Suppose Soygal wrote that book. One can write well but still be beastly in person.

Two, Sogyal did not write that book by himself. He needed help from others persons.

Quote

(Andrew Harvey)later, in 1990, he would collaborate with Sogyal Rinpoche and Patrick Gaffney in the writing of The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying.

[webcache.googleusercontent.com]


David C Lane, professor of religion stated that a persons ability to write a good book proves nothing of whether the person is worth consorting with in person.

I can tell you that I was impressed with written material by a particular guru.

Because of that material I was glad to go to a lecture given in person by that particular guru and hoped to find assistance for my dharma practice.

Much to my dismay the guru behaved with vile manners, acted like a spoilt brat, and his behavior was excused because he was, by his own self claim, an enlightened God Man.

One other person left and I was glad to leave too. This proved to my satisfaction that a fellow may write well but still be quite nasty in person.

There are a legion of famous writers who wrote beautiful and inspiring work and who were horrid to live with.

David Lane says this about Adi Da, a very abusive guru who was endorsed by Ken Wilber on grounds that Adi Da wrote well.

Quote

As I mentioned to Wilber in print and in person (I first wrote the
Paradox of Da Free John back in 1985 as a direct response to
Wilber's hype) just because one writes well does not mean by
extension that he is an embodiment of the highest truth or
realization. He could be quite the opposite. Wilber repeatedly
confuses the message with the medium, believing that if someone
writes well or beautifully or transcendentally that he/she is a
Master by virtue of it. Well, given that modus operandi, then Alan
Watts was an enlightened being (just tell that to his ex-wives and
his drinking buddies in Marin County). No, Alan was a good
writer.... Just like Wilber is a good writer. But that does not make
Wilber enlightened.

Simple mistake, no doubt, but a devastating one as well.

[webcache.googleusercontent.com]

Quote
Stoic
'If you are not ranting in good faith, I intend to find out why.'
We just have to make sure that they are not smothered by vested interests still using and promoting-- for their own benefit-- a medieval model of power.

If you are really dedicated to doing away with something, then for God's sake demand higher standards of those working on it! I have no doubt there are vested interests at work. I feel those vested interests include individuals who are so entrenched in the hunt that they find it hard to be objective, individuals who loathe sexual abuse and sort of blindly jump onto any hunt with good intentions but directed at not-always-guilty people, individuals who just plain dislike religion (or eastern religion), and perhaps even organizations ranging from Rigpa to the Chinese government. It is logical that each and every one of these people and organizations would gravitate to this story.

What is needed is clear documentation, published for all to see. If those working on this story for 16 years haven't been able to achieve that, then for God's sake find some new resources and make it happen.

And above all, try not to destroy good people and good initiatives along the way. We in the west are in sore need of (among other things) a palliative care system that does more than hover efficiently in silence as the patient dies. The Tibetan Book of Living & Dying is very, very ecumenical in its approach; about as ecumenical as one can get while still trying to help a person pass away with at least some sense of support. If Sogyal Rinpoche turns out to be Hitler himself, I hope and pray that the excellent advice in that book, which has come down through many teachers, can still somehow be appreciated.

It's very easy to destroy good people; it's nearly impossible to repair the damage once its done. A lot of people who benefit from the palliative care advice in TBOLD may, sadly, come to associate pain with it. To be brutally honest, I'm not sure if it's worth it, given the stakes.

I would like to ask this: if, as your friend or loved one is going through cancer treatment, you found out the primary oncologist slept around a lot, perhaps even using his elevated status to snag women, would you start over with a new oncologist, whether or not this break in continuity was best for the patient? If we are going to impune one man for allegedly sleeping around, mustn't we continue to stand up for that principle, by at least trying to make sure other men in our lives (grocers, bus drivers, bosses) meet our standards? This is question I personally wrestle with a lot--where does our responsibility as "consumers" lie?

You are not very good at this rational reasoning lark, Sile.

The oncologist is using his professional skill and knowledge in a professional capacity while treating a cancer patient.

If he then abuses the patient's trust and vulnerability while in his care to procure sexual favours from the dying patient--then yes, he is a corrupt and cynical exploiter who does not have the patient's best interests at heart and the patient is better off with someone who treats his patients with humanity and respect, not abuse and exploitation.

And I have never yet felt the need to give sexual favours, in addition to payment for what is owed, to grocers, bus drivers or bosses. Why should so-called 'enlightened' types demand these extra favours?

You are defending an abusive scam that taints good and sincere religious people of every denomination. Sogyal is a corrupt conman, there is no excuse for defending him.

By the way, good and sincere people have been finding the Dharma for almost three thousand years-- defending one conman's reputation with the excuse that you are defending the Dharma is ingenuous.

The real thing is very robust and doesn't need such a defence, it never has.

bump

Quote
corboy
Again and again the story is being reduced to the argument “well…the girls are older than 18 and they know what they are doing…THEY are the ones who want him…so all is fine…that`s how it is in Tibetan Buddhism…”

If this is how it is in Tibetan Buddhism, then TB is not a legitimate religion. Clergy are bound by strict ethical requirements and fiduciary trust law. Some say Tibetan lamas and Rinpoches "aren't clergy", but the robes of office belie that disclaimer. In the US at least, the wearing the robes of office carries legal implications.

Contrary to popular belief, often it is not the students who chase after the teacher, but visa versa. This is discrimination; women students of Buddhism are not able to study with a teacher unmolested, a right their male counterparts take for ranted. It's not unusual for women to end up schlepping from one sangha to another, searching for a teacher who, as one ex-TB follower pithily expressed it, can "keep his genitals to himself".

It surprising how many male "advanced practitioners" defend randy lamas by saying that having sex with the students is part of the religion, and "is for the women's own good". If that's true, then Tibetan Buddhism isn't a religion, it's a sex cult. And "for their own good" as determined by whom? A narcissistic sexoholic monk or lay lama? A survey of the local Tibetan community on this topic contradicts this self-serving belief. The very idea that the religion is about having sex with female followers was denounced as Chinese propaganda against their tradition.

Women who acquiesce to a sexual relationship with their priest or spiritual guide are typically those who have suffered abuse in the home while growing up. They have poor psychological defense mechanisms, are emotionally needy, and look for the approval of their teacher. Sexual predators like these lamas and Rinpoches can spot this personality type a mile away, and zero in. It is precisely due to this vulnerability to manipulation that clergy are required to observe strict rules of conduct. I believe it was D.T. Suzuki who, when faced with an overly-adoring disciple, famously said: 'It's good to revere the master. [in the sense that it motivates the student to study and practice with more dedication] Don't worry; I have enough discipline for the both of us." This is how clergy should behave: with integrity, professional ethics and discipline.

Sile does raise a good point about Rigpa providing good palliative care, and therefore an important public service. Should that strong standard of care be besmirched because of the misconduct of the organization's founder? Rigpa might do well to consider divorcing itself from its founder and corrupt leadership that has in the past facilitated Sogyal's exploitation of students at retreats, and looked the other way as Sogyal took advantage of bereaved members of the general public seeking his counsel. (Note: it is illegal for bereavement counselors to have sex with their clients.) Although this may be unrealistic to expect from an organization enthralled by its founder, the only way to clear the reputation of the organization would be to distance itself from the founder and change its name, IMO.

One final note: Victoria Barlow told me in a private communication (which she authorized to be shared publicly, as needed) that Sogyal told her back in the 1970's, before he had started his own organization and published the "Living and Dying" book under his name, that he wanted everything that Chogyam Trungpa had: the fame, the money and the women, and that he was determined to get that.

Small correction:

This statement was not written by me. It was quoted by me, Corboy from a longer discussion of Sogyal on Dialogue Ireland.

Quote

Again and again the story is being reduced to the argument “well…the girls are older than 18 and they know what they are doing…THEY are the ones who want him…so all is fine…that`s how it is in Tibetan Buddhism…”

Agreed. Separate the foundations from the troubled leader.

Separating Rigpa from Sogyal would be a hugely significant step in the right direction. I have had this in mind for some time, during my long and arduous campaign to highlight Sogyal's abuses (money, sex, public humiliations etc etc) -- to the point where the people who protect him come to their senses. For a taste of the level of character assassination, false accusation and poisonous personal attack that I have endured as a result of being a primary whistle blower, please check recent comment on Dialogue Ireland.

Quote
Blue Dakini
For a taste of the level of character assassination, false accusation and poisonous personal attack that I have endured as a result of being a primary whistle blower, please check recent comment on Dialogue Ireland.

Could you provide a link to that? I didn't know they had a comment section or forum. I'd love to check that out.

Keep on keepin' on, BlueDakini! Keep up the good work. :)

@Misstyk -- I would advise against visiting the nest of vipers on the most recent Sogyal thread on DI. It is a toxic environment which has now descended into outright insanity. However if you must, Google Dialogue Ireland then look for their blog section and scroll down column on right of screen until you find Rigpa. You will find a Guardian item by me which questions taboos. Go to the end of the Comment section and work your way backwards. Skip anything by "Giulia" and skim read Bella B.

Good heavens!! The situation is now completely out of control over there at DI. The Sogyal thread was closed just as I found it and got ready to post. Why would they close the thread just as Victoria Barlow joined the discussion, I wonder? Now another thread has been hijacked by "Giulia", and I tend to suspect Bella is a guy, judging by her answers. Such a shame; DI strikes me as potentially a good blog/discussion forum. I don't know what went wrong. I'm very surprised that women would be in denial of these serious problems.

Bringing this back to Sogyal and the topic of this thread, Blue Dakini, I can only guess that the reason he still collects large numbers of followers is that there are a lot of wounded people out there who need to feel they're part of something important. I have no other way of accounting for his continued ability to operate. It seems like a sad commentary on Western society, that it produces large numbers of emotionally needy and psychologically wounded people who are vulnerable to abusive spiritual leadership. But perhaps that's just part of the human condition. I think there's also the "exotica" factor at work, as well. People tend to become enthralled by exotic-looking people, no matter the quality of their character.

Was it on the DI Sogyal thread that Barlow said the transcripts from the Sogyal trial are available from the court upon request? Maybe someone should get a copy and post relevant sections, to settle criticisms of the lack of "clear documentation", like Sile's comment above. I don't understand how it's possible that court documents are available on request when the terms of the settlement specified that all records would be sealed, but someone should look into it to see if Barlow is correct.

I really don't understand why there's still so much denial of abuse by Sogyal when there have been so many complaints over decades. I think this problem points to the difficulty in documenting any type of clergy abuse. As I said on the "Lama" Ole Nydahl thread, if one were to try to file charges, it would be impossible to prove that coercion or manipulation took place. If victims still can't prove rape in spite of the widespread use now of rape kits (the defense is always that the act was consensual), how can anyone prove coercion or "breach of fiduciary trust"? In the absence of documented cases, it's all too easy for defenders of these rogues to say it's all lies, hearsay, etc.

A strategy is needed by which credible documentation could be generated. How has it been possible to prosecute in the context of the Catholic Church? The same obstacles would be present in those cases. Perhaps the process there should be studied and used as a model. Any thoughts?