ps. to Meteorite,

Since you raise the question of truth on this forum, and it is a valid point,
I am a therapist and know the accusations of molestation and lying to be true. I knew people to whom this happened and their degree of distress long before these accusations started appearing in public. They had no cause to lie. I don't personally know of "rape" but I do know of "strong persuasion". Coming from a powerful teacher, I see that as damning enough, not to mention the simple fact that he was married.

By all means, be grateful. But let others have their own experience. Their anger at such betrayal is understandable.

Zig, Blossom and now Meteorite...
I am intuitively convinced that CH is paying detailed attention to this forum. I am pretty sure he is participating in it. It would be out of character if he were not. Er -- that is if anyone could make an accurate assessment of CH's character. There are many CH characters and they do not appear to be integrated. To some he is an abusive charlatan. To others he is a healing angel. A landscape of extremes. In my view, the most eloquent posts in support of CH seem to be pointing towards a fudge, towards obfuscation. Towards justification of unethical behaviour. *Crazy wisdom* may work in isolated hermitages in the Himalayas -- but it does not work at a complementary medical centre on Sloane Square. And finally -- the Dzogchen teachings I have received definitely do distinguish between relative and absolute. We live in the relative world. None of us are realised Buddhas -- and that includes CH.
Pema

I agree Mr.H would, in all likelyhood, find it difficult to resist casting an egotistical eye over this forum. Moreover, it is indeed probable that he has offered various anonymous contributions in defence of his activities, he however uses a particular syntax that reveals itself to close scrutiny. That said, while it may be of academic and philosophical interest to debate obscure and rarified issues (an indulgence and defence used by Nr.H in his fact-free reply to my challenges to him) it should not, in my opinion, deflect or dilute attention from a number of very important and critical questions regarding Hansard. In particular his cynical explotation, and distortion, of Tibetan medicine, and the authentic Bon tradition.

Oh Dear, why do some of you find such enjoyment in attacking this man? He has been of great help to a lot of people and an inspiration to many others. He may have his faults, but who amongst us doesn't? Of course, immediately the wolf pack will attack my comments, but that I think this is their instinctive reaction. A little reflective thought may bring to you the understanding that angry attacks are not always the way forward. Understanding and compassion may make you all a little happier! I am not trying to be glib. I know this man and he he is not the evil character some of you portray. He has great abilities but perhaps he also needs some support at times. Give it some thought, that's all I suggest.

Yes indeed, 'understanding' and 'compassion', often talked about but practised very little, particularly by Mr.H who is seemingly unconcerned at his deliberate and cynical exploitation of Tibetan culture for what are self-centered and materialistic objectives. As to seeking to generate sympathy for Mr.H perhaps it would be more appropriate to extend concern to the oppressed and beleagured culture of Tibet, which is already under the merciless grip of communist China. Imagine for a moment seeking to defend the fantasy claims of a bogus Rabbi who was carving out a lucrative career whilst Jewish culture was being exterminated under Nazi Germany! Would dewey-eyed 'new agers' be rushing forward to urge symathy and support for such cold-hearted fakery?

Wick: "He has great abilities but perhaps he also needs some support at times."

How would you suggest this support be given?

You are perceiving criticism here as an attack. I can not speak for others but I am not attacking anyone.

What you and others don't seem to be getting is that it is his extra-ordinary claims of training, and reports of client abuse, that are under question here.

Should these be ignored as a means of "supporting" him.

Or would a more proactive way of "supporting" him be forcing the issue so that he actually does something about it.

If he is as talented as you say he is - and I agree with you on this score - it should not be hard to present himself to the world in a way that is responsive to some of the concerns mentioned here.

Not doing so is to hang out a moon at intelligent people. Is that his intent?

[christopherhansard.blogspot.com]

Quote
Wick
Oh Dear, why do some of you find such enjoyment in attacking this man? He has been of great help to a lot of people and an inspiration to many others.

For a fee. I mean we all have to live, but what we do for money doesn't make us saints, it often tends to do quite the opposite.

Hello Jeff and others,

What do you make of this statement, "that Hansard clearly read, and took as authentically Bon teaching, Namkhai Norbu's book Drung Deu Bon. He's following a 'scholarly reconstruction' of what ancient
Bon ought to have looked like, instead of what Bonpos today are actually saying." (from the yahoo zhang zhung group).

Has anyone read this book?

I agree and would urge contemplation upon the deeper meaning of 'scholarly reconstruction'. Yes Namkhai Norbu is a celebrated Tibetan Lama of the Nyingma tradition, of all Tibet's schools of Buddhism, it shares some (stress) concepts and practices with Tibet's Native religion, Bon. In particular central to its teachings is the practice and philosophy of Dzogchen, which is itself thought to derive from the Bon traditon which predated the arrival of Buddhism into Tibet. The book in question, while writen by a most learned and respected Tibetan lama must be read in the knowledge that he is comng from a Buddhist perspective and is disadvantaged in terms of the extent or depth of knowledge regarding the history and practices of the Bon tradition. This may explain his comments about the so-called 'Northern Treasure School' , which in fact does not exist and is not recognized by the Bon community. In another work by Norbu he refers to Bonpos as having black tongues from repetition of mantras. Clearly this is strange assertion, which I raised with emiment Bon scholars and practitioners, all of whom assured me this was utter nonsense. There may be areas of genuine scholoarly insight by Norbu and I am not denying his understanding of the basic principles of Bon, however there are questions to be asked. Indeed, since it would appear that Mr.Hansard has drawn heavily from Norbu's book a critical an thorough examiantion of his writing is perhaps overdue, not least to identify where exactly Hansard has derived some of his bogus theories.