Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche

Showing 1-23 of 23 messages
Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche pema 5/6/98 12:00 AM

About a year ago I posted on this newsgroup a response to many of Mary’s
claims about Sogyal Rinpoche. I tried really hard to cite examples that
were verifiable for anyone (e.g. quoting published sources) so that
people could judge for themselves whether to believe Mary or not.
Specifically, I believe I refuted Mary’s claims that Sogyal Rinpoche did
not write his book, that he did not properly credit Andrew Harvey or
Patrick Gaffney. Furthermore I tried to address Mary’s  belief that
Rinpoche only started teaching on Death and Dying after meeting
Christine Longaker, by quoting Christine where she directly contradicts
Mary’s version of events. At that time, I naively believed that Mary was
interested in dialog. Mary merely brushed me off as a devotee instead of
conceding that her claims were clearly contradicted by facts which were
independently verifiable by anyone reading netnews. Mary will probably
be dismayed to know that I received an avalanche of email for being
brave enough to speak up to her.

There in lies the heart of a problem. The way Mary presents herself is
much like a bully. By calling people names like "Dharmatose" she
discourages any possibility for real dialog.

For example, I have a close friend who read Mary’s posts and got quite
outraged by the falsity of Mary’s claims. She wanted to respond but
feels that the tone of Mary’s posts make it impossible for her to do so.
My friend has suffered abuse during childhood. She still has fear as an
adult that is a result of that time. Only because Mary makes it an
issue, I mention that my friend is relatively young and considered by
most men, extremely attractive. In the past two years she has received
personal teachings from Sogyal Rinpoche which she feels have really
"helped her to transform her habitual tendencies to become fearful in
certain kinds of situations."  She says it was only possible because of
the
atmosphere of complete trust.

Mary talks about events she was never present for, or claims intimate
knowledge of things that she doesn’t explain. She makes many claims that
are not true.

Recently, she claimed "most of his early disciples jumped ship." That
isn’t my perception, and I have been Rinpoche’s student for many years.
Did
she
take a poll? Did she compare how many of his disciples left versus
stayed and compared that result to other lamas who have been teaching
for so
long? She claims to have done research… What is more interesting is how
many of his oldest students have stayed with him, or in Dharma and still
consider him a great master.

Lama Tsering Everest, a female western Lama, who is also on the Mary
Finnegan list of approved, ethical, transmitters of the dharma ( at
least we agree about some things) has told the story many times of how
Sogyal Rinpoche was the Lama that first guided her into Tibetan
Buddhism. How grateful she is for the kindness he had and how it enabled
her to find her root Lama. She claims to have deep devotion and respect
for him and his ability to embody the teachings. She also will be
teaching
at his center in S.F. this summer. Anyone can go to a talk of Lama
Tsering Everest and ask her about Sogyal Rinpoche  and so we are not
forced
to take my word for it or the word of unnamed corroborating sources.
Should
I believe Lama Tsering Everest or Mary?

Mary says:
>It is possible,
>of course, that Sogyal has done this for some of his students too,
>although I find it hard to believe from a  base-path-fruit perspective
>that the experiential quality comes anywhere near Trungpa, Kalu, Norbu
>levels.

I think that this is pretty easy for anyone wishing to judge for
themselves to do so without Mary’s help. On one hand how can any of us
know what anyone else’s realization is? Many times, Mary represents
herself
as to be able to know other practitioner’s realization. Most of us,
while not
believing that we can ultimately judge anyone’s realization also
playfully
understand that each of us has some intuition or feeling about where
different
teachers are at.

Several of Sogyal Rinpoche’s older students teach publicly. Go hear
Christine
Longaker. Read her book. It seems like she has benefited quite a lot
from the teachings. Even Mary seems to like Christine. Christine claims
to owe her understanding and realization of the Dharma to Sogyal
Rinpoche.

Ian Maxwell gives Dharma talks. He completed a three year retreat and
has studied with many lamas. He was one of Sogyal Rinpoche’s earliest
students. Hundreds of people show up for his talks, I presume because
they really find them beneficial. Go hear Ian speak, talk to him, decide
for yourself if you think he has any special insight in Buddhadharma.

Patrick Gaffney edited Rinpoche’s book. He is probably Sogyal Rinpoche’s
closest disciple and one of his very first. He also gives Dharma talks
from time to time. When Penor Rinpoche gave empowerments, he invited
Patrick to have a seat  with the other Lamas receiving the empowerment!
Not only does Penor Rinpoche think Patrick is exceptional but I have
heard the same opinion voiced by several of my other teachers.


Mary says:
>And judging by reports from Sogyal's recent Easter retreat, the
>atmosphere at his teachings is still tense and rather miserable and he
>still bullies his students seomthing rotten.

I’m sure Mary wasn’t there. This phrase is so manipulative and
misleading,  as she implies that for years Rinpoche’s teachings have
been
tense and miserable. I have spoken with people who use very different
language to describe the Easter retreat. It is hard to believe that
several thousand people return year after year to attend  teachings in
an atmosphere of misery and tension that is only interrupted by sessions
of bullying.

Mary keeps discussing Sogyal Rinpoche’s training and realization as if
she followed him around since birth.

How could she possibly know what it was like for young Tulku Sogyal when
he was living with Jamyang Khyentse Chokyi Lodro? I have heard stories
from H.H. Sakya Trizin, and Nyushul Khenpo Rinpoche which paint a
different
picture. Don’t ask Mary, ask them.

Personally, I have been with Sogyal Rinpoche on many occasions when he
received days of private instruction from Dodrupchen Rinpoche, Dilgo
Khyentse Rinpoche, Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche,  and Nyushul Khenpo Rinpoche.
Maybe
Mary isn’t aware of the fact that Sogyal Rinpoche spends a lot of his
time around his masters, receiving instruction.

I have for many years, supported a monk who is studying to be a Khenpo.
Every year the Nyingma and ordained Sangha get together for a prayer
festival. In 1994, after the lawsuit was filed, the monk was present at
this gathering headed by H.H. Penor Rinpoche. According to my monk
friend, Penor Rinpoche praised the efforts of Sogyal Rinpoche, all the
work he has done in the Dharma, and how it was really important all of
us support Sogyal Rinpoche now. Should I believe Penor Rinpoche, or
Mary? (For honesty in advertising’s sake, I admit I have received
initiations and teaching from Penor Rinpoche)

Mary tries to present her views as unbiased research. But anyone who
spends a
little time looking into the basis of many of her claims can find
evidence
that directly contradicts her "facts." If she were really an unbiased
researcher, the introduction of new evidence would cause some
modification of
her views or at least and acknowledgement of how reasonable people might
come
to different conclusions. Instead she responds, as she did to me, with
accusations of devotion (guilty) and spin control. She only wants to
collect
stories of how horrible Rinpoche is, that seems to be more like a
hatchet job
than research. And because of the fact Mary claims things which are
verifiably  
untrue just to make her point, it makes me suspicious of all her other
claims.

It would be an interesting discussion to find out why students of Sogyal
Rinpoche have stayed the course despite rumors and accusations. It would
be
nice to hear the stories of people who feel that Sogyal Rinpoche really
helped
them and why. The environment here at A.R.B.T. makes that an unlikely
event,
though I have once again tried to offer another view. In fact, you don’t
have
to take my word for it, ask any of the people I have mentioned in this
post.
And please look up my post from a year ago on DejaNews and see if the
thread
sounds like I was a "devotee" engaging in "spin control" or presenting
information allowing anyone to come to their own conclusion.

Finally, there has been a lot of discussion about authenticity. Patrul
Rinpoche gave a lot of  instructions on how to evaluate a teacher in
Words of
My Perfect Teacher. I don’t believe that Patrul Rinpoche suggested this
because he thought that such evaluations were absolute  and we should
proclaim our findings of authenticity all over net news. Instead I
believe
that the point was that as a practitioner progresses along the path they
can
cause considerable harm to themselves if they cannot maintain a pure
view of
the teacher after receiving certain  teachings or empowerments. So I
think
it’s great that we share our insights and wisdom into how one can tell
whether
a teacher is qualified. But I think that when we take our perception so
seriously that we believe anyone who doesn’t see it the same way is a
fool or
worse, we lose sight of one of the basic reasons for Buddhist practice.
I
think publishing lists of qualified/unqualified teachers and belittling
those
who disagree is an example of such folly.

Diatribe finished! Sorry it was so long... At least modems are faster
and
disk drives are bigger. :)


All the best,

pema dorje

p.s. (from last year)
Just so my trip is clear. I have studied with Sogyal Rinpoche for 14
years. He is my refuge lama. It was through his great kindnes and skill
as a meditation master that I was able to connect with my root lama,
Kyabje Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche. That is just the way I put it based on
traditional ways of giving meaning to the phrases "root lama" and
"refuge lama." In reality, I don’t really make too many distinctions as
all my masters are emanations of Padmasambhava.  I am not a paid
employee of Rigpa. I do help them out. No one who works for
Rigpa knows that I am writing this and all views are
exclusively mine although it is my samsaric, clinging mind that hopes
that I share views with others.

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Mary Finnigan 5/7/98 12:00 AM

And it seems that Pema Dorje (whoever he/she is) does not know much
about Sogyal either. I will not refute her enormous outpouring of
apologia on his behalf -- except to quote the ancient
aphorism...methinks he/she doth protest too much..and also to suggest
that if Sogyal's students are afraid of challenging me on arbt...IMO
that does not say a lot for Sogyal. Also I invite Pema Dorje to visit me
and inspect my files. Listen to my tapes. Even talk to my contacts.
Finally note spelling of my surname..FinnIgan.
Mary

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Nevermind 5/7/98 12:00 AM

Well Mary, I, for one, was inclined to believe every word you had
to say about Sogyal, until the shameful and absurd Gere/Gerbil
debacle. By perpetuating one of THE most famous Urban Legends it
casts a pall of suspicion on everything else you have to say.
For someone making accusations, credibility is everything.


Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Mary Finnigan 5/7/98 12:00 AM

>
>Well Mary, I, for one, was inclined to believe every word you had
>to say about Sogyal, until the shameful and absurd Gere/Gerbil
>debacle. By perpetuating one of THE most famous Urban Legends it
>casts a pall of suspicion on everything else you have to say.
>For someone making accusations, credibility is everything.
You are comparing apples and oranges. See my post on Gerbil topic.
FYI I had never heard of *urban legends* until this nonsense came up.
Strictly a US phenomenon I think. Some of them must be true, or at least
founded in truth. Did a stint as a showbiz writer some time ago...great
tales of Hollywood debauchery -- most of them unpublishable. Eg: One
from now deceased former film star who became a Tibetan nun about what
she did to Burt Lancaster when he jumped her...
Mary

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Mick_G 5/7/98 12:00 AM

I think Mary is a loony.

Mick

Mary Finnigan wrote in message ...

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Mick_G 5/7/98 12:00 AM

I think this issue is a lot simpler than this. Have you read the Tibetan
Book of Living and Dying? Does the book ring true or not? A man's works
stand or fall on their own merit. I read the book and it is wonderful. I
incorporated one of the chants in my other chants. Great book and very
readable for non Buddhist.

I've never been to any teaching by Sogyal, but I've heard he is a good
teacher. I don't think there is anything else to say about this.

Mick

Nevermind wrote in message <3551a4c8...@news.infohouse.com>...

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Nevermind 5/7/98 12:00 AM

On Thu, 7 May 1998 08:35:11 -0700, "Mick_G" <mic...@email.msn.com>
wrote:

>I think this issue is a lot simpler than this. Have you read the Tibetan
>Book of Living and Dying? Does the book ring true or not? A man's works
>stand or fall on their own merit. I read the book and it is wonderful. I
>incorporated one of the chants in my other chants. Great book and very
>readable for non Buddhist.

Oh, I have read it. Enjoyed it immensely. Enough to go and see him
last fall. He *is* a good teacher in person. Warm-hearted, funny,
and groks the Western mindset.

As for teachers doinking students, well, what else is new? Way
too many people it seems have been poisoned by Katharine McKinnon
and Andrea Dworkin sorts, who perversely insist "all sex is rape"
and so on. This is an ugly trend in modern society. Deeply troubling,
in fact. It's gotten so bad that the politically korrekt transnational

corporations are so terrified of sexual harassment and discrimination
suits that a whole cottage industry has sprung up within Human
Resources to stamp out "imbalances of power" in sexual relationships
occurring in the workplace between boss & subordinate. Yale
University recently instituted a no teacher/student relationship
rule after a particularly nasty suit by a scorned coed.

Add to the fact that many infantile Westerners refuse to take
personal responsibility for their behavior, and you will likely
wind up with a situation in which someone like a Sogyal
Rinpoche is forced to settle one of these situations on the QT
lest an unwinnable (in the court of public opinion) nasty public
civil suit ensue.

Lest anyone need this fact hammered home again: based on what
limited knowledge I have, these were ADULTS involved in bumping
their uglies. As adults, the responsibility for their liason inheres
in themselves. Love and lust are never simple, and negative
fallout from a soured relationship is <*gasp*> a likely probability!

It should be left at this level, in my opinion, unless issues
involving genuine rape were involved. There is WAY too much
whining and kvetching by people who should be responsible for
their own behavior. There is NO obligation for a woman, even
under threat of Vajra Hell (if this in fact happened), to kowtow
to someone who's behaving in a manipulative fashion. If a person
lacks enough common sense and discriminative ability to recognize
such tactics for what they are, I'm short on sympathy. ESPECIALLY
when they then bandy lawsuits about as imagined redress for
their own volitional acts.

If Sogyal behaved in a mean-spirited fashion towards the alleged
"victims," he should be outed. The very points Mary has brought up
about people deifying their lamas as superhuman is EXACTLY the wrong
view that needs to be stamped out. In this sense, Sogyal may have
done something to further this important aim, if the allegations
have any merit (or even if they don't).

In learning to recognize and accept Dharma teachers as fallible
and above all, human, a greater service is done overall
in service of spreading the Dharma because after all, the
Dharma is all about learning to see things and accept them
as they are, no?

Cheers!


Mary Finnigan Doesn't Know Much About Sogyal Rinpoche corn...@hayboo.com 5/7/98 12:00 AM

Pema Dorje,

Thank you for an eloquent and courageous post.  To be frank, I personally do
not know any facts that refute Mary Finnigan's allegations regarding Sogyal
Rinpoche; neither do I know any facts that substantiate them.  For all I know,
every word she writes may be true, but without my own independent avenues for
verifying these allegations, I must sit squarely on the fence when it comes it
Sogyal Rinpoche.

Nonetheless, based on what I do know of my own teacher -- Jetsunma Ahkon
Lhamo, who has also made Mary's top-10 hit list of supposedly inauthentic and
abusive teachers, despite Mary's admittedly never having met her or attended a
teaching by her or having visited our temple and spoken first-hand with
Jetsunma's students -- and of the conclusions about her that Mary has felt
free to "insist" on over the Internet, I must say that I take Mary's
allegations about anything with many, many grains of salt.  I too have tried
to engage Mary in dialogue about her seeming lack of compunction in boldly
trumpeting unsubstantiated assertions of fact and black-and-white conclusions
which ignore opposing hard data or ignore opposing opinions which, unlike
hers, come from direct experience.  Rather than engage in reasoned debate,
Mary consistently resorts to the device of simply dismissing the other writer
as just a blind and duped devotee, and claims that there would be no point in
attempting to discuss anything with the other writer.  (To see these tactics
at play, check in Dejanews for the Jetsunma and Mirabella threads on a.r.b.t.
beginning in December 1997.)

I laud Mary's proclaimed aim of not letting the TB community sweep its dirt
under the rug, and I actually believe that she is sincerely motivated by a
desire to help TBism in the West. But I find her unilateral, predetermined ex
cathedra pronouncements, her unwillingness to engage in civil and reasoned
dialogue about her accusations, and her suspect "research" techniques all to
be severely flawed methodologically.  The fact that she is also turning her
lama-bashing "research" into a book for publication raises questions of its
own; after all, without lots of titillating and dramatic allegations, the book
would have no raison d'etre and far less appeal to the consumer.  Mary has
asserted on this ng that HH the Dalai Lama has encouraged her in her efforts,
but I wonder when and how this happened, and with what specificity Mary
described her undertaking to HHDL?  While I can certainly see HHDL supporting
the notion that TBism in the West must closely and honestly examine its
failings, I do have some difficulty buying the proposition that he had in mind
by that the sort of unsubstantiated (and frequently unsubstantiable) prejudged
accusations about her least favorite lamas that Mary has often unloosed in
this ng.

One is left to wonder:  Has Mary ever stepped back far enough from this
project and her vendettas for certain lamas to truly examine whether she has
gotten so seduced by and attached to certain predetermined views that it is
affecting her capacity to be objective?  I cannot say, but would hope that she
regularly does a reality check -- and the little gerbil exchange here frankly
does not inspire much confidence that she does.

Mary wrote to another poster that to compare the gerbil thread with her other
pronouncements here is to compare apples and oranges.  I would hope that she
reflects closely on this, and does not yet again airily wave away something
that challenges her comfort in her apparent prejudgments.  Contrary to what
Mary believes, the gerbil thread is a wonderfully clearcut illustration of
what is wrong with her methodology and her stone-deafness in the face of
opposing information.  It also yet again illustrates the naive view that
anything that appears in print in the US simply must be true, reflecting a
fundamental misassessment of relevant US law and the US legal system.
(Hopefully, she better apprehends relevant UK law and the UK legal system,
which are far more plaintiff-friendly than those of the US; her lama-bashing
book will presumably first appear in the UK, and so will potentially be
subject to stricter legal scrutiny there.)

Finally, Pema, how fortunate for you that you have found your teachers in
Sogyal Rinpoche and Kyabje Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche; how fortunate for Mary that
she has found her teacher in Choegyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche; how fortunate
for me that I have found my teachers in HH Penor Rinpoche and Jetsunma Ahkon
Lhamo.  Interesting that these are all Nyingma lamas...

May all lamas have long life and unfailing health, and may they unceasingly
expound the dharma; may the great Nyingma school flourish and bring untold
benefit to countless beings.  I think Mary would at least find common ground
with us in this wish.

All the best,

David

In article <355103...@synopsys.com>,


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Burt Lancaster and the Ani (Was Re: Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche) corn...@hayboo.com 5/7/98 12:00 AM

In article <IHdbfFA7...@pema.demon.co.uk>,

Assuming this *were* true (and who *knows* whether it is), how exactly does
disseminating this tantalizing, juicy little tidbit help even one single being
toward enlightenment?  Or is it that some folks just never met a piece of
gossip they didn't like and could resist passing on?

Ain't samsara seductive?  Hey, maybe we could even get our own little Tibetan
Buddhist supermarket tabloid going . . .  "Lurid Lama Lewdness!!!"  "Monastic
Monkey Business!!!"  "Ordained Orgy!!!"  "I Was a Teenage Nun!!!"  "Gere
Visualizes Gerbils!!!"

Jeesh.

David

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Michael B. 5/7/98 12:00 AM

....thank you pema for your post giving an alternate view of SR that
gives specific examples and does not seem to be merely based on
hearsay...Michael

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Mary Finnigan 5/7/98 12:00 AM

 Mick_G writes

>I think Mary is a loony.
Ah at last, a sane response:-)

Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche James Foster 5/7/98 12:00 AM

This is my (un-asked for) two-cents worth.
I think Mary provides a valuable service to this NG and the TB community
at large.  We have a tendancy to view our respective lineages, our
respective teachers and even the entire spectrum of TB with *very*
rose-tinted glasses.
We need to have at least one voice saying "Take another look, it ain't
so!" whether we agree with her or not.  Personally, there are a couple of
teachers on Mary's "list" that I find wonderful and genuine- and the rest
on her list I simply do not know and so cannot say.  Because I disagree
with her does not mean I think she should stoip, however.  People need to
be aware, and enter the Dharma or a teacher/student relationship with eyes
wide open, and sun-glasses off.
If you are interested in receiving teachings from a teacher that you have
heard less than glowing reports about (from Mary or anyone else) use that
as an opportunity.  Like Shakyamuni admonished his disciples not to take
his words as truth at face value, but to test them for themselves- so
should you test this teacher and his or her teachings for your self.  If
you find that the disparaging accounts were innaccurate- then your faith
in your new guru will be even more strong for having well investigated.
This need not be a maliscious or rumor-mongering affair, nothing like "Oh,
I'm going to see if I can get the dirt on you!" but a genuine and sincere
effort to reflect upon the teachings and teacher.


Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche Michael McLoughlin 5/8/98 12:00 AM

In article <3551a4c8...@news.infohouse.com>, nos...@nospam.org
says...

Yeah yeah yeah, so Mary goes a bit over the top on occasion (ok then most
of the time). And believes that newspaper editors are higher beings who
work on this earth to bring us the truth and that anyone who does not
believe their holy writ is sadly deluded. However your argument that it
undermines all she says about SR is a bit OTT in itself. SR may be Mary's
particular bugbear but many of the posters in this NG have had first hand
accounts from reliable people over many years that suggest that SR is far
from as white as he is painted, it's not the odd rumour. Despite of her
tendency to go into tabloid mode at the least provocation Mary Finnegan
does have the lowdown on Sogyal, I'm afraid.

M.

PS Mary, what's the story on Marianne Faithfull and the mars bar, then?

>


Mary Finnegan Doesn't Know much about Sogyal Rinpoche David McClanahan 5/8/98 12:00 AM

Mary, I'm new here, but you certainly have no (zero) credibility after the
Gere comment.
So now I can't believe anything else you propose.

Mary Finnigan <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<bNt$dFA7LX...@pema.demon.co.uk>...

Burt Lancaster and the Ani Mary Finnigan 5/8/98 12:00 AM

>
>Assuming this *were* true (and who *knows* whether it is), how exactly does
>disseminating this tantalizing, juicy little tidbit help even one single being
>toward enlightenment?
Zina Rachevsky. Born Paris 1932. Died Thubten Choling Monastery, Nepal
1974. Film star, high fashion model, society jet-setter. Ordained nun by
Trijang Rinpoche 1969. Thereafter known as Thubten Changchub Phalmo. Met
Lamas Thubeten Yeshe and Thubten Zopa Rinpoche in Darjeeling 1967. Moved
with them to Nepal 1969. Founded Kopan meditation centre, then known as
Ogmin Changchub Choling, which developed into the Foundation for the
Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition - now the largest dharma
organisation in the world.
Mary

Burt Lancaster and the Ani corn...@hayboo.com 5/8/98 12:00 AM

In article <Cq3J0LAT...@pema.demon.co.uk>,
  Mary Finnigan <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote (in reply to David's response
to her):

Mary,

Yes, I am familiar with the life of the wonderful Zina Rachevsky, who --
correct me if I am wrong -- is also the first Westerner whose tulku, a boy,
has been recognized.  Count me firmly among Zina's many admirers.

However, notwithstanding Zina's countless meritorious contributions to the
Dharma, your posting blatantly sets up a strawman, a diversion from the point
I was making.  In the earlier message you posted, the one to which I responded
with the question "How does this . . . help even one single being toward
enlightenment," you wrote:

In article <IHdbfFA7...@pema.demon.co.uk>,
  Mary Finnigan <ma...@pema.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> You are comparing apples and oranges. See my post on Gerbil topic.
> FYI I had never heard of *urban legends* until this nonsense came up.
> Strictly a US phenomenon I think. Some of them must be true, or at least
> founded in truth. Did a stint as a showbiz writer some time ago...great
> tales of Hollywood debauchery -- most of them unpublishable. Eg: One
> from now deceased former film star who became a Tibetan nun about what
> she did to Burt Lancaster when he jumped her...

Now, as much as I admire Zina Rachevsky, I utterly fail to see the link
between "what she did to Burt Lancaster when he jumped her..." and her service
to the Dharma, her realizations and accomplishments, etc.  Are you attempting
to say that *because* Burt Lancaster "jumped" Zina, she proceeded to take
robes and serve the Dharma? (I presume that UK slang's use of this verb is
every bit as salacious as that of US slang, in which it could mean either that
Lancaster sexually assaulted her or else, with her consent, "jumped her
bones," as they say.)  Is there a direct causality here, Mary, that is
relevant to Zina-as-nun, Zina-as-practitioner, Zina-as-servant-of-the-Dharma?
If so, please make that clear; your sentence is awkwardly worded and could be
interpreted either way.

If not, I emphatically repeat my question:  How exactly does disseminating


this tantalizing, juicy little tidbit help even one single being toward
enlightenment?  Or was it just irresistable to gratuitously slip in still
another steaming chunk of gossip, even as you retreat from your
unflinching "insistence" on Richard Gere's gerbil-stuffing ways?  Do you draw
any distinction at all between (a) the way you used to write when you were a
"showbiz writer" whose trade was to bandy about "unpublishable" "great tales
of Hollywood debauchery" and (b) the way you now write when discussing lamas,
anis, etc. in a forum purportedly devoted to discussing Tibetan Buddhism
rather than the headlines of tabloids past and present?

John Pettit said it best in his post yesterday regarding gossip and Milarepa.
 I wish I could be as succinct as he, but hey, we lawyers tend to get wordy...
And we surely don't fall for glaringly diversionary tactics like strawmen.

No more gratuitous gossip, please.

David


-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Mary Finnigan Doesn't Know Much About Sogyal Rinpoche lita 5/8/98 12:00 AM

David De Silva writes:

 To be frank, I personally do
> not know any facts that refute Mary Finnigan's allegations regarding Sogyal
> Rinpoche; neither do I know any facts that substantiate them.  For all I know,
> every word she writes may be true, but without my own independent avenues for
> verifying these allegations, I must sit squarely on the fence when it comes it
> Sogyal Rinpoche.

        David, I am glad you are able to reserve judgment on the Sogyal R.
issue.  It was brave to say that you simply don't know enough to form an
opinion.  However, as you may have expected, I do take issue with your
opinion of Mary as relates to Jetsunma (AKA Catherine Zeoli).  You note
that:


> my own teacher -- Jetsunma Ahkon
> Lhamo, who has also made Mary's top-10 hit list of supposedly inauthentic and
> abusive teachers, despite Mary's admittedly never having met her or attended a
> teaching by her or having visited our temple and spoken first-hand with
> Jetsunma's students -- and of the conclusions about her that Mary has felt
> free to "insist" on over the Internet, I must say that I take Mary's
> allegations about anything with many, many grains of salt.  

        I must disagree.  Mary has spoken with many people who have been
members of KPC.  She may not have first hand knowledge, but I do.  In my
opinion, nothing Mary has alleged against your teacher is untrue.  As
you know, I had the misfortune of personally experiencing Alyce's
abusive behavior.  Having spent a substantial amount of time with Alyce
and her family, I was dismayed at how she gossiped about both former and
current Sangha members who had come to her with personal problems.  I
find this particularly reprehensible for two reasons.  First, if she is
consulted as a minister, she has a duty to maintain confidentiality.
She does not.  Secondly, Alyce herself has made gossip an issue.  Her
web site clearly notes that Alyce dislikes gossip of any kind.  The
truth is that she hates gossip when it shows her in a negative light.
You know, I have no problem with her teachings, it's just that she
doesn't seem to implement the practices she preaches.  I may not agree
with Mary on everything, but, based on MY personal experience, I do
believe every word she has written about Jetsunma.  Speaking out against
Jetsunma not only does not indicate that Mary is wrong about other
issues, it has actually helped convince me that there may be something
to her allegations about other abuses. (Richard Gere excluded)


> Rather than engage in reasoned debate,
> Mary consistently resorts to the device of simply dismissing the other writer
> as just a blind and duped devotee, and claims that there would be no point in
> attempting to discuss anything with the other writer.  (To see these tactics
> at play, check in Dejanews for the Jetsunma and Mirabella threads on a.r.b.t.
> beginning in December 1997.)
 
        Well, is there?

> I laud Mary's proclaimed aim of not letting the TB community sweep its dirt
> under the rug, and I actually believe that she is sincerely motivated by a
> desire to help TBism in the West.

        Couldn't agree with you more.  We need more watchdogs IMO.

>But I find her unilateral, predetermined ex
> cathedra pronouncements, her unwillingness to engage in civil and reasoned
> dialogue about her accusations, and her suspect "research" techniques all to
> be severely flawed methodologically.  

        What do you know about her "suspect" research techniques and
methodology?  

The fact that she is also turning her
> lama-bashing "research" into a book for publication raises questions of its
> own;
        So, any book that "outs" questionable teachers shouldn't be written.
Or should it only be written if it does not have any negative anecdotes
about your teacher?
IMHO, research like Mary's is important.  We get so many questions here
at arbt about how one goes about finding a reliable teacher.  Hey, when
I look for a teacher, I want to know all the stuff, good and bad, before
making a lifelong commitment.  Most people, I think, would prefer to
make an informed decision.  If Mary and others have information about
teachers then I for one, want to hear it.  OK, I don't suggest taking
her book or any book for that matter, as gospel.  As Evelyn often tells
newbies, 'examine all available information'.

 


> the gerbil thread is a wonderfully clearcut illustration of
> what is wrong with her methodology and her stone-deafness in the face of
> opposing information.

        David, you're reaching here.  I don't think she ever took the gerbil
thread seriously enough to hold it up as an example of her
"methodology".


 
>It also yet again illustrates the naive view that
> anything that appears in print in the US simply must be true,

        Who are you saying hold this belief that the press is infallible?

> her lama-bashing
> book will presumably first appear in the UK, and so will potentially be
> subject to stricter legal scrutiny there.)

        So now you are saying that once her book does appear, if it is
published in Great Britain, you are more likely to believe what is
written?

> Finally, Pema, how fortunate for you that you have found your teachers in
> Sogyal Rinpoche and Kyabje Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche; how fortunate for Mary that
> she has found her teacher in Choegyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche; how fortunate
> for me that I have found my teachers in HH Penor Rinpoche and Jetsunma Ahkon
> Lhamo.  Interesting that these are all Nyingma lamas...
>
> May all lamas have long life and unfailing health, and may they unceasingly
> expound the dharma; may the great Nyingma school flourish and bring untold
> benefit to countless beings.  I think Mary would at least find common ground
> with us in this wish.
>
> All the best,
>
> David

P.S. One last question, when you say "May all lamas" are you using
discerning judgment?  Do you believe that anyone holding the title of
"lama" is necessarily worthy of your devotion?  Is is possible that this
could be part of an attachment to a title? (Just a thought;-))
Take care of yourself,
lita  

Mary FinnIgan Don't Know Much shiloh-x 5/8/98 12:00 AM
On March 5, 1998, Mary FinnIgan wrote
what are we doing
here other than gossiping? We are not meditating, we are not working, we
are not performing acts of charity. I may be irretrievably locked into a
journalistic mind-set, but it seems to me that cyber space consists
almost entirely of gossip.
 
Mary F. is basically a gossip columnist of tabloid quality posturing as one who would perform the service of protecting newbies from unscrupulous teachers.

But who will protect the naïve from the likes of Mary ?

-shiloh-x

Burt Lancaster and the Ani Mary Finnigan 5/8/98 12:00 AM

Has anyone else noticed how the whiff of blood brings out the hyenas?
And how seriously western Tib. Budhs. take themselves? And I wonder how
many closet tabloid readers there are out there?
Mary

Mary Finnigan Doesn't Know Much About Sogyal Rinpoche corn...@hayboo.com 5/9/98 12:00 AM

In article <35533F...@erols.com>,
  li...@erols.com wrote:
>
> David De Silva writes:

Lita,

That's "David da Silva Cornell"; we Portuguese tend to have a thing for long
surnames.  If you're going to shorten it, please use "David Cornell"; Spanish
do double surnames in father-mother order, but Portuguese (usually) do it
mother-father, and "da Silva" is from my mother, so would not (normally) be
used alone.  (Exceptions exist, e.g., former Brazilian president Fernando
Collor de Mello, who shortened to Collor because his mother's family was
prominent in politics.)

> >  To be frank, I personally do
> > not know any facts that refute Mary Finnigan's allegations regarding
Sogyal
> > Rinpoche; neither do I know any facts that substantiate them.  For all I
know,
> > every word she writes may be true, but without my own independent avenues
for
> > verifying these allegations, I must sit squarely on the fence when it
comes it
> > Sogyal Rinpoche.
>
>         David, I am glad you are able to reserve judgment on the Sogyal R.
> issue.  It was brave to say that you simply don't know enough to form an
> opinion.

Nothing brave about it, Lita.  It's the only approach I can legitimately take.
 It never ceases to amaze me when folks pronounce knowingly and emphatically
on things they have zero direct, personal knowledge of.  Sitting on the fence
is the only reasonable thing one could do; anything else would be just plain
stupid.

> However, as you may have expected, I do take issue with your
> opinion of Mary as relates to Jetsunma (AKA Catherine Zeoli).

Yes, Lita, I *would* expect that.  ;-)

> You note
> that:
> > my own teacher -- Jetsunma Ahkon
> > Lhamo, who has also made Mary's top-10 hit list of supposedly inauthentic
and
> > abusive teachers, despite Mary's admittedly never having met her or
attended a
> > teaching by her or having visited our temple and spoken first-hand with
> > Jetsunma's students -- and of the conclusions about her that Mary has felt
> > free to "insist" on over the Internet, I must say that I take Mary's
> > allegations about anything with many, many grains of salt.
>
>         I must disagree.  Mary has spoken with many people who have been
> members of KPC.

If she has, Mary has never, AFAIK, said so in this forum.   Perhaps she told
you that in private correspondence.  I assume that neither one of you would
count you, Lita, in that "many people," as you have never been a member of KPC
or a student of Jetsunma's, by your own admission in previous postings.

It remains 100% true that Mary has not personally been to KPC, or spoken with
Jetsunma, or received teachings from her.  Are these anonymous "many members
of KPC" with whom Mary has spoken a self-selected sample of people with
complaints?  It seems obvious that, if she is to attempt any impartiality and
objectivity in researching Jetsunma and KPC, she should personally experience
the center and speak directly with some of the many, many members who have
only positive things to say about her.  The latter *far* outnumber those with
negative things to say, IMO.  Please be clear that I am decidedly *not*
advocating that Mary or you or anyone else just *ignore* any negative
accusations.  What I *am* advocating is that one not issue papal
pronouncements in which opinion based on biased information is dressed up as
fact.

> She may not have first hand knowledge, but I do.

In a sense.  As noted above, you have never been either a member of KPC or a
student of Jetsunma's.

As you have made clear in several postings here, though, you do basically hold
a grudge against Jetsunma.  If you are going to continue to assert some sort
of insider insight into Jetsunma on this ng, perhaps it would be fair to first
issue a disclaimer noting the nature -- and the duration -- of your exposure
to her as well as what exactly you hold against her.  Although you have
written me mentioning the fundamental source of your negativity toward
Jetsunma, I don't recall that you have ever disclosed it here on a.r.b.t.  But
since you are not at all reluctant to make assertions here on the basis of
your "personal experience" with Jetsunma, it seems only fair that you also
provide readers with some needed context and permit them to judge for
themselves whether your statements are wholly unbiased or whether they reflect
something more personal and highly subjective.

My own bias is this:  I accept Jetsunma -- and HH Penor Rinpoche -- as my
teacher, I am a member of KPC, but I am in no way a paid employee of KPC.  Yet
if you or Mary ever came up with verifiable, objective, devastating criticisms
of Jetsunma or KPC, I guess I would have to genuinely reevaluate my
involvement.  Still, I have heard what you and Mary have had to say so far,
and from both my direct personal involvement and from the many KPC students
whose sincerity and accomplishment deeply impress me, I know there are enough
errors and omissions in the criticisms to date for me to recognize them as
either hogwash or absurdly out of context.

> In my
> opinion, nothing Mary has alleged against your teacher is untrue.

Most of what she has alleged is opinion masquerading as fact; it is difficult
to call someone else's subjective opinion either "true" or "false."  Of the
remainder, what I have seen are either wholly false or utterly lacking in
crucial additional information or context.

> As
> you know, I had the misfortune of personally experiencing Alyce's
> abusive behavior.  Having spent a substantial amount of time with Alyce
> and her family, I was dismayed at how she gossiped about both former and
> current Sangha members who had come to her with personal problems.

See my comments above regarding the potential subjective bias underlying your
personal experience of what you have purported is Jetsunma's "abusive
behavior."

> I
> find this particularly reprehensible for two reasons.  First, if she is
> consulted as a minister, she has a duty to maintain confidentiality.
> She does not.

I have never seen or heard such from her or about her.  This is not say that I
know what *you* have experienced -- only that I would need far more evidence
to be convinced than your allegation alone.  But I'm open to more data.

> Secondly, Alyce herself has made gossip an issue.  Her
> web site clearly notes that Alyce dislikes gossip of any kind.  The
> truth is that she hates gossip when it shows her in a negative light.

Sounds like your subjective opinion, not cold hard fact.  Like all opinions, I
respect it, but it runs counter to my own and fails to provide me any
verifiable facts I might use to retool my own opinion.

> You know, I have no problem with her teachings,

Indeed.  They do appear to have been sufficient to whet your appetite for
dharma and set you on the path in the first place.  Prior to meeting Jetsunma,
were you a practitioner?  Regardless of whether your personal experience with
Jetsunma has appeared externally to be a "positive" or a "negative" one for
you, it does appear there was at least *some* dharma-benefit to you in the
exposure, no?  Isn't it taught that tulkus don't really give a hoot about what
you think of them; they simply manifest in the form that will be of greatest
benefit to beings?  Can you say with a straight face that the first drops of
dharma you received from Jetsunma's teachings do not continue to benefit you?
 Even if I bought all the accusations you and Mary have made about her, and
even if I decided KPC was some wacked-out cult and I ran to the other side of
the world, I could not say such a thing -- the fact would remain, I received
this teaching and that teaching from her, and would always be grateful.

> it's just that she
> doesn't seem to implement the practices she preaches.

In your opinion.  Based on MY personal experience, she absolutely *lives*
them.  Both you and I have personal experience, Lita, mine as a student, yours
as a non-student who knew Jetsunma for a time in a very different setting.
Assuming arguendo that both experiences are subjectively "true," is yours
alone objectively "The Truth"?

> I may not agree
> with Mary on everything, but, based on MY personal experience, I do
> believe every word she has written about Jetsunma.  Speaking out against
> Jetsunma not only does not indicate that Mary is wrong about other
> issues, it has actually helped convince me that there may be something
> to her allegations about other abuses. (Richard Gere excluded)

Thank Buddha you threw in that parenthetical, Lita; I was beginning to worry
that you too would vehemently "insist" on the veracity of that (homophobic)
titillating tall tale...  Phew!!!   ;-)

> > Rather than engage in reasoned debate,
> > Mary consistently resorts to the device of simply dismissing the other
writer
> > as just a blind and duped devotee, and claims that there would be no point
in
> > attempting to discuss anything with the other writer.  (To see these
tactics
> > at play, check in Dejanews for the Jetsunma and Mirabella threads on
a.r.b.t.
> > beginning in December 1997.)
>
>         Well, is there?

Absolutely.  I've been proven wrong before and fully admitted it.  But from
what I've seen so far from you and Mary, y'all ain't got the goods.  Now, if
Mary had ever written me -- whether here or privately -- to calmly
substantiate some of her allegations, or to rebut my criticisms of her
methodology and of her reasoning, I'd have truly weighed the additional
evidence and her defenses.  Mary has never done me that favor. (Gee, Pema
Dorje even got invited to the UK to pore through Mary's files, talk to her
contacts, etc. -- how come I never got that offer about her "Jetsunma files"?
 I mean, her "Alyce Zeoli files," since you and Mary never can bring
yourselves to refer to her by the title HH Penor Rinpoche et al. call her, or
by the name (Ahkon Lhamo) he gave her.)  Instead, during the Mirabella flap,
Mary simply talked about me in the third person, dismissed me as a crazed
cultie (boring ol' lawyer that I am!), and refused to substantiate her
position.  (Verifiable by perusing those threads on Dejanews.)  Yeah, those
tactics are *really* gonna inspire my confidence in her credibility and
objectivity.  I was open to being debated with and persuaded of my
incorrectness -- it wouldn't be the first time -- but instead she fled from
criticism.

>
> > I laud Mary's proclaimed aim of not letting the TB community sweep its
dirt
> > under the rug, and I actually believe that she is sincerely motivated by a
> > desire to help TBism in the West.
>
>         Couldn't agree with you more.  We need more watchdogs IMO.

Better be careful, Lita -- you (and Mary) and I are on common ground here....
 Yet, as someone else put it in a very good post here today, who will watch
the watchdogs?  And especially the *self-appointed* watchdogs?

> >But I find her unilateral, predetermined ex
> > cathedra pronouncements, her unwillingness to engage in civil and reasoned
> > dialogue about her accusations, and her suspect "research" techniques all
to
> > be severely flawed methodologically.
>
>         What do you know about her "suspect" research techniques and
> methodology?

What she has told this ng of them, and what she has acknowledged not ever
doing, e.g., meeting Jetsunma in person, visiting KPC in person and
interviewing folks there to get opposing viewpoints, etc.

> The fact that she is also turning her
> > lama-bashing "research" into a book for publication raises questions of
its
> > own;
>         So, any book that "outs" questionable teachers shouldn't be written.
> Or should it only be written if it does not have any negative anecdotes
> about your teacher?

Lita, didn't we learn in law school how a financial stake in something
*always* potentially affects credibility?  I'm not saying folks should
*dismiss* Mary's forthcoming book out of hand on the ground that it is a
commercial effort, I'm just saying it's wise, in cases where financial gain
may increase the more scandalous the allegation, to subject the allegations to
extremely heightened scrutiny.  Seems sorta commonsense, don't you think?

> IMHO, research like Mary's is important.  We get so many questions here
> at arbt about how one goes about finding a reliable teacher.  Hey, when
> I look for a teacher, I want to know all the stuff, good and bad, before
> making a lifelong commitment.

Bingo, Lita, you hit the nail on the head.  We agree 100%.  But surely you
also see the inherent risks of rumormongering and distortion that a forum like
this provides?  If not, check out Dejanews for Liguo Sun et al.  So it's back
to the problem of accountability, i.e.:  Who's gonna watch the self-appointed
watchdogs?  "Facts" *literally* materialize out of thin air on this medium --
that's why, regarding those seeking advice on finding a teacher, I have felt
the best postings here are the ones that describe method, like Evelyn's,
rather than Mary's papal pronouncements:  "He's the real thing.  But HE isn't,
and that other one is a charlatan, and this one's a TV-watching womanizer, and
. . ."  Give the seeker the method, the criteria, and let her decide for
herself -- how could someone else's subjective opinion ever replace such an
approach?

Actually, I'd also like to amend your statement to:  "Hey, when I look for a
teacher, I want to know all the VERIFIABLY TRUE stuff, good and bad, before
making a lifelong commitment."  Would you agree with the addition of these two
little words?

> Most people, I think, would prefer to
> make an informed decision.  If Mary and others have information about
> teachers then I for one, want to hear it.

Hopefully then you'll also want to hear countervailing criticisms of shoddy
reasoning, unsupported allegations, and facts taken WAAAAAAAAAAAY out of
context.

> OK, I don't suggest taking
> her book or any book for that matter, as gospel.  As Evelyn often tells
> newbies, 'examine all available information'.

PRECISELY.

> > the gerbil thread is a wonderfully clearcut illustration of
> > what is wrong with her methodology and her stone-deafness in the face of
> > opposing information.
>
>         David, you're reaching here.  I don't think she ever took the gerbil
> thread seriously enough to hold it up as an example of her
> "methodology".

Lita, so far you're the only one here who has posted about this and *doesn't*
think it affects her credibility or reflect on her other "I insist"-type
postings. In my experience, any given individual tends to have a remarkable
consistency in reasoning technique and in willingness to buy into unsupported
"dirt," regardless of whether it's within a "serious" context or a more
"showbiz" context.  Moreover, very often, one encapsulates in something
seemingly trivial an important truth about one's approach.  (BTW, homophobic
garbage like the gerbil story is hardly "trivial" or "non-serious" in my book.
 People experience *real* harm and *real* suffering because of gay-hating
attitudes fostered by such drivel.)  In my opinion, and it appears others
agree, Mary did precisely that with her repeated insistence on patent b.s.
It's not like she put in emoticons showing she was "just joshing," Lita -- she
actually chose to *believe* that hooey, and to ignore the reality check
everyone else offered her.

> >It also yet again illustrates the naive view that
> > anything that appears in print in the US simply must be true,
>
>         Who are you saying hold this belief that the press is infallible?

Why, Mary, of course.  She has never indicated otherwise, and it underpins the
decisive authority she gives to any allegation that appears in print.  How
many times has she cited the "fact" that of course an allegation regarding,
say, a wealthy celebrity would never have gotten published unless it were
true, because of course the magazine editors would be quaking in their boots
that Mr./Ms. Rich would sue them otherwise?

> > her lama-bashing
> > book will presumably first appear in the UK, and so will potentially be
> > subject to stricter legal scrutiny there.)
>
>         So now you are saying that once her book does appear, if it is
> published in Great Britain, you are more likely to believe what is
> written?

No; I'm only saying that I hope that Mary puts me in the book, because
whenever it comes out in the UK I'll be much more likely than here in the US
to sue her for libel and make enough to finally pay off the last of my student
loans!  ;-)

> > Finally, Pema, how fortunate for you that you have found your teachers in
> > Sogyal Rinpoche and Kyabje Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche; how fortunate for Mary
that
> > she has found her teacher in Choegyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche; how
fortunate
> > for me that I have found my teachers in HH Penor Rinpoche and Jetsunma
Ahkon
> > Lhamo.  Interesting that these are all Nyingma lamas...
> >
> > May all lamas have long life and unfailing health, and may they
unceasingly
> > expound the dharma; may the great Nyingma school flourish and bring untold
> > benefit to countless beings.  I think Mary would at least find common
ground
> > with us in this wish.
> >
> > All the best,
> >
> > David
>
> P.S. One last question, when you say "May all lamas" are you using
> discerning judgment?  Do you believe that anyone holding the title of
> "lama" is necessarily worthy of your devotion?  Is is possible that this
> could be part of an attachment to a title? (Just a thought;-))
> Take care of yourself,
> lita


One last answer:  Lita, how about simply joining me in the wish, and when we
say "all lamas" together, you can visualize whomever you wish, and I'll
visualize whomever I wish?  The whole point was to get away from "My/Your Lama
= Your/My Scoundrel" mentality and instead remind us that we do have common
ground and interlocking ties.  Especially so since all the lamas I cited are
Nyingma lamas, and so the lineages of Mary and Pema (and you?) and I must all
come together somewhere back there....

Well anyway, it seems like *that* little exercise failed miserably....  Jeesh.
 ;-)

Oh, one more last answer:  What "title" is it I am getting attached to, Lita?
 "Lama"?  The word means simply "guru" or "teacher"; it's more a principle or
an energy than any given individual (or is that just some cultish nonsense I
picked up at KPC?), and I don't think a true lama necessarily bears any title
whatsoever -- although most of the ones I view as lamas do happen to bear the
title.

Take care of yourself, too, Lita, and all the best to you.

David

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Mary Finnigan Doesn't Know Much About Sogyal Rinpoche Mary Finnigan 5/9/98 12:00 AM

What jolly fun to watch two lawyers slogging it out on Usenet - the Lita
and David Show. High entertainment value and also educational. Both are
young and recently qualified I think. Testing their advocacy perhaps,
but from personally committed positions? Compare their rhetoric and
judge for yourselves. It should be obvious why I refrain from jousting
with David. OTH, thank you Lita for your support, cool presentation,
precise language and generous spirit. David, you too are welcome to
peruse my files which contain both pro and anti Jetsunma material --
except for testimony from several terrified ex members of KPC whose
requests for anonymity I continue to respect.
Mary

Mary Finnigan Doesn't Know Much About Sogyal Rinpoche corn...@hayboo.com 5/9/98 12:00 AM

In article <rbmToHAT...@pema.demon.co.uk>,

Mary,

Glad we can provide some amusement for you, although I'm sure it's not as
riveting as Hollywood hijinks or Dharma debauchery.  Anyway, for the record,
I'm not so young and not so newly qualified.  Thanks for the compliment,
though.

And yes, Mary, it *is* obvious why you refrain from "jousting" with me.  As
with Pema Dorje's comments to you, you have never addressed specific
criticisms, but instead routinely resort to blanket dismissals.  Since you are
fond of aphorisms, I will tell you that the two that come immediately to mind
each time you refuse to "put your money where your mouth is" are (1) "the
Emperor has no clothes" and (2) "there's no there there."

Mary, I'm sure you're a lovely person, and I'd rather enjoy visiting
the UK to peruse your files and discuss your methods and logic over a nice
cuppa.  And in return, I invite you to come visit KPC and finally meet, in
person, our deluded and abused little cult.  We should both promise to leave
our preconceptions at home, though, don't you think?

All the best,

David

PS:  What exactly is it that these former KPC members are "terrified" of?  Is
KPC now being linked with The Mob or something?  Is someone now alleging that
KPC hunts down and shoots former members?  That we control the banks and will
foreclose on their homes?  What?  "Enquiring minds want to know."

PPS:  Reality check available at http://www.tara.org

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Mary Finnigan Doesn't Know Much About Sogyal Rinpoche Konchog Norbu 5/10/98 12:00 AM

Mary Finnigan wrote:
>
> What jolly fun to watch two lawyers slogging it out on Usenet - the Lita
> and David Show.

That's spooky--Mary and I had the same thought! Though I must
say it makes "Titanic" seem like a newsreel.

Hey--ya'll are never going to agree on this, everyone's views
have been exhaustively expressed, can't we discuss something
more beneficial, if we have to talk? Like what was the karmic
cause for rebirth as that gerbil...?

xo,
Konchog

More topics »