I'm sure that some of the regular posters who have their own
sites could advise how this is done.
HOWEVER, the bigger issue (IMO) is one of "content" and "tone".
What would the wording of the petition be? Would it include the names
of (some) alleged offenders and an accounts of (some) of their deeds?
Written (and PROVED) by whom? Or would it merely serve as an expression
of unease? Maybe a re-statement of the teacher-student responsabilities
(according to TB texts? which ones? unfortunatly the famous "rules"
proposed by the western Buddish teachers in Daramsala a few years agon
were never accepted by HHDL)?
One wouldn't want such a site and any editiorial thereon to
become a source of conflict - it must clearly express the genuine
concern AND goodwill of the simple practising sangha... it shouldn't
become part of any one person's, group's or "revisionist-meme"'s
agenda...
Hmmm - not easy, but still worthwhile.
all the best,
Patrick
In article <dugalDAk...@pema.demon.co.uk>,
Mary Finnigan <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Hello to all who have contributed to this thread. It has bifurcated --
> not unusual on arbt. I will attempt a pull-together.
> The idea for a petition to HHDL was floated by Hayagriva. At first it
> fell pretty much on sightless eyes/deaf ears. Then I gave the plates a
> spin and a few people responded. Sylva and Kunukia backed off from
> direct action. Alex W and DT were sceptical about anything of this
> nature being effective on/from the net. Ev, Rick, K. Lhamo, I and
> others (but not many) supported it. If you set that against the number
> of people who probably read the thread, the favourable response is
> minuscule. So the questions arise:
> 1)Is it worth the effort?
> 2) If the effort were made, would it be effective?
> 3)How should the effort be made?
> I have no experience of internet petitions, beyond the Afghan women's
> one, which has been doing the rounds for a long time and, I am told,
> does not work because when you attempt to access the collection
address,
> messages bounce.
> So what alternatives could be considered? Someone suggested a mail out
> to dharma centres. IMO, this would not work because dharma centres are
> controlled by Tibetan lamas, who would strangle the idea at birth.
> And, in the light of the small response here, how many people would
sign
> a petition of this nature?
> Although there has been a significant attitude shift on the subject of
> sexual misconduct by Tibetan lamas over the past two years, in my view
> it is still a topic which few practitioners are willing to address
pro-
> actively. More people are discussing the issue. More people are
> recognising that it exists. More people are aware that it needs
> attention. But how many people feel strongly enough about it to risk
the
> disapproval of their teachers? I suspect that even today, post-
Trungpa,
> post-Thomas Rich, post-Sogyal and post many other sad stories that
have
> emerged, the broader sangha still shies away from grasping this
complex,
> challenging, intimate nettle. There has been much theorising around
the
> guru-disciple relationship. There have been many cries of pain and
> confusion from people suffering the after-effects of abusive
> relationships. There has been a lawsuit, which failed to curtail the
> activities of Sogyal Lakar, the accused lama, because only one woman
was
> brave enough to offer her support to the plaintiff and face the ordeal
> of cross-examination in open court. But even today, people like myself
> and Hayagriva are very thin on the ground. People who care about the
> long term survival of Tibetan Buddhism. People who care about the well
> being of the western sangha. People who do not duck away from
difficult
> issues. People who do not confuse guru devotion with blind faith.
People
> who do not fall into category error.
> Regretfully, I think that a petition is an idea whose time has not yet
> come. IMO, this is a pity, but the convoy cannot move faster than the
> speed of the slowest ship. Optimistically, I see that the convoy is
> moving and that sooner or later the adjustments that must be made if
TB
> is to continue to flourish in the west, will happen. Perhaps only a
> really big crisis will bring this issue into unavoidable focus. It is
> hard to envisage one bigger than two neophytes being infected with HIV
> as a result of the hubris of Thomas Rich. But that happened at a time
> when the culture of containment and denial within TB was much more
> dominant than it is today. And it happened pre-internet. If something
of
> this nature happened today, it would be all over every newspaper in
the
> western world -- which is precisely what HHDL said should happen. But
he
> said it to a small audience at an obscure conference which did not
> attract media attention.
> Mary
>
Mary Finnigan
Thanks for your fast, comprehensive response. I wrote my summary very
late last night, which of course is early evening in America. Stumbled
to the PC this am (Tues) and now have to apply slightly fuddled brain to
a sensible response. But -- I am feeling more optimistic now than I did
last night, because of the (to me still) amazing qualities of the
internet. The info:, perspectives and suggestions from you throw fresh
light on my research. And in the same download K. Lhamo e-mailed me
details of several web sites and organisations in the US I had not
previously heard of. Thanks also to her. I would be happy to draft a
petition for appraisal here, but I must state clearly now that I do not
have enough time available to steer the project through to completion.
If it is to work, someone else will have to take on the primary
organisational role.
>or it could trigger something larger and you have to start somewhere.
>So it may be worth the effort. But don't expect too much at first.
>And it needs to be done in conjunction with other actions as well
>for it to be effective, I suspect.
>
>
>That's a good question. Are there any other examples of this in the
>past and if so, what efforts were made and were any effective?
the first conference of western Buddhist teachers with HHDL. It does
seem to me though, that ACTION originating from the internet, rather
than just info:, propaganda and discussion would be a development that
might attract media interest, and thus bring the topic into the public
domain.
>
>Many of the dharma centres are more community-based, and not all lamas
>are going to turn their backs. Each will have an individual response.
of the Tibetan diaspora is that no matter how obvious the fault lines
are in its relationships with non-Tibetans, no Tibetan will ever
criticise another in public. It is worth noting that even at the height
of the DS controversy, HHDL never publicly criticised Geshe Kelsang
Gytaso by name. AFAIK, GKG is the only Tibetan in exile to break ranks
on this taboo, because he did publicly criticise HHDL.
>If all Tibetan lamas are so politically corrupt, then Buddhism is in
>bad shape.
is so deeply ingrained in the Tibetan national character is necessarily
always corrupt. It appears to spring from two sources -- oriental
distaste for loss of face (cultural) and the refugee mentality
(circumstantial).
>Zen ones and everyone else. In America, there is a connection among
>different sects, and the commonalities outweigh the differences.
>Except, of course, on the internet.
only one aspect of my research and my in-depth knowledge of it is
limited to TB. I have heard about the SF Zen Centre of course and about
a couple of ethnic Japanese teachers in the US -- and lots of stories
emanating from Christan sects and mainstream traditions. But I have
never assembled evidence in these areas.
>If you actually wrote it, and it sounded good and fair, at that point
>a lot of people might go for it who would otherwise be turned off by
>the mere abstract idea of writing it, as they might have pictured
>something else. So I think that you can't predict what the response
>will be until you post something tangible for people to mull over.
>Even a rough draft.
around to it ASAP. It would be a useful exercise for me and with the
insight and brain power evident from several posters here applied to it
as well, we may come up with something that would work.
>Mary, you write as if the Tibetan community are a bunch of sheep.
>obedience to some authority or teacher.
obedience to the lama as an absolute authority figure in both spiritual
and temporal matters is the norm. *Free radicals* like you and me are
the exception. I could go on at length about this, because it is a core
theme of my research -- but anyone interested will have to wait a while
cos I am not yet ready to make it public.
> It is the presense of a
>community of spiritual friends that means more to a lot of us.
>Get the community to discuss the issues, and it will be the lamas
>who will be worrying about whether they are going to lose their
>following unless they get real on social and community issues.
> If the Buddhist communities get stronger, then
>people will speak out more and tell their stories and support each
>other. So one thing to do is to strengthen the communities and not
>focus on an authority figure.
believe though, that movement in this direction is already underway. It
has its pitfalls though -- not least the awfulness of administration by
committee and the difficulties of consensus decision-making.
> How do Christian groups handle
>these situations, btw? They are the most established in this culture,
>so we should turn to them to see examples of this. How are priests
>and ministers dealt with? How often is action taken?
Ireland got away with paedophilia (sp?) for a long time cos their
superiors covered up for them.
>but in similar religious environments?
>Anyway, it's an interesting story, and certainly gives one perspective
>on the phenomenon of guru-abuse in America today.
one or two men) from the UK, USA, Ireland, NZ, India, Australia,
Germany, France, Italy and Canada.
>articles, as well as petitions and letters about the incidents, can
>be found at:
>
>< http://home.stlnet.com/~rcinfo/html/articles.html >
Regards and thanks again
Mary
Evelyn Ruut
I would endorse the idea of a website where people can sign as indicated by
Pat Ryan.
I think some abusive situations could be told about on that website in short
paragraphs
It would be important to present this eventually to HH in a very respectful
manner, asking him to comment in an official, quotable way, while allowing
him to make the decision what form that would take (not us telling him), and
maybe just asking that perhaps he might set down some rules or
recommendations for us.
If it were done right I would go with it.
Regards,
Evelyn
pat_...@hotmail.com wrote in message <7r2g97$2b8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
Mary Finnigan
Dear Pat Ryan and Evelyn Ruut,
I am happy to go along with the web site idea but:
Who would set it up?
Who would maintain it?
Who would pay for it?
Who would collate and forward the results?
Who would PR it?
I could help with the last item and also draft the wording, but the rest
is beyond my capacity.
Mary
kunukia
On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 00:41:24 +0100, Mary Finnigan
<ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote:
snipped
>Although there has been a significant attitude shift on the subject of
>sexual misconduct by Tibetan lamas over the past two years, in my view
>it is still a topic which few practitioners are willing to address pro-
>actively. More people are discussing the issue. More people are
>recognising that it exists. More people are aware that it needs
>attention. But how many people feel strongly enough about it to risk the
>disapproval of their teachers? I suspect that even today, post-Trungpa,
>post-Thomas Rich, post-Sogyal and post many other sad stories that have
>emerged, the broader sangha still shies away from grasping this complex,
>challenging, intimate nettle. There has been much theorising around the
>guru-disciple relationship. There have been many cries of pain and
>confusion from people suffering the after-effects of abusive
>relationships. There has been a lawsuit, which failed to curtail the
>activities of Sogyal Lakar, the accused lama, because only one woman was
>brave enough to offer her support to the plaintiff and face the ordeal
>of cross-examination in open court. But even today, people like myself
>and Hayagriva are very thin on the ground. People who care about the
>long term survival of Tibetan Buddhism. People who care about the well
>being of the western sangha. People who do not duck away from difficult
>issues. People who do not confuse guru devotion with blind faith. People
>who do not fall into category error.
Mary,
By calling those who agree with you on this issue; "People who
care..., people who do not duck away from..., people who do not
confuse guru devotion..." you are insulting those who do not agree
with you. There are folks who read this ng who did not respond to
this thread, who are very sincere, intelligent, long term
practitioners. (Not me, I am a raw newbie.) On their behalf, I must
again take exception.
>Regretfully, I think that a petition is an idea whose time has not yet
>come. IMO, this is a pity, but the convoy cannot move faster than the
>speed of the slowest ship. Optimistically, I see that the convoy is
>moving and that sooner or later the adjustments that must be made if TB
>is to continue to flourish in the west, will happen. Perhaps only a
>really big crisis will bring this issue into unavoidable focus. It is
>hard to envisage one bigger than two neophytes being infected with HIV
>as a result of the hubris of Thomas Rich. But that happened at a time
>when the culture of containment and denial within TB was much more
>dominant than it is today. And it happened pre-internet. If something of
>this nature happened today, it would be all over every newspaper in the
>western world -- which is precisely what HHDL said should happen. But he
>said it to a small audience at an obscure conference which did not
>attract media attention.
kunukia
Mary Finnigan
Kunukia writes:
>By calling those who agree with you on this issue; "People who
>care..., people who do not duck away from..., people who do not
>confuse guru devotion..." you are insulting those who do not agree
>with you. There are folks who read this ng who did not respond to
>this thread, who are very sincere, intelligent, long term
>practitioners. (Not me, I am a raw newbie.) On their behalf, I must
>again take exception.
be misleading. I acknowledge the sincerity of those who do not share my
POV.
Mary
Sylva Simsova
<ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> writes
>What other actions would you suggest?
There is always the possibility of the student realising that he/she
should keep the five basic precepts.
Or remembering what common sense advice their mother gave them.
:-)
--
Sylva Simsova
Evelyn Ruut
k_l...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7r3rvb$31n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>Hello again,
>
>Has any one seen the interesting letter
>called an "Open Letter To The Buddhist
>Community?" It may be viewed at:
>
>http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/m_buch/openlet.htm
>
>I wonder what the status of the letter is
>(in the Tibetan Buddhist
>community). I'm just wondering. Does any one
>have any information about this?
>
>With kind regards and compassion,
>Miss K. Lhamo
Looks like someone already beat us to the punch on this petition issue!
Regards,
Evelyn
pat_...@hotmail.com
k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> Has any one seen the interesting letter
> called an "Open Letter To The Buddhist
> Community?" It may be viewed at:
>
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/m_buch/openlet.htm
>
> I wonder what the status of the letter is
> (in the Tibetan Buddhist
> community). I'm just wondering. Does any one
> have any information about this?
>
> With kind regards and compassion,
> Miss K. Lhamo
>
Hello Miss Lhamo,
I'm afraid that this is the "infamous" letter mentioned earlier in our
discussions.
Contrary to the letter's statement "After four days of presentations
and discussions we agreed on the following points:"... there was no
such agreement.
HHDL refused to endorse the letter and his office went to far as to
publicly dissasociate himself from the letter.
beast regards,
Patrick
pat_...@hotmail.com
pat_...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <7r3rvb$31n$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
> > Hello again,
> >
> > Has any one seen the interesting letter
> > called an "Open Letter To The Buddhist
> > Community?" It may be viewed at:
> >
> > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/m_buch/openlet.htm
> >
> > I wonder what the status of the letter is
> > (in the Tibetan Buddhist
> > community). I'm just wondering. Does any one
> > have any information about this?
> >
> > With kind regards and compassion,
> > Miss K. Lhamo
> >
> I'm afraid that this is the "infamous" letter mentioned earlier in our
> discussions.
> Contrary to the letter's statement "After four days of presentations
> and discussions we agreed on the following points:"... there was no
> such agreement.
> HHDL refused to endorse the letter and his office went to far as to
> publicly dissasociate himself from the letter.
> beast regards,
BEST regards! :-)
(hmmm... it's getting a bit Freudian around here!!!)
> Patrick
RickFinney
of this letter from the Western Buddhist
Teachers Conference. It's an excellent
statement of clear, level-headed ideas.
My understanding is that His Holiness did
endorse these ideas and points as they were
being prepared in draft form, but that his
office (not he, himself) became extremely
nervous afterward about the implications
and blocked His Holiness' follow-up, formal
signature and endorsement.
In any case, during the next year in a
similar conference, His Holiness stated
very forcefully (the text is preserved in
an issue of Cho-Yang magazine) that the
misbehavior of abusive teachers should be
publicized in order to make them feel
"sorry for what they've done." So, His
Holiness has already spoken clearly
(if not loudly, or to a very wide audience)
about this problem, and I think he's simply
watching at this point to see if Westerners
are capable of solving these problems now
for themselves.
- Rick Finney
kunukia
wrote:
>>
Good-oh, Mary, thanks.
k
The activities of this degenerate age are like a madman's performance of dance.
No matter what we do, there is no way to please others.
Think about what is essential.
This is my heart's advice.
Drikung Bhande Dharmaradza
Evelyn Ruut
kunukia wrote in message <37d6d77...@news.mindspring.com>...
>
>The activities of this degenerate age are like a madman's performance of
dance.
>No matter what we do, there is no way to please others.
>Think about what is essential.
>This is my heart's advice.
>
>Drikung Bhande Dharmaradza
True.....
Evelyn
DharmaTroll
Thai citizens and authorities, unlike American spineless counterparts,
don't take crap from Buddhist teachers who use funds for personal use.
From today's edition of the Bangkok Post:
Phra Dhammakaya Temple Controversy
September 10, 1999
The police handed Phra Dhammachayo and his aide Thavorn Phromthavorn
over to the prosecution yesterday, together with an investigation
report bringing criminal charges against them.
In addition to earlier allegations of abuse of authority and fraud,
police brought a fresh charge against the Wat Phra Dhammakaya abbot,
who is also alleged to have ordered another aide to make false
statements to Chon Buri authorities about a land deal.
The embattled abbot, accompanied by two senior monks, his aide and
lawyer, was informed of the new charge after they arrived at the
Attorney-General's Office yesterday.
More than 400 of his followers turned up at the office to show their
support. About 100 police from Phahon Yothin station and the Special
Operations Unit were deployed in the area.
According to police investigators, Phra Dhammachayo ordered Therdchart
Srinopparat, one of his close aides, to tell land officials that Wat
Dhammakaya had purchased a five rai block of land. It was found out
later that the land had been donated to the temple.
The 5,918-page police investigation report submitted to the prosecution
yesterday charges the abbot with embezzlement, abuse of authority, and
ordering another person to make a false statement to authorities.
His aide, Mr Thavorn, was charged with being an accessory.
They both denied the charges and were each released on two-million-baht
bail.
Vichian Viriyaprasit, head of the Criminal Litigation Department, said
he had set up a panel to study the police report.
==============
And an earlier story last month:
August 26, 1999
Abbot freed on bail and vows to fight charges
Important evidence has come to light, say investigators
Sirikul Bunnag and Wassayos Ngarmkham
Phra Dhammachayo was charged formally with embezzlement and abuse of
authority after he turned himself over to police at Wat Chanasongkram
in Bangkok yesterday. (Click here for chronology leading to his arrest.)
<http://www.bangkokpost.net/issues/temple/stories.html> After three
hours of questioning, investigators said the abbot of Wat Phra
Dhammakaya had inadvertently disclosed information that could be used
for additional charges under the anti-money laundering act.
Thavorn Promthavorn, a close aide, was charged with being an accessory.
They denied the charges and were each released on two-million-baht bail.
In a statement, the abbot said he would defend himself in court and
appealed to all parties to be orderly.
Pol Gen Pornsak Darongkhavibul, the deputy police chief, who questioned
the suspects, said he had evidence the abbot had bought himself land
with temple money which had also been transferred into the bank
accounts of others.
The abbot, he said, had also deposited donations with a finance company
without the consent of the Religious Affairs Department.
A source said police had obtained evidence that Phra Dhammachayo had
bought a 900-rai plot on the border of Phichit and Petchabun provinces
under his lay name of Chaiyaboon Sutthiphol from Charnvit Temkamol for
about 10 million baht.
The source said gold had been found on the land and Phra Dhammachayo
told the vendor, a geologist, he planned to use it to cast a huge
Buddha image.
Mr Charnvit told Crime Suppression Division police the abbot paid for
the land by instalment.
The source said additional evidence had come to light that Phra
Dhammachayo had transferred a huge sum of cash into the bank account of
a nun.
Pol Gen Pornsak said bail was granted because the abbot and his aide
were unlikely to flee or intimidate. In addition, the abbot's release
would pre-empt possible unrest.
Pol Lt-Gen Vassana Poonlarp, leading the investigation, said measures
had been taken to prevent the abbot leaving the country.
Phra Dhammachayo's conditional surrender at Wat Chanasongkram instead
of a police station was agreed late on Tuesday night in talks between
the abbot's followers and Sanan Kachornprasart, the interior minister,
at the temple in Pathum Thani.
During the talks, Somdej Phra Maha Thiracharn, abbot of Wat
Chanasongkram, had recommended Phra Dhammachayo be granted bail.
Accompanied by Phra Tattacheevo, his deputy, another monk and a lawyer,
the abbot surrendered as 600 anti-riot policemen stood guard in and
around Wat Chanasongkram, where a number of fire trucks stood by.
The security cordon failed to stop a fistfight between a group of
Dhammakaya disciples and opponents as they tried to take away the
ignition key of a temple van with its engine being kept running. The
incident involved 10 people on each side, and a man was taken into
custody but was not charged.
About 500 monks and Dhammakaya followers also arrived at the temple
aboard 10 buses which were, however, diverted to Sanam Luang by the
police.
Aside from the criminal charges, the source said Somdej Phra Maha
Thiracharn would raise defrocking proceedings against Phra Dhammachayo
with the Sangha Council. Pipob Kanchana, the director-general of
Religious Affairs Department, said, however, that the defrocking
proceedings against the abbot would have to wait.
Somporn Thepsittha, leader of the Buddhist Youth Centre, yesterday
called on the monastic body to temporarily demote Phra Dhammachayo from
being an abbot pending criminal proceedings.
The Constitutional Court is due today to rule whether to accept or
reject a petition filed by a group of 73 followers of the Wat Phra
Dhammakaya cult.
Led by Pong Leng-ee, former director-general of the Forestry
Department, the cultists claimed that the police action against Phra
Dhammachayo ran against Article 38 of the constitution, which
guarantees an individual's freedom to profess a religion, a religious
sect or creed and observe religious precepts.
Mary Finnigan
This thread has gone dead again. But, meanwhile, there's been
constructive e-mail networking in progress. One person has been
researching possible free access to web sites that could be used as a
collection point for a petition. K.Lhamo, myself and another survivor of
sexual abuse by Tibetan lamas, Nicky Skye, have been in touch with each
other. Our discussions -- and the responses to this thread -- indicate
that there is a movement underway to:
*Bring the topic of sexual and other forms of power abuse by Tibetan
lamas into clear public focus
*Establish a discussion and support network for survivors of sexual
abuse by Tibetan lamas.
Nicky Skye is an internet novice and does not yet have access to ngs.
She does, however, read up via Deja News and it was through doing this
that she established contact with K.Lhamo and me.
She wants her story to appear on this thread. I will help her to do
this.
The most important next question is:
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO IS WILLING TO TAKE ON THE JOB OF SETTING
UP AND RUNNING THE PETITION WEB SITE?
I have neither the time nor the technical ability to do this.
Mary
Kent Sandvik
k_l...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7rejsa$pcq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>Can any one recommend
>a really, really good and kind
>(with high morals) Tibetan Lama?
>I think it's important we realize who the good Tibetan
>Lamas are. I think that's very important.
Oh, there are many good Tibetan (and Western) lamas, more than people
think when reading this newsgroup. Do not be discouraged. At the same
time, check, check, re-check, and not only check the lamas, check
their students and how they behave, that's also a good sign of how the
lama teaches and acts, as the students are mini-universes of their
teachers.
It's just important to check out teachers and teachings really well,
we are dealing with the most precious real estate you have -- your
mind.
Spend at least a year before you make your decision, especially if you
are taking more advanced teachings where the student-teacher
relationship is one of the strongest forces you have, and misuse of
this could lead to really bad situations.
sarva mangalam, Kent
Mary Finnigan
>
>>
>>Can any one recommend
>>a really, really good and kind
>>(with high morals) Tibetan Lama?
>>I think it's important we realize who the good Tibetan
>>Lamas are. I think that's very important.
polarised and exclude the broader landscape.
>
>Oh, there are many good Tibetan (and Western) lamas, more than people
>think when reading this newsgroup.
people. Accomplished contemplatives, knowledgeable scholars and
energetic in their endeavours to guide their followers into effective
spiritual practice. IMO, the problems that arise around sexuality,
accountability and financial clarity have much to do with cultural
dissonance. I have said this before and I will say it again: Mapping a
feudal-medieval social matrix onto millennium western democracy is no
easy task. Adjustments need to be made on both sides if it is to
succeed. These areas of dissonance are not yet being acknowledged, let
alone openly addressed, by the Tibetans. Some western teachers and
students are getting to grips with transitional problems. But time after
time after time, when westerners approach senior Tibetan lamas about
sexual misconduct and financial irregularities, they are ignored. So far
the Tibetans have not responded to the important concerns that they must
now be aware of.
>time, check, check, re-check, and not only check the lamas, check
>their students and how they behave, that's also a good sign of how the
>lama teaches and acts, as the students are mini-universes of their
>teachers.
with your wonderful Khenpo? I suggest she checks out the Dzogchen
Community, which is based in the USA at Tsegyalgar, at Conway, MA.
There's a web site, but I don't have to URL to hand. And Kent -- how
about the most psychic one I know -- the indomitable Thubten Zopa
Rinpoche? (He can read your mind as easily as I read The Guardian!) One
of my first teachers. If you can grit your teeth to sit through his very
demanding delivery style, his teachings are brilliant.
>
>It's just important to check out teachers and teachings really well,
>we are dealing with the most precious real estate you have -- your
>mind.
been fewer casualties.
>
>Spend at least a year before you make your decision, especially if you
>are taking more advanced teachings where the student-teacher
>relationship is one of the strongest forces you have, and misuse of
>this could lead to really bad situations.
If not, America and its children have a treat still to come. In the
second one, which I read while on holiday recently, there is a character
in it called Gilderoy Lockhart. A vain, glamorous, handsome, smooth-
tongued charlatan. His books sell millions. The girls fall in love with
him, but he is a plagiarist and totally useless as a magician. Apart
from the good looks, does this remind you of a certain Tib lama?
Mary
Peter Da Costa
I have twice been the victim of such tactics. On the first occasion I
was a few yards away from the screamer. That did not stop everyone in
the room from fixing me with hard stares.
On the second occasion I was halfway across a school playground when the
scream came out: once again this did not stop people giving me very hard
looks.
There is a certain kind of person that relishes this kind of drama.
Cheers
Peter
In article <EZ0soCA5...@pema.demon.co.uk>, Mary Finnigan
<ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> writes
peterd@_NO_SPAM_pdacosta.demon.co.uk remove _NO_SPAM_ to reply
http://www.sunderland.ac.uk/~os0dwe/bsa.shtml
http://www.quantrum.com.my/sadhu/
http://world.std.com/~metta/
http://jbe.gold.ac.uk/
"Introduction to Buddhism" P Harvey, Cambridge
kunukia
>I think it needs to be recognized that not all
>Tibetan Lamas are power-hungry lamas or bad lamas.
>I don't know if that was expressed yet in these
>various discussions.
Thank you. No, the discussion has so far been based on the bad stuff.
>
>I feel in my heart there's a lot of good Tibetan Lamas
>out there somewhere.... I am sure many people have
>very wonderful Tibetan Lamas, who never have any
>kind of difficulties at all. For any people who
>have had some bad experiences in the dharma, it will
>take much healing, I think. I realize, in myself,
>I am learning to forgive what happened (concerning
>my bad experiences in dharma). It is just something
>that takes time, though. Any thoughts about forgiveness
>in dharma out there?
>
>Can any one recommend
>a really, really good and kind
>(with high morals) Tibetan Lama?
>I think it's important we realize who the good Tibetan
>Lamas are. I think that's very important.
His Emminence Garchen Rinpoche
No breath of scandal, innumerable examples of kindness.
Will be teaching in Virginia, late September, before going to Asia,
and ultimately to Tibet for some months.
Details at:
http://garchen.com/prescottpracticeschedule.htm
>Often, it is so important to find the right teacher,
>though, especially the right karmic connection.
kunukia
The root lama is like a wish-fulfilling jewel.
He is the source of all good qualities.
Therefore, attend him with flawless respect.
This is my heart's advice.
Drikung Bandhe Dharmaradza
DharmaTroll
k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Hello again,
>
> I think it needs to be recognized that not all
> Tibetan Lamas are power-hungry lamas or bad lamas.
> I don't know if that was expressed yet in these
> various discussions.
Yes, I've expressed that several times, but not enough.
> I feel in my heart there's a lot of good Tibetan Lamas
> out there somewhere.... I am sure many people have
> very wonderful Tibetan Lamas, who never have any
> kind of difficulties at all.
> Can any one recommend a really, really good and kind
> (with high morals) Tibetan Lama?
> I think it's important we realize who the good Tibetan
> Lamas are. I think that's very important.
Sure. You can't do better than Tarthang Tulku, for starters.
I've found his books quite inspiring, and he has opened a huge
center in California, which has been going strong for 25 years.
I recommend TT's books, but some are more difficult than others.
In my personal opinion, Tarthang Tulku represents the peak
accomplishments of Tibetan Buddhism in the West. He is a master
of the Nyingma tradition, which is the oldest Tibetan school and
which traces its lineage back to Padmasambhava, who founded
Tibetan Buddhism somewhere around the 8th century A.D.
As far as I know, Tarthang is still alive and teaching at the
Odiyan Buddhist Center in California. I also think that in his
tradition he was able to marry and that he has a daughter, but
I'm not sure about that. Maybe someone else can fill me in.
In any case, there are two gems by Tarthang Tulku that I highly
recommend, and they are _Gesture of Balance_, a wonderful book
about Buddhist practise, and _Skillful Means_, an equally
wonderful book about applying Buddhist practise in daily life.
My favourite of Tarthang Tulku's, however, is a rather difficult
yet intriguing book, _Time, Space, and Knowledge_, which I read
in a class on Buddhism in college. It's an amazing work, complete
with 35 exercises which Tarthang has designed to guide the reader
to see things from a different perspective. The book is quite
fascinating, and Tarthang has written several follow-up books on
the subject, as it is one of his pet projects and visions.
Also, I've read his _Openness Mind_ and _Hidden Mind of Freedom_,
both of which are good, but I enjoyed the above three the best.
The Crystal Mirror series he's doing is quite good as well, and
I've glanced through a couple of them: they are about the history
of Tibetan Buddhism, and I think there are 12 or 13 volumes.
You can check out Tarthang Tulku at: < http://www.nyingma.org >
Notice that there are no big pictures of him, no rambling on of
guru-worship, and Tarthang is mentioned here and there, but the
community projects and on-going programs are given top billing.
That's a really good sign. Nor is there any talk of pumping up
the guru's rep with talk of being reincarnations of famous people,
and I think only once in the whole site is there a comment that
Tarthang is a reincarnated master of the tradition, and no more
on that kind of thing is mentioned. Another really good sign.
Finally, a description of retreats and ongoing programs at the
Odiyan center states: "Although the program draws on the practices
and insights from the ancient wisdom of the Tibetan Buddhist
tradition, it deal with the direct, human experience of growth and
change and does not require acceptance of any dogma." Now that's
the best sign of all.
Anyway, below I'll paste in an article about Tarthang Tulku as
presented in the journal of another religion, which makes it a more
reputable or objective source of information, in terms of any
positive content or praise. Anyway, Tarthang Tulku is the most
impressive living lama I've come across to date.
--Dharmakaya Trollpa
<< Tibetan Buddhist shrine rises in California hills
by Daniel, Sneider
Christian Science Monitor
Vol. 88 No. 143 1996.06.19
P. 12
Copyright by Christian Science Monitor
SONOMA COUNTY, CALIF.
A golden stupa shimmers in the California sunlight, appearing like an
Asian mirage in the hills above the magnificent coastline north of San
Francisco.
The traditional Buddhist monument, found everywhere across Asia, is
only one piece of a stunning complex of Buddhist temples opened to the
public this month.
The Odiyan Buddhist Center, which was more than two decades in the
making, is the creation of the adherents of a Tibetan lama. Designed as
a monastery and retreat for the study of Tibetan Buddhism, it is
purportedly the largest such structure in North America. A gleaming
copper-domed main temple, an 11-story pagoda-like temple, and four
libraries filled with thousands of sacred texts in Tibetan are set amid
acres of flower gardens, reflecting pools, and fluttering prayer flags.
The air is filled with the calming hum of more than 1,200 copper prayer
wheels engraved with Buddhist mantras.
From the plantings to the 108,000 images of the founder of Tibetan
Buddhism that fill the Vajra Temple overlooking the Pacific, Odiyan is
the handiwork of a small Buddhist community based in Berkeley, Calif.
For 21 years, a rotating group of people from diverse backgrounds, most
of them teachers, psychologists, and other professionals, built this
retreat from the ground up, learning construction techniques as they
went along.
Equally monumental is the publishing work of this movement, which over
the same period has collected and preserved a treasury of Tibetan
Buddhist texts, many saved from the efforts of the Chinese government
to wipe out the rich religious and cultural heritage of Tibet.
The driving force behind Odiyan is Tarthang Tulku Rinpoche, a Tibetan
scholar and teacher. Since fleeing the Chinese Communist takeover of
the Himalayan nation, Tarthang Tulku has devoted his life to the
reservation and dissemination of Tibetan Buddhism.
The temple complex is testament not only to the commitment of the small
band that built it but also to the growing popularity in the West of
all schools of Buddhism.
"Odiyan is a small piece of the spread of Buddhism in the West," says
Harvard University's Diana Eck, professor of comparative religion and
Indian studies who chairs a committee studying Eastern religions in the
United States.
The Asian religion initially came to this country in the 19th century
through immigrants from Japan and China, followed in recent decades by
immigrants from Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand.
This Asian diversity has grown to include Euro-American followers,
initially associated with the beat generation of the late 1950s but
long since spread widely across the country. "The Buddhist tradition in
the US is becoming an American religious tradition," says Professor
Eck. Estimates of the number of Buddhists vary from several hundred
thousand to several million.
"Buddhism addresses the question of 'what else is there?' in a culture
that is very fast-track and materialistic, and oriented toward ideals
of progress," Eck says. The tradition of meditation in Buddhism merges
religion with psychology.
"It stresses independent investigation," explains Sally Sorenson, a
project coordinator at Odiyan. "You're trying to understand how your
own mind works. You're not asked to believe. You're asked to discover
something for yourself. It's an individual pursuit guided by
tradition." This may account in part for its attraction to highly
educated people.
Tarthang Tulku adheres to the Nyingma, or ancient, school of Buddhism
which traces its roots back to Padmasambhava, a Mahayana Buddhist
master credited with introducing the religion from India into Tibet
beginning in the 7th century. The Nyingma school is the earliest phase
of a literary tradition notable for its comprehensive and accurate
translations of ancient Sanskrit texts and commentaries.
"Tibetan Buddhism is a repository of texts that were otherwise lost
because Buddhism died out in India," says Professor Janet Gyatso, an
associate professor of religion at Amherst College and a specialist on
Tibetan Buddhism.
That heritage thrived in the relative isolation of remote mountainous
Tibet until the Communists came to power in China, leading to growing
persecution of Tibetans and their culture.
The Tibetan supreme leader, the Dalai Lama, fled in 1959, along with
some 100,000 of his followers. According to human rights organizations,
the Chinese repression that followed killed hundreds of thousands of
Tibetans and destroyed all but 13 of the country's more than 6,000
monasteries, along with their libraries.
Along with many Tibetans, Tarthang Tulku initially went into exile in
India, where he taught at Sanskrit University. There he began an effort
to collect and publish texts and sacred art carried out by fleeing
monks and others.
In 1968, the lama came to the United States, where he founded Dharma
Publishing and later the Nyingma Institute, a center for the study of
meditation and Buddhist thought. Odiyan, whose construction began in
1975, was intended as a retreat for practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism
as well as for those engaged in serious scholarship.
Aside from a wide variety of publications in English popularizing
Buddhist thought, the core of Dharma Publishing's effort has been the
painstaking reproduction of Tibetan language texts, originally printed
by hand-carved woodblocks on thin strips of paper stored in wooden
boxes.
In 1981, the group completed a 128-volume edition of the Tibetan
Buddhist canon. This was followed in 1993 by publication an even more
ambitious 627-volume collection of the works of the Nyingma tradition,
as well as of masters of all four Tibetan schools, collected from
refugees and libraries the world over.
These works cover a vast range of subjects from philosophy to history,
medicine, and science. Large enough to fill the entire wall of a
vaulted underground library at Odiyan, the volumes are now being
distributed back to Tibet and to Tibetan exiles in India, Nepal, and
elsewhere.
"Since the Chinese took over, there are two generations that don't know
anything about Tibetan tradition," says Dharma Publishing's Jack
Petranker.
Now Dharma is embarked on translating these texts into English. Amid
the edifices and grounds of Odiyan, somehow this does not seem so
daunting a task.
* If you are interested in visiting Odiyan, call (510) 549-9310.
More information on Odiyan is available on the Internet at
http://www.nyingma.org
RickFinney
The easiest thing in the world is to scream "Rape!" >>
[This is a letter from Rick's wife, Chris]
Dear Peter,
You obviously have no direct experience with abuse. If you had been a victim,
your sympathies would be with the victims. Too many times the victims are
re-victimized by others who do not believe them when they try to seek help for
themselves, or simply to try and stop the attacker from hurting others.
You should remember that most women who have been sexually abused NEVER come
forth because of this re-victimization. Of the women I have known who were
assaulted, most chose to escape because there was no ally to defend them. This
included several women who were raped by step-fathers and uncles over a period
of years while they were under the age of 12. When one of the girls learned
that the step-father had begun abusing her younger sister, she took her sister
to their mother and said STOP HIM! It's us or him. The mother chose the
disgusting animal of a step-father over her own young daughters. Luckily, the
children grew up in a loving grandparent's care. I lost track of them after
college.
Most women never see their assailant tried and convicted because there isn't
enough "evidence". For a young girl who knows nothing about the "evidence"
taken at a rape crime investigation, there is only her word that something
wrong happened.
I once dated a man who had been repeatedly brutalized by his father when he was
a child. His father saw nothing wrong with this behavior. He also raped his
daughter. Do you share the same callous response with men who have been
victimized? I think you do not know what you are talking about and ought to
remain silent on these issues. Your posting is of no help to anyone and will
only reflect the ignorance of those who refuse to acknowledge that BAD BEHAVIOR
IS ALWAYS BAD BEHAVIOR.
Even lamas should not be above scrutiny over sexual abuse. Many of them are
guilty of the very behavior that they are accused of.
Chris Finney
RickFinney
endorsement of Garchen Rinpoche as some-
one who is ultimately trustworthy and kind.
No words can fully describe how wonder-
ful he is!
When we discuss these other matters--
abuse, corruption, and betrayal--it is with
the intention to cut through the deception
and naivete that keep people from seeing
these things for what they are. Hopefully,
they will then look for teachers who are
authentic exemplars of the Mahayana.
Such lamas exist, and Garchen Rinpoche is
one of them for sure!
- Rick Finney
robinandlynne
you are referring to, but YES we do have (in the U.S.) the Harry Potter
books. Yesterday our local bookseller had a party to celebrate the
arrival of the third book...and he had a child dressed as a bearded
wizard. I wonder if this is who you mean?. The picture was in this
morning's paper.
This is heresy, (suspect you will think) but there is entirely too much
emphasis on teachers. This is the modern world and we have to make
things our own.
We read, we do not live illiterate on a high mountain plateau. Why throw
oneself at a "teacher"? (Can this even be "good" for them?) We have,
for the first time in human history, the whole world of knowledge at our
fingertips if only we want to know.
This is personal work that no one can do for anyone else. HHDL has said,
"I am not anyone's teacher. I want to be thought of as a "Darmha
friend".
Your darmha pal, Lynne
Peter Da Costa
<rickf...@aol.com> writes
><<
>
>The easiest thing in the world is to scream "Rape!" >>
>
>[This is a letter from Rick's wife, Chris]
>
>Dear Peter,
Dear Chris
>
>You obviously have no direct experience with abuse.
This is not strictly correct, not especially relevant here. I will
willingly concede however, that I have not experienced the brutality
that you are certainly referring to. I have, additionally, met a
convicted rapist, and I can assure you, neither I nor the people that I
was with at that time felt the slightest sympathy for him and without
exception were all glad when he eventually moved on.
A few years ago, before the 'Web' took off and news groups were
positively civilised places to hang out in, I frequented, but did not
contribute to talk.rape: the standard being way above anything I could
have offered either then or now. It was the most insightful experience
I have ever had *bar none*. It both opened me up to the trauma of rape,
and also gave me an amazing insight into a side of the female psyche
that in all my then forty odd years had no idea existed. It gave me the
chance to see the creative side of the female psyche for the very first
time in my entire life. My relations with women, since then, have been
enhanced beyond all expectations as a direct result of this. My one
regret was that it hadn't happened ten years earlier, when perhaps I
could have done proper justice to this new found wisdom.
>
>If you had been a victim,
>your sympathies would be with the victims.
I hope my above ramblings give some idea about my sympathies with
genuine victims, both the attacked and the falsely accused. Just a few
years ago I was actually on duty (night porter) near a seated group of
three people, two women and a man. The man's presence was not
appreciated. Having invited himself to sit down and join them he
dominated the conversation, taking it into topics that the two ladies
had not the slightest interest in. Being incredibly thick he was
totally incapable of taking their hints to go away and leave them alone.
One of the ladies - to her credit - did warn him of the tactic she would
use if he did not get up and go, but neither he nor the second lady took
this threat seriously. Well, when the first lady had come to the end of
her tether, she promptly cried Rape, but the thick man still did not
take the hint and merely suggested that she go for a DNA test at the
local police station. The second lady was most distressed by all this
and I called the police. The police arrived but only one male PC
answered the call and was not able to do much more than get rid of the
man: leaving me to deal with the two distressed women and making a
complete hash of it into the bargain.
The moral of this storey is that false claims do happen. Entire careers
are at stake, as are reputations on both sides of the divide. Let us
not falsely accuse. Let us not conduct a rape hunt on line.
>
>Too many times the victims are
>re-victimized by others who do not believe them when they try to seek help for
>themselves, or simply to try and stop the attacker from hurting others.
This I can truly believe. Whilst never having met a victim of Rape, I
have met victims of attacks, and this was before taking on my present
job.
>
>You should remember that most women who have been sexually abused NEVER come
>forth because of this re-victimization.
Their profound sense of shame and abused worthlessness would also
contribute to deterring them. In the UK, their ordeal is only increased
by the nature of their court appearance, where the attacker gets to
cross examine the victim and often relives, in as vivid a detail as he
wishes, his original attack: those are his 'rights' believe it or not.
>Of the women I have known who were
>assaulted, most chose to escape because there was no ally to defend them. This
>included several women who were raped by step-fathers and uncles over a period
>of years while they were under the age of 12. When one of the girls learned
>that the step-father had begun abusing her younger sister, she took her sister
>to their mother and said STOP HIM! It's us or him. The mother chose the
>disgusting animal of a step-father over her own young daughters. Luckily, the
>children grew up in a loving grandparent's care. I lost track of them after
>college.
This is a typical example of the atrocities that abound. I am sure
every one on this ng has total sympathy for such victims as well as
disgust for the perpetrating beasts. In the UK we are currently
discovering whole horror stories around local authority care for
children. Apparently, since the sixties there has been an enormous
scale of such abuse: in one case, a male victim had committed suicide by
the time he reached his thirtieth year.
>
>Most women never see their assailant tried and convicted because there isn't
>enough "evidence". For a young girl who knows nothing about the "evidence"
>taken at a rape crime investigation, there is only her word that something
>wrong happened.
>
This is the one big injustice of our so called 'civilise' system.
However, as a small child, I had a most irate father come to the front
door of our house with his tiny daughter on his arm. My mother answered
the door, and the father was straining to get passed her and on to me
and my younger brother. The girl looked please with her self, and I
could not make out the exact nature of her accusation. All I know is
that I was spontaneously pointing my finger back at her as she pointed
hers at us. Her father, looked from us back to his daughter, and must
have read it all on her face. He went rather flushed and expressed his
embarrassment and apologies and promptly took his daughter back to their
home.
>I once dated a man who had been repeatedly brutalized by his father when he was
>a child. His father saw nothing wrong with this behavior. He also raped his
>daughter.
This is truly a devastation of young potential. Presumably the father
did not undergo any criminal action. But he had to face his children
when they became adult: no doubt he disappeared long before this.
>Do you share the same callous response with men who have been
>victimized?
Why don't you ask me if I have stopped beating my wife?
>I think you do not know what you are talking about and ought to
>remain silent on these issues.
I think you cannot possibly know such things about me or any other
poster to this forum: regardless of their gender.
>Your posting is of no help to anyone
My posting is of no help to anyone who wants to start a 'witch hunt'. I
would love to help you in your cause. I sincerely hope my post has gone
some way to that end by steering this thread away from the obvious pit
fall that it was careering towards.
>and will
>only reflect the ignorance of those who refuse to acknowledge that BAD BEHAVIOR
>IS ALWAYS BAD BEHAVIOR.
I deeply regret your choice of words. "BAD BEHAVIOUR" just does not cut
it. As far as I am concerned - for what that's worth - we are
discussing nothing less than CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR of the most violent
kind. For me, rape is second only to MURDER itself and strongly feel
that prison sentences should reflect this: i.e. life. Women deserve
nothing less than the full protection of the law.
>
>Even lamas should not be above scrutiny over sexual abuse. Many of them are
>guilty of the very behavior that they are accused of.
How many of them are innocent too? A wrecked reputation for a Lama is
the effective finish to his monastic career. Have you ever tried
getting a job after some ten odd years in a monastic environment? Not
much fun I can personally assure you. Let this only happen to those who
are guilty, and let us realise that we cannot possibly figure this out
from our PC screens.
I have had a belly full of false accusation against me to last the rest
of my life, but that is no guarantee that I wont get more in the future:
thank God for DNA and other forensic testing. Women do not have a
monopoly on virtue: they do however have a fundamental right to the full
protection of the Law: society owes them nothing less.
>
>
>
>Chris Finney
Respectfully
Peter Da Costa
DharmaTroll
Peter Da Costa <peterd@NO_SPAMpdacosta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> The easiest thing in the world is to scream "Rape!"
No, that's only the *second* easiest thing to scream, Pete.
The *easiest* thing is to scream "She wanted it!" or "She deserved it!"
or "She's the kind of person that relishes this kind of drama!"
> I have twice been the victim of such tactics.
And I致e certainly have had my share of psycho-chicks projecting their
crap onto me. So what? So that means that all the real victims should
be ignored?
> There is a certain kind of person that relishes this kind of drama.
>
> Cheers
> Peter
Easy for you to say. However, since there do exist those who cry 'wolf'
or 'rape', or 'abuse', are you suggesting that we ignore all the abuse
of all those people who are *actually* raped or exploited or abused?
Are you saying that because some women make things up that we should
ignore all of the ones who are abused by a lama or priest or rabbi or
guru or therapist or professor?
As you have in the past been insulting and taken cheap shots towards
me, Pete, I almost can't resist an ad hominem zinger given your previous
comments about women. On a second editing, I've decided that this would
not be "right speech", especially since I want to focus on Mary's very
commendable efforts, not my own food fights. So instead I wish to point
out that as men, many of us including myself at times, often can have
a lot of bias and prejudice towards women in such roles, even if only
because we remember cases where women have falsely accused us like that.
However, I try to discern this kind of thing from women who are abused
and often punished for trying to speak out about what has happened.
So just why is it that you wish to let all the lamas who have sexually
abused get away with it, Pete? You write:
> How many of them are innocent too? A wrecked reputation for a Lama
> is the effective finish to his monastic career. Have you ever tried
> getting a job after some ten odd years in a monastic environment?
Anyway, this brings up a good point: that if and when actions are taken
against gurus who abuse students, then the gurus need to be protected
from crying wolf as well, as this certainly can happen. The new DNA
testing has now led to the 65th man being released from jail in the USA
for wrongly being charged with rape. (Far, far more rapists have *not*
gotten prosecuted in the first place, keep in mind, just because of fear
of making this very kind of false positive error. Hopefully, the DNA
testing will correct this error to a much greater extent as well.)
There are many interesting cases in terms of (1) professors, and
(2) therapists, who get involved sexually with their students/clients.
If a professor or therapist can lose their credentials for engaging
in a relationship where there exists such a power hierarchy, then the
same thing should apply in religious organisations. Not that if two
people fall in love that they should be kept from each other, but only
that the student/client must be referred to another teacher/therapist
if their personal relationship is to continue. This will minimize the
possibility for abuse and exploitation.
If this is spelled out and anyone who feels that a teacher has made
sexual advances to the student is told to report this to the community,
and that this will not be considered disrespect towards the teacher
or the tradition, much of this abuse will be prevented. In the cases
where the student was projecting, the teacher's actions, such as what
they actually said, their body language, etc. can be explained as well
as their intentions without disgrace or disrespect to the student or
teacher, as mis-interpretations in the cases of false positives can be
easily straightened out by both parties explaining their intentions and
their feelings and interpretations openly, with no shame or disrespect
attributed if they turn out to have been mistaken.
And Mary: in any case, these kind of preventative measures should be
stressed in any petition: instead of narrowly focusing on dealing with
teachers who have been abusive and exploitative, you will connect with
a lot more people if they are being provided with preventive medicine
to stop abuse as well as misunderstandings in these areas, to which
all heirarchical structures tend to be vulnerable, by suggesting general
guidelines and safe ways for people who have been abused or simply are
confused about a teacher's ambiguity may disclose their fears without
being intimidated or shamed if they turn out to be mistaken. This
emphasis will also thwart the Peter Da Costa's who are quick to label
rape victims as the "kind of person that relishes this kind of drama"
and then go on and on about the lama losing his reputation.
In Tibetan Buddhism, when has a lama ever lost his/her reputation?
Rather, in the face of overwhelming evidence there is total denial,
time and time again. Hence, Pete pays lip-service with his empathetic
cry that "For me, rape is second only to MURDER itself," yet he'd rather
let them all get away with it because a lama's reputation might get
tainted. In the case of Jetsunma and the KPC, there are over 20 people
who have left the place and tell stories of abuse, Mistress Jetsunma
herself even wrote a poem about the nun she beat in which she refers
to her as "bitch, whore" and posted it on-line, and there are doctors'
reports of those poisoned when she compelled followers to work in
unsafe conditions, and *still* there are cries about a "witchunt" and
that there is no evidence at all. One of the most striking features
about that case, you see, is how the victims are intimidated and
labeled as mentally ill or as a "slut", which was actually the monk
Konchog's defense for justifying the nun's beating by his guru Jetsunma.
I think that a strong emphasis on this aspect would both appeal to
communities which have not had such incidences, as well as lamas who
are innocent and wish to have mis-interpretations resolved as quickly
as possible. For only when it is safe to voice one's concerns in the
local religious community will not only victims not continue to be
silenced, but mistaken accusations will be cleared up quickly as well.
So that works for the benefit of the innocent lamas as well as for the
benefit of all the victims.
What do you think, Mary?
--Dharmakaya Trollpa
> In article <EZ0soCA5...@pema.demon.co.uk>, Mary Finnigan
> <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> writes
<< Hello again.
This thread has gone dead again. But, meanwhile, there's been
constructive e-mail networking in progress. One person has been
researching possible free access to web sites that could be used as a
collection point for a petition. K.Lhamo, myself and another survivor
of sexual abuse by Tibetan lamas, Nicky Skye, have been in touch with
each other. Our discussions -- and the responses to this thread --
indicate that there is a movement underway to:
*Bring the topic of sexual and other forms of power abuse by Tibetan
lamas into clear public focus
*Establish a discussion and support network for survivors of sexual
abuse by Tibetan lamas.
Nicky Skye is an internet novice and does not yet have access to ngs.
She does, however, read up via Deja News and it was through doing
this that she established contact with K.Lhamo and me. She wants her
story to appear on this thread. I will help her to do this.
The most important next question is:
IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO IS WILLING TO TAKE ON THE JOB OF
SETTING UP AND RUNNING THE PETITION WEB SITE?
I have neither the time nor the technical ability to do this.
Mary >>
Alaya
alaya
DharmaTroll <dharm...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7rgnpo$3i7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Kent Sandvik
Mary Finnigan wrote in message ...
>K.Lhamo asks for recommendations. Evelyn -- can you put her in touch
>with your wonderful Khenpo? I suggest she checks out the Dzogchen
>Community, which is based in the USA at Tsegyalgar, at Conway, MA.
>There's a web site, but I don't have to URL to hand. And Kent -- how
>about the most psychic one I know -- the indomitable Thubten Zopa
>Rinpoche? (He can read your mind as easily as I read The Guardian!)
One
>of my first teachers. If you can grit your teeth to sit through his
very
>demanding delivery style, his teachings are brilliant.
Well, there's always the issue of purification when receiving
teachings, if there's an amount of work done in order to get the
teachings, such as sitting until 5am when the real interesting
teachings happen, then this is just good. It's also another way to
make sure that the student-teacher relationship is solid and has a
good basis, as someone being at a teaching 5am really wants to listen
to the teacher. Skilful means.
Expect your future and current teacher test you now and then, and be
very, very, very alert, or the test might fly past your ears and eyes!
Actually, Mary, you point out a good thing about a teacher-student
relationship, if the teacher really reads your thoughts and answers
your real answers, then you know there's a deep past connection, and
the best you could do (after of course the throrough test phase, and
expect the teacher to test you out as well (!), then is to cultivate
this relationship as much as possible, and the results come from
this).
May all practitioners find their ultimate teachers everywhere, as soon
as possible. mangalam, Kent
Peter Da Costa
Nice to see you appreciating some value in right speech training.
However, this includes a little more than avoiding harsh language, it
includes words conducive to harmony, respect and special care to avoid
'inadvertent misrepresentation': however, it is most encouraging to see
you make a start. Before long you will be so well practised as to be
able to show the rest of us a thing or two by your impeccable example.
Just don't loose that sense of humour of yours in the process: you don't
want to end up like me. I live in hopes that with enough practice I'll
rediscover my original brilliance: I'll need to work on conceit too!
I feel that your cut and paste job does fine justice to the main points
of my piece, which people can still read for themselves if it has not
already timed out.
You bring out well the importance of giving women the full protection of
the law, which they have a fundamental right to and thoroughly deserve.
Do you ever contemplate that your mother risked her life just to give
you yours? Most men are totally clue less about such things: I
certainly was! Civilisation is pure mockery if women and children
cannot be suitably protected from rogue adult males. I just want to get
away from the stigma of "All Men are Beasts". This is a matter for the
due process of Law, which is far from perfect, but hopefully gets better
as more experience is gained. The problem of women not coming forward
is a problem that society must deal with outside of the courts. I read
some very interesting posts concerning this in talk.rape several years
ago. I have no idea if the standard of posting has been maintained, but
in those days it was excellence itself. If such things are archived I
would well recommend browsing them.
Maybe, as you point out, the online world *is* the best place to pursue
such problems. After all the onus of proof lays with the posters and if
they are making false claims they would be opening themselves to legal
action if it were not for the fact that Usenet postings are not accepted
by the courts of most major countries as evidence. However, genuine
victims should and *must* have a course of action open to them, and this
campaign is being taken as such a measure. I hope the participants
achieve all their objectives. It is perhaps a sad thing that first
generation immigrants have a huge cultural shift to make, and that this
includes the attitude towards women's rights. One hopes that successive
generations, borne and raise here will not have any of this trouble.
Metta cittena
Peter
DharmaTroll <dharm...@my-deja.com> writes
>In article <EfVW8CAP...@pdacosta.demon.co.uk>,
> Peter Da Costa <peterd@NO_SPAMpdacosta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> The easiest thing in the world is to scream "Rape!"
>
>No, that's only the *second* easiest thing to scream, Pete.
>The *easiest* thing is to scream "She wanted it!" or "She deserved it!"
>or "She's the kind of person that relishes this kind of drama!"
>
>> I have twice been the victim of such tactics.
>
>And I致e certainly have had my share of psycho-chicks projecting their
>crap onto me. So what? So that means that all the real victims should
>be ignored?
>
>> There is a certain kind of person that relishes this kind of drama.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Peter
>
>Easy for you to say. However, since there do exist those who cry 'wolf'
>or 'rape', or 'abuse', are you suggesting that we ignore all the abuse
>of all those people who are *actually* raped or exploited or abused?
>Are you saying that because some women make things up that we should
>ignore all of the ones who are abused by a lama or priest or rabbi or
>guru or therapist or professor?
peterd@_NO_SPAM_pdacosta.demon.co.uk remove _NO_SPAM_ to reply
Evelyn Ruut
Mary Finnigan
She has only recently acquired a computer. It is an old one and she does
not yet know in detail how to operate it. She has managed to access Deja
News and has been following this thread. She contacted me via e-mail.
After discussion with me and others, Nicky decided that the time is
right for her to make her experience public. Anyone who would like to
communicate with her can e-mail her at Nick...@aol.com Replies to the
material below will be read by her via Deja News. I hope that the
collaboration between Nicky, myself and others will be benefit Tibetan
Buddhism.
Nicky Skye writes:
I have spent 23 years thinking about how to stop sexual abuse by lamas
since I experienced an abusive relationship with Sogyal Rinpoche. I have
openly discussed Sogyal's abuse with other lamas. On one occasion, I
was publicly ridiculed and privately threatened I would go to Vajra Hell
if I discussed it again. When I discussed my feelings about Sogyal (who
called me his girlfriend to everybody while telling me he had a
girlfriend in London) and his behavior when I went to see my dying
father for 3 days (I was told by the the sangha he had slept with 2
other women in those 3 days), a prominent western follower of Tibetan
Buddhism said that the Vajrayana had a "higher morality" and having sex
with many partners was no big deal. He said the Vajrayana was not about
being puritanical. So I felt my opinion was meaningless in the eyes of
the Dharma community. When I told other disciples about a Gelugpa geshe
insisting on seeing my breasts, I was told that it was a privilege and
that I must be a dakini. The final straw was when I told an American
nun about Sakya Trizin saying my Dorje Phurba practice required me to
have sex with him, she said I was an idiot to be manipulated by a
lamas' sex urges. Not being abused was my responsibility, she said. I
told her my Dorje Phurba practice REQUIRED me to see my teacher as a
Buddha. All the texts said I should follow my Vajrayana teacher's word.
My teacher told me to have sex with him. If I didn't see his word as
holy and true,like a mantra, I could consider myself, in the light of
the Dharma, a selfish, ignorant, bad disciple, not practising my holy
bond (damtsig) with my Vajrayana guru. If I did respect my teacher's
word I was to be considered a naive, gullible, sucker with no common
sense. It was a double bind, no win situation. I was wrong either way. I
felt despair. I have never had any desire to speak with a lama since. I
have never felt part of a sangha since. I felt surely Trungpa Rinpoche
would sort out this mess. I adored Trungpa from his books and seminary
transcripts and had complete faith in his intelligence. I waited to hear
what the Boulder sangha would do to explain the sex with lamas thing. I
felt by now that I was an idiot and a sucker on the one hand and not
practising the dharma correctly on the other hand. I had strong feelings
of discomfort but I did not want to "hurt the dharma in any way" by
speaking publicly about sexual abuse by lamas. When I heard that Osel
Tenzin had infected his disciples with HIV by having sex with them when
he knew he had AIDS, disgust and outrage overwhelmed any loyalty I had
previously to any Tibetan Buddhists who were not actively seeking to end
this monstrous ignorance.
When I started researching the legal side of "breach of pastoral
counselling", calling up the National Organisation of Women, and talking
about these incidents in Survivors of Sexual Abuse meetings, all my
FEELINGS came to the surface. Finally I got clarity on the issue. My
feelings, long buried and ignored, bid me be more truthful about the
EFFECTS these sexual encounters had on me as a person. It was only then
that I understood the wrongness of the breach of trust, the betrayal of
my inner spiritual core, the lie that this sex was of any benefit to
anybody including the lamas. I understood that the lamas had fear and
guilt, they knew it was wrong and did it anyway, again and again like an
addiction. I think it is less important to get money together now to
fund a petition than it is to get a group of like minded people who can
actually disclose the abuses they have seen, heard about or experienced.
Name the lamas, name the occasions, describe the abuses in detail,
describe their feelings and effects of the abuses.I think it would be
wise to reveal the international laws that protect women from being
sexually abused by priests, from being abused by professionals in the
arena of the profession, the laws about fraudulent misrepresentation.
If there are threats to quiet the people who are speaking up against
these crimes, there are also laws that protect freedom of speech, laws
against intimidation and harassment. The word Dharma means "the
truth".It will be to the benefit of the spread of Buddhism if the truth
is spoken. The Dharma is a path to end suffering. Since sexual abuse by
spiritual teachers causes deep psychological suffering it isn't
appropriate. In fact it is a crime. I think that a petition will be
more effective at a later date. I have observed the discussions on Deja
News and they lack coherence. There are not enough people who can admit
they were abused. I believe that when more women know there is a safe
haven to talk about having been abused, the natural momentum will build
up into a DEMAND for no sexual abuse by lamas. I have written to the
heads of 3 lineages about sexual abuse by lamas. No reply. A petition
is a call for attention to be brought to the topic with the hope that it
can result in an administrative request that the lamas control
themselves. My point is that I would like more than a request for
permission not to be abused. The abuse needs to end. It is WE, the
sangha, who need to state what is unacceptable and why. More people who
can state why it is unacceptable need to come forward. This could
result in a directive, legally worded, that sexual abuse is
unacceptable. Perhaps a consensus can be reached by each sangha
community not to FINANCIALLY back lamas who commit sexual abuse. That
would stop the abuse dead in its tracks. Some supporters of Tibetan
Buddhism do not like females squawking about "consensual sex they've
had with lamas as grown women". They do not understand why it is abuse.
The ABUSED need to speak their minds and say why it is not just
consensual sex and that it is sexual abuse. When the abuse issue is
clarified and shared among those who have been abused, I believe it
would be time to take action.
chino...@my-deja.com
dear nicky and mary,
i find much of this information very disturbing and moving, but other
parts of it to raise questions i hope you can clarify for us. (i trust
that the asking of questions will not be regarded as an attack, as
others here have sometimes perceived it to be.)
from what i have have read, and from knowing the experiences of various
survivors of various forms of sexual abuse, being told by one's lama
that sex with him is required for your dorje phurba practice, would
appear to be classic abuse, at least as understood in a modern western
context.
other acts described, i am less clear on. for example, nicky, you
mention that you were told, that sogyal r. had sex with other women
whilst you were attending to your dying father, and recount being told
that the vajrayana had a higher morality, and that sleeping with
multiple partners was no big deal. it sounds though as though you feel
this was a betrayal of some sort by sogyal r.
yet was there some sort of formal commitment by sogyal r. to you,
explicit or even implicit, beyond his having sex with you and holding
you out to others as being his "girlfriend"? (although, you also do
say he told you that *someone else* was his girlfriend.) so, is there
something more here in the way of a betrayal or transgressed
commitment? for to be honest, on the basis of this information alone,
i too fail to see the "big deal", unless some sort of formal commitment
was being violated. please, will you help me understand better,
exactly what problem you see with those particular actions of sogyal
r., as you describe them? on what is based your expectation of sogyal
being monogamous? or am i missing what you see as the problem? did he
abuse his authority with you in any way similar to yout assertion, that
his holiness sakya trizin told you to have sex with him as part of
dorje phurba practice, which as i said, seems more to meet the accepted
definition of clergy sexual abuse?
i do wonder whether there is a crosscultural problem going on, in at
least some percentage of alleged abuse instances (whilst still
granting, that a certain percentage may still be textbook cases of
abuse of counselor-counselee spiritual relationships). what i mean is,
for example with the geshe, what do we know about how such a scenario
would play out if the woman involved were instead a tibetan laywoman
practitioner? are there cultural or religious responses a tibetan
woman would know, ways to deflect and yet not perceive an "abusive"
attempt? what "abuse" a westerner perceives - legitimately, for that
is how these actions really would be motivated if done by a western
male speaking the shared cultural "language" with the female -- may not
be what a tibetan actually has as intent or motivation, it just looks
so much like what would be abuse from a westerner, that it gets
interpreted as abuse?
please understand, i am not advocating this view; i am just asking,
does anyone out there know tibetan culture well enough, to be able to
explain what such actions look like through tibetan glasses, and what
would be the culturally and religiously "appropriate" response(s)
available to the woman? as someone who myself straddles several
cultures, i have a keen appreciation, for how the same external
appearance of an action, may in fact represent very very different
underlying thoughts and motivations, depending on the cultural context
from which the actor is operating.
more generally, i would like to suggest that, whilst publicising bad
actions will be valuable, those who publicise owe it to all involved,
to first rigourously educate themselves on the state-of-the-art in
"abuse studies", as it were. in other words, they should make sure
that the allegations meet the modern standards of anti-abuse advocates
and researchers for what constitutes "abuse", as opposed to calling
every unhappy sexual involvement "abuse". normally, there must be some
knowing power manipulation of the position of authority, i understand,
for it really to merit the label of "abuse". not every sexual
relationship with a teacher (secular or religious) is *always* *per se*
an incidence of abuse, and it will help highlight *real* abusive
situations, not to mingle in, essentially freely-and-knowingly-entered-
but-gone-bad situations.
i am familiar with the following websites which may be of interest:
http://www.cpsdv.org/sexual1.htm
http://www.sexhelp.com/clergy.cfm
http://www.sagepub.co.uk/books/details/b004499.html
http://www.teleport.com/~snapmail/
along these lines, may i suggest, that direct confrontation and
adversarial approaches alone may not be effective (look at how no major
lama has responded to the letters you have mentioned; increased
adversariness may only reinforce the silence, rather than begin
communication). in approaching lamas, it may make sense to suggest to
them that there are real cultural differences that - as they have no
doubt encountered with other dharma subjects - mean that westerners are
prone to misunderstand and misinterpret actions by tibetan lamas,
through our own unfamiliarity with tibetan culture and even with
elements of dharma. take the "blame" for misunderstanding onto
ourselves, but also suggest that because we are likely to
misunderstand, the best skillful means to use amongst us may be to
entirely drop teacher-student sexual interaction until more of us are
truly in a better position to understand how to properly think about
and respond to and benefit from such actions by lamas. remind them how
often they consider that we are all just real "newbies" when it comes
to dharma, and so - by thewir own opinion - we are not well-prepared
for whatever advanced insights may in their view come to one through
sexual interaction with teachers.
and highlighting for the lamas the very real pain and suffering of
those who have lived through such experiences, may have the effect of
convincing them further how ill-prepared we are as a culture to
incorporate lama-consort and other sexual interactions into our dharma
practice. picture to them, that we are collectively still starting
ngondro, as it were, and that perhaps the dharma insights of sexual
contact with lamas are as lost on us collectively, and as potentially
dangerous to ourselves, as would be giving us the highest, most secret
tantric practices or dzogchen teachings, w/out the proper preparations.
another sugestion, fwiw, again along the lines of how approaches that
are not directly adversarial may be more effective over the long run:
how wonderful it would be, if a dedicated cadre of western tibetan
buddhists started a rigourous training organisation, that would
collaborate with groups like those in the links above, and train
themselves to address not only abuse by spiritual counselors, but also
domestic violence, rape, child abuse, and so. this group could then
offer to dharma centres everywhere, to come in and do workshops and
seminars on these issues generally - without singling out "clergy
sexual abuse" alone as an issue, but nonetheless making it an integral
ingredient of the curriculum (and doing so in a broad way, so that
students could also be prepared to benefit as well, non-buddhist
friends and family abused by priests and rabbis and so forth).
this approach would be more innocuous, less directly threatening - but
still serve to raise awareness and consciousness amongst the sangha at
large, so that people would know the signs and the responses to *many*
types of abuse, including this kind, and would be empowered to take
action within their communities, if they saw any of it. by working
with established and respected organisations in the field already, and
receiving rigourous state-of-art training from them, a new buddhist-
focused anti-abuse organisation would have greater credibility than
otherwise. credibility would also be enhanced, by having such lamas as
his holiness the DL, and khandro r., and so on, on an oversight board.
such an organisation might be more constrained in terms of specifically
denouncing this or that lama in particular, but it would put anti-abuse
tools right out there amongst sangha members themselves, potentially,
even right under the noses of the very abusers themselves.
for who could argue with hosting general presentations on general
principles and symptoms? indeed it would seem most strange, and
implicitly damning, for any lama to reject an offer by a respected,
respectful, and credible buddhist anti-abuse group, with respected
lamas being amongst those overseeing it too, to offer free seminars to
sangha members to assist them in recignising and combatting various
forms of abuse that beings suffer.
fwiw, just some random questions and thoughts.
cheers, and may all beings be free of all forms of abuse,
chino
Evelyn Ruut
Those who know me from these newsgroups know that I have personally taken a
more conservative role in pursuing instances of sexual abuse by teachers.
I just want to let you know that I have spoken personally on the telephone
today, with the individual named below.
I believe her story as stated below, and feel she is honest. I was deeply
touched by her knowledge, her sincerity, and her lack of desire for
retribution or punishment, but more to find a way to protect others from
similar experiences from happening in the future.
I also want to mention that what is stated below is only the tip of the
iceberg as told to me. We really DO have to do something. It is time.
This is a real problem.
Regards,
Evelyn
Mary Finnigan wrote in message ...
haya...@my-deja.com
"Evelyn Ruut" <pud...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> Those who know me from these newsgroups know that I have personally
taken a
> more conservative role in pursuing instances of sexual abuse by
teachers.
>
> I just want to let you know that I have spoken personally on the
telephone
> today, with the individual named below.
>
> I believe her story as stated below, and feel she is honest. I was
deeply
> touched by her knowledge, her sincerity, and her lack of desire for
> retribution or punishment, but more to find a way to protect others
from
> similar experiences from happening in the future.
>
> I also want to mention that what is stated below is only the tip of
the
> iceberg as told to me. We really DO have to do something. It is
time.
> This is a real problem.
>
> Regards,
> Evelyn
>
This is a problem of epidemic proportion. The last two Lamas I have
spent significant time and recieved significant numbers of empowerments
from, both proved out to be keeping harems of women within their
organizational structure. There was an unspoken rule that to "Tell
results in Hell". What incredible manipulation and abuse!! When I have
talked to these women, they without an exception are unwilling to come
forth publically. Some still see themselves as the "Spiritual
Concubine" or as the Dakini. I once observed a number of the "elite"
women in my "present sangha" get into a fierce argument over who and
who was not a dakini. Still others, even though abandoned for whatever
reason and kicked to the curb, still remain unwilling to tattle on the
Lama. With all of the elaborate mind control and brainwashing that is
being used by the Lamas and their cohorts in crime, it is amazing to
see a woman like this step forward with bravery to do what THEY KNOW TO
BE RIGHT, EVEN IN THE FACE OF CONDEMNATION FROM A PERSON OR
ORGANIZATION THEY ONCE STRONGLY BELIEVED IN, OR MAY STILL BELIEVE IN.
I have seen the horrible results of this disease, the mental illness,
the suicide attempts, the new levels of suffering that many of these
victims have been brought to. I wish I could take all the fence-riders
and zealous fanatics to the "cause", on a little tour through the
imagery I have accumulated as I went to see some of these victims in
mental hospitals, or ICU, or fishing them off the streets in attempts
to rescue them from severe and life-threatening drug abuse brought on
by the final blow of the Lama's abuse and rejection.
haya...@my-deja.com
SETTING
> UP AND RUNNING THE PETITION WEB SITE?
> I have neither the time nor the technical ability to do this.
> Mary
>
Pardon my absence from this thread. i am more than pleased to see
that it has started up again with renewed vigor. This type of vigor is
going to be necessary in order to put together an acceptable medium(s)
for taking action and distributing information. Actually, putting
together a website is not all that difficult, and it is free at many
sites, such as TRIPOD, which offer ~11 meg of space on their host site.
Although premade templates can be used and are effective for such
things as personal homepages, they really has limits when trying to put
together a first class site with nice graphics. What is required is
someone with a STRONG KNOWLEDGE of HTML at the very least. There should
be a number of individuals possessing this ability that read this
newsgroup. TECHIES COME FORTH!!
Sean the TECHno Dragon
students certainly does not seem to be compassionate nor proper. I could
never imagine Lord Buddha using sex in such a manner. I heard a lecture
once by a geshe and he emphasized to protect your spiritual real estate
because the impact of unskillful "lamas" can last lifetimes beyond this one.
I hope that everyone who has been through such experiences find healing.
How do we put an end to this behavior?
Sean
Evelyn Ruut <pud...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:7rjcq8$99g$1...@node17.cwnet.frontiernet.net...
Kirt Undercoffer
One point though -
Not all lamas are monks or nuns and while they
shouldn't (IMHO) have sex with their students
this wouldn't constitute a break in vows per
se if their aren't monks or nuns. I am thinking
specifically about people finishing at least
one three-year retreat being eligible to be
designated as a lama in the Kagyu tradition
and possibly about the ngakpa tradition in
Kagyu, Sakya, and Nyingma traditions. Since
I have mostly practiced outside of the Tibetan
traditions, please correct me if I'm wrong
on this (no real worries there this being a
newsgroup).
This then raises other issues as well, tied
partly to Puritanical view, partly not. At
any rate, lamas shouldn't be sleeping around
even in serially monogamous manner, also IMHO.
Kirt Undercoffer
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
...
> A lama who has sex has broken his vows, never mind tantra.
...
--
All beings arise in time,
Time continually consumes them all
Kirt Undercoffer
I should hasten to add that in
fact I have a couple of teachers
in the Zen tradition who have had
sex with their students although
neither party involved were monastics.
While I indeed don't know what to make
of this, I have been blessed by their
teaching. Of course, Zen isn't tantra
and the tradition can have a different
view on sex. But these were and to some
extent still are issues that came up
in Zen sangha's in the 80's.
Kirt Undercoffer
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
>
> A lama who has sex has broken his vows, never mind tantra.
>
--
Kirt Undercoffer
should have told you about
women as well. I've seen them
hit on males quite openly.
So if there is a problem with
the male lamas, there is the
possibility of a problem with
female teachers as well (and
for that matter with Gay/Lesbian
teachers).
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
>
> We should NEVER check our brains at the door when entering. ALWAYS
> remember what your mama told you about men. It applies in dharma centers
> just like everywhere else.
>
> The better part of spiritual practice and gaining wisdom, is done within
> your own mind, and nobody has to have sex with you in order for that to
> happen.
>
> Somehow we have to get that message across to everyone everywhere.
DharmaTroll
"Alaya" <al...@iname.com> wrote:
> Hi Dorje Porje!
> alaya
Fuck you, Alaya. You know spreading such shit is not cool.
I am not Dorje Porje or anyone else, and your adding to Steven's
hatred is pathetic. Nor am I anyone else. If you have a problem
with me, then take me on directly. What do you think you can
accomplish with spreading rumours like that? Is this a warning
that anyone who gives me a compliment gets harrassed? Look at
the crap people gave Evelyn for sticking up to me too.
Think about it, if I used an alias, would I use a silly name
or wouldn't I use a boring regular inconspicuous one? What,
did Konchog pay you off to smear me with rumours? Good luck.
And now you continue your/Chino/Steven's flaming and slander
even in a serious post of mine? What the hell's your problem?
--Dharmakaya Trollpa
Christopher John Fynn
>When I started researching the legal side of "breach of pastoral
> >counselling", calling up the National Organisation of Women, and talking
> >about these incidents in Survivors of Sexual Abuse meetings, all my
> >FEELINGS came to the surface.
People should realise that Tibetan Buddhism is not traditionally a
congregational religion and that it has no tradition of pastoral care
or counselling.
Tibetan lamas are trained to read pujas and sutras, and to perform
rituals and they may be trained in meditation and in Buddhist philosophy
and dialectics. Some may have also studied things like religious art,
astrology, grammar and poetics.
The last thing most Tibetans would do is to go and discuss their
personal, emotional, sexual and marital problems with a lama.
After all what is a monk brought up in a monastery supposed to
know about these things?
One trouble is that many of us are brought up in traditions where
priests, ministers or rabbis do give pastoral counselling and so
we tend to expect it from religious figures. These days people who
are qualified ministers and priests in any major church receive training
in pastoral care. The education of most lamas is one mostly designed
for people who will spend their life in monasteries. Lamas are no more
professionally qualified to give counselling than is a mechanic and
we shouldn't really expect it of them.
Remember too that for the most part lamas have been brought up
in a culture which is very different from our own - even without the
language barrier its not surprising that the signals we send them
and they send us are often misinterpreted on both sides.
This might not apply so much to an individual like Solgyal R. who
received an English-type boarding school education in India and
has lived for at least half his life in the west. (On the other hand
some might wonder just how much training as a lama he has
actually received and just when this took place.)
- Chris
Christopher John Fynn
<haya...@my-deja.com> wrote
> Indeed, Evelyn,
> This is a problem of epidemic proportion. The last two Lamas I have
> spent significant time and recieved significant numbers of empowerments
> from, both proved out to be keeping harems of women within their
> organizational structure. There was an unspoken rule that to "Tell
> results in Hell". What incredible manipulation and abuse!! When I have
> talked to these women, they without an exception are unwilling to come
> forth publically. Some still see themselves as the "Spiritual
> Concubine" or as the Dakini. I once observed a number of the "elite"
> women in my "present sangha" get into a fierce argument over who and
> who was not a dakini. Still others, even though abandoned for whatever
> reason and kicked to the curb, still remain unwilling to tattle on the
> Lama. With all of the elaborate mind control and brainwashing that is
> being used by the Lamas and their cohorts in crime, it is amazing to
> see a woman like this step forward with bravery to do what THEY KNOW TO
> BE RIGHT, EVEN IN THE FACE OF CONDEMNATION FROM A PERSON OR
> ORGANIZATION THEY ONCE STRONGLY BELIEVED IN, OR MAY STILL BELIEVE IN.
Yes it is a real problem and inexcusable - but why the hell did you take
"significant numbers of empowerments" from lamas who you had not
checked out enough to know that they were "keeping harems of women"?
Usually these things are very poorly kept secrets whatever the "to tell
results in hell" threats may have been made by the lamas concerned
or their students.
If people are going to get involved in something like tantra with all it's
very
explicit sexual imagery and requirements for absolute faith in the teacher
you'd think that alarm bells would ring saying that this is something which
is easily open to abuse and that human nature being what it is there are
bound to be many who abuse it - therefore only proceed with extreme
caution.
Almost every basic book on Buddhist tantra is full of health warnings
and there is plenty of material available in translation which list
the qualifications of a vajrayana teacher (the section on "Examining the
Teacher" in the 6th Chapter of Paltrul Rinpoche's "Words of My Perfect
Teacher" are a good place to start.) Now in this day and age it might
be difficult to find a lama that meets all these qualifications, but if
they don't even meet half the requirements set out in the fundamental
texts of their own tradition should you really be placing your spiritual
development in their hands and going for absolute refuge to them
with body speech and mind? If despite such warnings you do and
things turn out badly isn't it the case that you have been a real fool?
Of course this doesn't absolve lamas who take advantage of students
of blame but we have to take responsibility for ourselves too.
- Chris
Alaya
i was just saying hi to Dorje Porje, as I know he reads your posts with avid
interest, like L lhamo.
It's funny, I keep setting the trap, and you just can't help but throw your
foot into it.
Alaya
DharmaTroll <dharm...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:7rk7es$jel$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
DharmaTroll
Peter Da Costa <peterd@NO_SPAMpdacosta.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi DT
>
> Nice to see you appreciating some value in right speech training.
> However, this includes a little more than avoiding harsh language,
> it includes words conducive to harmony, respect and special care
> to avoid 'inadvertent misrepresentation'
Oh, will you can the moralistic crap? You take cheap shots whenever
you can at others, and then hide behind that double-talk. Yeah right.
> Just don't loose that sense of humour of yours in the process:
> you don't want to end up like me.
Oh, you do have a point there. Though me being harsh and not taking
crap from pompous gasbags doesn't necessarily mean losing humour.
Besides, your problem was divorcing yourself from your anima, wasn't
it? I mean, why else would you hate women so much and not be able to
get close to them unless it was the female part of you from which
you are isolated, right? And you think spirituality is destroying
that part, not connecting with it, eh? That won't happen with me.
> I feel that your cut and paste job does fine justice to the main
> points of my piece, which people can still read for themselves if
> it has not already timed out.
Oh, your post will be on deja.com for five years before it times out.
And I wasn't trying to distort it, just point out that there are lots
of people who think the way you were in that post, which can make it
hard for others to share their stories or stand up to being exploited.
> You bring out well the importance of giving women the full protection
> of the law, which they have a fundamental right to and thoroughly
> deserve. Do you ever contemplate that your mother risked her life
> just to give you yours?
She wasn't thinkin' bout that while she and my daddy were gettin' it on
and bumping uglies. Besides, thanks to modern science, there is very
little risk these days, and women don't die in childbirth except on
rare occasions.
> The problem of women not coming forward is a problem that society
> must deal with outside of the courts. I read some very interesting
> posts concerning this in talk.rape several years ago. I have no idea
> if the standard of posting has been maintained, but in those days it
> was excellence itself. If such things are archived I would well
> recommend browsing them.
I've had lots of friends who've been raped. It's a big issue.
> Maybe, as you point out, the online world *is* the best place to
> pursue such problems.
I don't remember pointing that out, but I think that every place is the
best place, actually. I don't think they should be silenced *anywhere*.
I also think that false claims tend to also be a function of them not
being able to express their feelings, and that there wouldn't be nearly
as many false claims if everyone was allowed to express themselves in
the first place and feel safe and connected to others.
> After all the onus of proof lays with the posters and if they are
> making false claims they would be opening themselves to legal action
> if it were not for the fact that Usenet postings are not accepted by
> the courts of most major countries as evidence. However, genuine
> victims should and *must* have a course of action open to them, and
> this campaign is being taken as such a measure. I hope the
> participants achieve all their objectives.
Me too. I also hope their actions prevent others from being abused.
That's the most important thing, as that is the goal, to stop it from
continuing to happen.
> It is perhaps a sad thing that first generation immigrants have a
> huge cultural shift to make, and that this includes the attitude
> towards women's rights.
Well, if a lama thinks that women are resources to be exploited, then
I don't care if he came from Tibet or Borneo, Bhutan, or Bombay.
No spiritual person should ever treat other people like that.
> One hopes that successive generations, borne and raise here will not
> have any of this trouble.
It has nothing to do with where they are born. Since when does being
born in Tibet pre-dispose one to be a rapist, for example? I've never
heard such a thing. Perhaps Tibetan culture is more primitive and
savage than I realised, but I'd think monks could rise above that.
And anyway, it's just a few of them, as most lamas and monks are kind
wonderful people.
The problem is in the power structure, that whenever people worship a
guru and don't think for themselves, there will be exploitative lamas
to use them, doesn't matter first or tenth generation. The problem is
in people being sheep and not questioning authorities and then looking
the other way when things don't fit their idealised fantasy images.
Literalism and all the 'surrender' crap do the worst damage, I think.
--Dharmakaya Trollpa
margaret
>i do wonder whether there is a crosscultural problem going on,
>what i mean is,
>for example with the geshe, what do we know about how such a scenario
>would play out if the woman involved were instead a tibetan laywoman
>practitioner? are there cultural or religious responses a tibetan
>woman would know, ways to deflect and yet not perceive an "abusive"
>attempt?
This is precisely what was crossing my mind - I really want to know this
too. We seem to (understandably) always be looking at this problem through
*our* "western glasses". For instance - does/did sexual abuse happen in
Tibet? How, in what situations? With laywomen only, or with nuns too?
Does the fact of being married or not make a difference? How would a Tibetan
woman deal with these kind of situations? A few thoughts cross my mind,
which are guesses and would have to be corroborated by anyone who has direct
knowledge of these things.
My guess is that very few Tibetan women would have been in a *position* to
pursue the dharma in the way that we do in the west. I guess that they
would usually marry pretty young, and then be very taken up with
childrearing, housekeeping and (if not city dwelling) field work etc. Or
else if they became nuns they would (so it appears to me) be given very
basic training & then expected just to get on with it, not expected to want
or be able to deepen their practice much.
Then there were the very few laywomen who abandoned a conventional lifestyle
to pursue the dharma. Casting my mind quickly over the very few female bios
I have read, generally they appeared to receive their teachings from male
teachers, and usually became their consorts, whether the men were monks or
not. To recap in a nutshell, women appeared to either become nuns or
consorts of teachers.
So, I can imagine these abusive lamas seeing western female practitioners as
fitting into the "yogini" path as outlined above. I am not talking about if
the lama's behaviour is "right" or "wrong", "good" or "bad", but just trying
to work out what might be going on from their side, other than the very
obvious aspect of simple human urges and how they become perverted and
dangerous when you try to repress them (I'm talking about celibacy vows
here, which personally I feel should be outlawed).
All the stories of abuse sadden and shock me deeply, but I also feel that we
do need to accept that Vajrayana *is* heavily sexual, and that that
sexuality *is* often secret - that's the way it is, whether we like it or
not, whether it leads to abuse or not.
Abuse is a terrible thing, but we do have to beware taking on Vajrayana with
rose coloured glasses because it suits us at the time, and then balking at
the dark side later. This is a very scary and still unclear issue, and in
saying it I'm saying it to myself as much as to anyone else. For instance,
Dorje Phurba practice *may well* require having sex with the lama at a
certain level! I'm not saying that it DOES - just that it MAY do - I don't
know - but if it DOES then we should be aware of this and act accordingly.
Ie, if it *does* then we can't seriously embark on that practice and then
later say "ok, I like this bit of the practice and that bit but not the
other bit".
Anyway, I'm sure I've read stories of people not exactly saying "no" to an
outrageous request from a lama, but more like "well, I'm not able to because
x, y, z". For instance, HHDL says only a lama who is so highly realised
that they are as happy to eat excrement as they are to eat nice food, can
embark on a consort relationship. Thus by extension the woman should be
that realised too, to my mind. Thus, if any lama tried to tell *me* I have
to have sex with them I hope I would not be too shocked to reply "it's not
possible for me to do that - I'm not highly realised enough".
Actually, a lama DID ask once in a veiled sort of way - half joking & half
not. I did something that Tenzin Palmo herself also advised me
(essentially) in person
once : I played dumb & purposefully "misread" his joke, but with a pretty
stern tone of voice & stern expression, so that it was very clear that I
understood full well, wasn't going to play the game, and wouldn't appreciate
being asked again. And it didn't happen again. I hope I continue being so
lucky... it's tricky - for instance, I'm not a nun, not married and yet have
no intention or desire to become a consort. But I *do* want to deepen my
practice and be as commited in it as possible.
>please understand, i am not advocating this view; i am just asking,
>does anyone out there know tibetan culture well enough, to be able to
>explain what such actions look like through tibetan glasses, and what
>would be the culturally and religiously "appropriate" response(s)
>available to the woman?
Yes! Please, please please someone who really knows Tibetan culture well,
help us on this point. It's so important.
as someone who myself straddles several
>cultures, i have a keen appreciation, for how the same external
>appearance of an action, may in fact represent very very different
>underlying thoughts and motivations, depending on the cultural context
>from which the actor is operating.
This is so true. I know from having done loads of travelling that body
language & speech etc can be MASSIVELY misread - to an extraordinary degree.
I am not saying here that it was the women's fault at all - just that
cultural differences can cause huge glitches and messes in communication. I
have experienced this personally. Just for an example, as we all probably
know in India modesty is very important. But when I went there one summer
it was clear to me that the main point is *not* whether you can see bits of
the body or not, but whether those bits are *covered* or not. Thus, all the
matrons that were out shopping in *almost completely* transparent but long
sleeved and buttoned to the neck salwar kameez clearly were considered
perfectly modest. But if a woman had gone out in say a sleeveless T shirt,
then that is considered "erotic" (I read this in a newspaper there!) because
the shoulders & upper arms would be exposed.
not every sexual
>relationship with a teacher (secular or religious) is *always* *per se*
>an incidence of abuse,
Many examples here : Yeshe Tsogyal, Dawa Drolma (Chagdud R's mother) etc.
>along these lines, may i suggest, that direct confrontation and
>adversarial approaches alone may not be effective (look at how no major
>lama has responded to the letters you have mentioned;
The fact that they didn't answer doesn't necessarily reflect on the content
of the letter. My experience is that lamas hardly ever answer *ANY*
letters! This used to frustrate and confuse me (and countless people I
know, too) until I read in Chagdud R's bio that Tibetans don't like
letter-writing at all, and on the v rare occasions that they have to, it is
even considered "bad form" to write at any length.
increased
>adversariness may only reinforce the silence, rather than begin
>communication). in approaching lamas, it may make sense to suggest to
>them that there are real cultural differences that - as they have no
>doubt encountered with other dharma subjects - mean that westerners are
>prone to misunderstand and misinterpret actions by tibetan lamas,
>through our own unfamiliarity with tibetan culture and even with
>elements of dharma.
Before there can be any successful dialogue we *must* have a thorough
understanding of where they are coming from culturally, and at present we
are far from having that. During a 21/2 month stay in a Nepal monastery I
was shocked by just how different the monk's way of thinking & view of the
world was to mine. We were so different we might as well have come from
different planets.
>and highlighting for the lamas the very real pain and suffering of
>those who have lived through such experiences,
I doubt they would even understand. Drukchen Rinpoche touched on this
once - said the subject of abuse was v shocking to him as he never heard of
such things happening in Tibet. He clearly had a lot of trouble even
believing in it happening. They simply don't have the framework to conceive
of this.
>how wonderful it would be, if a dedicated cadre of western tibetan
>buddhists started a rigourous training organisation, that would
>collaborate with groups like those in the links above, and train
>themselves to address not only abuse by spiritual counselors, but also
>domestic violence, rape, child abuse, and so. this group could then
>offer to dharma centres everywhere, to come in and do workshops and
>seminars on these issues generally (snip)
This is indeed a wonderful *and* extremely clever & diplomatic vision. If
it is talked about enough, hopefully one day it will come to be.
M
Evelyn Ruut
DharmaTroll wrote in message <7rktda$31b$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
>Well, if a lama thinks that women are resources to be exploited, then
>I don't care if he came from Tibet or Borneo, Bhutan, or Bombay.
>No spiritual person should ever treat other people like that.
>
>> One hopes that successive generations, borne and raise here will not
>> have any of this trouble.
>
>It has nothing to do with where they are born. Since when does being
>born in Tibet pre-dispose one to be a rapist, for example? I've never
>heard such a thing. Perhaps Tibetan culture is more primitive and
>savage than I realised, but I'd think monks could rise above that.
>And anyway, it's just a few of them, as most lamas and monks are kind
>wonderful people.
>
>The problem is in the power structure, that whenever people worship a
>guru and don't think for themselves, there will be exploitative lamas
>to use them, doesn't matter first or tenth generation. The problem is
>in people being sheep and not questioning authorities and then looking
>the other way when things don't fit their idealised fantasy images.
>Literalism and all the 'surrender' crap do the worst damage, I think.
>
> --Dharmakaya Trollpa
Dharmatroll has said a mouthful here, especially in his last sentence.
If the dharma is to thrive in the West, there will have to be some changes.
Not in the core teachings of course, but in the way teachers relate to
students, especially female students.
We should NEVER check our brains at the door when entering. ALWAYS
remember what your mama told you about men. It applies in dharma centers
just like everywhere else.
The better part of spiritual practice and gaining wisdom, is done within
your own mind, and nobody has to have sex with you in order for that to
happen.
Somehow we have to get that message across to everyone everywhere.
Regards,
Evelyn
Evelyn Ruut
Christopher John Fynn wrote in message
<37dda...@newsread3.dircon.co.uk>...
Hi Chris,
Very well said, and this is of course the whole core of the problem.
If a teacher ever came on to me, I know I have enough "street smarts" to
know that he was simply a letch. If he cloaked the pass in spiritual
sounding clothing I would still know it was a pass. I am deeply saddened
by those who have been unable to know that and been hurt by these kinds of
things.
This is NOT a blame the victim mentality, but simply stating a warning, that
Lamas are human beings and can indeed have human desires, and can use that
to take advantage of female students. We need to express that and say it
often and loud and where it can be heard and read.
When I first heard of sexual encounters by female students with Lamas I was
very upset. I felt that vows of celibacy were sacred and part of the
things that a person gives up in order to join the sangha and wear a robe.
One of the basic reasons we respect and make offerings to the robed sangha
is our of respect for what they HAVE given up in order to help not only
themselves, but all living beings.
A lama who has sex has broken his vows, never mind tantra.
Tantra takes place in the mind not the body. Tantra is supposed to use the
sexual energy, like everything else is used, towards changing physical need
and baser thoughts into means for enlightenment. It is not meant to be
simply having physical sex (at least as I understand it).
When a Lama has broken his vows, he is no longer worthy of the respect of
his position and is not someone who should be treated like a Lama anymore
unless he renews his vows and takes necessary measures to repair the
situation, with appropriate practices and sincere regrets and retreats etc.
I think it is time for me to repost my old letter I wrote to Tricycle when I
first heard about the June Campbell issue a couple of years ago. We need
to examine our own motives and our own understanding before committing to a
teacher.
We should NEVER surrender our control of our bodies to anyone who professes
to enlighten us with them. It's hokum and nonsense and they are quite
simply making a pass at you and looking for sex if that happens.
Keep spiritual issues and sexual issues separate......Please! and if your
mama didn't tell you, "mama Evelyn" is telling you NOW!
Regards,
Evelyn
kunukia
<dharm...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>> You bring out well the importance of giving women the full protection
>> of the law, which they have a fundamental right to and thoroughly
>> deserve. Do you ever contemplate that your mother risked her life
>> just to give you yours?
>
>She wasn't thinkin' bout that while she and my daddy were gettin' it on
>and bumping uglies. Besides, thanks to modern science, there is very
>little risk these days, and women don't die in childbirth except on
>rare occasions.
Well, as a women who has had two children, naturally, and with no
drugs (as is best for both mother and child, if at all possible), easy
for you to say!! Childbirth is for most women the point when they
really face their own mortality. They say the closest a guy can come
to the experience is when passing a kidney stone. I say, show me a
kidney stone that weighs 9 lbs. 6 ozs. (as my first child did) and I
may concede the point.
Nowadays, with birth control and easy access to killing the fetus it
is possible to have carefree sex (at least for those willing to kill
their child) but every girlchild was raised hearing the gossip of her
momma and friends about childbirth. Even in the pleasure of "gettin'
it on" one remembers that.
kunukia
kunukia
Right-o, Chris.
k
Mary Finnigan
BIG HURRY -- BIG SNIP
>
>Of course this doesn't absolve lamas who take advantage of students
>of blame but we have to take responsibility for ourselves too.
Happy to see you de-lurked on this. And thanks for your many excellent
observations. Have you been following this thread from the start? If so,
you will know that Hayagriva initiated it with a suggestion that a
petition is made to HHDL. I jumped into the picture when I saw this and
since then there's been much networking and collaboration among the
females. This has resulted in:
Web site as best option for petition collection point
Research into possible free web sites
Appeals for a techie to volunteer to set up and run the site. No
response so far.
IMO, this constitutes *taking responsibility for ourselves*. At long
last something is being DONE. Enough blah blah. Action stations.
Over and out for now.
Mary
haya...@my-deja.com
> Yes it is a real problem and inexcusable - but why the hell did you
take
> "significant numbers of empowerments" from lamas who you had not
> checked out enough to know that they were "keeping harems of women"?
A very good point. Both of these very highly regarded Senior Nyingma
Lamas I am speaking of had an inner circle that was exceptionally good
at keeping secrets of this type well under wraps. By the time I found
out about the first one, I had attended a mega empowerment that went on
for a month,l and included nearly 200 empowerments. I first got
a "feeling" that something might be going on right towards the end of
the series of empowerment, but I just blew it off as a product of my
own disturbed/doubting mind. The second Lama I allied with because I
had heard stories of him rejecting the advances of women. I was very
vocal in our Sangha about how pleased I was to have found a pure Lama
who stayed away from the vices of the West. I have been with him for
over 4 years, and it was just recently that I was informed that he was
not as squeaky clean as i thought him to be. Doing some checking of my
own, I found out that he had several Western consorts. I was in fairly
close here and was given the position of being one of two Protector
lamas in his Western organization. I had placed much trust and love
with him, so the revelation to me was not only disorienting in a sense
of trusting my own powers of discrimination, but devastating, radically
effecting my ongoing practice, and leaving me wondering where to turn.
You see, its not only the primary parties that are damaged by this kind
of behavior. Many others within the organization can also be adversely
effected.
If despite such warnings you do and
> things turn out badly isn't it the case that you have been a real
fool?
I don't see the value in making such a hipshot assessment as this.
Only time will tell if I have been a fool or been guilty of being an
idealistic romantic
>
> Of course this doesn't absolve lamas who take advantage of students
> of blame but we have to take responsibility for ourselves too.
AGREED!!!
>
> - Chris
Evelyn Ruut
Kirt Undercoffer wrote in message <37DD2F87...@worldnet.att.net>...
>And don't forget what you mama
>should have told you about
>women as well. I've seen them
>hit on males quite openly.
>So if there is a problem with
>the male lamas, there is the
>possibility of a problem with
>female teachers as well (and
>for that matter with Gay/Lesbian
>teachers).
Dear Kirt,
Absolutely.
Women often flirt with men in higher positions as a form of currency, a
jockeying for position in the pecking order. I am completely certain this
happens in Lama/student situations as well.
Where a teacher is concerned, sexuality ought to be kept out of it, or else
have them for your lover, but get another teacher. (This is of course
assuming that it is not a person constrained by sacred vows of celibacy)
Regards,
Evelyn
Evelyn Ruut
haya...@my-deja.com
>
> This is precisely what was crossing my mind - I really want to know
this
> too. We seem to (understandably) always be looking at this problem
through
> *our* "western glasses". For instance - does/did sexual abuse happen
in
> Tibet? How, in what situations
This same concern has passed through my mind on several occasions. Is
this all a matter of extraordinary cultural differences. I think, from
what I have gleaned, that your assumptions here are correct., a few
become consorts and yoginis, some become celibate nuns, and the
majority bear chidren and work until they drop. Time is available to
eat and do a daily worship. Here in this Western culture we have risen
above survival economy, have lots of leisure time available, and we use
it to pursue our various interests. We also possess the precious time
to reflect upon the quality of our circumstances, and make observations
about those things which we choose to bring in to our lives, along with
those things we must collectively endure (govt, taxes, etc.) We also
have a smorgasbord of religious affiliations that we can experience,
and many, like myself, have done a great deal of shopping around
attempting to find a path. When I arrived at Tibetan Buddhism, I felt
as if I had at last come home. Dusty memories and half-formed images I
had been seeing all my life began to become clear. >
All the stories of abuse sadden and shock me deeply, but I also feel
that we
> do need to accept that Vajrayana *is* heavily sexual, and that that
> sexuality *is* often secret - that's the way it is, whether we like
it or
> not, whether it leads to abuse or not.
>
I felt the familarity and power of Vajrayana as I practiced. It often
brought me near to tears. I saw Vajrayana as lofty, above any form of
mortal degradation. I saw the sexual part as an very high and intense
bonding of two beings, and I longed to learn the secrets of such
practices. Mental images of the harnassing and application of
primordial forces intrigued me. The Lama was the holder of such
advanced and secret knowledge, and surely anyone who was initiated into
such practices had passed by the earlier "lions at the gates", leaving
lower desires behind in order to attain enlightenment. What an eye-
opener and a drag it was to have to leave these early mental images
behind. On one hand, I would experience things around the Lamas that
transcended the ability of language to describe. On the other hand,
things were going on that any drunk on a barstool could describe all
too well. What a mind-bending paradox!
> Abuse is a terrible thing, but we do have to beware taking on
Vajrayana with
> rose coloured glasses because it suits us at the time, and then
balking at
> the dark side later. This is a very scary and still unclear issue,
and in
> saying it I'm saying it to myself as much as to anyone else. For
instance,
> Dorje Phurba practice *may well* require having sex with the lama at a
> certain level!
If this is the case, there are a lot of men out there who are going to
be making some tough decisions with regard to proceeding to the next
level of practice....heh,heh,heh....
I'm not saying that it DOES - just that it MAY do - I don't
> know - but if it DOES then we should be aware of this and act
accordingly.
> Ie, if it *does* then we can't seriously embark on that practice and
then
> later say "ok, I like this bit of the practice and that bit but not
the
> other bit".
>
Good point here. If this is the case it needs to be made clear at the
outset, and it needs to be overseen by some sort of governing board
that is responsible for the sanctioning of Lamas as individuals not
only qualified to be carrying on this level of activity,but in
compliance with the established rules of the governing board. The
secrets may have to go!!
> Anyway, I'm sure I've read stories of people not exactly saying "no"
to an
> outrageous request from a lama, but more like "well, I'm not able to
because
> x, y, z". For instance, HHDL says only a lama who is so highly
realised
> that they are as happy to eat excrement as they are to eat nice food,
can
> embark on a consort relationship. Thus by extension the woman should
be
> that realised too, to my mind. Thus, if any lama tried to tell *me*
I have
> to have sex with them I hope I would not be too shocked to
reply "it's not
> possible for me to do that - I'm not highly realised enough".
Once again, a good argument for going before some sort of governing
board comprised of a select group of advanced Western and Himalayan
teachers.
>
I played dumb & purposefully "misread" his joke, but with a pretty
> stern tone of voice & stern expression, so that it was very clear
that I
> understood full well, wasn't going to play the game, and wouldn't
appreciate
> being asked again. And it didn't happen again.
I have seen this method used by a few strong and well-informed women in
many sanghas. This is what it takes. There would be no problem if there
weren't those who "maybe" would like the experience, or would crawl
over broken glass to have the experience for whatever disturbed
motivating reason.
I hope I continue being so
> lucky... it's tricky - for instance, I'm not a nun, not married and
yet have
> no intention or desire to become a consort. But I *do* want to
deepen my
> practice and be as commited in it as possible.
And making this choice should not limit your access to higher
teachings. Consort activity is ONE way to approach Ati yoga, not the
only way. Dzogchen, in my understanding(correct me if I am wrong), has
no such activity involved in its process
>
> >please understand, i am not advocating this view; i am just asking,
> >does anyone out there know tibetan culture well enough, to be able to
> >explain what such actions look like through tibetan glasses, and what
> >would be the culturally and religiously "appropriate" response(s)
> >available to the woman?
>
> Yes! Please, please please someone who really knows Tibetan culture
well,
> help us on this point. It's so important.
I'll add a third request for this.
>
>
> Before there can be any successful dialogue we *must* have a thorough
> understanding of where they are coming from culturally, and at
present we
> are far from having that. During a 21/2 month stay in a Nepal
monastery I
> was shocked by just how different the monk's way of thinking & view
of the
> world was to mine. We were so different we might as well have come
from
> different planets.
My experiences are somewhat similar, although I am also amazed by the
similarities. Sex is sex in any culture, and elicits the same
characteristic gleam in males of any culture. I've seen that gleam in
many Lamas eyes.
>
>
> >how wonderful it would be, if a dedicated cadre of western tibetan
> >buddhists started a rigourous training organisation, that would
> >collaborate with groups like those in the links above, and train
> >themselves to address not only abuse by spiritual counselors, but
also
> >domestic violence, rape, child abuse, and so. this group could then
> >offer to dharma centres everywhere, to come in and do workshops and
> >seminars on these issues generally (snip)
This could be one branch of a larger organization, the governing body I
have been speaking of, or do we get to close to being Rome if there is
too much centralization of control??
margaret
know the names of these lamas so that new prospective students can be
warned?
M
Kirt Undercoffer
something Westerners and especially Americans
should be very careful of as they have great
propensities in that direction (just take a
look at history, even recent history).
Accusations are not fact. The Buddha was accused
of sexual abuse as well, Hakuin was accused of
fathering a child, etc.
As for cultural confusion issues: if a teacher
can't see through cultural issues over time, then
they shouldn't be teaching in the culture in
which they are confused.
Kirt Undercoffer
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
>
> If we don't name names, we fail to
> prevent this sort of thing from happening. ...
> We really do have to name names. I did not think so, but now I do. At
> least until we have some official recourse or place to complain to.
>
> Regards,
> Evelyn
Kirt Undercoffer
>
> In article <37DE6692...@worldnet.att.net>,
> ki...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> > That runs the risk of generating into a witch hunt -
> > something Westerners and especially Americans
> > should be very careful of as they have great
> > propensities in that direction (just take a
> > look at history, even recent history).
> > Accusations are not fact. The Buddha was accused
> > of sexual abuse as well, Hakuin was accused of
> > fathering a child, etc.
> >
> > As for cultural confusion issues: if a teacher
> > can't see through cultural issues over time,
>
>
> one year?
>
> 10?
>
> 50?
>
> >then
> > they shouldn't be teaching in the culture in
> > which they are confused.
I was thinking that the teachers themselves would make
this determination and students as well. Meaning that
if people were in a culture for a while and didn't
really feel that they understood it then it might not
be a good idea for them to teach beyond basic stuff.
Students would also play a part in checking the teacher
out. After thinking aout it a bit more, I'm really not
sure that this is necessary however. But the suggestion
came up in the context of sexual innunedo, etc. anyway.
>
> whilst i agree with your statements in principle, in practicality, this
> is a gradual process, and some degree of leeway must be accorded,
> otherwise we would have no teachers amongst us who were not also born
> amongst us. much good dharma teaching would be lost with such a
> standard, maybe.
>
> also, it may arguably be proposed, that teaching, like all forms of
> communication, is a 2-way street. not only must the teacher make every
> effort to understand their students and their culture(s), in order
> better to speak to them in a way that gets through, but also, every
> sincere student likewise should make every effort to understand the
> teacher and their culture, in order better to listen to them in a way
> that gets through, in other words, where one actually can *hear* what
> is being said.
>
> the "burden" should hardly be entirely on the teacher. if we are
> serious and sincere in hearing the teacher, we must share the "burden"
> of facilitating communication.
>
> as i see it, we "cut off our nose to spite our face", when we reject a
> teacher who may not be 100% culturally adept in the west (though odds
> are, they are far more adept in our culture(s) than are we in *theirs*,
> usually).
>
Well it sounds like we are more in agreement than disagreement.
Robert Laurence
> In article <7rejsa$pcq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> > Hello again,
> >
> > I think it needs to be recognized that not all
> > Tibetan Lamas are power-hungry lamas or bad lamas.
> > I don't know if that was expressed yet in these
> > various discussions.
>
> Yes, I've expressed that several times, but not enough.
I agree. It is actually one good reason to follow the advise given when
finding a teacher. Before acepting one the student has to look for the
qualities in a teacher, and the teacher tests the student. Admittingly, the
teacher has a head start as we students may not allways have the insight
what to look for in a teacher, however, the Dharma gives guidelines on what
to look for.
And when one reads the Words of my Perfect Teacher, one can see that less
perfect teachers were also the norm in Tibet.
One has to find a teacher according to ones spritual needs like following a
specific religion to ones spiritual needs, whether Buddhism, Christianity,
Hinduism, Islam etc.
All religions have at the core to develop compassion and wisdom, and if we
as an individual practice that and try at all times to apply it into our
daily lives, the world around us would become a better place to live in.
Christopher John Fynn
wrote in message news:7rjjp2$4oq$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
<SNIP>
> please understand, i am not advocating this view; i am just asking,
> does anyone out there know tibetan culture well enough, to be able to
> explain what such actions look like through tibetan glasses, and what
> would be the culturally and religiously "appropriate" response(s)
> available to the woman? as someone who myself straddles several
> cultures, i have a keen appreciation, for how the same external
> appearance of an action, may in fact represent very very different
> underlying thoughts and motivations, depending on the cultural context
> from which the actor is operating.
I'm probably as familiar with Tibetan culture as anyone who posts to this
ng - so I'll give it a go.
With that hat on, I can think of few circumstances where a geshe would
dare ask a Tibetan woman to see her breasts - unless he was a doctor
and the woman had some medical problem with her breasts. For a start
the opportunity would rarely arise since it is very rare for a woman to go
and see a lama, especially a monk, alone - unless she happens to be a near
relative; and a lama of any stature would rarely see a nun or a female lay
student alone since this is against the monastic code (vinaya) and also
might lead to
all kinds of stories, rumours and speculation on the part of others.
The appearance of propriety, maintaining a good reputation, "face"
and shame are very strong factors in Tibetan culture. If it ever got
out that a geshe had made some improper suggestion to a woman
or was seeing women alone he would loose a great deal of respect
in the eyes of most people and people would probably make jokes
about it for years and years. I'm not saying these things never
happened but a respected lama would be very foolhardy to make
an improper suggestion or to make a pass at a Tibetan woman unless he was
pretty well certain she would consent and he was 100% certain that it would
be kept quiet.
It is rare for a Tibetan woman to look a lama whom she respects directly in
the eyes or to sit close to him unless she is a relative or old enough to be
his
mother and Tibetan women normally only speak to lamas using very
respectful -
not familiar - language.
This is not to say that Tibetan women are meek, mild and servile. If a lama
did make an unwanted sexual advance a Tibetan woman might instantly
loose all respect for him and would be likely as not to show this *very*
clearly.
I can think of a few Tibetan women who would not hesitate to spit on
a lama or hit him with her shoe if this sort of thing happened. I'm not
suggesting that anyone respond like this but if a woman has an unwanted
sexual advance from a lama she should at least let him know in a very
clear and unambiguous way that it is not on, that this kind of behaviour
is not generally tolerated in the west, and that if it ever happens again
everyone will know about it.
One thing is that it is not uncommon for westerners to make eye contact
with a lama, to use familiar language or even to place a hand on them
when talking to them. If a woman does this I can easily see how a Tibetan
brought up in a monastery might mis-interpret this especially if he is not
used to being alone with women or much used to normal western behaviour.
(After all if a Tibetan woman behaved in this way with a lama she probably
*would* be signalling "I'm available".) While I don't suggest that western
women should start behaving and dressing exactly like Tibetan women
when they visit a lama, I think that when coming into close contact with
a person from a very different culture it is always a good idea to be
mindful
of how your normal behaviour might be misinterpreted by that person.
Remember
that even when someone seems very westernised or familiar with western
culture
and expectations they may not in fact be so.
Most lamas have been brought up in monasteries where they have been
since the age of seven or even earlier. Their career was more or less
laid out for them from that point and they didn't really choose to become
monks. Brought up with a whole bunch of others in a monastic environment
(that is often far more comfortable than that of the average Tibetan or
Tibetan
refugee) and respected for being a monk by the Tibetan community, most
probably give little thought to another career. In this situation many lamas
have probably never confronted their own sexuality and they since they
have always been surrounded by other monks they probably rarely have felt
lonely. Now when they come to teach in a western dharma centre they are
like fish out of water - away from their culture and friends, and everybody
expects them to be the all-knowing lama. In this situation they probably
feel very lonely and it is not surprising that their sexual feelings, which
they
may be ill-equipped to deal with, come to the fore - maybe for the first
time
in their life. If they find that sex with their western students is easily
available (and they have probably heard all kinds of rumours that it is) it
may
be very difficult to resist the temptation. From there I can imagine it may
be
only a few steps to the kind of "sexual addiction" some of these teachers
seem to manifest - after all being brought up in a monastery since
you were a young child is hardly the best training for a normal sexual
relationship and it is anyway quite difficult to have a normal close
relationship
with a person whose language and culture you don't understand well.
> more generally, i would like to suggest that, whilst publicising bad
> actions will be valuable, those who publicise owe it to all involved,
> to first rigourously educate themselves on the state-of-the-art in
> "abuse studies", as it were. in other words, they should make sure
> that the allegations meet the modern standards of anti-abuse advocates
> and researchers for what constitutes "abuse", as opposed to calling
> every unhappy sexual involvement "abuse". normally, there must be some
> knowing power manipulation of the position of authority, i understand,
> for it really to merit the label of "abuse". not every sexual
> relationship with a teacher (secular or religious) is *always* *per se*
> an incidence of abuse, and it will help highlight *real* abusive
> situations, not to mingle in, essentially freely-and-knowingly-entered-
> but-gone-bad situations.
There is an interesting reference to how Tibetans dealt with one
misbehaving high tulku in a book I was reading written by someone
who visited Khams and Amdo (E. Tibet) in the 1940's:
"The monastery at Hetsho accommodates 350 monks studying exoteric
Buddhism. The nine-storied building is famous in the region.
The Grand Lama in charge is Gser-khri IV, an incarnation of one
who was once abbot of Dgah-ldan in Tibet. This dignitary at
Hetsho is notorious for his violation of monastic discipline
by having free sexual relations with many women. His Tibetan
devotees had to besiege him carrying arms in order to secure from
him a pledge that he would formally marry a few wives. His power
is independent of Bla-bran and extends to the border between
Kan-su and Sze-chwan. But there is another Living Buddha, Sotshang
by name, whose rank is lower than Gser-khri, but whose reputation
is exceedingly high."
I'm not suggesting that anyone goes to see a misbehaving monk carrying
arms or forces him into a shotgun wedding but I think there is nothing wrong
in students letting their lama know in no uncertain terms that sexual
misbehaviour is just not on.
- Chris
DharmaTroll
tang_...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <19990914152914...@ngol03.aol.com>,
> ther...@aol.com (Theravad) wrote to DT:
Terry Vad:
<<Chickens coming home to roost, are they. You didn't hesitate to smear
me all over the boards, running off at the mouth like you knew shit
from Shinola. Try to be a man about it, i was. he who lives by
slander shall die by it! Get a grip, DT but don't grasp. Try the
Middle Way.>>
Tang:
> Wow! Again, more true words of a saint! "You didn't hesitate to smear
> me all over the boards, running off at the mouth like you knew shit
> from Shinola". "Try to be a man about it, i was". "he who lives by
> slander shall die by it!"
>
> As to: "Get a grip, DT but don't grasp. Try the Middle Way."
> That is way above my head. Where are you, Mubul, when we need you?
>
> Tang Huyen
Mubul has left for beyond the rim with the other First Ones, Tang, and
the universe now is ours. However, since you mention it, I will repost
Mubul's discourse on the Middle Way for you. It is quite appropriate
today, as it also responds to the reckless misuse of the term nihilism
by Bhante Punnadhammo to label anyone who fails to blindly swallow his
literalist funduhmentalism. There is also some excellent advice in this
one particularly suited to you perhaps, Tang. Enjoy.
--Lord Brahma
<< In the Discourse of the Middle Way, His Howlingness the Ven. Coyote
thus spoke:
Richard "Mubul" Hayes writes on t.r.b 98/08/19:
The Buddha said that anyone who correctly understands dependent
origination avoids two extreme views. The first view is one called
atthivaada, which is described as the view that things exist absolutely
or independently, without causes. The opposing view is natthivaada, the
view that things to do not exist at all. The remedy to believing that
things absolutely exist, said the Buddha, is observing that things
perish. The remedy to believing that nothing exists, he said, is
observing things come into being. Pretty down-to-earth advice.
The view that the Buddha called natthivaada is similar to ONE of the
several meanings of the modern word "nihilism". I don't know of any
poststructuralists, materialists etc who are nihilists in this sense of
the word. I must say I have never encountered anyone in modern society
who seemed to me to hold either of these two extremes that the Buddha
said it was important to avoid. I have never met any people who were
nihilists in the sense of holding the doctrine that denies existence
altogether. (I suspect this is a bit of a straw man position.)
There is another sense of the modern word "nihilism". This second sense
is the doctrine that there is no basis for moral values, and therefore
it does not matter how one acts. There were reportedly people in the
India's time who did hold such views. Some Ajivikas (aajiivika), for
example, argued that the world is composed of eternal atoms and eternal
souls. Since the constituent parts of the world were all eternal, they
said, nothing can be destroyed.
Therefore, if one were to hack a living human being into a thousand
pieces, nothing would really be destroyed. Therefore, they concluded,
there is no such thing as death, therefore no such thing as murder or
harming anyone in any way at all. Moreover, since there is no such
thing as ownership, there is no such thing as theft. In the final
analysis, said the Ajivikas, all morality is merely conventional. All
the alleged grounds for morality are spurious. There does not exist any
justification for leading a moral life.
It is noteworthy that the Ajivikas were simultaneously metaphysical
eternalists AND moral nihilists. The Buddha said several times in the
Pali canon that there was no doctrine in his day more thoroughly evil
than that of the Ajivikas. He even singled out one man, Gosaala
Mankhaliputra, as the most evil man in the world. This Gosaala
character is also mentioned in Jaina scriptures, where he is described
as a man who made his livelihood traveling the countryside, performing
all kinds of magical tricks, singing songs, telling tall tales,
stealing from the blind, cheating the elderly and seducing young women.
He had no scruples whatsoever, and he justified his behaviour on the
ground that everything real is eternal, and every composite thing is an
illusion. According to Jain sources, he was killed when he tried to
incinerate Mahaaviira with a blast of psychic heat; the founder of
Jainism turned his mind into a mirror and reflected the psychic heat
back to Gosaala, who was then burned to a crisp. (This is what Indians
read before Batman comics and computer games were available to them.)
It is important to realise that if the Buddha was opposed to nihilism,
it was to moral nihilism, the view that, as one of my nihilistic
college friends used to say, "it doesn't matter what you do, no matter
what you do". (My friend had read far too much Nietzsche, Camus and
Genet as a teenager. Eventually he outgrew them. He is now a fervid
evangelical Christian, spending the second half of his life feverishly
repenting for how he lived the first half of his life.)
Interestingly enough, I have encountered more than a few Buddhists who
were nihilists in this moral sense. One of the fairly common
misappropriations of the doctrine of emptiness and non-duality claims
that ultimately the disctinction between wholesome and unwholesome is
merely conventional and ultimately ungrounded, and the task of Buddhist
practice is to "transcend" the dualistic thinking on which morality is
based. Once one has transcended morality, they say, then one can party
with impunity. (This doctrine is very attractive to some young adults
and to some men in their fifties. It is a doctrine for adolescents and
paunchy business men going through midlife crisis. I call it Hugh
Hefner Buddhism.)
The doctrine of dependent origination was also described as one that
avoided the two extremes of metaphysical eternalism and cessationism
(uccheda-vaada). The former was the view that everything real (such as
atoms and souls) is eternal and therefore one's true Self never dies.
(Quite a few Western Buddhists that I have encountered seem to think of
nirvana as a kind of eternally blissful disembodied consciousness, not
at all unlike the Catholic doctrine of salvation as beatific vision.)
The other view, cessationism, says there is a self that comes into
being when one is conceived and goes out of being when one's physical
body dies. (Most materialists hold a view like this.)
If we look closely at the reasons why the Buddha rejected the
metaphysical views of eternalism and cessationism, it is very clear
that he objected to these views ONLY if they were accompanied by moral
nihilism. We have already seen how eternalism could be used as a
metaphysical justification for moral nihilism. In the Buddha's time,
this sort of eternalism was expressed as a denial of the reality of
karma. The way in which the opposed doctrine, cessationism (uccheda-
vaada), could lead to moral nihilism is spelled out by the Buddha is
several places, where some cessationists are depicted as saying that
since one will die and before all the consequences of one's actions are
felt, it ultimately makes no difference how one lives. Thinking "The
consequences of my actions are somebody else's problem, not mine," the
cessationist is unrestrained by the conventional belief in karma as a
basis for morality and lives by the principle that one might as well do
whatever one can get away with doing, because ultimately death lets us
all off the hook.
This completely self-centred view is rejected not because it is founded
on the wrong metaphysics, but because amoral self-centred action is not
conducive to the common good.
Not all eternalists are moral nihilists. The Buddha was not opposed to
eternalism as such, but only to morally nihilistic eternalism.
Similarly, not all cessationists are moral nihilists. The Buddha was
not opposed to cessationism as such, but only to cessationism that was
used as a metaphysical justification for the denial of moral
responsibility. Some materialists in classical India were in fact very
strongly dedicated to moral responsibility, to living one's one-and-
only life altruistically so that one would leave a world in which
others could live their one-and-only lives in peace. (Most of the
materialists that I know in the modern world are quite dedicated to
environmentalism and civic responsibility and lead lives that no
Buddhist moralist would find reprehensible in even the slightest
detail.)
There is yet a third pair of extremes that the Buddha talked about. He
said that the middle path is one that avoids the two extremes of
hedonism and mortification of the flesh. The middle path is neither one
of seeking pleasure without regard for the consequences to self and
other, nor is it one of literally beating the the material body into
submission to an ironclad Will residing in the realm of pure spirit.
Neither of these is a good strategy for overcoming the desires that are
the ultimate cause of all dukhha. (Here dukkha is defined as being
separated from what one likes and being in contact with what one
dislikes. Lust is based on craving for pleasures; hatred is based on
aversion to pain.)
The middle-path strategy for overcoming desire is to come to the
realisation that no matter how much pleasure one gets and how much pain
one successfully avoids, one is never really satisfied. Nothing
provides really lasting satisfaction. Once this lesson sinks in, then
one learns to accept whatever life happens to dish out, neither
becoming attached to the pleasant nor complaining about the unpleasant.
This sort of realisation is traditionally called insight (vipassanaa).
I have never advocated abandoning any of the tenets of Buddhism. What I
have advocated is understanding what those tenets really are, rather
than guessing about them, mixing them up with modern pop psychology,
psychedelic pseudo-mysticism, new age superstition and various forms of
Christianity and Judaism. (Some people, especially those who are
attached to American pop Buddhism, perceive those of us who are staunch
supporters of traditional Buddhist scholasticism as abandoning Buddhist
principles. Such accusations are founded almost entirely on moha, with
occasional doses of dosa thrown in for acrimonious good measure.)
I would add that those who can benefit from Buddhism could also benefit
from just about any of the other religious or philosophical traditions
that have managed to survive for a couple of thousand years. It really
does not matter very much which religion or philosophy one follows;
what matters more is that one make a serious commitment to learning
from the collective wisdom of our ancestors. This is why I tend to get
impatient when I see Buddhists wasting precious time trashing
Christianity or other traditional religions, or denigrating such modern
techniques as psychoanalysis. This is a time to work together with
allies to save the planet, not to argue about who gets credit for
saving it.
I think Buddhism could also benefit from a liberal dose of Jungian
analytic psychology (based on a powerful combination of modern
empiricism and the ancient science of alchemy, the art of transforming
the human soul from base metal to gold). For Buddhists to stick their
noses up in the air and reject other wisdom traditions, on the feeble
grounds that they are based on eternalism or cessationism, is to act
very little like the Buddha and the early Buddhists.
Thanks for a most stimulating message. May the discussion continue!
Richard Hayes >>
=====end of quote======
DharmaTroll
"Robert Laurence" <rlau...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
> All religions have at the core to develop compassion and wisdom,
At least, all religions that are at least a couple thousand years old.
I don't think you can say that about new ones, such as Scientology,
or the Moonies, or Eckankar or EST. I think it takes centuries to get
to this common ethical core in religions with long traditions.
> and if we as an individual practice that and try at all times to
> apply it into our daily lives, the world around us would become a
> better place to live in.
Agreed.
> One has to find a teacher according to ones spritual needs like
> following a specific religion to ones spiritual needs, whether
> Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam etc.
Do you think people actually shop around for a religion to suit their
needs? The idea is wonderful, but I don't think it would work, unless
they really could see all the beliefs as accidental and arbitrary,
and not at the core of the religion. Otherwise, one is too stuck
trying to find compatible beliefs to worry about needs and values,
which are actually the things that really count, don't you think?
That's one of the coolest things about Tarthang Tulku's group. They
don't claim that their beliefs are right, as do others who brag of
their guru's wisdom or lineage. They tend to say, "it doesn't matter
what you believe, actually: just try these exercises and see if you
find them helpful." I really liked that attitude. Two thumbs up.
--Dharmakaya Trollpa
RickFinney
there is nothing wrong with students'
confronting their lama regarding improper
sexual behavior. But what to do when that
lama invokes the "higher view" of tantra?
Many years ago, when I was a member of
the executive committee of the Washington
D.C. Dharmadhatu, I attended a meeting
called by the Vajra Regent Osel Tendzin
(Thomas Rich). Mostly, we all discussed
administrative matters, but at one point
--and apropos of nothing we had been
talking about up until that point--he began
to quote the siddha Saraha in defense of
some of his own (the Regent's) indefensible
personal behavior: "If I am like a pig that
covets worldly mire, you must tell me what
fault lies in a stainless mind."
Whether or not the Regent had a stainless
mind is anybody's guess, but what is for
certain is that his self-centered sexual
behavior destroyed at least two valuable
lives, including his own; caused factional
fighting within the community he had been
entrusted with; and brought great shame
to the Dharma. What's especially sad is
that he had enormous potential. He was
a gifted speaker and was capable of great
kindness. Even now, I can't help thinking
that if Trungpa Rinpoche had sat on him a
little harder--or if the officers and rank
and file members of Vajradhatu had
confronted him a little more--he might
have also turned into a decent human being.
- Rick Finney
Stefan Gmaj
>I'm probably as familiar with Tibetan culture as anyone who posts to this
>ng - so I'll give it a go.
<snip>
Wonderful post
>I'm not suggesting that anyone goes to see a misbehaving monk carrying
>arms or forces him into a shotgun wedding but I think there is nothing
wrong
>in students letting their lama know in no uncertain terms that sexual
>misbehaviour is just not on.
So much for desirelesness
(perhaps the students have got to teach the teachers!)
Sexual desire - proceed with caution!
Desire for others to be happy, now that's my kind of desire!
- virtuous intention, go for it!
Perhaps I will change my position again
(The wriggler)
Martin Ellison
a religion to suit their needs? The idea is wonderful, but I
don't think it would work, unless they really could see all the
beliefs as accidental and arbitrary, and not at the core of the
religion. Otherwise, one is too stuck trying to find compatible
beliefs to worry about needs and values, which are actually the
things that really count, don't you think?"
Actually, there are a number of cases of peoples doing just that.
For example, in the wash-up to the Mongol invasions of central
Asia, various khans put out requests-for-tenders for new
religions. Some of them went Muslim, a few Buddhist, and the
Khazars became Jewish. There were also cases of shopping around
for sects within a religion, such as the synods of Whitby and
Lhasa.
Martin
Evelyn Ruut
margaret wrote in message <7rnche$sbk$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk>...
Dear Hayagriva,
I am in agreement with Margaret. If we don't name names, we fail to
prevent this sort of thing from happening. Right now there is no governing
situation in place where people can protect themselves. The only thing we
have is our knowledge between ourselves of who to avoid and who seems to be
OK.
I for one, was amazed at the story about Sakya Trizin reported here, since
he has never been mentioned along with the other problem lamas. It seems
there is a lot more of this stuff going on than any of us realized. We
must stick together, name names, and know who they are, and steer newbies
away.
A very good point was made yesterday when someone commented what do the
"guys" do to get an edge with the Lama? This alone should be proof that
sleeping with a teacher is unneccessary.
What was even more revealing was the description by Chris Fynn on how
Tibetan Women behave with body language and other socio-cultural attitudes
towards monks. We westerners often make eye contact, sit up front, and in
general, (however innocently), often behave quite differently with these
gentlemen from a culture from which these actions are perceived as blatant
come ons.
Cultural conditioning runs deep, and what for us might be simply an
expression of interest in what is being said could be perceived wrongly.
And this is not to mention that there are always some women who deliberately
come on to men all the time as a means of manipulation.
Although not overtly seeing it as "coming on" - I know for a fact that
when stopped for traffic violations as a younger woman, I NEVER got a
ticket.......doing things that by Chris's description would have been not OK
at all with a Lama from a Tibetan cultural background. OK, 'nuff said
about THAT. :-)
chino...@my-deja.com
i think i find myself on the same page, except when it comes to the
idea of a "governing board". whilst such a solution appeals to our
highly organised, norm- and process-orientated minds, if you know many
tibetans you know what looks of incredulity, and puzzlement, and
laughter would greet such a suggestion. can you really picture chagdud
tulku applying to such a board for permission to teach, or defending
himself before it? gyaltrul r.? namkhai norbu r.? the famous "khenpo
brothers"?
TB-ism has always tended toward decentralisation, with occasional
centralising impulses, at least within each major school. but even
with the ris-med movement, the ecumenism realistically was not about
centralising hierarchy, it was more about parallel practice and
recognition of equal "authenticity" and worth. i think almost all
tibetans, lama or not, would respond to the notion of a governing
board: "a teacher holds teaching authority inherently, without
dependence upon external recognition, even if some external recognition
(as with tulku-hood) is built into the tibetan system. if a teacher
benefits you, stay. if not, leave." tibetans are not likely to
abandon such perspectives no matter how much we shout at them that they
should do so.
so, in all practicality, i think non-centralised (in terms of
"authority"), non-"adversarial" mechanisms, would stand the best chance
of really carrying weight or successfully communicating with tibetan
lamas on these issues.
cheers,
chino
chino...@my-deja.com
"Evelyn Ruut" <pud...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> Those who know me from these newsgroups know that I have personally
taken a
> more conservative role in pursuing instances of sexual abuse by
teachers.
>
> I just want to let you know that I have spoken personally on the
telephone
> today, with the individual named below.
>
> I believe her story as stated below, and feel she is honest. I was
deeply
> touched by her knowledge, her sincerity, and her lack of desire for
> retribution or punishment, but more to find a way to protect others
from
> similar experiences from happening in the future.
yes, evelyn, i get this impression reading her account. but i am still
quite confused as to what exactly is being asserted about sogyal r.
whilst i "get" the assertion made about the bosom-fond geshe and about
hh sakya trizin's admonition that, as it were, his own phurba should be
incorporated into her dorje phurba practice, i still do not understand
how sogyal's sleeping with other students whilst nicky was away meets
the standard accepted definitions of clergy sexual "abuse", in the
apparent absence of some power manipulation or broken commitment.
what elements in this equation am i missing? will someone please
explain to me, wherein lies the "abuse" here? i am trying hard to see
it, but just do not. "tactless" and "unfeeling" it may have been of
him (although in the absence of a commitment i am not so sure even
about that (and why the seeming presumption that these liaisons had
anything at all to do with nicky's separate involvement with him?)),
but seemingly, not "abusive". will someone please explain further the
grounds for defining this, as "abuse"?
thanks and cheers,
chino
> I also want to mention that what is stated below is only the tip of
the
> iceberg as told to me. We really DO have to do something. It is
time.
> This is a real problem.
>
> Regards,
> Evelyn
>
> Mary Finnigan wrote in message ...
> >I have been asked by Nicky Skye to post the message below on her
behalf.
> >She has only recently acquired a computer. It is an old one and she
does
> >not yet know in detail how to operate it. She has managed to access
Deja
> >News and has been following this thread. She contacted me via e-mail.
> >After discussion with me and others, Nicky decided that the time is
> >right for her to make her experience public. Anyone who would like to
> >communicate with her can e-mail her at Nick...@aol.com Replies to
the
> >material below will be read by her via Deja News. I hope that the
> >collaboration between Nicky, myself and others will be benefit
Tibetan
> >Buddhism.
> >
> >Nicky Skye writes:
> >I have spent 23 years thinking about how to stop sexual abuse by
lamas
> >since I experienced an abusive relationship with Sogyal Rinpoche. I
have
> >openly discussed Sogyal's abuse with other lamas. On one occasion, I
> >was publicly ridiculed and privately threatened I would go to Vajra
Hell
> >if I discussed it again. When I discussed my feelings about Sogyal
(who
> >called me his girlfriend to everybody while telling me he had a
> >girlfriend in London) and his behavior when I went to see my dying
> >father for 3 days (I was told by the the sangha he had slept with 2
> >other women in those 3 days), a prominent western follower of Tibetan
> >Buddhism said that the Vajrayana had a "higher morality" and having
sex
> >with many partners was no big deal. He said the Vajrayana was not
about
> >being puritanical. So I felt my opinion was meaningless in the eyes
of
> >the Dharma community. When I told other disciples about a Gelugpa
geshe
> >insisting on seeing my breasts, I was told that it was a privilege
and
> >that I must be a dakini. The final straw was when I told an American
> >nun about Sakya Trizin saying my Dorje Phurba practice required me to
> >have sex with him, she said I was an idiot to be manipulated by a
> >lamas' sex urges. Not being abused was my responsibility, she said.
I
> >told her my Dorje Phurba practice REQUIRED me to see my teacher as a
> >Buddha. All the texts said I should follow my Vajrayana teacher's
word.
> >My teacher told me to have sex with him. If I didn't see his word as
> >holy and true,like a mantra, I could consider myself, in the light
of
> >the Dharma, a selfish, ignorant, bad disciple, not practising my holy
> >bond (damtsig) with my Vajrayana guru. If I did respect my teacher's
> >word I was to be considered a naive, gullible, sucker with no common
> >sense. It was a double bind, no win situation. I was wrong either
way. I
> >felt despair. I have never had any desire to speak with a lama
since. I
> >have never felt part of a sangha since. I felt surely Trungpa
Rinpoche
> >would sort out this mess. I adored Trungpa from his books and
seminary
> >transcripts and had complete faith in his intelligence. I waited to
hear
> >what the Boulder sangha would do to explain the sex with lamas
thing. I
> >felt by now that I was an idiot and a sucker on the one hand and not
> >practising the dharma correctly on the other hand. I had strong
feelings
> >of discomfort but I did not want to "hurt the dharma in any way" by
> >speaking publicly about sexual abuse by lamas. When I heard that Osel
> >Tenzin had infected his disciples with HIV by having sex with them
when
> >he knew he had AIDS, disgust and outrage overwhelmed any loyalty I
had
> >previously to any Tibetan Buddhists who were not actively seeking to
end
> >this monstrous ignorance.
> >
> >When I started researching the legal side of "breach of pastoral
> >counselling", calling up the National Organisation of Women, and
talking
> >about these incidents in Survivors of Sexual Abuse meetings, all my
> >FEELINGS came to the surface. Finally I got clarity on the issue. My
> >feelings, long buried and ignored, bid me be more truthful about the
> >EFFECTS these sexual encounters had on me as a person. It was only
then
> >that I understood the wrongness of the breach of trust, the betrayal
of
> >my inner spiritual core, the lie that this sex was of any benefit to
> >anybody including the lamas. I understood that the lamas had fear and
> >guilt, they knew it was wrong and did it anyway, again and again
like an
> >addiction. I think it is less important to get money together now to
> >fund a petition than it is to get a group of like minded people who
can
> >actually disclose the abuses they have seen, heard about or
experienced.
> >Name the lamas, name the occasions, describe the abuses in detail,
> >describe their feelings and effects of the abuses.I think it would be
> >wise to reveal the international laws that protect women from being
> >sexually abused by priests, from being abused by professionals in the
> >arena of the profession, the laws about fraudulent
misrepresentation.
> >If there are threats to quiet the people who are speaking up against
> >these crimes, there are also laws that protect freedom of speech,
laws
> >against intimidation and harassment. The word Dharma means "the
> >truth".It will be to the benefit of the spread of Buddhism if the
truth
> >is spoken. The Dharma is a path to end suffering. Since sexual abuse
by
> >spiritual teachers causes deep psychological suffering it isn't
> >appropriate. In fact it is a crime. I think that a petition will be
> >more effective at a later date. I have observed the discussions on
Deja
> >News and they lack coherence. There are not enough people who can
admit
> >they were abused. I believe that when more women know there is a safe
> >haven to talk about having been abused, the natural momentum will
build
> >up into a DEMAND for no sexual abuse by lamas. I have written to the
> >heads of 3 lineages about sexual abuse by lamas. No reply. A
petition
> >is a call for attention to be brought to the topic with the hope
that it
> >can result in an administrative request that the lamas control
> >themselves. My point is that I would like more than a request for
> >permission not to be abused. The abuse needs to end. It is WE, the
> >sangha, who need to state what is unacceptable and why. More people
who
> >can state why it is unacceptable need to come forward. This could
> >result in a directive, legally worded, that sexual abuse is
> >unacceptable. Perhaps a consensus can be reached by each sangha
> >community not to FINANCIALLY back lamas who commit sexual abuse. That
> >would stop the abuse dead in its tracks. Some supporters of Tibetan
> >Buddhism do not like females squawking about "consensual sex they've
> >had with lamas as grown women". They do not understand why it is
abuse.
> >The ABUSED need to speak their minds and say why it is not just
> >consensual sex and that it is sexual abuse. When the abuse issue is
> >clarified and shared among those who have been abused, I believe it
> >would be time to take action.
chino...@my-deja.com
ki...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> That runs the risk of generating into a witch hunt -
> something Westerners and especially Americans
> should be very careful of as they have great
> propensities in that direction (just take a
> look at history, even recent history).
> Accusations are not fact. The Buddha was accused
> of sexual abuse as well, Hakuin was accused of
> fathering a child, etc.
>
> As for cultural confusion issues: if a teacher
> can't see through cultural issues over time,
what time limit shall they be given?
one year?
10?
50?
>then
> they shouldn't be teaching in the culture in
> which they are confused.
whilst i agree with your statements in principle, in practicality, this
is a gradual process, and some degree of leeway must be accorded,
otherwise we would have no teachers amongst us who were not also born
amongst us. much good dharma teaching would be lost with such a
standard, maybe.
also, it may arguably be proposed, that teaching, like all forms of
communication, is a 2-way street. not only must the teacher make every
effort to understand their students and their culture(s), in order
better to speak to them in a way that gets through, but also, every
sincere student likewise should make every effort to understand the
teacher and their culture, in order better to listen to them in a way
that gets through, in other words, where one actually can *hear* what
is being said.
the "burden" should hardly be entirely on the teacher. if we are
serious and sincere in hearing the teacher, we must share the "burden"
of facilitating communication.
as i see it, we "cut off our nose to spite our face", when we reject a
teacher who may not be 100% culturally adept in the west (though odds
are, they are far more adept in our culture(s) than are we in *theirs*,
usually).
cheers,
chino
> Kirt Undercoffer
>
> Evelyn Ruut wrote:
> >
> > If we don't name names, we fail to
> > prevent this sort of thing from happening. ...
> > We really do have to name names. I did not think so, but now I
do. At
> > least until we have some official recourse or place to complain to.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Evelyn
>
> --
> All beings arise in time,
> Time continually consumes them all
>
Alex Wilding
>>
>> If we don't name names, we fail to
>> prevent this sort of thing from happening. ...
>> We really do have to name names. I did not think so, but now I do. At
>> least until we have some official recourse or place to complain to.
and Kirt countered:
>That runs the risk of generating into a witch hunt -
>something Westerners and especially Americans
>should be very careful of as they have great
>propensities in that direction (just take a
>look at history, even recent history).
>Accusations are not fact. The Buddha was accused
>of sexual abuse as well, Hakuin was accused of
>fathering a child, etc.
It seems to me that the problem is that if names are *not* named, then two
things go wrong.
One is that the whole discussion dissolves very rapidly into one of those
vague, gossipy, smeary rumour middens for which the Internet is notorious.
The other is that a lot of people will have a damned good idea who is being
talked about anyway, so that the disadvantages of spreading accusations will
still be present, and will also spread to those who nobody is naming because
not *everybody* knows. However, because the names are still not explicit,
nobody can counter the accusations if they are (or are believed to be)
false. In other cases, on the other hand, nobody can support a brave lone
voice if it is appropriate for someone to say "much the same happened to
me". And nobody can make up their own mind. All that will result is a
general dirty stink, much of which will remain with those who are
facilitating the process.
If we are not ready to name the names, to "publish and be damned", then the
exercise is before its time. I've heard of unfair interrogations where the
victim is not told what the crime is of which they are accused. But not
knowing who the accused party is seems to lack all sense.
Kirt's worry is of course well founded, and the accusers must be ready to
take the flak if the process is to have any semblance of fairness. Surely
the best chance of fairness is if the accusers and the accused are all known
and have a chance to speak?
Of course, its easy for me to talk, I'm a bloke. I can see that opening up
like Mary's contact did takes courage. But we blokes are, I think, just as
guilty of creating the silly, unbalanced atmosphere in which all this could
take place as are the gals. We seem to want to take bits out of the
teachings like having a true guru on whom we can rely body speech and mind
until enlightenment, but without the bits like staying with a potential guru
for years before making such a commitment.
Alex W
chino...@my-deja.com
w/out taking a position on any of the many controversies that have
flared here around various lamas, i will observe that this seems a
misplaced concern, as i have never really witnessed much hesitancy at
all here in the "naming of names", whereas those i have seen most
pilloried and insulted and dismissed out of hand have been those who
speak up to question or counter any accusation, or otherwise, in
defense of any lama.
to question an accusation, either as to its factuality, or as to its
import and its interpretation, or to provide countering testimony,
almost always brings cries of "you are bashing the victim!" and "you
are lying!
in such an atmosphere, how may truth be determined? is there an online
neutral judge, to ensure fairness, both in testimony as in cross
examination, to both accuser and accused?
>In other cases, on the other hand, nobody can support a brave lone
> voice if it is appropriate for someone to say "much the same happened
to
> me". And nobody can make up their own mind. All that will result is a
> general dirty stink, much of which will remain with those who are
> facilitating the process.
>
> If we are not ready to name the names, to "publish and be damned",
then the
> exercise is before its time. I've heard of unfair interrogations
where the
> victim is not told what the crime is of which they are accused. But
not
> knowing who the accused party is seems to lack all sense.
>
> Kirt's worry is of course well founded, and the accusers must be
ready to
> take the flak if the process is to have any semblance of fairness.
Surely
> the best chance of fairness is if the accusers and the accused are
all known
> and have a chance to speak?
unless the lamas themselves become participants in ARBT, how may this
come to pass? are we to rely on their students, who may or may not
participate here, and may or may not have "the truth", but are certain
to be savaged automatically as "liars" and "victim-bashers"?
are all "names named", always guilty as charged, by virtue merely, of
having been named on-line? for that is the impression i receive of "NG
justice".
how are we to determine truth online?
"are you now, or have you ever been, a cardcarrying student of a
vajrayana lama?"
> Of course, its easy for me to talk, I'm a bloke. I can see that
opening up
> like Mary's contact did takes courage. But we blokes are, I think,
just as
> guilty of creating the silly, unbalanced atmosphere in which all this
could
> take place as are the gals. We seem to want to take bits out of the
> teachings like having a true guru on whom we can rely body speech and
mind
> until enlightenment, but without the bits like staying with a
potential guru
> for years before making such a commitment.
damn well told!
cheers,
chino (trying to balance between avoiding victim-bashing and avoiding
the making and propagation of false allegations)
> Alex W
Shiloh-x
chino...@my-deja.com wrote:
Well said.
Next thing you know we'll have to register our dorjés.
virya,
shiloh
Evelyn Ruut
chino...@my-deja.com wrote in message <7rofrs$k0l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
I said;
>> I believe her story as stated below, and feel she is honest. I was
>deeply
>> touched by her knowledge, her sincerity, and her lack of desire for
>> retribution or punishment, but more to find a way to protect others
>from
>> similar experiences from happening in the future.
Chino replied;
>yes, evelyn, i get this impression reading her account. but i am still
>quite confused as to what exactly is being asserted about sogyal r.
Well to put it mildly, this is a guy who has been not just maybe slipping
one time once, but seemingly a regular womanizer, having multiple lovers.
>whilst i "get" the assertion made about the bosom-fond geshe and about
>hh sakya trizin's admonition that, as it were, his own phurba should be
>incorporated into her dorje phurba practice, i still do not understand
>how sogyal's sleeping with other students whilst nicky was away meets
>the standard accepted definitions of clergy sexual "abuse", in the
>apparent absence of some power manipulation or broken commitment.
Well the way I saw it was that she was made to believe somehow that she was
some sort of a consort doing a special practice of a deeply secret and
privileged variety. When she found out that there were multiple partners,
she realized that this was not only NOT the case, but that she and the
others had been "had" ......bigtime.
I think the confusion you are picking up on, Chino, stems from the perhaps
mistaken view that it was like a "cheating" on her thing, but that was not
what it was at all. She was really under the impression this was some
private, individual, advanced, tantric practice.....
I hope I am not revealing anything too private here, but in my conversation
with her, she made it clear that at the time she was quite naive, had come
from a background which was to some degree dysfunctional, and therefore
perhaps more prone to being led down such a primrose path with his
soggyness.
>what elements in this equation am i missing?
I hope I have provided some of them here.
> will someone please
>explain to me, wherein lies the "abuse" here?
Chino, maybe it is a "girl" thing, but I can tell you that when I was
younger, there were some astonishingly creative lines that some men use in
order to score. When one is young, naive, starry eyed with fascination
for the guru idea, and yes, egoistic as only a young person can be, to
believe that SHE of all has been singled out for this magical honor, yeah,
it can be so close to the word "abuse" that I would fault no one for using
it.
i am trying hard to see
>it, but just do not. "tactless" and "unfeeling" it may have been of
>him (although in the absence of a commitment i am not so sure even
>about that (and why the seeming presumption that these liaisons had
>anything at all to do with nicky's separate involvement with him?)),
>but seemingly, not "abusive". will someone please explain further the
>grounds for defining this, as "abuse"?
Hope I have done so to some degree, and yes it is a fine line. This is why
Nicky never told it about before or made any charges or anything. After
all she was indeed of legal age, and it was not rape. According to what
she told me, she blamed herself as much as him, but people who have been
scammed often tend to do that. Now she is older and wiser, and knows what
a shit he was and is.
To give you a better perspective, supposing you had a 21 year old daughter
and she went to study tibetan buddhism. The philosophy is attractive,
intelligently based, colorfully packaged, exotic, just different enough to
make it appealing to rebellious young things, and your child came back with
this tale. How would you feel about it then?
I agree completely that "trial by internet newsgroup" presents some problems
with credibility, accuracy and hearing both sides of the story. But I am
hoping and praying that some young college kid just away from home, lurking
here, sees this stuff and says "oops, better stay away from THAT
dude".....and yeah, THAT one too!
Same goes with the threads Dharmatroll started on Jetsunma. I tried not to
get involved with it then, but these abuses are much wider spread than I
thought.
It is GOOD to find buddhism and be drawn to it, it is GOOD to practice and
use these methods to open your mind to greater awareness. But you don't
have to screw the lama or work as slave labor, poisoning your unborn child,
and you don't have to give all your money to some charlatan who is
playacting like a rich movie star who is also playacting as a tulku, or go
to some vajra hell.
Yes, I kept myself out of it before, because I felt that trial by internet
does not allow the accused person fair representation, and could easily
become abuse of another kind. I still feel those things are true, but
yours and my daughters and granddaughters are coming up right behind us, and
we need to get this message out there.
Not EVERYBODY'S mama told them what Sylva's and mine and Mary's did. It is
for them that we need to get the word out.
No it is not a trial and there is no verdict and no sentence, but where
there is smoke there is usually some fire. Warning people off is a good
thing.
Regards,
Evelyn
Robert Laurence
> In article <7rmljn$8b5$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk>,
> "Robert Laurence" <rlau...@netcomuk.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > All religions have at the core to develop compassion and wisdom,
>
> At least, all religions that are at least a couple thousand years old.
> I don't think you can say that about new ones, such as Scientology,
> or the Moonies, or Eckankar or EST. I think it takes centuries to get
> to this common ethical core in religions with long traditions.
Yes I did mean the older established religions, and maybe I am wrong, but
looking at history, those religions that get a lot of blood on their hands
seem to suffer from decline of the teachings. Most likely as individuals in
those religions already started to corrupt the teachings and that's why they
resort to violence to prove they're 'right'.
The following isn't meant as a general criticism against the Catholic
church, just more of a regret that history hasn't been kinder.
I am referring to the time of the reformation. There have been some people
trying to change the situation from within the church, however there were
probably too many power hungry people in charge. Anyway, the end result was
that when Luther started his campaign, a lot of other people jumped onto the
bandwagon and started their own little sects. (I had grown up being
protestant but learned that they were just as violent as the Catholic church
during the reformation). Besides people have to find their own spiritual
path and not be forced into one that would only damage them, as it is not
suitable for them.
I think that a lot of religions have been through a very painful period.
It has allways been caused by greed or ignorance (or both).
I just regret, and I assume that lots of people posting here feel the
same, that this newsgroup is often poisend by a similar group of people who
seem to be driven by sheer ignorance, at least their slandering messages
appear to indicate that. Those people will do the same to the Dharma as the
same type of folk who corrupted the Christian religion.
Shiloh-x
k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
Anyways, I withdraw my vote for a petition. I say, let karma take care of everything. Let us cherish the positive things about Buddhism. There are so many wonderful things about Buddhism. To me, it is a very compassionate religion. Let us all, women and men (dharma sisters and dharma brothers), carry on - on the dharma path to *enlightenment.* Cheers! Wishing you all peace and compassion, Miss K. Lhamo
Dear Miss Lhamo,
Thank you for expressing yourself so clearly. I can feel your heart in these words and find wisdom in your suggestion.
peace,
shiloh
_______________________________________________________________
"So gurus, teach wisely! Students, meditate well! Do not be proud but question the wise.
Don't be artificial, but go right to the source of your mind. Don't deceive yourself. Remove all doubts!"-Dza Patrul Rinpoche
Â
Â
chino...@my-deja.com
"Evelyn Ruut" <pud...@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> Dear Chino,
hi evelyn!
> chino...@my-deja.com wrote in message
<7rofrs$k0l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
>
> I said;
> >> I believe her story as stated below, and feel she is honest. I
was
> >deeply
> >> touched by her knowledge, her sincerity, and her lack of desire for
> >> retribution or punishment, but more to find a way to protect others
> >from
> >> similar experiences from happening in the future.
>
> Chino replied;
> >yes, evelyn, i get this impression reading her account. but i am
still
> >quite confused as to what exactly is being asserted about sogyal r.
>
> Well to put it mildly, this is a guy who has been not just maybe
slipping
> one time once, but seemingly a regular womanizer, having multiple
lovers.
okay, ley us say that that is so, and assume all allegations of his
utter promiscuity to be true.
perhaps this alone is sexual misconduct, but in the sense that he may
be harming himself through a sexual addiction. but not all promiscuous
people per se meet the clinical definition of "sex addict" or "sexual
compulsive".
but w/out him breaking a commitment to monogamy and sexual fidelity to
someone, i do not see how it could be considered as sexual misconduct
against them.
nor, without an element of coerciveness, or of manipulation of personal
psychological insights privately confided to him through the lama-
student relationship, or such, would the behaviour meet the clinical
definitions of "abuse" accepted by professionals in that field.
so if there was nothing more than "womanising" (imo, a victorian notion
in itself, that disempowers women and glorifies puritanical anglo-saxon
notions of sexual morality) w/out breakage of a commitment to fidelity
and without manipulation of power position ("i will retaliate against
you if you do not sleep with me", or "you will go to vajra hell unless
you sleep with me") or of personal confidence or belief ("your father's
abandoning you as a child will be healed by sleeping with me"; "the
only way you will become a buddha in this lifetime is to sleep with
me"), i believe it quite clear that no expert on abuse in the USA or
elsewhere in the modern west (and i myself have a background in this
area and its definition, with my study of it, and my counseling and
advocacy work in it, based in the experiences of a number of people
close to me who are abuse survivors, so before the accusations of
victim-bashing start to flow, i suggest people read up on the actual
definitions of "abuse" by those who work in the field), would apply the
label "abuse". abuse is about power and control, not merely about
getting one's rocks off all over town to the distress of a partner.
> >whilst i "get" the assertion made about the bosom-fond geshe and
about
> >hh sakya trizin's admonition that, as it were, his own phurba should
be
> >incorporated into her dorje phurba practice, i still do not
understand
> >how sogyal's sleeping with other students whilst nicky was away meets
> >the standard accepted definitions of clergy sexual "abuse", in the
> >apparent absence of some power manipulation or broken commitment.
>
> Well the way I saw it was that she was made to believe somehow that
she was
> some sort of a consort doing a special practice of a deeply secret and
> privileged variety. When she found out that there were multiple
partners,
> she realized that this was not only NOT the case, but that she and the
> others had been "had" ......bigtime.
whoa.... how in the world does a multiplicity of partners affect
whether or not the practice was special and effective? if my lama
gives me a rare and supersecret teaching on dzogchen, and tomorrow
night he gives you the same one, is my own teaching somehow diminished
thereby? and since when is buddhism about "i am receiving a special
and secret and privileged teaching, and others are not, and if i find
out that they too are, i will be angered because my turf is invaded and
my uniqueness and privilege and specialness taken away"? i mean, if
someone *really* believes that their sexual practice with a lama is
effective, would they not properly wish for EVERY woman in the sangha,
and EVERY woman in the world for that matter, and hell, every MAN and
ANIMAL in the world to have that sexual practice with their lama?
sexual possessiveness in dharma?!
> I think the confusion you are picking up on, Chino, stems from the
perhaps
> mistaken view that it was like a "cheating" on her thing, but that
was not
> what it was at all.
yes, this is true, but evelyn, i am afraid that from the facts even as
clarified, no expert would term this "abuse"; the sole source of grief
here (as opposed to the geshe and sakya trizin incidents described,
which *do* fall into modern definitions of "abuse", imo) appears to be
his having sex with others and the perception he was thereby diluting
the privilegedness and uniqueness of the relationship. since concerns
about uniqueness and privilege - especially in light of nicky *knowing*
and apparently accepting that he proclaimed to her another woman, in
london, as his "girlfriend" - do not go well with buddhist equanimity
and wishing the best for all beings, and since there was no express
commitment to monogamy (again, with at least the london woman also in
the picture, how could there have been?), how could this even have been
buddhist sexual misconduct, let alone "abuse"?
>She was really under the impression this was some
> private, individual, advanced, tantric practice.....
how is this impression (and in "impressions", where there are no
express commitments articulated, misunderstandings sometimes/often
occur) necessarily what was in sogyal's head? tang has in the past had
a certain impression of your personality and intentions vis-Ã -vis him ;
because this is his subjective impression (and maybe even one could
call it a projection!), does that mean it is "objectively" true?
and again, if she really thought the practice was as powerful as you
describe was her impression, and if there was really no issue here
about "cheating", and sexual possessiveness, and monogamy/fidelity vs.
promiscuity, why would one not be *absolutely delighted* that someone
else - better yet, *many* others - also could benefit from that
practice?
did not guru rinpoche have *untold* numbers of consorts -
simultaneously? do we think mandarava got upset over yeshe tsogyal and
the legions of others? do we forget that king trisong detsen gave up
yeshe tsogyal as his concubine, dropping any sexual
possessiveness/territoriality he had, because he knew she would benefit
from becoming a consort to guru rinpoche? do we forget that, in turn,
yeshe tsogyal took many men as her consorts - simultaneously? did they
ever assert she "abused" them because they finally realised they did
not each have an *exclusive* relationship with her? did they ever say
to themselves, "my sexual practice with yeshe tsogyal is less secret,
less beneficial, less advanced, less powerful, because other men are
fortunate enough also to engage in such practice with her"? did they
ever say, "may all beings have happiness and the causes of happiness,
but may i alone be yeshe tsogyal's consort, for if anyone else has that
cause of happiness, it will make my having it less unique and
privileged, and the teachings i receive will be worth less, for others
will have them as well"?
> I hope I am not revealing anything too private here, but in my
conversation
> with her, she made it clear that at the time she was quite naive, had
come
> from a background which was to some degree dysfunctional, and
therefore
> perhaps more prone to being led down such a primrose path with his
> soggyness.
and i am indeed saddened to know of all the suffering she went
through. but that does not mean that i believe sogyal in fact to merit
being pinpointed as the *cause* of that suffering (i.e. as opposed to
her own expectations and projections and attachments), and labeled an
"abuser" for the actions as described (obviously, if there are missing
facts here, my opinion may be quite off, but i do feel strongly, that
no one in the field of combating abuse or healing abuse, would call
this "abuse"), UNLESS sogyal really *knew* her to be naive, and with a
dysfunctional background, and so more vulnerable than another woman
might have been, and thus more easily manipulated into doing things she
would not have, otherwise, and then in fact manipulated her into doing
such things. now, if *that* was the case, i would concur, the commonly
accepted elements of abuse appear to have been present.
> >what elements in this equation am i missing?
>
> I hope I have provided some of them here.
>
> > will someone please
> >explain to me, wherein lies the "abuse" here?
>
> Chino, maybe it is a "girl" thing, but I can tell you that when I was
> younger, there were some astonishingly creative lines that some men
use in
> order to score. When one is young, naive, starry eyed with
fascination
> for the guru idea, and yes, egoistic as only a young person can be, to
> believe that SHE of all has been singled out for this magical honor,
yeah,
> it can be so close to the word "abuse" that I would fault no one for
using
> it.
evelyn, you know i have great respect for your views. but i must say
that abuse professionals and activists would, i believe, look at that
as really overextending the word "abuse", in a way that might make
people take less seriously, the cases that *do* fit and deserve the
label.
abuse does not take place purely in the subjective eyes of the claimed
abusee. there are objective criteria, and they tend to focus on the
intentions and actions of the purported abuser, and do so from an
objective perspective, though that includes what the purported abuser
knew about the particular person and the emotional vulnerabilities or
other available control mechanisms. but, not every "seduction" of a
naive young lass is "abuse"; if the male does not know how naive she
is, or if he does not know about and intentionally trigger emotional
weakpoints she has, is he always then to be blamed that his "line"
worked? or, in the case of lamas, chris fynn has explained ways in
which tibetan men (especially those raised in a cloistered monastic
environment) and western women may greatly misread each other's cues
and intentions. if a tibetan really thinks a woman is coming on to
*him*, as chris described about eye contact and bodily touching, and is
therefore open to tantric sexual practices or even just plain samsaric
sex, and if the woman has misunderstandings about the nature of such
involvements and maybe too subconscious typical western (and especially
anglo-saxon) concepts of how relationships "go" (dinner and a nice
wine, moonlit walks, dancing in fountains, sexual fidelity and
"romance" - none of which do we hear about guru rinpoche or yeshe
tsogyal engaging in with their many consorts, and none of which should
probably be expected from a modern-day lama either), then should the
tibetan be called an "abuser" because cultural miscommunication
occurred?
> i am trying hard to see
> >it, but just do not. "tactless" and "unfeeling" it may have been of
> >him (although in the absence of a commitment i am not so sure even
> >about that (and why the seeming presumption that these liaisons had
> >anything at all to do with nicky's separate involvement with him?)),
> >but seemingly, not "abusive". will someone please explain further
the
> >grounds for defining this, as "abuse"?
>
> Hope I have done so to some degree, and yes it is a fine line. This
is why
> Nicky never told it about before or made any charges or anything.
After
> all she was indeed of legal age, and it was not rape.
no, it we are agreed it certainly does not meet *that* definition.
>According to what
> she told me, she blamed herself as much as him, but people who have
been
> scammed often tend to do that. Now she is older and wiser, and
knows what
> a shit he was and is.
again, abuse professionals would simply not term this abuse, at least
not as described so far. there must be some element of coercion or
manipulation or retaliation or knowingly preying on mental/emotional
weakpoints.
i am troubled and saddened that she "blamed" herself at all. if
anything, our practice should tell us there is no usefulness at all in
"blame". we learn lessons, we grow wiser, we move on.
> To give you a better perspective, supposing you had a 21 year old
daughter
> and she went to study tibetan buddhism. The philosophy is
attractive,
> intelligently based, colorfully packaged, exotic, just different
enough to
> make it appealing to rebellious young things, and your child came
back with
> this tale. How would you feel about it then?
well, first, if all she had to tell me was the same as described here
so far about sogyal, i would tell her that if she truly believed in the
spiritual power of her relationship, and if he was not breaking a
commitment he had expressly given her, then she ought to be delighted,
or certainly not upset, that other beings too benefited from the same
practice. and i would remind her that yeshe tsogyal and mandarava and
all the other consorts of guru r. rejoiced in each other's being his
consort, and acted as sisters to each other. and as well, that after
guru r. left tibet with mandarava, yeshe tsogyal took a whole company
of consorts, who rejoiced in each other's being her consorts and acted
as brothers to each other.
then i would tell her, however, that if she simply believed herself
unable to escape her concepts of and attachment to sexual
possessiveness over her partner, that was more than understandable, as
it is probably one of the hardest attachments for humans to let go of.
(who amongst us modern western men, could turn over our beloved partner
to her teacher to be *his* partner, for her own spiritual benefit, as
did king trisong detsen with yeshe tsogyal?! but do we think these are
just cute stories that teach us no lesson? true or myth, the tale
carries a message, and that message is *not* that victorian sexual
morality = dharma!) and that she should therefore not be hard on
herself, for clearly, it would be bad for both her mental/emotional
health *and* her practice to continue in such a situation. and so,
that she needed to get out of that situation, and that i would support
her in doing so.
and of course, if she did not truly believe in the spiritual power of
sex with her lama, then not only would i ask her why she would put up
with "infidelities" that clearly bothered her, but also, why she would
want to be in such a relationship in the first place. and again, help
her leave it.
evelyn, amiga mÃa, i hope you did not think that appealing to my
fatherly protectiveness of a daughter, would lead me to just ignore
such clear dharma examples as guru r.'s consorts, and yeshe tsogyal's
consorts, and king trisong detsen's non-possessiveness over yeshe
tsogyal.....
> I agree completely that "trial by internet newsgroup" presents some
problems
> with credibility, accuracy and hearing both sides of the story.
yes, it definitely does.
>But I am
> hoping and praying that some young college kid just away from home,
lurking
> here, sees this stuff and says "oops, better stay away from THAT
> dude".....and yeah, THAT one too!
which begs the question, because it falls into the tremendous
assumptions, that all accusations of "abuse" in fact warrant that
label, and that all facts alleged are facts indeed.
would it not be better, just to publicise the criteria as to what
constitutes abuse according to experts? and broadcast them wherever
one can, plus suggested guidelines on "things to be wary of when your
lama asks you for sex or to enter into a consort relationship"? not
just students of known alleged sexual abusers (who may or may not in
fact be that, but we will *never* be able to determine that through "NG
justice" or a "naming names" website) should be thinking about these
issues and educated on how to respond and what to look out for, but ALL
students of ALL teachers should be. but that is not about naming names
that may in at least some cases be falsely accused, that is about
educating about the core to equip students to handle these issues.
> Same goes with the threads Dharmatroll started on Jetsunma. I tried
not to
> get involved with it then, but these abuses are much wider spread
than I
> thought.
but vigilantism has never worked, and becomes itself an abuse,
particularly when labels like "abuse" get abused by overuse and
overextension. that's why all would-be fighters of abuse in western TB-
ism, need really to study up, on the "state of the art" in the anti-
abuse community.
there is an excellent feminist anti-abuse listserv i am on, that would
be a good place to start for people, except that it is by invitation
only (the anti-abuse world needs to assure privacy regarding things
like survivors' tales (if they so wish), mother and child shelter
locations, policy strategies, etc.). i will try to find some other
good resources to post about here, so that all those who have expressed
a desire to fight abuse in various forms, as well as perceived
survivors, may continue the process of educating themselves on what is
"abuse" and ways to combat it.
> It is GOOD to find buddhism and be drawn to it, it is GOOD to
practice and
> use these methods to open your mind to greater awareness. But you
don't
> have to screw the lama
indeed, one does not have to.
>or work as slave labor, poisoning your unborn child,
a tale told here, the facts of which are far from clear. i, for one,
remain far from convinced about it.
> and you don't have to give all your money to some charlatan who is
> playacting like a rich movie star who is also playacting as a tulku,
do you mean the tulku recognised by hh penor r.? "playacting" and
"charlatan" is perhaps not accurate, given the undeniable fact of their
fully traditionalist recognition and enthronement - which is not at all
to say, that they are necessarily fully enlightened and never ever make
a mistake.
anyway, i do not myself know, whether rebirth is literal or just
figural, and same with tulkus, and so i act on the assumption, that
they are not literal. and certainly, one would not need to give *any*
lama, charlatan or not, all one's money.
>or go
> to some vajra hell.
no, indeed not.
> Yes, I kept myself out of it before, because I felt that trial by
internet
> does not allow the accused person fair representation, and could
easily
> become abuse of another kind. I still feel those things are true,
very much so.
>but
> yours and my daughters and granddaughters are coming up right behind
us, and
> we need to get this message out there.
>
> Not EVERYBODY'S mama told them what Sylva's and mine and Mary's
did. It is
> for them that we need to get the word out.
if "the word" is "naming names" without an actual adjudicatory process
with guarantees of fairness to both accuser and accused, then it serves
nothing, for what we are teaching is, it is okay to make allegations
and maybe ruin people, or at least their good name, without the
standards of proof and guarantees of "fair play" in process that our
modern societies have said are essential: "substantive justice" a.k.a.
"due process". personally, i will always resist our children being
taught such a lesson.
but if what you mean by "the word" is educating so that our daughters
and g'daughters - and our sons and g'sons - are wise and savvy in the
face of attempted abuse, or even in the face of "seductive" romeos (and
juliets) who come bearing "lines", well, then i am right there with you.
> No it is not a trial and there is no verdict and no sentence, but
where
> there is smoke there is usually some fire.
i used to chain smoke, and i assure you, that my lit, glowing cigarette
never constituted "fire". so no, smoke does not always come from fire
per se.
> Warning people off is a good
> thing.
educating people to defend themselves and others, from accurately
identified threats, here in this crazy place called samsara, is a good
thing.
tossing aside mainstream professionals' and advocates' definitions of
"abuse" (and of similar emotionally overcharged labels like "cult"), as
well as throwing out with the garbage, all the civilised notions that
our societies have developed about resisting false or inaccurate
accusations, and also too our notions of "substantive justice"/"due
process" and "standards of proof", is a very, very, very bad, bad, bad
thing.
cheers,
chino
Shirley
thanks :)
--
Love and Hope, Shirley
______________________________
"Thanks for noticin' me"....Eeyore
chino...@my-deja.com
ki...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> chino...@my-deja.com wrote:
> >
> > In article <37DE6692...@worldnet.att.net>,
> > ki...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> > > something Westerners and especially Americans
> > > should be very careful of as they have great
> > > propensities in that direction (just take a
> > > look at history, even recent history).
> > > Accusations are not fact. The Buddha was accused
> > > of sexual abuse as well, Hakuin was accused of
> > > fathering a child, etc.
> > >
> > > can't see through cultural issues over time,
> >
> > what time limit shall they be given?
> >
> > one year?
> >
> > 10?
> >
> > 50?
> >
> > >then
> > > they shouldn't be teaching in the culture in
> > > which they are confused.
>
> this determination and students as well. Meaning that
> if people were in a culture for a while and didn't
> really feel that they understood it then it might not
> be a good idea for them to teach beyond basic stuff.
> Students would also play a part in checking the teacher
> out. After thinking aout it a bit more, I'm really not
> sure that this is necessary however. But the suggestion
> came up in the context of sexual innunedo, etc. anyway.
>
> >
yes, i certainly agree that teachers and students both should step back
every so often, and examine whether teacher-student communication
(a.k.a. teaching and learning!) is really going on. if not, time to do
something else maybe.
and actually, that is also true, just maybe less obvious, when it comes
to teachers and students who come from the same culture as each other!
cheers,
chino
> --
> All beings arise in time,
> Time continually consumes them all
>
margaret
>mortal degradation.
Forgive me for saying so, but this sounds firstly dualistic, secondly naive
and thirdly (as a result of those two) dangerous. I mean, there is nothing
on earth or in "heaven" that is outside of samsara *and* nirvana...
remember?
I saw the sexual part as an very high and intense
>bonding of two beings, and I longed to learn the secrets of such
>practices.
A dangerous motivation. How is this any different from those who "lust"
after Oshoite teachings such as Margo Anand's stuff? The search for thrills
all too often leads right over a cliff. What happened to the Bodhicitta
motivation? (I'm far from saying it's easy or that *I* have it, but then
you *are* talking about one of the highest practices in Vajrayana).
The Lama was the holder of such
>advanced and secret knowledge, and surely anyone who was initiated into
>such practices had passed by the earlier "lions at the gates", leaving
>lower desires behind in order to attain enlightenment.
"lower" desires? Look, I'm not condoning abuse, but have you forgotten that
Vajrayana rejects nothing, and indeed works with everything to reach our
ultimate nature?
>> Dorje Phurba practice *may well* require having sex with the lama at a
>> certain level!
>
>If this is the case, there are a lot of men out there who are going to
>be making some tough decisions with regard to proceeding to the next
>level of practice....heh,heh,heh....
Don't understand you here.
we can't seriously embark on that practice and>then>> later say "ok, I like
this bit of the practice and that bit but not>the>> other bit".
>>
>Good point here. If this is the case it needs to be made clear at the
>outset, and it needs to be overseen by some sort of governing board
>that is responsible for the sanctioning of Lamas as individuals not
>only qualified to be carrying on this level of activity,but in
>compliance with the established rules of the governing board.
I doubt this will ever happen. From what I gathered from my time amongst
them, lamas operate very much on a one man show basis. In the
student/teacher lines there, students gradually get their own students, set
up monasteries, and then although *they* are answerable to their gurus,
their monastery isn't & seems to be totally their own business.
>The>secrets may have to go!!
The secrets can go anytime - that will be a new form of Vajrayana. Good,
bad, neutral - who can say.
> I played dumb & purposefully "misread" his joke, but with a pretty
>> stern tone of voice & stern expression, so that it was very clear
>that I
>> understood full well, wasn't going to play the game, and wouldn't
>appreciate
>> being asked again. And it didn't happen again.
>
>I have seen this method used by a few strong and well-informed women in
>many sanghas. This is what it takes. There would be no problem if there
>weren't those who "maybe" would like the experience, or would crawl
>over broken glass to have the experience for whatever disturbed
>motivating reason.
Yes, the people who ""maybe" would like the experience" may well be
disturbed. That bit of the picture is purely their responsibility.
> I hope I continue being so
>> lucky... it's tricky - for instance, I'm not a nun, not married and
>yet have
>> no intention or desire to become a consort. But I *do* want to
>deepen my
>> practice and be as commited in it as possible.
>
>And making this choice should not limit your access to higher
>teachings. Consort activity is ONE way to approach Ati yoga, not the
>only way.
Here I agree with you totally.
Dzogchen, in my understanding(correct me if I am wrong), has
>no such activity involved in its process
Where do you get this idea from? I have heard of just as many Dzogchen
teachers having consorts as any other lineage.
MdB
chino...@my-deja.com
"margaret" <marg...@mdebethlen.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
> > I saw Vajrayana as lofty, above any form of
> >mortal degradation.
>
naive
> and thirdly (as a result of those two) dangerous. I mean, there is
nothing
> on earth or in "heaven" that is outside of samsara *and* nirvana...
> remember?
yes, agreed.
> I saw the sexual part as an very high and intense
> >bonding of two beings, and I longed to learn the secrets of such
> >practices.
>
> A dangerous motivation. How is this any different from those who
"lust"
> after Oshoite teachings such as Margo Anand's stuff? The search for
thrills
> all too often leads right over a cliff. What happened to the
Bodhicitta
> motivation?
precisely!
>(I'm far from saying it's easy or that *I* have it, but then
> you *are* talking about one of the highest practices in Vajrayana).
>
> The Lama was the holder of such
> >advanced and secret knowledge, and surely anyone who was initiated
into
> >such practices had passed by the earlier "lions at the gates",
leaving
> >lower desires behind in order to attain enlightenment.
>
> "lower" desires? Look, I'm not condoning abuse, but have you
forgotten that
> Vajrayana rejects nothing, and indeed works with everything to reach
our
> ultimate nature?
right on the mark, imo, margaret. this "lofty"/"lower" dualism is just
the sort of thing, i think, that leads to setting oneself up for
getting WHOMPED on by one's harnessing the techniques of the vajrayana,
instead of benefitting from them.
ONE taste...
ONE taste...
ONE taste...
(gee mum, tastes like nectar!)
> >> Dorje Phurba practice *may well* require having sex with the lama
at a
> >> certain level!
> >
> >If this is the case, there are a lot of men out there who are going
to
> >be making some tough decisions with regard to proceeding to the next
> >level of practice....heh,heh,heh....
>
> Don't understand you here.
ahem...
i believe what was being said, was that if dorje phurba practice
required, beyond a certain level, actually "knocking boots" with one's
lama, well then, many male students of male lamas might re-think how
far they really intend to take their dorje phurba practice....
> we can't seriously embark on that practice and>then>> later say "ok,
I like
> this bit of the practice and that bit but not>the>> other bit".
> >>
> >Good point here. If this is the case it needs to be made clear at the
> >outset, and it needs to be overseen by some sort of governing board
> >that is responsible for the sanctioning of Lamas as individuals not
> >only qualified to be carrying on this level of activity,but in
> >compliance with the established rules of the governing board.
>
> I doubt this will ever happen. From what I gathered from my time
amongst
> them, lamas operate very much on a one man show basis. In the
> student/teacher lines there, students gradually get their own
students, set
> up monasteries, and then although *they* are answerable to their
gurus,
> their monastery isn't & seems to be totally their own business.
absolutely so.
> >The>secrets may have to go!!
>
> The secrets can go anytime - that will be a new form of Vajrayana.
Good,
> bad, neutral - who can say.
hmm... if i had to guess.....
> > I played dumb & purposefully "misread" his joke, but with a pretty
> >> stern tone of voice & stern expression, so that it was very clear
> >that I
> >> understood full well, wasn't going to play the game, and wouldn't
> >appreciate
> >> being asked again. And it didn't happen again.
> >
> >I have seen this method used by a few strong and well-informed women
in
> >many sanghas. This is what it takes. There would be no problem if
there
> >weren't those who "maybe" would like the experience, or would crawl
> >over broken glass to have the experience for whatever disturbed
> >motivating reason.
>
> Yes, the people who ""maybe" would like the experience" may well be
> disturbed. That bit of the picture is purely their responsibility.
>
> > I hope I continue being so
> >> lucky... it's tricky - for instance, I'm not a nun, not married and
> >yet have
> >> no intention or desire to become a consort. But I *do* want to
> >deepen my
> >> practice and be as commited in it as possible.
> >
> >And making this choice should not limit your access to higher
> >teachings. Consort activity is ONE way to approach Ati yoga, not the
> >only way.
>
> Here I agree with you totally.
thirded.
> Dzogchen, in my understanding(correct me if I am wrong), has
> >no such activity involved in its process
>
> Where do you get this idea from? I have heard of just as many
Dzogchen
> teachers having consorts as any other lineage.
actually, maybe even more so, since so many are householders or else
ngakpas.
cheers,
chino
Mark Dunlop
[...]
>so if there was nothing more than "womanising" (imo, a victorian notion
>in itself, that disempowers women and glorifies puritanical anglo-saxon
>notions of sexual morality) w/out breakage of a commitment to fidelity
>and without manipulation of power position ("i will retaliate against
>you if you do not sleep with me", or "you will go to vajra hell unless
>you sleep with me") or of personal confidence or belief ("your father's
>abandoning you as a child will be healed by sleeping with me"; "the
>only way you will become a buddha in this lifetime is to sleep with
>me"), i believe it quite clear that no expert on abuse in the USA or
>elsewhere in the modern west (and i myself have a background in this
>area and its definition, with my study of it, and my counseling and
>advocacy work in it, based in the experiences of a number of people
>close to me who are abuse survivors, so before the accusations of
>victim-bashing start to flow, i suggest people read up on the actual
>definitions of "abuse" by those who work in the field), would apply the
>label "abuse". abuse is about power and control, not merely about
>getting one's rocks off all over town to the distress of a partner.
>
...
On one occasion, I was publicly ridiculed and privately threatened I
would go to Vajra Hell if I discussed it again.
I told her my Dorje Phurba practice REQUIRED me to see my teacher as a
Buddha. All the texts said I should follow my Vajrayana teacher's word.
My teacher told me to have sex with him. If I didn't see his word as
the Dharma, a selfish, ignorant, bad disciple, not practising my holy
bond (damtsig) with my Vajrayana guru. If I did respect my teacher's
word I was to be considered a naive, gullible, sucker with no common
sense. It was a double bind, no win situation. I was wrong either way. I
......end quote......
Chino, doesn't that sound like an abusive situation to you?
It is true that we only have Nicky's word for this situation, but the
onus must be at least equally on Sogyal to refute her evidence as on
Nicky to prove it.
I have heard similar allegations against Sogyal from other sources, but
AFAIK the evidence has never been tested in court or in any equivalent
arena. A woman called 'Janice Doe' brought a court case a few years ago,
but, I am told, Rigpa (Sogyal's organisation) settled out of court for
$3m.
[...]
Wear the yellow robe
But if you are reckless
You will fall into darkness
Dhammapada 22:2
--
Mark Dunlop
chino...@my-deja.com
Mark Dunlop <ma...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <7rprdh$k0l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, chino...@my-deja.com
writes
> [...]
notion
> >in itself, that disempowers women and glorifies puritanical anglo-
saxon
> >notions of sexual morality) w/out breakage of a commitment to
fidelity
> >and without manipulation of power position ("i will retaliate against
> >you if you do not sleep with me", or "you will go to vajra hell
unless
> >you sleep with me") or of personal confidence or belief ("your
father's
> >abandoning you as a child will be healed by sleeping with me"; "the
> >only way you will become a buddha in this lifetime is to sleep with
> >me"), i believe it quite clear that no expert on abuse in the USA or
> >elsewhere in the modern west (and i myself have a background in this
> >area and its definition, with my study of it, and my counseling and
> >advocacy work in it, based in the experiences of a number of people
> >close to me who are abuse survivors, so before the accusations of
> >victim-bashing start to flow, i suggest people read up on the actual
> >definitions of "abuse" by those who work in the field), would apply
the
> >label "abuse". abuse is about power and control, not merely about
> >getting one's rocks off all over town to the distress of a partner.
> >
> ...
> would go to Vajra Hell if I discussed it again.
> I told her my Dorje Phurba practice REQUIRED me to see my teacher as a
> Buddha. All the texts said I should follow my Vajrayana teacher's
word.
> My teacher told me to have sex with him. If I didn't see his word as
of
> the Dharma, a selfish, ignorant, bad disciple, not practising my holy
> bond (damtsig) with my Vajrayana guru. If I did respect my teacher's
> word I was to be considered a naive, gullible, sucker with no common
> sense. It was a double bind, no win situation. I was wrong either
way. I
>
> ......end quote......
>
> Chino, doesn't that sound like an abusive situation to you?
nicky's account is *quite* clear that the sexual dorje phurba practice
was mandated by hh sakya trizin, not by sogyal r., so let us not
confuse lamas and attribute one's actions to another.
now, to be honest, i was shocked to read such a claim about sakya
trizin, as i have never before heard any such claim about him. so
before actually buying a claim, i personally would need to hear a lot
more evidence, and maybe parallel claims coming to the light of day.
but that is a distinct question from whether the allegation about sakya
trizin even alleges the *elements* that experts would consider to
constitute "clergy sexual abuse". without taking any position as to
whether or not i believe the allegation to be true, i have already made
clear in other posts, that i believe that particular allegation to
contain the elements that would be considered to cross the line into
real "abuse".
my questioning is focused not on the sakya trizin allegation but rather
the sogyal allegation, as i still simply do not see how it can be made
to fit into the start of the art definition of what elements comprise
"abuse" by a clergy member of their power and position and confidences
gained through the lama-student relationship.
> On one occasion, I was publicly ridiculed and privately threatened I
> would go to Vajra Hell if I discussed it again.
now, this truly troubling statement of nicky's was indeed made in
relation to her involvement with sogyal r.
however, you have omitted quoting the line in her account immediately
preceding it, which states that this was the reaction *of other lamas*
(not sogyal) when she attempted to complain to them about her perceived
abuse at sogyal's hands.
thus what is clear, unless she omitted it from her account, is that
*sogyal* himself never threatened her with vajra hell. moreover, even
if he had done so *after the fact*, it would not address his state of
mind in entering into sex with her. only if sogyal
manipulated/controlled nicky into doing something she would otherwise
not have (for which, a certain degree of knowledge/awareness of his own
actions and intentions would be necessary on sogyal's part), would the
anti-abuse community be likely to take this as alleging the elements
necessary for "abuse". thus, if he told her to have sex with him or
else she would go to vajra hell, that would meet the criteria. but
that is not what nicky says happened, unless her account is incomplete.
in addition, i confess i personally have "vajra hell threat allegation"
fatigue. i suppose perhaps some lamas or others somewhere really do
threaten people with that in an attempt to control them. but what i
have myself seen firsthand on a number of occasions, is a tibetan lama
will circuitously and politely tell someone, in response to a question,
that maybe such and such is not a good idea, and that it will result in
bad karma for those who engage in it, maybe even to the point of vajra
hell. the next day i hear the distraught, almost hysterical western
practitioner who had asked the lama's guidance, telling a tut-tutting
and tsk-tsking circle of a few sangha members, "oh, lama so and so
threatened me with vajra hell if i did not do as he said!" this type
of advice from lamas seems particularly prone to setting off
miscommunication or misinterpretation with westerners, so before i
personally accepted that a lama actually had "threatened vajra hell" as
an abusive control mechanism, i would want some damn good corroboration
as to what was really said and in what tone and so on.
and in any event, if a lama other than sogyal really did threaten that
as a control mechanism against nicky, it would be evidence maybe of
cult mentality on the part of that lama, but not of abusiveness on the
part of sogyal.
let us keep our analytical thinking clear and detached, eh?
> It is true that we only have Nicky's word for this situation, but the
> onus must be at least equally on Sogyal to refute her evidence as on
> Nicky to prove it.
that is simply not how either western legal systems work, or even the
anti-abuse community. in our legal systems, one is innocent until
proven guilty, no? and do people really think that anti-abuse experts
simply take all allegations made as true? they are some of the most
skeptical and critical and scrutinising people i have ever met when it
comes to believing abuse claims, although not expressing that directly
to the face of the person who claims she (or he) was abused.
they know the real signs to look for, they know "abuse" is often
incorrectly claimed when just normal human disagreements and disputes
and miscommunications occur, and they do not simply take up arms
whenever a purported victim cries "abuse!" they know that sincere but
unwarranted claims of abuse, and even the occasional outright false
claims of abuse, undermine the very work they do combating and healing
*real* abuse. they can take quite a bit of convincing sometimes
(though again, the claimant does not tend to be privy to those
analytical discussions), but once convinced, will fight tooth and nail
against the abuser, and to get healing resources for the abusee.
and from my own experiences in the field, i am convinced that, *unless
there are key missing facts here*, anti-abuse experts simply would not
consider sogyal's dealings with nicky, even if they were exactly as
alleged by her, to be "abuse" - though they may well feel, in the
absence of any TB-ist belief in at least the theoretical value of
consort-type practices or tantric sexual practices - that sogyal was
just a "womanising cad", a "player".
"abuse", "cult", and similar emotionally overcharged terms can lead
people to throw calm cool analysis and reasoning, and the need for
reliable evidence, right out the window. we quite understandably get
upset to hear of such events, and get swept away sometimes in our
emotions about them. but not all facts alleged are always true, and
not all true facts are always interpreted the way experts who fight
*real* abuse and *real* cults and so on, would. this is not to say
that i automatically reject nicky's claims about sogyal. i am laying
out how her allegations appear to fall short of something the anti-
abuse community might take seriously, and even trying to elicit any
additional information that her account might originally have omitted,
that would make more supportable, an allegation of abuse by sogyal.
> I have heard similar allegations against Sogyal from other sources,
okay, but have you or anyone else - and i am specifically asking here,
to mary finnigan, given her having so far led the charge against
sogyal, and being in much possession of information about him from her
research - specifically about any of the elements i have outlined for
"abuse"? or is this all simply because his otherwise willing sex
partners felt they had been "had" when they found out he was engaging
in consort or tantric sex not just with them but with other women as
well (even with at least nicky knowing of and accepting at least one
other woman being in the picture, the one in london), making them feel
less "special" and "privileged" and singled out for "honour", even
though he had made absolutely no commitment to fidelity to them?
> but
> AFAIK the evidence has never been tested in court or in any equivalent
> arena. A woman called 'Janice Doe' brought a court case a few years
ago,
> but, I am told, Rigpa (Sogyal's organisation) settled out of court for
> $3m.
the thing about settlements is, routinely it happens that innocent
parties too settle, even for outrageous sums, because the mere expense
of the court case would be even more outrageous. settling is hardly an
admission of guilt - and of course i am not saying that guilty parties
never settle, just that the fact of settlement really means nothing
either way. what would be more pertinent, is if janice doe's alleged
facts indicated some degree of coercion or manipulation or betrayal of
pastoral confidence or similar behaviour, that would indicate real
abuse by sogyal. does anybody know?
cheers,
chino
> [...]
>
> Wear the yellow robe
> But if you are reckless
> You will fall into darkness
>
> Dhammapada 22:2
>
> --
> Mark Dunlop
>
mag...@my-deja.com
Here's what would be an amusing statement from a PRC spokesperson -- if
it were not for the fact that the consequences of such statements are
deadly. It is taken from an Associate Press story on 9/9 reporting
responses to a US State Department report detailing the most recent
Chinese abuses in Tibet.
``Nobody has been arrested or detained because of religious beliefs,''
Foreign Ministry spokesman Sun Yuxi said at a weekly
news briefing. ``If religious believers are arrested, it is not because
of their religious beliefs but because they have taken part in
criminal activities.''
What beautiful double-speak! Of course, religious believers practicing
their religion *is* a criminal activity in Tibet and other parts of
China. Needless to say, the AP fails to point this out. Ah well.
Probably on deadline.
So, friends, The Point, or points, that I think we all are missing in
our haste to reform Tibetan Buddhism for our Tibetan friends, follow:
1) Tibetan Buddhism is dying out. Just because a handful of us injis
are practicing and following Tibetan Buddhism, don't think that by any
means this religion will securely remain for future generations.
A Tibetan friend just recently mentioned to me his own personal agony at
having visited his relatives in Tibet. (He and his family escaped to
India in the early 60s). He saw for himself that Tibetan children are
*not* being exposed to Buddhism but are getting generous doses of
Chinese propaganda at school. They speak Chinese, they listen to Chinese
music and admire all things Chinese and think of all things Tibetan as
primitive and unworthy. The parents cannot communicate anything about
culture, never mind religion, to their children because of the chance
that this could result in a mention it to a PRC informer. Such a slip
could result in anything from losing a job to grueling self-confessions,
torture, beatings and jail terms. Many Tibetans even in India only
learn cursorily about the Dalai Lama in school or, worse, are completely
ignorant of their own traditions because of their Catholic education
(when they even can get that). I personally have seen Tibetan
children, raised here in the US, who can no longer speak Tibetan and
have no interest whatsoever in Tibetan culture. Thank you Ninja
Turtles. So, many, many Tibetans have absolutely no idea about their
own rich traditions. Make no mistake about it. This religion, perfect
or imperfect, with flawed or flawless teachers, is severely endangered.
2) Every day Tibetans suffer and even die because of persecution
inflicted upon them by the PRC. The PRC has stepped up its campaign to
eliminate Tibetan Buddhism altogether by those few who do practice it.
3) The old masters, the ones who carry the lineages and are able to
give the direct mind-to-mind transmissions upon which this tradition
depends, are passing away. Most recent loss of course was Nysoshul Khen
Rinpoche, the great Nyingma khenpo and master of Dzogchen. The real
teachings can only come in person from a master who has realized the
teachings him or herself.
So I'm just wondering. If during the Nazi liquidation of the Jews,
would we have set down to consider how we could improve and reform
Judaism? Pondered and debated how we might adapt it to our liking for
our culture? Spread rumors, substantiated or not, about different
rabbis in forums in which they were sure not to be able to defend such
accusations?
I don't think so, but then collaboration is not always conscious.
Just on that basis alone I'd say "ENOUGH ALREADY" with your polls and
petitions and so forth. Let's free Tibet first then you can start
bothering His Holiness the Dalai Lama with your brilliant ideas to
reform his religion and culture.
For those of you similarly interested in the real issues, check out the
US Dept. of State report at:
http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/1999/irf_china9
9.html
(or link here:)
<a
href="http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/1999/irf_
china99.html>
http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/1999/irf_china9
9.html</a>
Best wishes, all.
Mary
m...@well.com
http://www.state.gov/www/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/1999/
and click on Near East, then on the next page, China.
:O)
Mary
chino...@my-deja.com
mary, i must disagree that tibetan national and cultural survival is
The Point. this is laudable, and desirable, of course, and would help
safeguard the tibetan traditions of the buddhadharma. and i, and i am
sure many here, make our own efforts towards that cause.
but for injis, and even for ethnic tibetan practitioners of TB-ism, the
tibetan cause is not The Point per se. *liberation from samsara*, for
oneself and for all beings, is The Point.
and so, while i think petitions and polls will have no effect, and may
even be counterproductive, and that western-centrism and
idiosyncratically western neuroses are often at play, and that many
"facts" and interpretations are not as rigourous as they should be
before crying "abuse!" or "cult!" in a crowded shrineroom, i think the
western sangha, at least, *must* address and confront these issues
through reasoned and civil dialogue and discussion and education, for
they impact the transmission of the buddhadharma into our own
countries, and, whether abuse is going on in fact in a particular case
or not, somebody is undeniably *suffering*, and that *must* be
addressed *somehow*, or what is the point of practice in the first
place?
cheers,
chino
Mary Finnigan
>
>It is true that we only have Nicky's word for this situation,
spoken to me and other researchers about Sogyal's sexual activities. The
evidence is overwhelming. In addition to the abused women, there is also
the testimony of former members of Rigpa who were not sexually involved
with Sogyal, but who witnessed his behaviour and were appalled by it to
the extent that they left Rigpa and spoke openly about why they had done
this. I was one of the founder members of Sogyal's group in London in
1973. I too witnessed his incessant womanising -- and the acute distress
that resulted from it.
>onus must be at least equally on Sogyal to refute her evidence as on
>Nicky to prove it.
who has spoken about her experience with him, because they are telling
the truth. Everyone connected with Sogyal knows this. Proof is difficult
too. How can you prove that you have been abused, when it happens in
private? I do know though, that several people within Rigpa did witness
Sogyal humiliating members of his harem.
>
>I have heard similar allegations against Sogyal from other sources, but
>AFAIK the evidence has never been tested in court or in any equivalent
>arena. A woman called 'Janice Doe' brought a court case a few years ago,
>but, I am told, Rigpa (Sogyal's organisation) settled out of court for
>$3m.
disclosed.
Mary
chino...@my-deja.com
Mary Finnigan <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Mark Dunlop writes:
> >
> >It is true that we only have Nicky's word for this situation,
> Nicky's word substantiates the accounts of many other women who have
> spoken to me and other researchers about Sogyal's sexual activities.
The
> evidence is overwhelming. In addition to the abused women, there is
also
> the testimony of former members of Rigpa who were not sexually
involved
> with Sogyal, but who witnessed his behaviour and were appalled by it
to
> the extent that they left Rigpa and spoke openly about why they had
done
> this. I was one of the founder members of Sogyal's group in London in
> 1973. I too witnessed his incessant womanising -- and the acute
distress
> that resulted from it.
"incessant womanising", even that results in "acute distress" for
partners who believe thay have some implicit claim to sexual
exclusivity, without anything more in the way of coercion or
manipulation, simply does not meet the elements of "abuse".
mary, you must know much about sogyal. what other elements are present
in the cases you are aware of, that would raise his behaviour beyond
mere "womanising" and into actual abusiveness, such that the anti-abuse
community might take it seriously as being real abuse?
> > but the
> >onus must be at least equally on Sogyal to refute her evidence as on
> >Nicky to prove it.
> Sogyal could not refute Nicky's allegations or those of any other
women
> who has spoken about her experience with him, because they are telling
> the truth. Everyone connected with Sogyal knows this.
"everyone"? so all rigpa people who deny it, are lying?
>Proof is difficult
> too. How can you prove that you have been abused, when it happens in
> private?
sadly, this is often very true. proof *is* extremely difficult, though
our societies would be back in the dark ages - or the USA's mccarthy
era - if we threw out requirements for proof and evidence.
yet from what has so far been posted, we are not even at the point of
requiring proof in this inquiry, because even the *alleged* elements of
sogyal's "womanising", as they have so far been laid out, simply do not
rise to meet the accepted definitions for clergy sexual abuse.
sleeping around, and maybe distressing some partners, does not per se
abuse the specific power position of a clergy member / one's spiritual
counsellor. what *else* is there, even by allegation only, leaving
aside matters of "proof" for later, to suggest that this was more than
"womanising", it was actual abuse? or, contrary to the commonly
accepted definitions amongst the anti-abuse community, do you define
all "womanising" as inherently "abuse"?
>I do know though, that several people within Rigpa did witness
> Sogyal humiliating members of his harem.
okay, now *that* perhaps begins to suggest real abuse. what was the
nature of this humiliation? examples? how did these actions seek to
control and exert power over the "harem members"?
> >I have heard similar allegations against Sogyal from other sources,
but
> >AFAIK the evidence has never been tested in court or in any
equivalent
> >arena. A woman called 'Janice Doe' brought a court case a few years
ago,
> >but, I am told, Rigpa (Sogyal's organisation) settled out of court
for
> >$3m.
> The figure here is guesswork. The amount involved has never been
> disclosed.
> Mary
guesswork as well, is what this settlement says about sogyal's
innocence or guilt.
eve hardman
Hello Again,
I feel the results of your meditation, and feel that your proposed
action/ non-action is "good".
I especially like "let kharma take care of everything".
Eve
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 22:43:18 GMT, k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I wanted to add some final thoughts to this thread.
>I've done a lot of meditation.
>
>I realize that, I thought, at first a petition would
>be the answer to everything. I realize my *boo boo.*
>(mistake) I have many imperfections!
>
>I believe, in my heart, there are a lot of good
>lamas out there. I feel, now, a petition would mean
>bad *PR* to the wonderful and compassionate Tibetan
>Lamas out there.
>
>I am wondering, now, exactly what did people feel would
>be accomplished from the *petition.* Does any one
>really know? Do people feel there would be
>a *lama conference?* Now, I'm wondering.
>Regarding the petition, I personally feel
>it would go ignored, anyways.
>
>A petition, in my opinion, does not show forgiveness.
>
>For those who have sincerely been *sexually abused,*
>(whether it be by a clergy, in a family, or
>whomever), I hope that there is healing for all. I think many
>kind prayers need to be said for them.
>
>Perhaps many of us (including myself, too) have been
>looking for *Shangrila.* Shangrila, to me, was the
>place where happy dreams were made of (and where
>all our desires came true).
>
>Perhaps, it's just better to have no desires ---
>
>Anyways, I withdraw my vote for a petition. I say,
>let karma take care of everything.
>
>Let us cherish the positive things about Buddhism.
>There are so many wonderful things about Buddhism.
>To me, it is a very compassionate religion.
>
>Let us all, women and men (dharma sisters and
>dharma brothers), carry on - on the dharma
>path to *enlightenment.*
>
>Cheers!
>
>Wishing you all peace and compassion,
>Miss K. Lhamo
>
>
eve hardman
And again!
I know I personally have a lot to learn about taking everything to the
cushion.
And I do believe, as Tenzin Palmo in "Cave in the Snow" puts so well
on the chapter called "Challenges", that the onus is on the student to
find and follow the lama. However painful or glorious that search and
following might be.
Eve
On Wed, 15 Sep 1999 21:29:18 GMT, k_l...@my-deja.com wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I wanted to add some thought to this thread.
>I realize that, I thought, at first, a petition
>would be the answer to everything. I thought if
>survivors were to network, this would pave the
>way to healing. I realize I made a big "boo boo"
>(mistake). Now, I realize, one must maintain
>the right speech and motivation. A petition would
>not fall into this category. I know, in my heart,
>there are a lot of good lamas out there. A petition
>would mean bad "pr" to the wonderful, compassionate
>Tibetan Lamas out there. Perhaps here in
>the West and elsewhere, we're just not familiar enough with Tibetan
>tradition. I think, if we are to be in
>Tibetan Buddhism, we must study everything
>carefully, including traditions of
>the Gelugpa, Nyingmapa, and
>so on.
>It's so true that we must choose our
>Tibetan Lamas very carefully, especially if we are
>to take a step of refuge with them. We must ask
>questions, if we are to find the right Tibetan Lama.
>Yet, I realize
>many of us are searching for "Shangrila." It is
>the place where dreams are made of.
>
>Now, I don't know what would be accomplished from
>a petition. As Buddhists, we should be
>compassionate, kind, and forgiving. A petition
>does not show forgiveness. There should
>not be any hint of egotism. I certainly wouldn't
>want any kind of publicity (or attention) regarding
>this.
>
>I think if any one is quick to criticize Tibetan Lamas,
>we must take a look at ourselves. I can tell you all
>I'm not perfect in any way!!! NOW, I'm taking a good
>hard look at myself and understand myself better!
>
>I wonder if we can take a Zen look at all this? Any
>Zen Buddhists out there to understand this?
>
>Perhaps it's just better to have no desires :)
>
>Anyways,I withdraw my vote for a petition.
>I say, let karma
>take care of everything. Om!
>
>Let us all, men and women,
>carry on - in the dharma path to enlightenment!
>
>Wishing all peace and compassion,
>
>Sincerely,
mag...@my-deja.com
If there are no masters transmitting the traditions of Buddhism, it will
be mighty difficult to have the motivation of wanting to relieve the
suffering of Motherly Sentient Beings -- because there will be no one to
remind us that can in fact be one's motivation, or least, in as pure a
way. We'll just end up with more "I'm OK, You're OK" philosophies
running amuck.
I appreciate your reasoned response! Thanks!
Mary
PS: You may want to cut more of the initial post you are responding to
so that people can more easily read what you yourself have to say.
In article <7rts9s$ha9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
mag...@my-deja.com
I must say it is refreshing to hear the voice of fairness in this
discussion, although as I mentioned in my earlier post, it seems to me
that it is not yet the time to address these issues. (A "Let's try and
preserve Tibetan Buddhism from going extinct first, guys," post).
I find it mighty suspect that the accused are all addressed in forums
such as these where they may not be aware that such conversations are
transpiring or, even if they know, where it may be difficult to respond.
Especially if they've already passed away. Similar to British tabloid
journalism in which a subject is eviscerated and then left to, perhaps,
fight it out in court all too late -- the public's perception has been
formed. Or to US mainstream journalism which convicts the accused
before they've been given a fair trial all the time.
In any case, thanks for the clear cool breeze of reason into this
discussion.
Best wishes,
Mary
In article <7ru0e2$kl3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
chino...@my-deja.com
mag...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Chino,
>
> I must say it is refreshing to hear the voice of fairness in this
> discussion, although as I mentioned in my earlier post, it seems to me
> that it is not yet the time to address these issues. (A "Let's try
and
> preserve Tibetan Buddhism from going extinct first, guys," post).
thanks, i am happy you find some use to what i have written. and i do
think your point about TB-ism's extinction is valid, though we may be
facing (sadly) a situation like when vajrayana buddhism was
extinguished in india but lived on in tibet because of the successful
transmission there. so the oppression of tibet is all the more reason
to ensure the healthy and lasting transmission to the west. tibetan
vajrayana was not totally the same as indian vajrayana, nor will
western vajrayana be identical to tibetan vajrayana. still, we need to
face the possibility - whilst fighting for tibetan survival too - that
the next major stage in the history of the vajrayana lies in the west.
> I find it mighty suspect that the accused are all addressed in forums
> such as these where they may not be aware that such conversations are
> transpiring or, even if they know, where it may be difficult to
respond.
> Especially if they've already passed away. Similar to British tabloid
> journalism in which a subject is eviscerated and then left to,
perhaps,
> fight it out in court all too late -- the public's perception has been
> formed. Or to US mainstream journalism which convicts the accused
> before they've been given a fair trial all the time.
>
> In any case, thanks for the clear cool breeze of reason into this
> discussion.
thanks again. i will even take this opportunity to boil the conundrum
down into the simplest possible formulation i have ever heard used to
define "sexual abuse" in the context of clergy or other "professionals"
(therapists, lawyers, doctors): sexual abuse = sex + abuse of power.
okay, we have heard a lot about the sexual shenanigans that sogyal
allegedly engage(d)(s) in, but where is the "abuse of power"? we have
not seen it alleged yet, unless one is to deem all lama-student sex as
being *inherently* an abuse of power.
there *is* a developing argument, still quite controversial and by no
means generally accepted yet in the anti-abuse community, that a
"bright line" rule *should* be created, that *no* clergy-believer
sexual contact should *ever* occur. this is essentially based on the
theory, that the power relationships stemming from a pastoral
counselling situation are so inherently unequal, as between an adult
and a child, that true "consent" can never really be given.
to my mind, though, this is just one step away from catharine
mackinnon's famous radical feminist proposition that in all patriarchal
societies, including all modern western ones, heterosexual sex = rape,
always and without exception, because the societal power relationships
inherently subordinate every woman to every man, and hence, no woman
can truly give free consent to sex with a man.
now, a similar rule *is* standard now in the case of therapists, and is
slowly being introduced in the context of faculty-student sex at some
universities. but it has not yet become standard in clergy situations.
personally, whilst i believe such a rule to make perfect sense in the
therapist context, or in the christian or jewish pastoral counseling
context, i think it not reasonable or desirable in the vajrayana
setting for 2 reasons.
first, lamas are not traditionally pastoral counsellors, though we
westerners often project that role upon them, and to some degree may
even force them into it. thus, the therapeutic and confidential nature
of pastoral counselling - in which is rooted the potential for abuse of
power by manipulation of personal information or psychological
processes exposed in the expectation of there being "safe space" - is
just not part of the equation, traditionally, at least.
second, vajrayana sexual morality is simply radically different from
that of judaism or christianity. the existence of tantric/consort
sexual practices as an important (if rare for most practitioners) and
accepted feature of the religion, plus the lack of monogamous
injunctions ("what god hath put together...") and victorian sexual
morality (i mean, just *try* to find a christian minister who will
perform a polyandrous marriage!), suggests that western vajrayana will
need to find a way to preserve this feature, but do so in a way that
better educates the whole sangha on how dangerous a path it can
sometimes be, and how to prevent and heal suffering that results from
it, whether that suffering meets the definition of "abuse" or not.
however, if what the anti-sogyal posters are proposing, is that western
vajrayana must abandon completely *all* lama-student sex, as they feel
it to be so inherently unequal power-wise (at least, in the context of
modern western societies) that it is impossible for it to be freely
entered into, they should say so, and let the discussion go on from
there.
similarly, if they feel, that western vajrayana should adopt
conventional western sexual morality, rooted in the judaeo-christian
tradition, as in reading in implicit sexual territoriality, and
expectations of "fidelity" even in the absence of an explicit
commitment, or in raising an eyebrow if someone is "slutty" enough to
have more partners than "one would approve of", well then, they should
say so and let the discussion move forward from there. (evelyn had
mentioned that whilst the problem for nicky was not about "cheating",
this was not a once or twice thing for sogyal, and he had "slipped"
many times and had multiple partners - to which i have to ask, from
*where* is it that sogyal allegedly "slipped"? since he was not
married or committed to anyone expressly, it seems, nor was he an
ordained monk vowed to celibacy, from what state or condition did he
"slip" by his "womanising"? the only answer i can come up with is,
from Conventional Western Proper Sexual Mores - but when did *those*
awful things get incorporated into the buddhadharma?!)
cheers,
chino
> Best wishes,
>
> Mary
kunukia
<marg...@mdebethlen.freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>Dzogchen, in my understanding(correct me if I am wrong), has
>>no such activity involved in its process
>
>Where do you get this idea from? I have heard of just as many Dzogchen
>teachers having consorts as any other lineage.
Or more, as a percentage. After all, many if not most Dzogchen dudes
are not ordained.
k