Dzogchen Beara, Ireland, 3 – 11 July 2010: annual retreat with Sogyal Rinpoche

339 Responses

Servicii internet dedicate, on 27 September 2012 at 7:24 pm said:

Norocel Foarte tare, ce pot spune, traim in Romania moderna, Oricum e de retinut, informatiile bune sunt oricand binevenite. Mesajul este de memorat in cazul de fata :)

LikeLike
shona, on 14 November 2011 at 8:07 pm said:

..wrong thread!

LikeLike
shona, on 14 November 2011 at 7:59 pm said:

I find it quite despicable of you, ANON, that you are naming anon-la, in an attempt to ‘out’ her or him. You post very aggressively and to be frank, having little time for Rigpa, am feeling you are losing this argument, by your below the belt tactics, and your hypocrisy. You post endlessly yet berate people for posting at all…you attempt to stifle discussion BY USING SHOUTY CAPS LOCK. Be careful that you don’t alientate people by your tactics. I think Shiela and Anon-la are a bit more courteous than you, and I know you are desperate for people to agree with you, but you’re not winning any arguments here, as far as I’m concerned.

LikeLike
ME Moose, on 30 June 2011 at 10:30 am said:

The previous poster is clearly delusional. I believe persistent denial in the face of the repeated presentation of hard evidence in the form of personal testimony, broadsheet condemnation, and television exposes to be a clear manifestation of ‘Ostrich with head in sand’ syndrome. I belve the relevantn phrase to b DNFTT (Do not feed the troll) Congratualtions DI n demonstrating fair values allowing freedom of speech. However, in this case, you demonstrate some of the situations where such may not be of value. As long as this person gets the last post,in aworld where those who dont follow threads rarely read back, bellabs presence violates principles of free speech by allowing those determined to hide the truth to take the dominat position. Perhaps the only real value in allowing the poster tocontinue is to sdemonstrate the downright lunacy that some of Sogyal’s followers demonstrate when it comes to matters of truth

LikeLike
bellaB, on 21 June 2011 at 7:45 pm said:

So you think I accept love from men while they beat up women? Is that beating up selfless love? Don’t take me for an idiot that you can press your frustration upon.

“many of Sogyals victims have claimed was their experience” WHERE those stories were published? I haven’t read them. Janice Doe story was written by a journalist. You may know the rest of the story: a non-Tibetan female Zen Buddhist teacher was against Tibetan Buddhism – and her husband was the lawyer of Janice Doe. The law suit was ‘cancelled’.

“Since you are violating important principles by discussing these issues on a public forum ( on the internet of all places!), you are violator of samaya,”

I’m braking the samaya and causing harm to Dharma when I correct the misconception of Tantric Sex being pornographic, selfish shit – and saying that the goal is to rise up the energy to open one’s heart to feel love! Oh no, I must burn in 8 million hells.

Just read Miranda Shaw’s book and stop freaking out. I’ve read Tib. texts too.

Those Western people scared of Eastern stuff and energy can start facing their fears with this study:
INDIVIDUATION AND SUBTLE BODY A Commentary on Jung’s Kundalini Seminar
by Gary W. Seeman

Click to access INDIVIDUATION%20AND%20SUBTLE%20BODY.pdf

LikeLike
Nemesis, on 21 June 2011 at 4:52 pm said:

Love, according to Buddhist principles, is the wish for others to be happy. I choose to follow that definition rather than any provided by others, particualry where those others demonstrate such strange behaviour as youreelf. You are clearly in need of help/ in the care of professionals

I believe many of the great dictators of history were ‘popular’ Sadly (for you) this is not an indication of authenticity, only the degenerate state of Buddhism in general

A complete description of ritualised sexual abuse appears four posts above, in rsponse to your request for such immediately preceeding that. (REMEMBER?) Since the definition and description are clear, I have nothing to add, other than to point to the fact that the description is also one that many of Sogyals victims have claimed was their experience

As for ‘tantric sex; since it is totally inappropriate to discuss such issues in open public forums (something you would appreciate if you were a genuine tanric practitioner) I suggest you ask your guru. Alternatively, there are a number of texts from within the traditions which explain these issues, inparticular the rarity of such practices and the lack of qualfication most practitoners who claim to be qualified exhibit. You might take a look at Longchenpa’s Sem Nyid Rang Grol which comments on the issue in th second chapter

Since you are violating important principles by discussing these issues on a public forum ( on the internet of all places!), you are violator of samaya, In order to preserve my own samaya I therefore have nothing more to say to you. if your teacher were genuine and he knew you were seaking of such issues on a public forum on the internet, Im absolutely certain you woudl incur his displeasure, if not his well documented wrath (towards the ‘weaker sex’)

If you are an indication of the type of person Sogyal is initiating, I dread to think of the consequences for the Dharma. At least his victims had a lucky escape!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 21 June 2011 at 2:43 pm said:

Maybe you don’t know what I mean by *LOVE*. I have a pretty high standard for a man, learnt my lessons, never been beaten up by any of them, so drop your nonsense. You either don’t understand what I’m talking about or misread me.

I’m fed up arguing with you. I have met many Tibetan masters – and I would have had easier access to other lamas had they been even close to SR as a teacher. They were far ‘behind’. There is a reason why he is popular: it’s not just me.

Just answer these:
A) ritualized sex description
B) tantric sex

LikeLike
Nemesis, on 21 June 2011 at 12:07 pm said:

You really need toget out more/study the characteristics of a qualified guru/ stop quoting books on tantra authored by those unqualified to talk about it.

As for ‘he is the best meditation teacher I’ve ever met.’ I saw a Russian Mastiff this weekend, its the only one Ive ever seen. it too was the best one Ive ever met (In other words, shop around before throwing youself at the feet of the first oriental charlatan that you come across)

.” Women should also demand men to LOVE them before they engage into sex with men. Then there would be no feelings of abuse.”

So as long as you love someone, if you beat the shit out of them or screw them, thats OK? Nonsense

LikeLike
bellaB, on 21 June 2011 at 11:11 am said:

One thing: I don’t claim SR to be enlightened, a Buddha or anything else that grand. For me he is the best meditation teacher I’ve ever met.

If he himself believed that the woman could be healed through love risen in the love making with him, how can we say he is wrong? Maybe he believed he could reach her heart? Of course if her experience was not ‘love’ then it would feel abusive. I know it from my own experiences of sex with men.

According to Miranda Shaw’s book Passionate Enlightenment the early tantric teachers were women – and they formed a female lineage. I truly believe women should be in charge of sex: first of all to get to know their own pleasure – and then teach men how to do it. Women should also demand men to LOVE them before they engage into sex with men. Then there would be no feelings of abuse.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 21 June 2011 at 11:02 am said:

That was not all written about it. Where is the book about ‘Satanistic Sex Rituals’?

LikeLike
Briefing Document, on 21 June 2011 at 10:36 am said:

Adult Ritualised Sexual Abuse: A Contemporary, Western Phenomena?

A consultant to Dialogue Ireland wrote concerning Eoghan Harris’s view:

‘While all sexual abuse is immoral, it is obvious that the depth of the immorality varies in dependence on the context of the abuse: the abuse of an adult is immoral, but that of a minor is significantly more so. Here, sexual activity at first seems to have occurred between two, consenting adults and, generally speaking, such a consensual act would not be considered immoral; this is certainly how your correspondent Mr Harris appears to perceive it.

However, where a religious figure in a position of trust engages in a sexual act with a follower, that person’s status transforms a seemingly consensual act into an abusive one. It is blatant abuse where a person in a position of trust engages in sexual relations with another, both from the perspective of the abuse of power and the abuse of the individual victim.

The status of the teacher too contributes to determining the depth of the abusiveness of the act. If relations occur between a ‘mere mortal’ teacher and an equally mortal student, that is one thing. But where the teacher is perceived as a ‘tantric master’, and the act is accompanied by the promise of spiritual benefit, this moves everything to an even deeper level of abusive depravity. Mr Harris appears to have not understood this.

If the multiple allegations are true and were accompanied by promises of a ‘tantric experience’, or as the Janice Doe suit suggests, victims were told they ‘would be strengthened and healed by having sex’ with Sogyal, the relations were abusive and ritualized.

It is clear that in groups of all religious traditions, this type of abuse has existed for generations. To be a victim of such then, does not render one part of what Mr Harris mistakenly portrays as contemporary ‘American victim culture’, though no doubt such a culture exists. Rather it renders one yet another unfortunate victim of that serious and calculated deception that, while as old as the hills, remains as improper and immoral as it has done for the millennia it has existed throughout mankind’s different cultures and creeds.

That it has existed for so long however renders it no less immoral. In fact, with religion in the advanced state of decline that it is, this renders the act even more so, for it destroys what little is left of what is good in the world. If the faiths are to survive and assist the spiritually needy, we have a responsibility to rid all of the traditions of those who engage in such selfish and irreligious acts in the name of their faith. Mr Harris may be correct in his assertion that such abuse, ‘…has no bearing on the general message of Buddhism’. However, it certainly does have a bearing on the purity and future existence of the faith: while it may not destroy ‘the message’, it damages ‘the medium’ irreparably.’

This therefore, is no crusade against Buddhism; rather it is a crusade against Sogyal’s abuse of his position within that religion to procure pleasures for his personal gratification. DI has found the same adult ritualised sexual abuse in Yogic, New Age, Christian and Hindu groups.

‘This (abuse) is in large part a result of the naiveté of westerners when it comes to visiting Asian gurus. People who are deeply suspicious of western organized religion suspend all scepticism when it comes to smiling brown-skinned men telling them to let go of their attachments as they slide their hand onto their knee. People in the West are so desperate for spiritual salvation they are prepared to blind themselves to the rogues and charlatans making millions of dollars through the New Age industry in the last 30 years.’

LikeLike
bellaB, on 21 June 2011 at 8:49 am said:

Nemesis, please describe to me in detail what you mean by
a) ritualistic sex
b) tantric sex

Then we can see if we even talk about the same issues.

I don’t have energy nor interest to find out the conversation about ritualistic sex, but the book refered to was (as I recall) offered by Christian or at least the one defending the claim was the thedialogueireland -poster who is a former Christian cult member himself. The book was about satanistic sex rituals – not about Tibetan Buddhism.

But please start by describing your own ideas about the sabove. (Then we can laugh at your naivety and ignorance.)

LikeLike
Nemesis, on 19 June 2011 at 4:57 pm said:

PS ‘Did you get the hypocrisy? The official ‘response’ to all allegations was. ‘we dont consider it ‘helpful’ to enter into a debate…about the experiences of any individual’. So the response says it does not respond??? And ‘helpful’ to whom? Arent admissions of culpability seen as the way forward nowadays, their being the gateway toforgiveness and reconciliation? oh, I get it: when they say its not helpful, they t mean is its not helpful to RIGPA . Guess theyve been watching whats going on in the Catholic Church (which at least has had the balls to admit to its failings, to try and reconcile and compensate for the harm it has done) Clearly, RIGPA have decided, having seen this that its too damaging from the viewpoint of money and reputation to openly discuss Sogyals abuse-One again, further qualities to look for in a modern Buddhist gur/community: Attachment to money and reputation. Hasnt Buddhism changed a lot since the time of the Buddha

LikeLike
Nemesis, on 19 June 2011 at 4:56 pm said:

PS ‘Did you get the hypocrisy? The official ‘response’ to all allegations was. ‘we dont consider it ‘helpful’ to enter into a debate…about the experiences of any individual’. So the response says it does not respond??? And ‘helpful’ to whom? Arent admissions of culpability a seen as the way forward nowadays, their being the gateway toforgiveness and reconciliation? oh, I get it: when they say its not helpful, they t mean is its not helpful to RIGPA . Guess theyve been watching whats going on in the Catholic Church (which at leas has had the balls to admit to its failings, to try and reconcile and compnesate for the harm it has done) Clearly, RIGPA have decided its too damaging from the viewpoint of money and reutation to openly discuss Sogyals abuse-One again, further qualities to look for ina modern Buddhist gur/community: Attachment to money and reputation. Hasnt Buddhism changed a lot since the time of the Buddha

LikeLike
nemesis, on 19 June 2011 at 9:10 am said:

‘I suspect if anyone from RIGPA is watching (and since there have been meetings about the content of these pages in Paris and London, there is little question that they are) you will soon be told to shut up.’ !!!

Coincidence? Doubt it, after all, its official RIGPA policy, according to their response to the allegations, not to respond. I would remind Sogyal et al that, according tot the Vinaya, remaining silent when asked a question, wher one actually has committed an action, constitutes lying.So, I guess you can add that to the list of qualities of modern Buddhist masters.

LikeLike
nemesis, on 17 June 2011 at 5:37 pm said:

Dont you recall the proprietors of this page pointing out to you that the references to riutalised sexual abuse here were writtten by a Buddhist not a ‘Christian divine satanic dualist’? Sorry love, your smokescreen attack on Christianity is therefore an irrelevance designed solely to distract from the issue at hand

I dont recall expressing anTibetan Buddhism has ‘ritualistic sex’-thats you. Also, if you deny this, why do you continue by then trying to justify it’s nature? Rather an odd way of going about things. It makes me think you are not what we would refer to as a ‘full shilling’?

As for your risible (that means worthy of being laughed at), somewhat child like understanding of ‘Tibetan Tantric sex’ , which is clearly based on a very brief reading of one of the plethora of books by arrogant Westerners who claim, in all humility, to have understood the tantric processes, despite being unqualified to practice them, without wanting to go into too much detail, lets just remember that the practices you refer to depend on both parties having received the same initiaitions and having equal levels of realisation. This was also spoken of in the briefing document when Sogyals disciples attempted to justify the abuse by claiming he was Buddha and could therefore do anything.In this respect, I would point you to Guru Rinpoche’s statement that, though his view is like the sky, his actions are like grains of barley. Increasingly nowadays, those who claim to be representative of the Buddhist faith seem to dispense with the second half of this important couplet

Even if Sogyal Rinpoche is Guru Rinpoche as he and his disciples claim, it is highly unlikely that so many young vulnerable women a few weeks into beginners courses could be of the same level. Or are you suggesting that all the victims are actually highly realised beings, they just dont know it?If they are dakinis, how come a) they dont know it or b) mention it in their lawsuits/newspaper articles? Is their advanced level of realisation why some have felt polluted and suicidal afterwards I wonder?

If you are going to direct people to books on tantra, perhaps someone who is fully aware of the incredible rarity of such practices, along with the requirements and restraints, rather than some big mouth who breaks every samaya in the book by revealing secrets for the sake of profit might be a more suitable point of contact. At least they would know such practices are conducted by only one or two highly realised beings, a far smaller number for instance than the hordes of self aggrandising pleasure seekers (Tibetan and Western) who have lept on the tantirc bandwagon in recent years in order to a) get rich and b) get laid

I note also that your mail is a not very implicit acceptance of the allegation that Sogyal used the ‘tantric sex’ line to procure his victims. How unfortunateThe more you say, the bigger the hole you dig for yourself and your teacher. I suspect if anyone from RIGPA is watching (and since there have been meetings about the content of these pages in Paris and London, there is little question that they are) you will soon be told to shut up. After all, your naivety and arrogance are only causing more damage to an already badly holed and sinking ship

LikeLike
bellaB, on 17 June 2011 at 3:29 pm said:

Please read Miranda Shaw’s book on Passionate Enlightenment. It could sound very idealsitic and pure in the hedonistic West, but I think it describes history of tantric practice well – as well the point of tantric sex.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 17 June 2011 at 3:25 pm said:

Ritualistic Sex Rites described in these Christian pages was coming from the other holder of these pages who himself has abeen a former Christian cult person – and therefore has this mission at heart. I was directed in these pages (in discussion section related to ritualistic sex) to a book (which I can’t remember) that was dealing with Ritualistic Sex Rites in Satanism.

If you say Tibeatan Buddhism has ritualistic sex rites then that’s your opinion. Beware of seeing sex similarly as a person coming from the divine/satanistic -world view.

In my eyes ritualistic sex involves many people, a group, that makes an offering to ‘gods’ or satan. Just like Sumerian sculptures depict.

If you don’t understand the meaning of sex in Buddhist context, you should also beware making hasty judgements. Sex is Tantric Buddhism is not dirty, pornographic, denied evil. Only a few know what tantric sex involves. Main goal is to open the heart of those 2 poeple involved. Opening the heart is crucial in the enlightenment process, but it’s not the goal. The energy flows through the body to higher chakras. Most of the people have their hearts closed, even though at times they feel loving feelings.

So the point is not to *get orgasm*, *get a kick out of it*, *use other person for my pleasure*. It has nothing to do with the sex view of the pornographic West.

LikeLike
abc, on 17 June 2011 at 8:17 am said:

Not a christian. If you want to know what ritualised sexual abuse is, read the Briefing Document on Sogyal Rinpoche on this site. basically it boils down to offering people a ‘tantric experience’ in order to get laid. The fact that he failed to come up with the goods on a majortiy of ocassions is an irrelevance

LikeLike
bellaB, on 17 June 2011 at 6:48 am said:

What is ritualistic sex?

Satanistic sex rites? Try to be a bit less Christian scared person.

LikeLike
Nemesis, on 14 June 2011 at 7:24 am said:

Youre completely nuts daaahling!
You want to talk about ethics? Try justifying sexuala buse, batttery, abandonment of fiduciary care for starters, Is ritualised sexual abuse ethical too?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 11 January 2011 at 10:31 pm said:

My University professor told us a story today: there was a big head-line of “A Study shows: People prefer to live in the Central City Area”. My Professor called the journalist asking how many people had been interviewed for the Study. The journalist told him:14 – and they were 12 house wives and 2 reclutant males living in a specific central area. So my professor asked: you didn’t interview the people in the suburbs and further away? No: just those people sitting in one yard during a one single day. When my professor complained that the ‘Study’ was a really poor example, the journalist didn’t give a s***. Actually my professor used the words when telling that story: “So, it was just another journalist acting as God…”

Just a nice example of journalistic ‘ethics’. Made me laugh – and I couldn’t help posting this here. I should not do it, since it’s better to end conversating, but… :)

LikeLike
themadhair, on 5 January 2011 at 1:54 pm said:

DI, I would like to bow out of the discussion if I could, stop receiving emails.

This is not something that can be done on our end since we do not have access to the internal wordpress.com workings.

There should be an unsubscribe link in the emails you receive which you should be able to use to unsubscribe.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 5 January 2011 at 1:28 pm said:

DI, I would like to bow out of the discussion if I could, stop receiving emails.

LikeLike
Pema, on 5 January 2011 at 1:06 pm said:

All this talk about clairvoyance and psychic powers IMHO illustrates how far western interpretations of Buddhadharma have strayed from the essence. As far as I know Buddhist practice is about awakening. Awareness and presence of awareness. Its hard to imagine anyone less present or less aware than our robot who insists on having the last word. And who repeats banalities ad nauseam. Sorry Drolma — I do not share your patience. Over to you robot….

LikeLike
bellaB, on 5 January 2011 at 12:56 pm said:

I have known SR for 10 years. I got to know the allegations on my year 1,5. That means that I have known for 8,5 years now. Do you think that I wasn’t shocked in the beginning? Do you think that I didn’t keep my eyes open and investigate as much as I could? I did. That is why I have probably been posting a lot, because I’ve thought about it a lot. And I’m pretty sensitive, so I’m not the best person to be called a ‘robot’ or a ‘plant’. I think perhaps some others on this site could be called like that – the ones throwing in comments and statements, judgements, without explanations.

People who can ignore the stuff as rumours are the ones who can. I couldn’t. But I don’t trust Pema one bit – her slander makes me angry.

I don’t like abusive males… at all.

I think HH Dalai Lama is equally clairvoyant as SR – and I don’t think he would give SR the support he has shown. I also think Namkhai Norbu must be clairvoyant – I’ve never met him – and he is a friend of SR too. Are they all part of the male schauvinist order? I don’t think so. SR values his female students equally as his male students. I can’t see any difference in his way of treating the sexes – nor genders (sexual orientation).

Thank you for your kind ending words and I hope you’ll be well too.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 4 January 2011 at 3:22 pm said:

Hey Bella, what say we end our blogging now, gently and kindly, in honor of our common teacher Shakyamuni Buddha?

If I were to be completely honest with you and myself, I would have to admit that I would probably defend HHDL as fiercely as you have defended SR. I think I understand the feelings that drive you. Would I defend him against allegations of criminal behavior? I like to think I would investigate thoroughly first.

The fact is, this is all probably quite beyond us to resolve. In the end, it is what we make of our own hearts and minds that counts. The Buddha’s teachings do hold true. I am very certain of that.

So let’s end on a positive note, shall we? Knowing that we can debate without rancour– that we should debate without rancour. And we can also know when to quit when it’s time.

Thanks and be well!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 4 January 2011 at 1:47 pm said:

dialogueireland,

I must say that you are the most stupid blog keeper I’ve ever seen.

LikeLike
dialogueireland, on 4 January 2011 at 2:05 am said:

Now I guess I’m on holiday and have enough time on my hands – but no more interest.
2011/01/03 at 7:46 pm

LikeLike
dialogueireland, on 4 January 2011 at 2:03 am said:

Sorry must be sleeping at the wheel!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 7:46 pm said:

They don’t know in Rigpa who I am – but I have spoken to them already and they have taken care of me, don’t worry. Now I was conversating with Drolma, who I considered to be humane… You rest, anonymous and all, are not ‘persons’ to me in a human sense – and you don’t treat me as one either. With Pema, we already have history and nothing has changed. But: did you notice that there was almost 6 months break? Now I guess I’m on holiday and have enough time on my hands – but no more interest.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 3 January 2011 at 7:16 pm said:

I daresay this will sound a bit crass…but can’t help but think that if the Rigpa Care Team were any good, they would have helped Bellab, or got in touch with her, and taken her off this website. Internet is OK but not this much. Face2Face much better for mental health.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 3 January 2011 at 7:10 pm said:

Bella

Do you have someone you can talk to? Truly, someone to process all this with? I suggest you do that, call up a good friend. I know we’ve been rough on you. I think, if you are just one woman (and not a plant), that this is too much for you to do, much bigger than you, than just one person.

Please, call up a friend, share a joke or two.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 6:50 pm said:

I’m just saying good-bye to Drolma. And I wrote – IF you read – that sometimes I forgot to say something – and I add. Anything else?

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 3 January 2011 at 6:49 pm said:

DialogueIreland:you missed this one :

bellaB, on January 3, 2011 at 3:19 pm said:
Good bye. I hope you’ll find the truths for yourselves.

LikeLike
dialogueireland, on 3 January 2011 at 6:34 pm said:

2011/01/03 at 12:03 pm
I’ m also really tired to conversate, so I’ll have a break.
2011/01/03 at 12:06 pm
A Video link is left
2011/01/03 at 12:08 pm
A Video link is left
2011/01/03 at 12:11 pm
A Video link is left
2011/01/03 at 2:43 pm
Another comment
03 at 6:09 pm
Another comment
If this is taking a break, tell me what normal commenting is like?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 6:09 pm said:

Drolma,

One thing I would like still to point out to you – especially if you continue working as a psychologist – is that if you were on some kind of crisis and during that time ended up in Rigpa, it means that what happened to you is an exception. When one is traumatised – like you should know – one can see everything through those ‘distorted lenses’, as if everybody would be experiencing one thing in a similar way as the traumatised person.

I just want to remind you that your experience is a unique one. (Otherwise Rigpa Sangha would not be very calm sangha as it seems to be – many lamas have pointed that out. SR has also said that the 3 year retreat has matured people.) Therefore I would really try to figure out what happened to you after a few years, when more time has passed. You told yourself that you also saw a distorted dream about HH, but you recognized already in the dream that the dream is not real. Somehow you failed to recognize the same in your dreams while you were involved with SR. Does that automatically mean that it is the fault of SR – or does it simply mean you have gotten over the crisis you were in? It’s easy to blame someone or one single thing about your state, but maybe you could go through the times before you went to Rigpa or the family history. I think things are repeated in the families too.

What about the influence of your environment as a psychologist? If the therapist carries the pain and experiences of their patients to some extent, don’t you think that rather would influence you, if you got tired in carrying their burden? Were you looking for something good and supportive from Dharma, when your own strength was fading? Was it so that you ended up in Rigpa, but were already facing the crisis? I don’t believe that psychosis happened out of the blue. As a professional I think you should know it too.

Don’t be too easy now: I know that it’s easy to land on the arms of anybody who supports your fears and seemingly gives you support, but is it honest and the right thing to do? Maybe it is right for you now, but in the long run? Truth will liberate. I hope you’ll find it, because through your profession you will influence many people, not just yourself.

True that many people in some kind of life crisis end up looking for answers in Buddhism or in some other religion. How Rigpa should deal with these people? They have developed the Care side in Rigpa – and are motivated in developing it further. It also states in the retreat application that Rigpa doesn’t give psychological treatment and that the teachings are not anykind of replacement for medication etc. What happens to the people who end up in Rigpa and are not well? I know a person who hasn’t been well in the beginning, but over the years Dharma & practice has helped him to stabilize his condition. That person has also looked for help actively – and has gotten it. People in Rigpa do care, but it’s a 2-way road.

LikeLike
dialogueireland, on 3 January 2011 at 5:46 pm said:

It was not the Madhair who moved anything. It was not moved, but because we in Dialogue Ireland formed the view it was an important contribution we made it into an actual post.
This is to highlight it as we can see every comment coming in, their address and IP, which we do not disclose to anyone. Also it was not moved, but still remains a comment in its original
context. We use the term from Comm2Post to describe this process. It is rather arbitrary as one could also say that someone leaving a comment is also posting, but you know what I mean! Whether the new post opens up a new dialogue is up to you the public. DI. The Madhair is one of the people who monitors this site, and many people attribute to him what he does not do and others attribute things to the Director of the Trust Mike Garde things which he does not write. So be it! bella B it is not all about you, you can take a rest you will stress yourself!

LikeLike
Pema, on 3 January 2011 at 4:26 pm said:

@Drolma You could join FB — but when I get your friend request I’ll have to know who it is because when I don’t recognise the name I reject them. Also make sure you get the right MF — home town is Bristol UK.
But — my contact details are on my web site which is listed no 2 or 3 on Google.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 3:19 pm said:

Tangential? So if I look at something from one side only, I’m fanatical. If I look at something from another side, I’m suspicious?

Since the conversation has gone down to pushing me into a corner… people don’t care to read what I try to say, but it goes into this: let’s lynch her…

It has happened ten times before on this page, when you can’t answer back, question on the next level.

You all seem to enjoy agreeing with Pema, who obviously lies: SR can’t read…. What does it make you seem to me? Not extremely truthful, I must say.

Good bye. I hope you’ll find the truths for yourselves.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 3 January 2011 at 2:54 pm said:

Pema

You’re right about the mind numbing. Reminds me of some very tangential clients I’ve had. I go back and forth between compassion and suspicion.

But in the end, it works, doesn’t it? Dumbs this important debate right down.

I looked for you online, but it seems that unless I join Facebook (which would delight my kids and I probably should do) I can’t email you. Is that true?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 2:43 pm said:

her attachment to her teacher’s reputation

-> what is that? Don’t just throw in ‘statements’ without grounding.

fan-atical

-> I am his fan, of course, but I have also other aspects to my relationship to him… like I said I have never experienced bad things in Rigpa, so what do you expect?

To every post by someone questioning Sogyal, there are 5 posts by Bella b

-> Yes, because I forget stuff. I’m thinking while writing, but my thought process continues after I press the Post Comment. Then I add. I also post different posts to Pema and Drolma, responding their posts. Did you also notice that you can’t put more than 1 link to one message?

Even without meeting Sogyal I would think, not a good idea, to be a student of someone, who has devotees like this one. Fundamentalism, fanaticism, no thanks.

-> So I can’t write the answers… don’t you think denying conversation promotes fundamentalism?

I’m just a person under the pseydonym bellaB, others are others. There are a few thousand Rigpa people, so if you group the whole punch of people from all walks of life and from all levels of spiritual practice with your idea about me, then don’t you think you are a bit judgemental?

You are entitled to your opinions, but I’m mainly defending my own ideas, opinions and experiences – like every one else. You don’t describe, but just throw in a judgement. It’s not conversating, but trying to end the conversation. :)

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 3 January 2011 at 1:30 pm said:

Anonymous, on January 2, 2011 at 1:32 pm said:

The problem I have with all of this, every time s/he posts, her attachment to her teacher’s reputation is displayed to the extent of being fan-atical. To every post by someone questioning Sogyal, there are 5 posts by Bella b. Even without meeting Sogyal I would think, not a good idea, to be a student of someone, who has devotees like this one. Fundamentalism, fanaticism, no thanks.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 12:11 pm said:

SR on Winning and Losing. Maybe it’s better to listen to the Masters than wasting time here. Happpy New Year!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 12:08 pm said:

And in this one he shortly addresses HH Dalai Lama. I can’t find all kinds of clips in the internet but here are at least some. They are not for Drolma, but for others to see, if they want.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 12:06 pm said:

In this video he has his travelling shrine infront of him.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 3 January 2011 at 12:03 pm said:

Final words: illiterate Sogyal Rinpoche is me being uninformed? Okay: thank you for letting me and everybody know that SR can’t read. I have probably seen dreams all these years. His pronounciacion is also so bad that hardly anybody understands. See the video below: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ur0eoKq3KS8

It’s good that your investigation as a journalist is up-to-date! BTW: I said already earlier that I will try to correct you.

Drolma asked me and probably other Rigpa people questions, so I answered. That is called conversation. Robots throw in comments – and judgements – without any background to their ‘thought processes’.

I’ m also really tired to conversate, so I’ll have a break.

LikeLike
Pema, on 3 January 2011 at 10:06 am said:

Dear Drolma,
I have been taking a winterval over the past few days. Have vaguely kept up with your exchanges with the Rigpa robot, but only vaguely because I have long since given up ploughing through his/her/its incoherent drivel. Repeated time after time after time until everyone except you and me has fled from the thread out sheer brain numbing boredom. This I think is the intention. You will note that the robot always has the last word. However fatuous, banal or ill-informed it may be. Yawn. Snore. Can we resume in private? Google me. You’ll find my email address.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 2 January 2011 at 9:32 pm said:

Shugden came from trying to tell you that I have also my fears about Buddhism. What is happening during the practices in our minds? If there have been such a deity as Shugden in the Buddhist tradition (especially in Gelug), how do we know when we are doing the right practices?

I even read in the “reliable source” Wikipedia that Shugden spirit can revenge the pratitoner if he goes and receives Nyingma teachings. I think these kinds of rumours and speculations are frightening.

You expressed yourself that you ‘went mad’ while attending Rigpa teachings. It’s frightening when we don’t know what is exactly going on. That is why I wanted to say that I have my own fears, but I have never experienced anything really negative in Rigpa. Minor things between people of course, because we are only humans, but nothing serious.

Did you notice that themadhair moved your earlier comment as the beginning of a new thread?

LikeLike
Drolma, on 2 January 2011 at 8:34 pm said:

Anonymous

Fanatical? I am beginning to think more on the lines of defending his/her empire. There’s stuff that just doesn’t jive or hold together here, makes me wonder.

Good grief, where did Shugden practice suddenly come into the picture? We’re all over the place in this discussion, aren’t we?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 2 January 2011 at 7:42 pm said:

I have said to Drolma – I think – all I wanted. I wish you good luck with her discoveries on the path.

We don’t share the same view, because I haven’t had traumatic experiences in Rigpa or while I’ve been there. I’ve had intense experiences, but it’s not the same. I truly hope you will find the way out of past… and will be able to include the experience in your life in a way that would come out as positive… weather it means by being able to help others or some other way. Of course I don’t recommend going back to Rigpa for you, since those events happened at the same time that you were there. One needs a lot of time to distance oneself from traumatic things. I hope one could find understanding for events. Western non-Buddhist psychologist probably would immediately freak out and wouldn’t have the courage nor the means to help out, except to enforce the taught of Buddhism as potentially evil… I hope you will find the kinds of people who have the wisdom to discern and can truly help you.

I have my own set of fears related to Buddhism – and they were caused by reading about Shugden practice in some New Kadampa centers. At least in Rigpa we practice practices that are completely Buddhist and according to the tradition. So there’s safety at least there.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 2 January 2011 at 7:09 pm said:

Drolma, how do you know how much or little I’m questioning? I have studied before more about Buddhism, read books of all kinds, but not at the moment. My memory is not very good, so I should look up and check almost everything. What is my main interest it is the practices – and therefore I don’t forget those that easily. But I can’t say that I wouldn’t have been studying Buddhism. I also happen to discuss with Shedra people about Buddhism… and we discuss everything.

Anonymous, I’m mainly discussing with Drolma, not you. If you are Pema, then I think it’s right to correct your errors – illiterate… :)

LikeLike
Drolma, on 2 January 2011 at 6:45 pm said:

Bella
You need to know in order to question. If you don’t study and investigate, if you don’t have a strong overview of the Buddhist path, you don’t have a basis on which to question. Your mind and reasoning grow dull. It’s that simple.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 2 January 2011 at 1:32 pm said:

The problem I have with all of this, every time s/he posts, her attachment to her teacher’s reputation is displayed to the extent of being fan-atical. To every post by someone questioning Sogyal, there are 5 posts by Bella b. Even without meeting Sogyal I would think, not a good idea, to be a student of someone, who has devotees like this one. Fundamentalism, fanaticism, no thanks.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 2 January 2011 at 12:50 pm said:

I’m not against questioning. I have questioned everything in my life and also in Rigpa. I have had anger towards various Rinpoches, I have always been afraid of being brain washed or joining some cult. It was only because I taught the there’s some real spirituality and progress possible that I have become Tibetan Buddhist. I have been disappointed in life on many levels, I have been disappointed in various Tibetan lamas… and slowly given up the need for perfection, since it only leads to disappointments. But I have to say that I have found in Rigpa and Sogyal Rinpoche the strenght and good things in my life. It’s not perfect, but there I’ve found valuable things to my life.

Sogyal Rinpoche says about the same issue as HH Dalai Lama: you don’t need to emulate every action of the teacher: you don’t need to blow your nose like he does… etc.

In one (Western) Buddhist group the students are emulating every idiotic thing their lama does, because they are not taught NOT to do it, but told to do and be interested in the same things as their lama is interested in. It would be same as if I was told to read same comic strips as SR.

I remember once SR saying that sometimes the teacher can have worse karma than his students…. Don’t you think he has some self-critisism? He laughs at himself, makes jokes… those are not traits of a psychologically disrurbed person. I think the narcissistics don’t really have any sense of humour regarding themselves.

He is more like a mirror to us the students… everything there is in our minds, he seems to respond to them…

LikeLike
Drolma, on 2 January 2011 at 12:31 pm said:

Bella

I have an excerpt from a commentary by HH Dalai Lama on Essence of Refined Gold that I’d like to share:
“It is frequently said that the essence of the training in guru-yoga is to cultivate the art of seeing everything the guru does as perfect; but personally I myself do not like this to be taken too far. Often we see written in the scriptures, ‘every action seen as perfect,’ but this phrase must be seen in the light of Buddha Shakyamuni’s own words: ‘Accept my teachings only after examining them as an analyst buys gold. Accept nothing out of mere faith for me.’ The problem with seeing everything the guru does as perfect is that it very easily turns to poison for both the guru and the disciple. Therefore, whenever I teach this practice, I always advocate that the tradition of ‘every action seen as perfect’ not be stressed. Whenever the guru manifests un-Dharmic qualities or gives teachings contradicting Dharma, the instruction on seeing him as perfect must give way to reason and Dharma wisdom. Take myself, for example. Because many of the previous Dalai Lamas were great sages and I am said to be their reincarnation and also because in this lifetime I give frequent religious discourses, many people place much faith in me, and in their guru-yoga practice, visualize me as being a Buddha. I am also regarded by these people as their secular leader. Therefore, this teaching of ‘every action seen as perfect’ can easily become poison for me in my relationship with my people and in my effective administration. I could think to myself, ‘They all see me as a Buddha, and therefore will accept anything I tell them.’ Too much faith and imputed purity of perception can quite easily turn things rotten. I always recommend that the teaching on seeing the guru’s actions as perfect should not be stressed in the lives of ordinary practitioners. It would be an unfortunate affair if the Buddhadharma, which is established by profound reasoning, were to have to take second place to it… A student of the spiritual path should rely upon a teacher and should meditate on his kindness and good qualities; but the teaching on seeing his actions as perfect can only be applied within the context of the Dharma as a whole and rational approach to knowledge that it advocates” (pp 54-55)

So you see, Bella, this is not about whether or not one is scholarly– it is about “the Buddhadharma, which is established by profound reasoning.” It is about keeping that reasoning alive and not dumbing yourself down. That’s what this conversation is about, I believe.

And a few lines later, His Holiness says, “As for the guru, if he misrepresents this precept of guru-yoga in order to take advantage of his naive disciples, his actions are like pouring the liquid fires of hell directly into his stomach.” (p.55)

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 January 2011 at 8:29 pm said:

true closeness between teacher and student is not something that anyone from outside can ever know. It is not something to be proven or not. Nonetheless, I “see no evidence of a close teacher-student relationship between SR and HH Dalai Lama simply because their approaches to Dharma are so very different. One is calm, the other throws tantrums.One teaches from traditional texts, the other creates his own brand of Dharma. One devotes his life to ethics and the promotion of human values, the other is promiscuous and abusive. And so on—I’m sure there are other differences.”…

I wanted to continue that ethical behavior is also taught in Rigpa. If you ever come across a taped teaching “Opening the heart” you’ll see what SR has taught on love and sexual relationships. That is the only kind of teaching I’ve heard from him (on that tape but also elsewhere, publicly), so I know that he is aware of abuse and the effects of that. Sex without love is not what he promotes.

Own brand of Dharma… I leave the authenticity to other lamas to decide. I’ve noticed that new, insecure Eastern lamas who have spent their entire time in the monasterios teach exactly from the texts – like in the monasterios. The ones with experience about Western people tend to teach more freely. I hardly ever receive scholarly teachings from monks or other lamas who teach in the West: Khandro Rinpoche, Tulku Pema Wangyal, Minguyr Rinpoche… they mostly teach Meditation technique or talk freely about compassion or other subject that they think is timely. What about Chögyam Trungpa? I never met him, but I think he had that psychological approach (like SR), too? What about Akong Rinpoche’s book? Taming the mind? I don’t think it’s based on any traditional text, but the Buddhist philosphy is there.

Are they also teaching their own brand of Dharma?

If you like scholarly approach, then please choose another teacher. SR also teaches the texts, but his best approach is the essence and ‘juice’ of the teachings: “he brings the texts into live”, has some other lamas said.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 January 2011 at 8:05 pm said:

I’ve never ever heard teachings of psychological ‘illnesses’ from Tibetan Buddhist view.

I wanted to add that I have heard teachings on lung disorders, subtle channels and tiglé, and their links to some psychological states, but not about schitzophrenia, manic-depression or psychosis, nor about personality disorders.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 1 January 2011 at 7:45 pm said:

Note that when a post includes more than one weblink it sets off our spam filter, and gets moved into a moderation queue. This can delay the post from appearing. In order to avoid this please try to restrict posts to only one weblink.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 January 2011 at 7:41 pm said:

I’ve met a few Namkhai Norbu’s students over the past years. I also know Buddhists from other groups. I think it’s very difficult to talk with Namkhai Norbu’s students compared to others. I even think the Dzogchen community is the most secretive of all groups. I was also told by them that they don’t want to share – or are asked not to share. I’m not criticising, but I can’t help but bring it up when we talk about ‘cults’ and openness… why we demand openness from some but not from all?

Why I can explain here in detail about Rigpa but Pema doesn’t say a word about Dzogchen community? This is just an observation.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 January 2011 at 6:51 pm said:

“For example, you talk about how there’s lots of study going on at Rigpa and lots of books available at Zam. However, the fact remains that this is not observable from the website or any of the Rigpa programs.”
– If there is a Rigdzin Düpa retreat – like there was 5 years ago, it means that on that retreat that text is taught. That text was also taught during the 3 year retreat. If the web pages are not as informative as some other group’s web pages, it still doesn’t mean these things are not taught. In fact the content of 3-year retreat was for those who joined it either at the temple or at home: it’s not public information because those retreats were not public events. Dzogchen Retreats in the summer are not open to me, but I assume there are deeper teachings: the content is not told on the web pages, since there is a private invitation to the Dzogchen Mandala students. (Dzogchen Mandala students have a daily commitment to some practises).

“For example, what has happened to the Western Shedra? It appears to have disappeared.”
– It hasn’t. Please don’t rely on internet pages. It continues and is going to continue. http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Rigpa_Shedra
http://www.rigpashedra.org/

“Also, why does the introductory study program only use teachings from SR and no other Tibetan Buddhist texts? If students don’t set up a practice of study from the very beginning then their Buddhist practice is on very shaky grounds. This is fact.”
– Introductory program probably concentrates on Meditation, in which Sogyal Rinpoche is an excellent teacher. I wonder how long you were around if you never faced with these things. When were you there? There are also internet courses. On many summer retreats other teachers, like Minguyr Rinpoche and many others are teaching in Rigpa. Minguyr Rinpoche is also an excellent meditation teacher (but a scholar as well).

“she gave me some ridiculous and obscure explanation that had nothing to do with emptiness”.
– Okay, she failed. I’d like to know what she said.

“Nagarjuna, Shantideva”. I’ve heard those names many times in the commentaries we have gone through. I must say that I’m not a scholarly type: I prefer practices and visualizations. I also don’t have a lot time to study Buddhist philosophy, so I’m not a best person to answer these things. Believe me, SR quotes at least those two very often.

“Buddhism is simply about how the water clears when the mud settles—Does SR still teach that?—and then you miss all the other vital points and you think clear water is very profound and complete, you think clear water (and the lama) are all you need.”
– I have never heard SR saying that clear water is all there is to Buddhism: that is just an example what he uses when we sit with him and practice meditation. Meditation is not all he teaches and clear water is not all he teaches about meditation.

Okay: good, if HH Dalai Lama says Tibetan Buddhism is not ‘lamaism’, which is the main political argument of the Chinese against Tibet. SR teaches also the other things, so it’s not all centered around him: he wants us to learn and study, so we can truly hold the teachings after he is gone. He also wants younger teachers to continue to work in Rigpa, so it all doesn’t end when he is gone.

“She gave me that “insider look” and said she would ask and find out. The next day she simply told me no, she couldn’t give me the mantra. That was all. It was clear to most people that I was going through a hard time, but she didn’t offer any other advice or solace. She just simply refused.”
– I have no idea how you were in Rigpa. Vajrasattva mantra I learnt during the first 6 months of being in Rigpa on a Ngöndro retreat. I guess they want you to start the complete Ngöndro and not just a single mantra. I don’t know why that person denied it or didn’t explain why: weird. I do agree that texts are not just handed down. I guess because there’s a lot of people and it feels more safe to give texts on some context where those texts are taught. If all the texts were given freely, then I guess Rigpa would be blaimed for it too.

“So I did ask for help at Lerab Ling and New York, Bella. Not about my personal trouble, but about the Dharma—isn’t this what it’s all about? So when you talk about how friendly people are at Rigpa, look more closely, Bella. See if you can recognize—in yourself and others—that “insider look.” See if there’s a little arrogance coming from those who are close to the big master. See how often he encourages this by separating out his close students. Think about the insidious nature of this, with everyone scrambling to become one of those close students.”

– To some extent that is true. But somebody pointed that out to SR and to the close students – and the system was changed a few years ago. I wonder if that same thing is not happening in every Tib. Buddhist group? I’ve seen it happen. Some teachers are very possessive of their lineage and who they share it with. Others are semi-openly giving at least basic teachings to everybody.

– Mindrolling Monastery is famous for ‘strict orders and rules’: everything is not just shared. Namdroling Monastery is completely different: Penor Rinpoche used to allow boys (and girls?) to become monks only for a short time, like 2 years, because then at least they would have that amount of access to Dharma. Mindrolling is the other extreme.

– I’ve seen mostly kind people in Rigpa, especially those who work in care. I guess all these things are something that they want to approve. I don’t think I can have ‘the insider look’ – I’ve always been a ‘rebel’ and like my freedom so I don’t easily adapt to social organizations.

“This is so very different from my experience as a student of HH Dalai Lama. I have never spoken personally with His Holiness, but within months of my decision to become his student, he began putting all his teachings at Dharamsala on website and suddenly there was a wealth of Dharma available to me. Unlike my experience at Rigpa, I lack for nothing now in terms of the Dharma. There is such an incredible generosity from His Holiness and I feel no need to become a “close student” of his in order to progress on the path—at least not from the outside. My temple is within my heart now and he resides there in a very close and supportive way.”
– I’m happy for you. Maybe it was meant to be this way. Rigpa wasn’t your place. SR has opened my heart. I’ve met HH Dalai Lama also, but not personally – and received teachings from him. He is my idol too, but I didn’t feel the same as with SR, who has really grown deep into me and my heart. I have lost hope to all political leaders in the World: if HH Dalai Lama didn’t exist, I would completely lost my hope in the world – and been even more cynical about the future of the Planet: pollution, capitalism, sex traffic, Islam and wars.

“true closeness between teacher and student is not something that anyone from outside can ever know. It is not something to be proven or not. Nonetheless, I see no evidence of a close teacher-student relationship between SR and HH Dalai Lama simply because their approaches to Dharma are so very different. One is calm, the other throws tantrums.One teaches from traditional texts, the other creates his own brand of Dharma. One devotes his life to ethics and the promotion of human values, the other is promiscuous and abusive. And so on—I’m sure there are other differences.”
– I never said that HH Dalai Lama is the teacher of SR. Connection is more on the level of friendship and mutual support. I have heard HH Dalai Lama is also vey strict with his really personal students, but obviously he never gives those orders infront of an audience. SR trains his students infront of everybody, so yes: there is a difference. SR’s father’s and his own yidam practice is Vajrakilaya, so what can one expect? His Yidam practice is not Avalokiteshvara, even though he does practice those practices as well. I don’t know what is the Yidam practice of HH.

“I understand that the Tenzin Gyatso Institute has as its mission the promotion of His Holiness’s values of altruism. You say it’s going to “preserve HH’s work for future generations.” However, if you look on the website, there is not one quote or teaching from His Holiness on altruism—or anything else—given. He actually has a very distinct perspective on the promotion of human values and he has written and taught extensively on this.”
– Patrick has only applied for the residency permit in the States, so I think it’s only starting. Patrick is a Saint Patrick (if you’ve met him: very calm person) and I’m sure he can present HH Dalai Lamas work perfectly. I have no idea of the function of the center – and how it’s going to be. It was just inaugurated this summer.

“I have a very odd experience every time I look at the picture of His Holiness that SR chooses to put on this website and on the Dzogchen book. When I look, I experience strong aversion and I think: “This is not His Holiness, this is not my lama.” It’s a very strong aversion, almost as if I’m looking at an imposter. Really, the picture looks nothing like him. Odd isn’t it?”
– No, not necessarily. There are different pictures of everybody. You also really have strong aversion to SR, so what ever he does you see it in the negative light, isn’t it? There’s a lot of fear, I believe. I don’t know if you have truly a real reason for the fears, but you clearly had very bad and frightening times behind you. I don’t wonder about your feelings. I just don’t know what could be done to help you get over those events. Maybe if those events happened only a few years ago, it might be too soon to ‘get over’ and trust that it’s really over. Also those experiences happened during meeting with SR, so of course they seem to be related, but I don’t know how they are.

I was wondering if it was so that meeting SR stirred some old karma to surface. Maybe it’s no wonder you are working with people with psychosis? Maybe it’s karmic too? I don’t know what kind of karma it is (so don’t misread me ‘judging’ you or something), but maybe your mission is to know the mind and those experiences so you can help people even better? Many psychologists don’t have those experiences – and they may give wrong advice, just give pills that cause even worse things etc. (violence, when they ought to calm the person down). I don’t know. I have a friend who has gone through psychosis: it occurred at an age (40) when her own mother killed herself. It seems to be related to the family history. She went to hospital for sometime, but decided she has to get out of there as soon as possible: creating art and handicrafts was her way to heal herself. Sometimes she can experience similar sensations as in the psychosis, but she can deal with them: focus or turn her mind into some other things, so that passes away.
I’ve also heard of Shamans being schitzophrenics who can control their states. Could you consider that to be part of your path? Having gone through something yourself can help you to deal with patients better? I would – probably – trust such a psychologist more if I had psychosis than someone in white jacket who doesn’t have a clue of what is happening to me.

“His Holiness doesn’t have a speech impediment.” And then everything was OK again and I woke up and kept on studying. I feel a little the same when I look at that picture. There’s just something wrong there, like a lisp or something, something telling me that this is not where His Holiness resides.”
– Maybe it is not where he resides – yet. Who knows what happens when he dies? Maybe he gives his blessings to that place too? I was there when Lerab Ling temple was inaugurated. I heard many lamas, Tibetan government officials and also HH Dalai Lama talk. It was extremely positive event. There was no cloud on the sky that day. I didn’t get the feeling that there was something wrong in the event, or that HH wouldn’t approve of something. He was very pleased there.

I’m sorry I cannot address all questions, because I’m myself not a learned person. I’m more a practice person than a scholar. I also find psychology interesting and getting to know how mind works etc. Tibetan Buddhism is very mystic path. I hope the texts that high lamas study explains what happens to the mind on the path. I haven’t received teachings on those texts and I don’t know if that kind of information exists there. Your case is also a big mystery to me – and I find it fascinating and would be happy to find answers to those events. Maybe some Bönpo Shaman could have some interesting views on the experiences too? I’ve never ever heard teachings of psychological ‘illnesses’ from Tibetan Buddhist view. I even think those do not exist. Bönpo priest could be the next address. I wonder if Tenzing Wangyal Rinpoche could help?

I guess the interaction between Western Science, psychology and Tibetan Buddhism & meditation is only starting. There are books, but still it’s just a beginning.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 January 2011 at 5:21 pm said:

Drolma, it’s very interesting what psychic powers are. I have no idea. Clairvoyant – I think he is. Charismatic – I think he is. Lovable – I think he is. Funny – yes.

It would be interesting to figure out what the Siddhis are. The whole Buddhist path and the mind can be scary, because we don’t have any system like that in the West. Many have written books, but I don’t know the content since I was too lazy to read.

I agree that the path can seem to be scary and faschinating at the same time – and one needs absolute trust. I always ask for protection from the Buddhas and Guru Rinpoche.

But I think it would be hasty about judging SR for misuse or ‘something evil’… We don’t know enough and lack understanding about the path and psychological processes. SR is open for scientific research.

One think he addresses and has been addressing since the beginning (as long as I have known him) is not to be ‘new agy’, not to be flying in the air etc. He has wanted us to ground ourselves – and asked us not be ‘fluffy’ or hippies searching for weird experiences. He doesn’t give any yogic or energetic teachings. Once I asked him and he said we have to ask another teacher. He teaches us mainly to sit, ground us, be spacious. I think he is right in his teaching style: ground people and not to give away too much too soon. He also pretty much tests the people if they are ready for things…

I would like to ask you to tell me Drolma, how long you knew SR and what really happened. How your experiences started & how soon?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 January 2011 at 5:05 pm said:

“And our obscenely obese little chap never does anything vaguely resembling personal practice — or anything which might require sustained effort. And finally, you are correct: Soggy received a minimal education in India.He is barely literate. I am told by former “dakinis” that he reads comic books and porn. He certainly could not manage to read a Buddhist text out loud to a roomful of people.”

If this is your level of information you have of Sogyal Rinpoche, it’s no wonder no one listens to you.

Barely literate…. he happens to read the texts all the time… in front of us.

He has his daily practice in pecha pages which is about 12 centimeters high.

Pema, you haven’t been around for aeons, so don’t claim to know anything at all.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 1 January 2011 at 2:23 pm said:

Bella—You haven’t really addressed any of my concerns—in fact, you’ve only strengthened them. Your point of view is founded on chit chat with lots of lamas and friends and you never address the main points.

For example, you talk about how there’s lots of study going on at Rigpa and lots of books available at Zam. However, the fact remains that this is not observable from the website or any of the Rigpa programs. For example, what has happened to the Western Shedra? It appears to have disappeared. Also, why does the introductory study program only use teachings from SR and no other Tibetan Buddhist texts? If students don’t set up a practice of study from the very beginning then their Buddhist practice is on very shaky grounds. This is fact.

I used to travel weekly to New York City to attend a “study group” at Rigpa. I remember once that I was stuck on a phrase I read about seeing the lack of inherent existence even in one’s dedication of merit. I questioned the senior student running the study group about this and she gave me some ridiculous and obscure explanation that had nothing to do with emptiness. Certainly as a beginner, if I had been given a more sound grounding in basic Buddhist tenets, I would have avoided much trouble—but Rigpa didn’t provide this.

This is not my own point of view, but that of HH Dalai Lama. I cannot count the number of times His Holiness has said, “The Tibetan tradition of Buddhism is the Nalanda tradition.” Again and again he has advised students to study texts by Nalanda scholars such as those by Nagarjuna, Shantideva and Kamalashila. This is not a Gelug perspective—His Holiness rarely presents a Gelug perspective anymore; his concern is clearly now the preservation of Tibetan Buddhism, which is a precious and complete form of Buddhism—which is the Nalanda tradition.

In fact, for almost every teaching His Holiness gives, he first provides what he calls an “introduction to Buddhism” in which he reminds us all about what Buddhism really is. There is such a temptation to believe that Buddhism is simply about how the water clears when the mud settles—Does SR still teach that?—and then you miss all the other vital points and you think clear water is very profound and complete, you think clear water (and the lama) are all you need.

In fact, it is HH Dalai Lama who speaks so frequently about Lamaism, about how Tibetan Buddhism is NOT about Lamaism. He is not speaking Gelug when he says this, Bella, he is speaking for all Tibetan Buddhist traditions, even those of Dzogchen. This is precisely why study is so important. It puts the role of the lama in a sound perspective based on understanding the complete path. Even in Dzogchen you need this, Bella.

My suspicion is that SR wants to be completely sure of students’ loyalty before he exposes them to a rigorous study program where they might ask uncomfortable questions. When I was at Rigpa there was a strange, almost possessive attitude towards the Dharma. Once at Lerab Ling, I had read that repetition of the 100-syllable mantra was very powerful in removing obstacles and purifying negative karma. As I was going through a very difficult time, I asked a senior student if she could give me this mantra. She gave me that “insider look” and said she would ask and find out. The next day she simply told me no, she couldn’t give me the mantra. That was all. It was clear to most people that I was going through a hard time, but she didn’t offer any other advice or solace. She just simply refused.

So I did ask for help at Lerab Ling and New York, Bella. Not about my personal trouble, but about the Dharma—isn’t this what it’s all about? So when you talk about how friendly people are at Rigpa, look more closely, Bella. See if you can recognize—in yourself and others—that “insider look.” See if there’s a little arrogance coming from those who are close to the big master. See how often he encourages this by separating out his close students. Think about the insidious nature of this, with everyone scrambling to become one of those close students. It reminds me a little of high school.

This is so very different from my experience as a student of HH Dalai Lama. I have never spoken personally with His Holiness, but within months of my decision to become his student, he began putting all his teachings at Dharamsala on website and suddenly there was a wealth of Dharma available to me. Unlike my experience at Rigpa, I lack for nothing now in terms of the Dharma. There is such an incredible generosity from His Holiness and I feel no need to become a “close student” of his in order to progress on the path—at least not from the outside. My temple is within my heart now and he resides there in a very close and supportive way.

So when you recount all the gossip about a deep connection between His Holiness and SR, I’m afraid it has a little taste of that same “insider” approach to the Dharma. SR wants to demonstrate that he too is an insider, a close student of a high master. Your stories about their closeness have a little taste of chit chat—certainly, true closeness between teacher and student is not something that anyone from outside can ever know. It is not something to be proven or not. Nonetheless, I see no evidence of a close teacher-student relationship between SR and HH Dalai Lama simply because their approaches to Dharma are so very different. One is calm, the other throws tantrums. One teaches from traditional texts, the other creates his own brand of Dharma. One devotes his life to ethics and the promotion of human values, the other is promiscuous and abusive. And so on—I’m sure there are other differences.

I understand that the Tenzin Gyatso Institute has as its mission the promotion of His Holiness’s values of altruism. You say it’s going to “preserve HH’s work for future generations.” However, if you look on the website, there is not one quote or teaching from His Holiness on altruism—or anything else—given. He actually has a very distinct perspective on the promotion of human values and he has written and taught extensively on this. I have studied this as part of my work in psychology. However, no evidence of this perspective is available on the website. The website has just started you say, but I think it’s been a few years, surely enough time to get some of those teachings, that are going to be preserved, up and running.

I have a very odd experience every time I look at the picture of His Holiness that SR chooses to put on this website and on the Dzogchen book. When I look, I experience strong aversion and I think: “This is not His Holiness, this is not my lama.” It’s a very strong aversion, almost as if I’m looking at an imposter. Really, the picture looks nothing like him. Odd isn’t it?

I had a similar experience in a dream. I dreamt I was having an interview with His Holiness and he was telling me to stop studying so much. At about the same time that I was wondering how His Holiness would ever say such a thing to any student, in the dream I noticed he was speaking with a lisp. Then I said to myself in the dream—“His Holiness doesn’t have a speech impediment.” And then everything was OK again and I woke up and kept on studying. I feel a little the same when I look at that picture. There’s just something wrong there, like a lisp or something, something telling me that this is not where His Holiness resides.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 1 January 2011 at 2:14 pm said:

Pema

Thanks for the lift. I’ve just finished a long-winded reply to Bella and your reply gave me needed relief! I rarely admit this in public, but I have a soft spot in my heart for the late Trungpa R. probably because my only real Dharma friends come from Shambhala groups– or because he was the first to recognize that there were difficulties in bringing the Dharma to the West. At least he never sugar coated and he did take off those robes before hopping into all those beds, didn’t he?

As for psychic powers, I can tell you that Sogyal definitely has many of them– too many. I don’t know that these have to be siddhis or based on pure conduct or practice. I believe that they can be gained from Bon practices etc. I also believe that these powers carry across lives. They can be used freely to abuse or control others.

On this, I speak from experience. I think those fugitives who have “lost their marbles” as you say have indeed been harmed by Sogyal and his psychic powers. It is difficult to speak in depth on my own personal experiences, but I can tell you that it has taken every ounce of my sanity, courage and steadfastness in the Dharma to withstand these psychic energies, powers– whatever you want to call them. As I gain greater clarity and self-confidence, I see exactly how I have been mentally manipulated and harmed– and this is precisely why I am speaking out now in this forum. I believe this to be a very serious situation.

I am also curious about those fugitives you talk about– are they receiving help? Is it good help? Are they regaining their sanity? It is becoming more and more evident to me that there are no accidents in my life and the strange calling I had four years ago to obtain this degree in mental health counseling, coupled with my own journey in regaining sanity, seems to be for some purpose. So in the same way that you are wanting to know about all those who have been sexually abused by Sogyal, I am very interested in knowing about all those who have been psychiatrically abused.

LikeLike
Pema, on 1 January 2011 at 11:17 am said:

@Drolma,
I’ve never given a thought to aeons…but your comment brings to mind two pearls of wisdom from the late great deeply flawed Trungpa R.
1. “You’ll have an easier life if you don’t do spiritual practice, but if you do — do it 100%”
2. You can’t even start until you get past the excitement”.
Choegyal Namkhai Norbu speaks of integration. And the way he expresses this is about as far removed from fascination with siddhi (psychic powers) as its possible to get. Spiritual practice is simply something you do — without projections and minus expectations.
I have come across several fugitives from Rigpa who have lost their marbles as a result of Sogyal’s manipulative machinations. I think its possible he has picked up some low level siddhi along the way — although I find this difficult to believe because in order to acquire them you do actually have to do some yoga. And our obscenely obese little chap never does anything vaguely resembling personal practice — or anything which might require sustained effort. And finally, you are correct: Soggy received a minimal education in India.He is barely literate. I am told by former “dakinis” that he reads comic books and porn. He certainly could not manage to read a Buddhist text out loud to a roomful of people.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 31 December 2010 at 3:09 pm said:

“Still the main points are being missed. I personally am not that concerned with whether or not SR is a nice person with “good motivation” as you say.”

But you come up with not prostrating to shrine and other things about him trating students in a certain way… I think I need to say my point here too, so there at least 2 sides. We can have different experiences, but I think mine can be added as well.

“I am much more concerned with what Pema terms “the dumbing down of Dharma,” a phenomena that is occuring throughout the West and very particularly at Rigpa.”

It is not happening in Rigpa. I know that people have good intentions, deep devotion (that is needed) and will to help themselves and all sentient beings. People study on all levels, Bodhicitta, shedra, practices… what else there is? They also take care of people.

“1. Is it still policy during teachings that questions not be asked? I remember we were told to “hold our questions in our hearts and they would be answered.” ”

No. People ask questions, but obviously many hundreds people presenting their questions is not an ideal option – or a 2-week retreat would be 1-year retreat. On the other hand I have felt that my questions have been answered even though I didn’t say them aloud to him – during the same retreat. I have also always ‘bothered’ the workers with my little messages or questions to Rinpoche. Sometimes I feel that I can connect with the person and being understood, given a good advice on my issue, sometimes not – it depends on the person, since they are only humans like elsewhere. Many times Rinpoche just gives me the answer during teachings.

“I’m afraid that this instruction simply encouraged me to look towards psychotic experiences for answers to my questions, instead of seeking the solid ground of Dharma. You know, don’t you, that questions and investigations are the core of Buddhist practice? Why won’t SR take them? Is he afraid that he can’t answer them?”

I agree that you should have spoken to somebody about your questions. Of course they seemed very personal and if you didn’t feel you could trust anyone there (didn’t have real friends?) then of course it is a burden to carry such questions in your heart and SR just shaking his head to you… I wish you would have been able to open up to somebody you felt comfortable with. If I had been in your shoes, I think I would have not spoken to anyone either. But I have always had good frinds there, so I did talk about my concerns, since I can’t ‘just shut up’.

“2. Why are none of the major Tibetan Buddhist texts taught at Rigpa (except in the Eastern Shedra, which I presume is only for very advanced students)? It is, in fact, beginners who have the most need of studying these core texts. Why does SR have Patrick read from texts during teachings? Does he not know how to read? Where is the Bodhicharyavatara? Where are the Lojong Teachings? Are they studied or just quoted from randomly?”

They have been gone through all those texts in the three year retreat and home retreats – got them in the centers. Began with Lojong, Bodhicharyavatara, went through Ngöndro, The Three Root practices and Tendrel Nyesel (the daily practice in Rigpa), after that I didn’t join because I’m not part of the 3 year retreat. Patrick has a good voice and clear pronounvciation. Many times SR reads the texts himself too – ususally he comments and gives examples. He uses readers, maybe it’s part of the training that those can continue teaching after… you know what. He also always teaches those readers how to read, so they can ‘get the most of the text out’, the essence. It’s traing on all levels, all the time.

You know, SR travels all the time, sometimes just staying a day in one place. He had a plan to build 1st the outer sangha & the temple, then 2ndly the inner temple, the maturing of the students and 3rd the innermost temple, teaching the sangha during the 3 year retreat. It has happened, but I guess it took some time.

3. Why do none of HH Dalai Lama’s commentaries appear in any Rigpa study programmes? Believe me, there are many commentaries available! Does SR truly respect HH Dalai Lama as a teacher or just as an ornament to show off, showing people that he has friends in high places?”

In Zam shops I’ve seen many books by His Holiness. SR also quotes him at times like he quotes Minguyr Rinpoche, Dudjom Rinpoche and the past masters. He compiles many different commentaries with his workers: takes what he think is best for certain lines, takes several different commentaries for the same text.

He received and took care of HH Dalai Lama when HH first came to Europe in the 70’s. In Rigpa the bond between HH Dalai Lama and Sogyal Rinpoche are considered very strong: karmic from past lives. I wonder how long did you stay in Rigpa and missed that? HH Dalai Lama has shown us that he gives full support for Sogyal Rinpoche. HH even said while visited & inaugurated the Temple in Lerab Ling that he wishes to come back. Another lama said HH NEVER says that: he is usually complaining that the temple is too big or too small, but that time he had been very pleased.

“4. Why, in fact, at the Tenzin Gyatso Institute, are there absolutely no teachings from His Holiness taught? What does that name mean? Is it just another ornament?”

It will preserve the teachings and life work of HH to future generations. Isn’t that what we all want? I haven’t visited, but I think the activity is just starting. Do you know that you are really not the only person in Rigpa, who values HH dalai just like you? :)

5. I once asked the Nyingma lama HE Shyalpa Rinpoche about the importance of studying all the major Madyamaka texts for Dzogchen practice. He said that practicing Dzogchen without studying these texts would be like trying to rock climb without hands. Is that fact properly honored in Rigpa? Or is Dzogchen just taught as something that can occur suddenly in a moment of great devotion? Is Rigpa turning Buddhism into Lamaism?

Somekind of ‘Lamaism’ is integral part of Dzogchen path. I wasn’t part of the 3 year retreat so I don’t know exactly what was taught. I think many practices give you the possibility to experience deep spiritual experiences. It depends a lot about devotion too. I know Nyingma is pretty different from Gelug or Kaguy, since we have deep appreciation of Guru Rinpoche: it’s quite different from Gelug School which never had the same relationship to GR as the Nyingmas. I got my experince during a Three Root practice (Guru practice), but I can’t say what kind of experience it was. Lasted for longer than just a few moments.

Once I asked another lama: “what is Danakosha, where does it exist?” He smiled and looked at me. I can’t remember his words, but at that moment when I looked into his eyes something opened in my mind. Totally unexpected.

I’m not able to answer your questions, but I believe there are the fundamental experiences present in all religions and everybody’d minds & hearts. I’m not a Dzogchen practitioner either. I just do the preliminaries, when I have time. Still it didn’t prevent me from experiencing something.

“Suddenly, one of the men in the group looked at me and said: “Traitor.” He didn’t speak with any rancour, but that he could even come up with such a response to my freedom to leave Rigpa spoke at best of dangerous Sectarianism and at worst of Cultism.”

So, maybe he was ironic, making a joke? If he said it seriously, I think he was just some idiot, so don’t consider his words more than that. I can’t see cultic things happening there, since we are all very free… also to leave. Not many people leave because we see value in staying.

“However nice SR might be to you, Bella, these are the insiduous and lethal risks of his failure to abide by the carefully laid out tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, where no indivdual, no matter what their rank, strays too far from the foundations laid out by the masters of the past.”

I think SR knows it all, so don’t worry. He has more than enough respect for the tradition, past masters – and most of all to Guru Rinpoche. He has also said many times that the Sangha is his family and that he loves us very much. Despite the moments of ‘spanking’… :)

LikeLike
Drolma, on 31 December 2010 at 2:14 pm said:

Pema
Money does play a big role in Dharma centers these days doesn’t it? Here in the US, they’re all overextending themselves with ideas of grandeur and all desperate for cash. I frequently see lamas dance on that fine line between what is permitted and not permitted in regard to money (e.g. never to teach for money, not to hint or bribe). For example, when I was in charge of organizing travel and teachings for a lama at the monastery, I might have a conversation with his wife who would ask the hard questions, e.g. is there going to be a good sized offering? (While no one is to teach in exchange for money, offerings may be made.) HH Dalai Lama stays very pure, teaching for free in India and returning his offerings while in the West. Certainly, he has no need of the money. However, most lamas I have seen are very desperate for money and do questionable things such as hinting and bribing. For example, at HH Karmapa’s monastery in New York, they have a new deal for membership where your picture is sent to His Holiness if you take on a large enough membership package. If you take a little less of a package, your name is sent to His Holiness but not your picture. Of course, if you are just an ordinary member, neither your picture nor your name will be sent. Weird isn’t it?

And in a Dharma Center nearby, the lama is selling gold-plated statues of himself in a former incarnation in order to earn money for building his multi-million dollar monastery. Thousands of dollars for these statues– of himself.

It’s all such weird stuff and it does result in a watering down of authentic Dharma. I think from the Western perspective, people will pay great sums of money, myself included, just to be close to their lama. It’s actually the lama’s psychic powers that are more of a commodity than the Dharma itself. I’ve even watched this happen over the years, with high lamas who once taught from the major texts but are now teaching off the top of their heads or teaching Western psychology. Like Sogyal, they’ve developed a charismatic persona, with humor, wit and that certain something that lamas have– AND THIS SELLS WELL.

It looks to me like lamas believe if they teach authentic Dharma, attendance and donations will slip. They’ll be boring– and besides, it’s hard work keeping up with study.

This all gets worse when you get into the Vajrayana. SO MANY Westerners are practicing highest tantras without a clue as to what they’re doing. When I finished my Ngondro, I myself was instructed to begin Karma Pakshi, a highest tantra. However, this was when things well and truly fell apart for me with my Kagyu lamas, so my practice of Karma Pakshi was put on hold. A year or so later, I studied the books HH Dalai Lama has written on tantra and discovered that I was totally unequipped to be practicing highest tantra, which requires a stable meditation on emptiness and is only appropriate for very few acutely intelligent students.

Today, in almost all Dharma centers, empowerments are given out like lollies and vajrayana practices are done with an abysmal lack of understanding. And I think you’re right, Pema, about the money because Vajrayana sells, doesn’t it? Quick and easy sells big, particularly in the West. Unfortunately, that’s not Dharma, which for most of us involves eons.

And that brings us back to SR, who frequently, while I was involved with Rigpa, would talk about certain methods being “too slow”, as if his methods of abuse and disregard for traditional Dharma were done to speed up everyone’s journey to enlightenment. I wonder if he still does that? At Rigpa, we always had the feeling that enlightenment was just around the corner, ready to happen with a snap of the finger.
Probably that’s why Rigpa discourages the study of texts because students might then find out the more arduous reality of genuine Dharma.
At risk of being long winded here, I have a beautiful little story about this. During a teaching, HH Dalai Lama was asked about the quickest, easiest and cheapest path to enlightenment. In response, His Holiness gave the story of Milarepa and his prize student Gampopa saying good-bye at a bridge. Gampopa was walking away over the bridge, when Milerapa called out to him and said, “Wait. I have one last instruction.” Whereupon, Milarepa pulled down his pants and showed Gampopa his bared bottom, well calloused from years of arduous practice.

His Holiness broke down and wept while telling this story. When he had regained his composure he said, “So don’t think cheapest, easiest, fastest– think eons, think eons.”

LikeLike
Pema, on 31 December 2010 at 9:22 am said:

This is a critical issue Drolma and along with widespread sexual abuse, it is being consistently swept under the carpet by both western devotees and the ethnic Tibetan diaspora. I can to some extent give westerners new to Tibetan Buddhism the benefit of the doubt. They almost certainly believe that what they are getting from Rigpa et alia is the genuine article. On the other hand there are no excuses for ethnic Tibetans. They KNOW the authentic nature of their own traditions. Certainly only a minority of ethnic Tibetans study in depth and practice the yogic/Dzogchen disciplines, but the majority know that they are an integral aspect of the magnificent Tibetan spiritual schema which flourished in its entirety prior to the Chinese takeover. Is the Tibetan diaspora now more interested in the material wealth creation aspect of TB in the developed world? The dharma is without doubt the biggest source of income for the exile Tibetan community. One has to wonder….

LikeLike
Drolma, on 29 December 2010 at 10:36 pm said:

Bella

Still the main points are being missed. I personally am not that concerned with whether or not SR is a nice person with “good motivation” as you say. I am much more concerned with what Pema terms “the dumbing down of Dharma,” a phenomena that is occuring throughout the West and very particularly at Rigpa.

I have some serious questions for the Rigpa trolls:

1. Is it still policy during teachings that questions not be asked? I remember we were told to “hold our questions in our hearts and they would be answered.” I’m afraid that this instruction simply encouraged me to look towards psychotic experiences for answers to my questions, instead of seeking the solid ground of Dharma. You know, don’t you, that questions and investigations are the core of Buddhist practice? Why won’t SR take them? Is he afraid that he can’t answer them?

2. Why are none of the major Tibetan Buddhist texts taught at Rigpa (except in the Eastern Shedra, which I presume is only for very advanced students)? It is, in fact, beginners who have the most need of studying these core texts. Why does SR have Patrick read from texts during teachings? Does he not know how to read? Where is the Bodhicharyavatara? Where are the Lojong Teachings? Are they studied or just quoted from randomly?

3. Why do none of HH Dalai Lama’s commentaries appear in any Rigpa study programmes? Believe me, there are many commentaries available! Does SR truly respect HH Dalai Lama as a teacher or just as an ornament to show off, showing people that he has friends in high places?

4. Why, in fact, at the Tenzin Gyatso Institute, are there absolutely no teachings from His Holiness taught? What does that name mean? Is it just another ornament?

5. I once asked the Nyingma lama HE Shyalpa Rinpoche about the importance of studying all the major Madyamaka texts for Dzogchen practice. He said that practicing Dzogchen without studying these texts would be like trying to rock climb without hands. Is that fact properly honored in Rigpa? Or is Dzogchen just taught as something that can occur suddenly in a moment of great devotion? Is Rigpa turning Buddhism into Lamaism?

These are my concerns, as a Buddhist, who would like to see true Buddhism flourish in the West. I remember an alarming incident that occured a couple of years after I left Rigpa. I was working in the front office at a monastery in upstate New York when a group of Rigpa people, accompanied by some famous lama whose name I’ve forgotten (the movie star one) came by. They had just blessed the ground for the Tenzin Gyatson Institute and wanted to visit all the nearby Buddhist centers. One of the women in the group recognized me and we talked a bit about how I was studying with Kagyus now. Suddenly, one of the men in the group looked at me and said: “Traitor.”
He didn’t speak with any rancour, but that he could even come up with such a response to my freedom to leave Rigpa spoke at best of dangerous Sectarianism and at worst of Cultism.
However nice SR might be to you, Bella, these are the insiduous and lethal risks of his failure to abide by the carefully laid out tradition of Tibetan Buddhism, where no indivdual, no matter what their rank, strays too far from the foundations laid out by the masters of the past.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 25 December 2010 at 8:27 pm said:

So I couldn’t find anything substantial about Victoria Barlow. If you know her, Pema, why don’t you ask her to write here? Is Victoria Barlow acutely suffering from something?

I have been talking to some other lamas, also some monks here in the West: even a monk-lama can stray aside sometimes if they are not under the surveillance of their order…only human, I guess. I’ve travelled to India, stayed in monasteries, met Western women having a Tibetan man as a boyfriend, met Western women having a relationship to a Tibetan monk, met Tibetan nun having a relationship to a monk… all these human things exist on all levels… I must admit it was a shock for me since I had the idealised view of Tibetans being far advanced and I had a need to see something pure and sacred.

I don’t believe in monkhood, nunhood, sainthood etc. Maybe I’ve become somewhat cynical, which is sad, I guess: there’s no paradise on earth, except the state of mind. Somehow I would like to let go of the fantacy of a perfection and paradise on the earth – important is to help where there is need. I think SR is here with a good motivation – and that should count in the discussion too.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 25 December 2010 at 8:01 pm said:

If you wonder why I post in certain manner to Pema, please read all the posts, where you can find out the way she writes… actually the way she writes is something that puts people off. I’ve spoken to lots of people.

In short Pema has been posting about SR smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol, spending money… on what? watching porn… her posts include all kinds of unbelievable slander.

Like one has forgotten or doesn’t know that SR is praying to his lamas and Guru Rinpoche, addressing them often during teachings… He is the lama that has made me believe in the existence and presence of the Buddhas. I think one can feel it.

If me writing this is completely opposite to your experience about Sogyal Rinpoche, then I’m sorry. I don’t mean to offend, but if one pays all their attention to some trivial stuff about their own fantasies and speculations and fears about SR and misses out the important parts, which are really the teachings… then one’s mind chooses to pay attention to drama, and forgots what is really going on. He is here to help people.

He said himself this summer he is not harming anybody – and I really don’t believe that harming someone is his aim. He wants to help people – and he is working pretty hard.

LikeLike
Pema, on 24 December 2010 at 4:30 pm said:

Once again Drolma I agree with you. My friend Victoria Barlow (one of Sogyals’ victims who is not afraid to stand up and be counted) posts on Metafilter — where she reckons there is a much higher quality debate. I guess it has not yet been invaded by Rigpa trolls. Dunno why I hang in here — probably because from time to time really useful stuff materialises. I tend to by-pass the trolls — or tease them a bit b4 I do so.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 24 December 2010 at 3:29 pm said:

Pema– Along those lines, I have noticed a certain lack of authenticity to many of the posts here. Recently the post from “Whatever”, appearing suddenly as it did, left me a little uneasy– as have some of BellaB’s posts. I believe that there is a critical need for people to air their concerns about lamas in legitimate, authentic and considered ways– some of these posts seem to have the effect of simply dumbing down those concerns.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 24 December 2010 at 11:36 am said:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/dec/13/astroturf-libertarians-internet-democracy
in particular:
Articles about the environment are hit harder by such tactics than any others. I love debate, and I often wade into the threads beneath my columns. But it’s a depressing experience, as instead of contesting the issues I raise, many of those who disagree bombard me with infantile abuse, or just keep repeating a fiction, however often you discredit it. This ensures that an intelligent discussion is almost impossible – which appears to be the point.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 December 2010 at 4:00 pm said:

I don’t like Boys’ Clubs either – and I have encountered them everywhere I look, in working places, schools…

I think you should keep in mind that outward appearances and acts (prostrations to the shrine etc.) can be done with all kinds of motivations… one can look and act as a saint, but not actually being more than an empty actor.

What I like about Sogyal Rinpoche is that I see him not ‘pretending’ but being extremely straight. Even so straight that he pisses people off, like you well know.

His weight… Pema should know that he went through an operation in London – and being so skinny (in youth) ever since the operation he has gained weight, since it was done so badly.

Have courage, Pema, you may not live forever, go meet the reality in his presence.

Merry Christmas and Peace.

LikeLike
Pema, on 21 December 2010 at 5:46 pm said:

The prospect of losing the physical reality of one’s tsawai lama is like facing up to family bereavement ( a recent experience for me). It is also the best possible lesson in non-attachment. And yes, ChNN has recovered from life threatening illness once already this time around, so its entirely possible that he’ll do so again. Especially as the worldwide Dzogchen Community is doing practice for him.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 21 December 2010 at 5:38 pm said:

Pema

Yes, His Holiness does carry a burden– and spending more and more time these days with scientists.

I am sorry about your lama, that must be hard for you. I hope he recovers– and I’ve learned to trust that the buddhas do seem to have a way of providing what we need.

LikeLike
Pema, on 21 December 2010 at 10:53 am said:

Drolma — agreed. Let us hope the fallout is less painful than we envisage. My own lama, Choegyal Namkhai Norbu is very ill at the moment and I cannot help my thoughts turning to a future when he is no longer with us in physical form. It churns at my heart. I have very little faith in the tulku system nowadays — but I guess its possible one or two of them might turn out to be exceptional beings on a par with their predecessors — but I am only very cautiously optimistic. HHDL carries a massively heavy burden.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 20 December 2010 at 6:01 pm said:

Pema

Yes indeed, I agree with everything you’re saying. Believe me, I have had a good dose of the boys’ club and its loyalties. However, I believe that the trouble extends far beyond Rigpa and has no simple solutions. Unlike the Pope, Neither HHDL nor HH Karmapa have powers to police TB lamas. Neither do they have powers to fire or expel them. Certainly, they could be more forceful and transparent with their opinions about certain lamas and their behaviors. However, I’m not sure that this would solve the trouble and it might fire up sectarian rivalries instead.

I remember a story I heard from a therapist about a group of psychologists who went to Dharamsala and presented HHDL with multiple cases of lama abuse against students, describing the subsequent psychological damage. I was told that after the psychologists had finished with their reports, His Holiness put his head in his hands and wept.

Pema, I believe that these troubles are more serious and more complicated than we can know. At risk of sounding like a blindly devoted follower, I would suggest that His Holiness is doing the best that he can. If, as you intend, SR’s days as a lama are numbered, then his students will be in great need of support and guidance. From my own experiences, I am not sure which is more torturous, following a treacerous lama or finding out that he is, in fact, treacherous. If these students have a habit of trusting in HHDL, then perhaps their trauma might be eased a little, as mine were, and they might not turn completely away from the Dharma.

LikeLike
Pema, on 20 December 2010 at 3:25 pm said:

@Drolma. Working within the limitations imposed on him by Tibetan cultural constraints and political expediency. I was recently in conversation with a lama whom I respect. He told me that despite deep distaste for Sogyal’s behaviour and dumbing down of the dharma, no lama who wishes to stay within the TB fold can publicly criticise another one. In other words they have to maintain an outward appearance of solidarity. I can see how this stacks up for them as a refugee community — but to me it smells like hypocrisy and a lamentable absence of transparency. Its the way the Vatican functioned for a long time — I don’t need to remind how this worked through.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 20 December 2010 at 2:04 pm said:

Whatever-

Speaking from a Buddhist standpoint, I don’t believe that deceit and treachery, on the part of an influential lama, are sustainable. Something has to give eventually. I concur with Pema that patience is needed. Also, I feel there’s a real need, at this point in time, for all serious Buddhist students to hold fast to the Dharma– which has nothing to do with treachery and deceit. As frustrated as I often feel to see individuals abuse power in the name of Buddhism, I do try not to get caught in frustration or discouragement.

As for HH Dalai Lama’s involvement, I myself feel more comfortable knowing that Sogyal is answerable to His Holiness– if it weren’t for that, I believe his capacity for harm would be greater. For example, in a wonderrful teaching by His Holiness that I watch frequently, one attended by Sogyal in 2004, His Holiness makes reference to lamas who are so fat that they can’t get out of their chairs– and he says that if a person is fat, it’s their own fault– these are not the sorts of jokes and coments I hear him make in other teachings. In that same teaching, His Holiness made references to the great risk of lamas straying from the major Buddhist texts, the Kangyur and Tengyur,. He also talked at length about the need for humility in lamas, the need for them to prostrate to the throne before teaching, to remember that the only reason they are on a high seat is to teach the Buddha’s teachings, not because they are important people. He frequently talks about how Tibetan Buddhism is being falsely portrayed as “Lamaism” these days.

So I think he’s working on this as well– but in his own ways.

LikeLike
Pema, on 20 December 2010 at 12:20 pm said:

Please do not despair Whatever. It may seem like a lost cause at the moment, but there are wheels in motion. Sorry to be cryptic but I’m under omerta right now. As soon as I can be more open I will do so here.

LikeLike
whatever, on 20 December 2010 at 11:27 am said:

By now I´m 100% sure that nothing will ever stop sogyal and rigpa from doing what they`re doing…
It´s a perfectly run machinery and they have money, important people like the Dalai Lama and time working for them. As we speak here there are hundreds or thousands of new students filling his Centers and there is nothing anybody can do!
Look at their Websites…Look at the picture which reaches the surface of public awareness…Most wiki sites don`t even mention any criticism. I don`t think that anybody cares about the few people discussing the topic here. There`s just not enough support and I don`t think that will change! I just don`t see it coming and I don`t even know where it should come from! The only thing which maybe could make a difference would be some of the victims going to court and that obviously will not happen (and even then I doubt if they could be successfull as he would probably pay himself out of the trial again). It´s such a sad and disgusting thing but I think everybody will have to live with the fact that people like sogyal get away with the harm they cause…at least in this world…

LikeLike
Pema, on 4 December 2010 at 10:08 pm said:

Thank you Drolma. I am very impressed with your level headed eloquence and commitment to the moral high ground.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 4 December 2010 at 10:23 am said:

Pema

I pray for you then and the great, supreme power of truth. May it shine.
Glad about the anger and hatred, those unfriendly bedfellows.

LikeLike
Pema, on 3 December 2010 at 4:45 pm said:

Drolma — Hatred and anger? Are you ticking me off? Not so. More like realism and determination. Have tried all other routes. No success.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 3 December 2010 at 4:40 pm said:

Pema

Yes and HH Dalai Lama has been trying to reason with the Chinese for fifty years! It doesn’t change the fact that hatred and anger only hurt you yourself and finally impede your ability to achieve your goal. Isn’t that true? (I also have a little gleaming faith inside that the Buddhas themselves can assist enormously with this particular project– but only if we keep our gloves on!) Just a thought.

LikeLike
Pema, on 3 December 2010 at 4:30 pm said:

@Drolma. Broadly I agree with your comments but I cannot see how to it is possible to deal with Sogyal’s actions without dealing with him as an individual. Many people have tried the path of reason with Sogyal. All have failed. I have tried for 20 years. Now the gloves are off.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 3 December 2010 at 3:40 pm said:

Pema

I, and other Buddhists like me, can only support you in your efforts to bring SR’s transgressions to light. The Buddha Dharma will flourish in the world only in an atmosphere of complete transparency. So I applaud you for your work towards that.

However, I cannot support a vendetta or ill will towards any being. It is my deep belief that only SR’s actions must be targeted and not SR himself.

Like you, I hold my head and want to scream over the hypocracy I see practiced in Dharma centers today. I am happy to be in exile! However, I try to keep a broader perspective on what I see. For example, I believe that my main Kagyu lama, the lama that saw me through Ngondro, is essentially a humble and good-hearted Buddhist monk. However, I saw two motivations that would lead him to harm others and break his vows. One was his deep deep loyalty to other Tibetan lamas, a loyalty that completely blinded him to their actions. The other was simple superstition.

I think we mustn’t underestimate the effect that China’s horrific genocide of Tibetans has had on her lamas. Maybe they thought they were invincible. Of course, I don’t know about that, because the lamas I knew rarely spoke of their feelings. In fact, one of my lamas had lost his entire family when he was ten, but he never once spoke of it. At the time, I simply believed that he was above any feelings of trauma or sorrow.

What I appreciate highly from both HH Dalai Lama and HH Karmapa is their willingness to speak of their feelings about Tibet and what has happened. They speak in human terms, not pretending to be above the trouble. HH Karmapa speaks of how he misses his mother. HH Dalai Lama speaks of his worry and feelings of helplessness.

This is surely a critical period for the Buddha Dharma and we do have to demand a higher level of accountability. We must.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 2 December 2010 at 9:33 pm said:

bellaB

Thanks, bella, I appreciate your honesty and willingness to share your experiences.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 2 December 2010 at 7:39 pm said:

Yes, I would like to know for sure, but to know for sure will not happen in the internet forums – or at least during the past ten years I didn’t find strong evidence neither in the internet nor in real life. Stories that tell a different view and different experience – supportive and grounding – I did hear in real life.

I did think a lot about this issue this past year. On a retreat I spoke to many people, who are working in Rigpa. I’m 100% sure those people do give feedback for Rinpoche. I’m certain he knows what is on our minds (by other means as well). On the last day of the retreat he said that “I’m not harming anyone. You can count on me”. I still feel more like trusting him than strangers, who tell vague stories. I also ‘owe’ him a glimpse of the nature of mind. A person who gave me that, is just not going to be pushed aside in my life.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 2 December 2010 at 11:11 am said:

BellaB

But wouldn’t you like to know for sure? Wouldn’t you like to know that the person you are entrusting your spiritual wellbeing to is not, in fact, a sexual predator? Particularly in the Vajrayana, where we are instructed to overlook the faults of our lamas and see them as Buddhas, wouldn’t it be a good idea to find out first exactly how big those faults are?

I believe it was HH Karmapa who observed recently that we spend more time over the purchase of a car than we do over choosing the person we are entrusting with our innermost being. It’s called blind devotion, a little like the thinking of Creationists in Christian circles. I see a lot of that in Dharma centers these days.

Of course, you would have great trouble knowing for sure about SR wouldn’t you, because the hard questions are never encouraged in Rigpa. There’s far too much fear. Questioning the teacher is unthinkable, isn’t it? Terrifying, right? I remember that.

I still wonder if those Rigpa members who talk about SR’s right, as a lay practitioner, to sexual freedom with a consenting female have any understanding of Buddhist ethics? Has the definition of sexual misconduct ever been outlined? My suspicion is that if SR has no concern for the Buddhist mandate regarding sexual misconduct that he also likely lies, steals and perhaps even murders as well. Where do you draw the line? Wouldn’t you like to know for sure?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 December 2010 at 11:37 pm said:

Yes, we can quit. But I hope you understand other people’s side: those who have no single evidence of the claimed events. There hasn’t been an open court case where I could read what has happened. I can only read what has been claimed. Those ‘sloppy kisses’, ‘beer’, ‘sexual healing’ don’t fit to the Sogyal Rinpoche I’ve met. Either he has changed or he has been falsely accused. How can we know of his ‘remorse’ or ‘quilt’? Would you believe everything said on the internet? For creating slander there can be many reasons.

I read the few stories here – and I must say that those stories are really just *few*. I also paid attention to the story: how general was it or how detailed. I’m sorry but the detailed descriptions came from people who had a positive experience. If ‘second hand’ person tells a vague story it doesn’t really convince me. Some were said to have been written by the victims, but again, the stories had quite little detail.

I’m not denying your experience, I’m not saying I know what has happened. My old school friend has been psychotic and I know it is a state where there’s fear and paranoia even. Everything is interpreted a bit ‘wrong’. I wonder how Sogyal Rinpoche should face such a person? When there are hundreds of people around? Maybe the easiest way to deal with it is to shake one’s head and not to start conversation that could blow out of proportions. I’m sorry if my words hurt you. It’s not my intention. Psychosis is not usually a solid state – it can heal, but living is a bit on the edge, said one who experienced it.

Could you make use of your experience and perhapse write a book on Buddhism and psychosis? That would be really helpful too. It would be interesting to learn how Tibetans interpret mental states and sicknesses. I heard American Indians’ shamans can be schitzophrenic, but they can control their states, unlike the more permanently ‘sick’. I heard also that schitzophrenia is not permanent in other cultures because there is a framework in which that sickness can be faced with and worked with.

A book about advice on how Buddhist lamas should treat mentally unstable persons? Is there any idea?

(You may think I’m side tracking, but I didn’t plan to write this: it just evolved while writing.)

LikeLike
Drolma, on 1 December 2010 at 10:21 pm said:

BellaB

So we’re probably going around in circles a little bit now, missing each others main concerns. Probably time to quit.

I think the three of us all have three missions– Pema’s is, as she states clearly, to end SR’s career, yours is to defend him and the people who are helped by Rigpa and mine is to make a call to the hearts of all Buddhist students– Stop glossing over your lama’s transgressions.

The fact remains, if it weren’t for SR’s deep pocket, he might have been imprisoned. He might today be wearing an anklet so that police can monitor his whereabouts. He has committed a crime for which he has shown no remorse. That is a fact.

Every time we participate in hiding our lama’s transgressions, we diminish ourselves and imperil our Buddhist practices. We MUST demand of our lamas that they behave ethically and question them seriously and stubbornly when they don’t. We must demand of ourselves no compromise, no looking the other way, no political maneuvering.

So this is my mission, but I realize it is not something you wish to discuss so we should probably quit.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 December 2010 at 7:15 pm said:

“I would pass by someone who had just received his or her bashing and there would be no friendly, kind greeting. There would be no humble warm hearted look. Instead, there would be a dark, cold look as if no one lower on the hierarchy existed, as if the ego bashing was an initiation into some priveleged club.”

I don’t know how people usually react after the ego hits… I might not look peaceful or relaxed either after that, if someone questioned my attitude a lot. Changes doesn’t necessarily occur in an instant.

My friend was deeply moved and he started to question his direction in life quite a lot. He was usually pretty ‘ego-full’ and self-assured person. He was used to setting the rules… so I think it was okay that Rinpoche set his back against the wall questioning him: is it an ego-trip for him to receive Dzogchen teachings or is it something deeper? What does he want? Is he leaving Rigpa if he doesn’t get his way?

He pondered and lived in uncertainty for months. Today there are no big questions and no uncertainty.

Ill-tempered… but he does question people also humourously. Actually he cracks jokes most of the time… also about himself. The narcissists that Pema keeps on describing usually can’t laugh at themselves, can they? When it’s the ‘wrathful manifestation’ in action it of course stays in people’s minds longer even if it was only 1% time of the retreat.

I’m also wondering sometimes about wrathfulness, but it doesn’t really bother me. Once I saw a dream about him in the ‘wrathful form’, but the message in the dream was to not go to harmful direction (where I wasn’t planning on going anyway). For me that wrathful form meant: shocking me awake and really seriously telling me not to go to harmful direction. Therefore it was protective act. Dreams are only dreams, of course, from my own mind.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 1 December 2010 at 6:45 pm said:

BellaB

Sorry I lost that last thread. I believe that the deer story will be the downfall of the Dharma in the West if we are not more careful. There is a general idea that if the lama does something, then he knows best and even if it looks bad on the outside, it is for the best. I even starting eating meat with that mindset!

Your ideas about SR working with your egos reminds me a little of that. The entire 84,000 teachings of the Buddha can probably be called instructions on how to work on our egos. It is the whole point of Buddhism. I don’t see any need for SR to bring in his own practice of ill temper to work on students’ egos. My experience at Rigpa was that there was more ego not less as a result of the “ego bashing” from SR. I would pass by someone who had just received his or her bashing and there would be no friendly, kind greeting. There would be no humble warm hearted look. Instead, there would be a dark, cold look as if no one lower on the hierarchy existed, as if the ego bashing was an initiation into some priveleged club.

I cannot see how SR’s practices of ill temper can promote a more kind hearted, open, less suspicious, more generous and trusting sangha. If the teacher demonstrates ill temper, even if his eyes don’t look that way, the mood in the room changes and becomes rougher and more filled with ire. It breaks any hope of cultivating bodhicitta.

As for the texts, I made a mistake in my reference to the Shedra study– I had meant to refer to the online study programme, which uses no texts. It does appear that the Eastern Shedra is a good study programme. I do still wonder, however, why SR never takes on a text as his teaching topic. Perhaps it’s for the same reason that he chooses to work on egos the way he does.

I appreciate that you find Rigpa works for you– believe me, I have been where you are at; I understand devotion. I can only say that I see danger when ethical standards are not adhered in the lives of senior teachers and when excuses for their behavior become too frequent.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 1 December 2010 at 6:25 pm said:

BellaB

I guess I just find it very strange how Rigpa students gloss over a criminal offense done by their main guru. In this society, a sexual transgression is a serious matter. $10 million does not repair it. Only true remorse repairs it– and a pledge never to repeat the offense.

At the same time, I don’t find it strange how Rigpa students gloss over this offense because I’ve been where you’re at. During the years that I worked in a Kagyu monastery, I sat in a town board meeting, watching top officials of the monastery lie to board members– in front of the lamas– in order to obtain a building permit to expand the monastery. I was told to pass all calls from the town on to our building committee and answer no questions myself. This was all done in the interests of building up Dharma in the West– AND I DIDN’T BAT AN EYE. I remember thinking to myself that HH Karmapa (still a boy) would probably rather we worked on building a peaceful, strong sangha, rather than lots of fancy rooms. Instead, the mood became grumpier, the debt grew bigger, but the fancy expansion was built.

There is a story about how it is permissable to lie to a hunter about the whereabouts of a deer that I believe is at risk of becoming the

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 December 2010 at 5:15 pm said:

Pema, time and again I wonder on which planet you live on? You didn’t meet SR for decades…

Please: is it really too much to ask you to meet him again? I can’t stand your (unjustified) rage, disgust anymore… Think of the energy you embody: is it helpful – to you, or anyone? I need to leave ‘the room’…

LikeLike
Pema, on 1 December 2010 at 4:05 pm said:

@Drolma
Q. Is he still seducing married women? Dunno but probably. Janice Doe was married — so was Patrick Gaffney’s wife — can’t remember her name. Not the one he has now. The status, mindset, age, vulnerability etc etc of women doesn’t matter one iota to our fat, unhealthy little chap who fancies himself as a posh guru. In fact I think he hates women — his Mum’s a tyrant and that probably warped him from an early age. He probably hates himself too.
Q. Is he still a foul-tempered martinet? Without a shadow of doubt. He has a mean, controlling, sadistic streak which he indulges at the expense of other people’s peace of mind and self respect.
How right you are that these characteristic s are as far away as you can get from the teachings of Shakyamuni Budda. I wonder if Sogyal has even read the Eightfold Path?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 December 2010 at 3:00 pm said:

I have never met a married or non-married woman Sogyal Rinpoche would have had sex with. Can’t comment on that.

I just met some students and we discussed Rinpoche’s behavior in general. They have been on the fire line some times because of their work and they told me that even if he seems to be angry, he is not. That can be seen in his eyes, which are not angry.

For me he has always seem like a manifestation of Vajrakilaya – an ‘ice-hockey player’ that you can’t win. The hits one gets from plain ordinary teachings are all targeted at ones ego. Maybe at times it’s not YOUR ego that is targeted and you feel pity for someone, but perhaps the person her/himself doensn’t feel the need for pity. I know someone that got a rough ride for sometime by Rinpoche, who was testing his loyality before giving him Dzogchen teachings. He is a very strong person, so I think it was the rough ride ever he got during his life.

I’m sure that in a period when you had specially rough time, Rinpoche’s group teachings were not necessarily the best for you. I don’t know. If ever I had problems (which I didn’t impose on him directly, but thought about them a lot and spoke them to my friends) Rinpoche always seemed to be on my side, protected me and helped me. Sometimes he has gone through a text on lojong – and in between teaching on that he said things irrelevant to the text, but directly hitting ‘my issue’. So, in a way I have never felt abandoned by him.

When I have been feeling ashamed of my failure on Dharma, he would always smile warmly to me – not punishing me. I’m probably not on that level of commitment that I would get ‘rough time’.

Rigpa Shedra: it is taught by Khenpo Namdrol and other lamas in Nepal (not so much by Sogyal Rinpoche). These other texts (non-Shedra) are taught by Rinpoche in regular retreats. During the 3-year retreat he went through all basic texts, main practices in Rigpa (3 Roots and others) and ended up teaching Dzogchen to some lucky ones. Other lamas also teach to Rigpa Sangha every year. He wishes younger lamas to continue his work after he has passed away.

He seem to be the right teacher for me. Maybe he is not for you? One can find the kind of teacher for oneself that seems to work. I don’t know how he didn’t ‘notice’ you and your issues. I don’t know how the situation was from his side.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 1 December 2010 at 1:12 pm said:

BellaB

I am sure that there are kind people like yourself who make Rigpa a better place for people– and I am glad of that. I have several opinions about the need for being “shaken” during a retreat and about the lack of texts used in the Rigpa Shedra program, but really, these issues are all secondary to the main point being raised in this thread.

I remember once during my darkest time in 1999 sitting at a Rigpa retreat in France while SR, dressed in an undershirt, called us all together for an unexpected meeting so that he could tantrum and chew us all out viciously. I’m not sure what it was we had done wrong, but I sat in an abject slump, sure that I had committed some unforgiveable sin.

This was a very low point in my life and I am wondering: does SR still tantrum and chew people out? Is he still having sex with married women? (This is considered “sexual misconduct” in the Buddhist cannon). Has he EVER demonstrated remorse for his physical and sexual assault of a sentient being?

In both Buddhism and modern psychological practices, remorse is a necessary first step towards repairing the damage of a transgression. Sexual transgressors are taken very seriously both in my profession and in the legal field– one transgression is frequently treated as a life-long risk.

People can say whatever they like about “crazy yogis” and their unorthodox methods with their students, but ethical discipline is still central to the Dharma. It is a vital foundation to the Buddhist path. I wonder if ethics are ever taught in Rigpa retreats? I wonder if patience is ever taught? Has SR become more patient?

Personally, I believe that SR’s flagrant disregard of ethical boundaries– and his disregard for basic practices such as simple patience– puts Rigpa and its students at risk. In my mind, it is an example of the dangers of straying too far from the central, core teachings of the Buddha.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 30 November 2010 at 9:25 pm said:

“I believe that it is a dangerous situation when one man can have deep psychological effects on hundreds of individuals, many of whom he never even meets.”

Could be shaking… then there is the Care System in Rigpa. In the start of every retreat people are separated into small groups, where they can disguss their experiences. If one is really ‘shaken’ by something one can talk privately with olders students or Care persons, who often have psychological training (outside Rigpa). I would assume it would happen quite rarely that some one is as shaken as you were. One might also think of karma. Could that explain some of our experiences? I was also quite often stirred emotionally, because the teachings do make us reflect on our selves. I guess that is the purpose of them too? Retreat after retreat my reactions have quieted down. I guess it’s like in therapy when a person is facing his/her emotions and thoughts enough, dealt with them, they stop bothering the person. I assume something like that has happened to me. One becomes more peaceful and not so reactive.

“It is dangerous because SR, at the same time that he is having strong psychological effects on many people, does not even teach from traditional Buddhist texts but from his own personal brand of Dharma.”

It’s not only his own brand of Dharma. I think you may know how devoted he is to Guru Rinpoche and his own masters. We have been going through many texts. People like Patrick reads them often aloud and Sogyal Rinpoche comments on them. He also has gathered with his close students the commentaries of different masters on the texts – and they are also read aloud. His teachings are not his inventions…

Strangely enough many other visiting lamas have commented how calm Rigpa sangha is. How it has matured. There are many different sides to the reality. I wanted to bring this one in.

LikeLike
Pema, on 30 November 2010 at 8:23 am said:

Hello again Drolma. Your points are lucid, relevant and accurate. Thank you. If you are interested in talking to me in more detail please Google me. My name is Mary Finnigan. I am the journalist who has been on Sogyal’s case for many years…as you are probably aware from posts in this forum.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 30 November 2010 at 12:38 am said:

BellaB

Of course, I could never make the claim that SR actually imposed my psychotic experiences on me. My intention in writing on this thread was only that I might benefit anyone with similar experiences. However, I might add that as a mental health counselor, I have worked with psychotic individuals and I know that if my experiences to do with SR had been entirely my own mental projection and psychosis, I would be stark raving mad by now. Instead, without any medications or psychiatric intervention, I have managed to regain my sanity.

The reality that frightens me most about the situation with Rigpa is exactly the one which you describe, when you describe a “powerful master” who “makes great impact on us, shakes us, touches us deeply.” I believe that it is a dangerous situation when one man can have deep psychological effects on hundreds of individuals, many of whom he never even meets. It is dangerous because SR, at the same time that he is having strong psychological effects on many people, does not even teach from traditional Buddhist texts but from his own personal brand of Dharma. Even HH Dalai Lama never does that, but always has a text on which he bases his teachings and always gives the name of the teacher he has received the text from.

I believe that with the Buddha Dharma spreading so swiftly throughout the West there is a grave danger if teachers do not stay close to the traditional teachings. I believe that Tibetan lamas have considerable psychic clout that can be misused easily. What frightens me most about my own experiences with SR and other lamas is how willing I grew to excuse everything they did and said. I think I could have excused them for murder! I swiftly became a complete follower. I lost the Buddha’s central advice, which is that we test his teachings the way that a goldsmith tests the quality of gold and never accept his words out of mere devotion. It is so important to keep that sharpness, that alertness.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 29 November 2010 at 5:50 pm said:

Dear Drolma,

I’m truly sorry for your experience and I feel sad from my heart (for your life story).

I must still say that there is a difference between Sogyal Rinpoche and the projections people have about him. He is a great master and he presses our buttons… I have no idea what kind of ‘visions’ or dreams you saw about him, but please remember they were born fundamentally in your own mind.

The real life Sogyal Rinpoche obviously tried to send you another message by shaking his head to you. He didn’t try to encourage your fantasies (?) about him by flirting with you. I think he is pretty direct in that way. I guess something made you take your ideas as more real than what was actually happening in reality.

In fact, opposite things happened in reality than what you accuse him of. I’m wondering how often these internet stories are based on similar experiences. Reality vs. projections, expectations, fears, hopes… He himself said last summer he will not harm anybody.

I am happy for you, Drolma, anyway that you find peace with HH Dalai Lama.

Pema,

did you – for once – stop to think what has really happened and what are people’s fantacies about reality? A powerful master like Sogyal Rinpoche makes great impact on us, shakes us, touches us deeply… sometimes our reactions can be a bit distorted. Like you know, Vajrayana is not for everybody. One needs to be able to separate ones thoughts and emotions as projections. If one becomes completely one with thoughts and emotions, it’s not training in a Buddhist way, I think. I’m myself driven by thoughts and emotions so I’m not trying to say anything ‘from a higher level’.

Pema, I still think you should go and visit Sogyal Rinpoche himself. Just to make sure you are not reacting out of ignorance, but are aware about the reality and how Sogyal Rinpoche really is. It’s difficult to wrap him into a box with definite ideas… especially when you try to do it from the distance, relying on internet stories or past memories/projections. Please, face him – today.

LikeLike
Pema, on 16 November 2010 at 4:27 pm said:

Sorry Drolma — I was tagged as Anonymous — no idea why because this thread knows me as Pema.

LikeLike
Pema, on 16 November 2010 at 4:25 pm said:

Anonymous you are doing fine. This thread is widely read. I am doing my best re warnings as well.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 16 November 2010 at 4:04 pm said:

Anonymous

Thank you for your kind words. Your advice on how better to approach a lama reminds me of some advice HH Dalai Lama makes to students who ask about abusive lamas. He says that we should take a teacher as a lecturer for a long time before committing to him or her as a disciple. He has also said that we should have the “long noses” of reporters and sniff lamas out from behind and from all around. Unfortunately for me, lama devotion blindsided me very early on and I don’t think anyone could ever have convinced me to be more careful and sniff around!
His Holiness also says, over and over– “Read more books” and this is the advice I believe saved my life and is helping me heal from this horror. Through study, we can do as you say and advance our own spiritual path– we can question and reflect and ignite our own intelligence.
There’s a real conflict between the courage and self-confidence needed to progress on the Buddhist path and the “weak at the knees” experience of devotion. I wish I knew how to really warn people about this!

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 15 November 2010 at 9:57 pm said:

Dear Drolma,
Each time I encounter a cry from the heart like yours I feel humbled. There is nothing more I can say or do to make it easier for the people I now know, who have been traumatised by Rigpa and other TB organisations. All I can say to you is that HHDL is probably more trustworthy than many lamas who are currently enjoying luxurious lifestyles at the expense of needy, deluded western devotees. The message of Buddha Shakyamuni is clear — no-one, no guru, friend, relative or therapist can advance your spiritual awarness for you. They can give you a road map and offer guidance along the way…but the persistent work is up to you and you alone. They are teachers. they are not gods. Relate to them as teachers. If they measure up in terms of wisdom, compassion and intelligence respect them for these attributes. But do not surrender your common sense.

LikeLike
Drolma, on 15 November 2010 at 7:33 pm said:

Dear Pema

I believe that it is probably important now to look at the situation in Rigpa as an empire in the process of crumbling. I say this because there are thousands of people who are deeply and emotionally involved with Sogyal, who can be harmed when he falls and we need to be thinking about them. I believe that this is why HH Dalai Lama is staying so close to Rigpa. I believe that Sogyal’s students will have great need of His Holiness in the years to come– and they have great need of us. We need to stop bickering!
I speak from experience, from someone who herself was badly scarred from connecting with Sogyal and his empire. Eleven years ago, when I first attended a Rigpa retreat, I was a happily married mother of five daughters. Within a year, I was psychotic, my marriage was destroyed and I was sending my two youngest daughters away to live with their father in Australia so that I could become Sogyal’s wife and live in France. As I say, I had become psychotic– I believed that Sogyal was speaking to me through clairvoyance and telling me to leave my family and become his wife. His voice in my head directed my every move, telling me not to eat and not to participate in family activities. Over just a few months, I lost 20 lbs and the trust of a good husband. This all occurred and I never once exchanged a word with Sogyal. I attended all his teachings, but everytime I tried to speak to him, he would either look away or shake his head.
Over time, I started drinking and smoking heavily and became dangerously suicidal. Nevertheless, it took me some time to actually believe that I was never going to be Sogyal’s wife– amazing!
I then started studying Buddhism at KTD in Woodstock, NY, with Kagyu lamas there. By then, I was such a wreck that I had no chance of establishing a healthy relationship with any lama. For five years, I travelled from lama to lama until the day that I was driving down the New York State Thruway on my way home from a teaching with a Nyingma lama, sobbing and smoking and suicidal. When I arrived home that day and looked at the photo of HHDalaiLama on my wall, I knew suddenly that I was through with all those lamas and would stick fast with His Holiness and his teachings and his practices and his simple message of loving kindness.
From that day, five years ago, I have been studying Buddhism with His Holiness daily and practicing refuge and my vows and I have not had a suicidal thought. It has been a hellish journey and I am still torn to shreds emotionally, but there is a solid ground beneath my feet that I call the true Dharma– and there is a slow, strong, solid trust growing between myself and my lama, HH Dalai Lama, that I know will not fail me.
I write this because it is difficult to fathom the depth of horror a student experiences when the lama she has entrusted with her very being is shown to be treacherous– it is impossible for anyone walking into a Rigpa gathering to understand the extraordinary dynamics of guru devotion that causes our intellect to become dumbed down and our best selves to become lost. My youngest daughter describes me during my worst days of lama madness as “a hunched over abject woman”. This was not the woman who was her mother before I met Sogyal– nor is it the woman I am now. Yet I too would have justified all my abject, dumb stupidity as the lama working on my ego. I too would have said that it is what I needed. I would have let Sogyal do anything to me. Anything.
I think we are at a critical juncture with Tibetan Buddhism in the West. I think if it is to survive, we all need to support each other and not fall into bickering. Those of us who have been damaged in our relationships with lamas, need to remember how it felt to be devoted and honor the devotion in our fellow human beings. At the same time, we all need to stand up straighter– and help each other stand up straighter– and demand from Tibetan lamas that they bring us a pure tradition of Buddhism– and demand from ourselves that we refuse to be dumbed down. We must refuse to be dumbed down! We all must question our lamas and continue to expose their abuses of power and then support and respect each other as well.
Please, let’s stop the bickering and see what’s to be done to get through this difficult time.

LikeLike
KS Tan, on 7 November 2010 at 2:59 am said:

Pema
have you checked out this site before? i like to recommend this source of one web translation:
THE MIND TRAINING IN EIGHT VERSES
http://www.khandro.net/practice_8verses.htm
i believe your reverance Teacher had introuduced before?
S.E.Asian Reader

LikeLike
bellaB, on 10 September 2010 at 1:25 pm said:

Anonymous, who ever you are: a lot of anger in your post. I hope you KNOW what you are angry about.

I did get my answers this summer – and that is enough of this slanderous B*** for me. I did talk person to person with people – and I think I would sniff outragous lies…. like Pemas

… if you read her posts it’s pretty easy to see her agenda. I’m still wondering if she dared to do a reality check with her ‘own lama’ Namkhai Norbu, a good friend of Sogyal’s, about her stories. I believe many high lamas as the ones mentioned above are clairvoyant – unlike Pema.

LikeLike
Pema, on 10 September 2010 at 7:06 am said:

Tee hee..Wikipedia says there must be some truth in the allegations against Sogyal because ” he lacks credibility as a chick magnet”.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhist_sex_abuse_cases

LikeLike
Pema, on 9 September 2010 at 4:34 pm said:

Er — for “he” in line 3 above read Sogyal.

LikeLike
Pema, on 9 September 2010 at 4:33 pm said:

Anonym — I would very much like to talk to you. I am easy to locate via Google. I am the journalist who wrote the 1995 item in The Guardian following the Janice Doe lawsuit. I have been in hot pursuit ever since and will not rest until he is taken out of circulation as a teacher. FYI there is a grovelling apology from a Zen Roshi caught out having sex with his students on the Tricycle blog. I have emailed it to Rigpa, suggesting it as an example for Sogyal to follow. The Roshi is resigning his position as an abbot.

LikeLike
anonym, on 5 September 2010 at 12:07 pm said:

“…seek answers in the real world…” So I guess being a student of this charlatan for many years and being pushed into a hell that is hard to describe, being traumatised and hurt on a very deep level and loosing faith completely as a result of that, ending up in therapy and still struggling to get life back together, talking to others who have experienced the same stories which followed the exact same patterns and witness their deep pain and problems they have to deal with even years after they had to leave the community and teacher they trusted and in the first place turned to in search for help and guidance…I guess all that has nothing to do with the real world as the real world seems to be exclusively all the lovey dovey stuff that`s happening in rigpa (you again did what`s right and talked to older students in rigpa…what did you expect THEM to say? THEY think they are doing nothing wrong…Everything is kept secret…has to kept secret from students “not ready for it”!) All this has been explained and described in comments above and the dynamics leading to that point have been revealed for example by June Campbell. I`m not writing this to add anything to that or to convince you (as I´m 100% sure this will not happen and as far as I`m concerned it doesn`t have to. If you really think that should be your teacher and that is what you want to become like, that`s fine with me). I`m writing this because your one dimensional views on this topic are (once again) hurting and disrespecting all those who experienced hell because of this man and his mislead followers (most of them not knowing what`s going on behind closed doors). 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…” My personal view on that is, that a spiritual teacher, just like a trustworthy Therapist in a western context, should not abuse his position to have sex with his students/clients EVEN or ESPECIALLY if they want it (as if that would be a good and healthy sign…) There MIGHT be an exception in some rare cases (like for example Dudjom Rinpoche and his wife) if it is really about consort practice but I`m pretty sure that is not what we`re talking about here as there seem to be hundreds of girls (if that is enough) which in some cases were seduced on their first retreat and don`t tell me that all of them were on the spiritual level to benefit from a higher tantric practice (if you think so, you should get some more information about what the exact requirements for such a practice really are)…And if it`s “casual sex between two adults who both want it”, you should ask yourself: did the girls REALLY want exactly THAT or what were the hopes they maybe had in doing so? (and don`t just blame it on the magic aura of men in positions of power…) What brought them to that point? Is there probably a repeating pattern in an organisation which brings girls to the point wanting it and is that really helpful for them (even if they think so or are brought to the point in believing it…healing family karma etc…)? What is the dynamic between a teacher and a student and what are the deeper emotional and psychological layers beneath such a relationship? etc…What also really bothers me is that all the other complex stories evolving around that topic and all the lives being destroyed don`t seem to mean anything at all. Of course that`s not your intention but what comes across between the lines of all your justifications tells a different story and reveals a lot of the cynicism, self-righteousness and disrespect of the rigpa sangha for everyone who is not following their godlike teacher without asking too many questions…even though I think that`s not something exclusively going on inside rigpa, rather than being a dangerous dynamic in many religous movements…(as they put a lot of honest meant energy and good will into something they believe in hole heartedly which on the other hand naturally tends to lead to a direction were a lot of self-defensive patterns will rise up if anything is going wrong…and then you go to war with God on YOUR side or your teacher is an enlightened Buddha who can`t do anything wrong which justifies any behavior whatsoever…) but I DO think that this is a very big problem especially in rigpa!!
But as I said: all of this has been explained above…
One last thing: I have personally seen people break down after what Sogyal did to them and and due to his behaviour and I know that this is always downplayed by the rigpa students as something beneficial which they should be thankful for…like it would reveal something to them they still have to work on (it`s always their problem…it never has to do with any misbehavior or incapacity of their teacher…). At least I can speak for myself, that what I experienced and still have to struggle with is far from being beneficial for me in any way..! It has nothing to do with the story of “the wise teacher showing you your deeper stuff which keep you from living life to it`s full potential”…After years of therapy I can say that it is a deep trauma that has been following me ever since and this special problem is not something building up on older stuff which now (thanks to Sogyal) I can work on…THIS particular story has been started by him! But of course that is only my “not ready”-view and has nothing to do with Sogyal or any of his responsibilities as a teacher. I`ve now come to the point where I`ve lost my connection to Buddhism because I just can`t trust a teacher the way it seems to be necessary in Buddhism at some point. I tried it for years and I just can`t do it anymore because all the stuff I experienced in rigpa always comes up again. But when I first left rigpa I tried to find my way within the buddhist community, searching for other teachers and in doing so I stumbled across the Spirit Rock Center on the Internet and I found out that they have an Ethics Code that is based on the awareness of exactly the problematic dynamics that can occur in a spiritual Organisation which I found really impressive. They even have regular meetings to check the dynamics of the Organisation which seems to be a really healthy thing, which is why I thought it might be useful to share it here:

Teacher Code of Ethics

“The Spirit Rock teachers recognize that the foundation of spiritual life rests upon our mindful and caring relationship to the life around us. We acknowledge that without the support of monastic vows and Asian customs, we have a need for clear Western guidelines. In keeping with this understanding, and for the long-term benefit of ourselves and the community at large, we, as lay teachers, agree to uphold the five lay training precepts. Furthermore, we have specifically expanded the scope of these five precepts to make them explicitly appropriate to our role as teachers of the Dharma in our specific cultural setting. The Spirit Rock teachers have thus agreed to the following guidelines:

1) We undertake the precept of refraining from killing.
In undertaking this precept we acknowledge the interconnection of all beings and our respect for all life. We agree to refine our understanding of not killing and nonharming in all our actions. We seek to understand the implication of this precept in such difficult areas as abortion, euthanasia, and the killing of pets. While some of us recommend vegetarianism, and others do not, we all commit ourselves to fulfilling this precept in the spirit of reverence for life.

2) We undertake the precept of refraining from stealing.
We agree to not take that which does not belong to us and to respect the property of others. We agree to bring consciousness to the use of all of the earth’s resources in a respectful and ecological way. We agree to be honest in our dealing with money and not to misappropriate money committed to Dharma projects. We agree to offer teachings without favoritism in regard to student’s financial circumstances.

3) We undertake the precept of refraining from false speech.
We agree to speak that which is true and useful and to refrain from gossip in our community. We agree to hold in confidence what is explicitly told to us in confidence. We agree to cultivate conscious and clear communication, and to cultivate the quality of loving-kindness and honesty as the basis of our speech.

4) We undertake the precept of refraining from sexual misconduct.
We agree to avoid creating harm through sexuality and to avoid sexual exploitation or relationships of a sexual manner that are outside of the bounds of the relationship commitments we have made to another or that involve another who has made vows to another. Teachers with vows of celibacy will live according to their vows. Teachers in committed relationships will honor their vows and refrain from adultery. All teachers agree not to use their teaching role to exploit their authority and position in order to assume a sexual relationship with a student.

Because several single teachers in our community have developed partnerships and marriages with former students, we acknowledge that such a healthy relationship can be possible, but that great care and sensitivity are needed. We agree that in this case the following guidelines are crucial.

a) A sexual relationship is never appropriate between teachers and students.
b) During retreats or formal teaching, any intimation of future student-teacher romantic or sexual relationship is inappropriate.
c) If interest in a genuine and committed relationship develops over time between a single teacher and a student, the student-teacher relationship must clearly and consciously have ended before any further development toward a romantic relationship. Such a relationship must be approached with restraint and sensitivity – in no case should it occur immediately after retreat. A minimum time period of three months or longer from the last formal teaching between them, and a clear understanding from both parties that the student-teacher relationship has ended must be coupled with a conscious commitment to enter into a relationship that brings no harm to either party.

5) We undertake the precept of refraining from intoxicants that cause heedlessness or loss of awareness.

It is clear that substance abuse is the cause of tremendous suffering. We agree that there should be no use of intoxicants during retreats or while on retreat premises. We agree not to abuse or misuse intoxicants at any time. We agree that if any teacher has a drug or alcohol addiction problem, it should be immediately addressed by the community.”

I understand that this is mainly a Vipassana Buddhist Society but I think as Buddhism is coming to the west everybody should think really carefully about wether he wants every little relic of the tibetan society as part of an authentic Buddhism in the west or if not the west has also something to add to Buddhism which might be important for future societies.

I also want to point out that I´m not against Buddhism because of my experiences. It`s just no longer a way for me…
One last thing: I`ve spoken to people I know very well and who have talked for example to one of Sogyals former assistents about that topic (not the one who led the centers in europe and reveals his experiences in the story above) who had nothing good to say about him also. This guy now lives in Dharamsala and is close to many other Lamas and I know for sure that Sogyal is not the well respected Lama he presents himself (and is presented by his followers…). I know that rigpa always argues that the Dalai Lama has visited Lerab Ling and that Sogyal is close to him…but HH has a lot of far reaching responsibilities (for example regarding Tibet) and like with anything there are many things involved that have to be considered but I`m pretty sure this is not the last chapter in this story! As someone else described it in a comment above: The shit-covered Boomerang will find it`s way back…
All the best wishes and love to everyone who has been rattled and hurt by his experiences within rigpa!
There is nothing to fear…

LikeLike
bellaB, on 2 August 2010 at 8:53 am said:

I have clarified to myself (and hopefully to other Sogyal Rinpoche’s students) that Sogyal Rinpoche is not and hasn’t abused females. I met old students, who’ve been close to SR for 20-30 years – and their descriptions did convince me forever. Also meeting him and hearing his own direct words assured me forever. If I ever had a small doubt – it’s gone – completely. It was born out of my own fears – about men.

Some of his girlfrieds are or have been students, which is okay in Tibetan environment and in Tibetan Buddhism world wide. (Should he rather have relationships to Muslim women?) Tibetan Buddhist master is not fundamentally the same as a Christian priest – that is how it is in Tibetan tradition. Women were not abused, they were not children, victims of abuse. Other Tibetan Buddhist masters have also met their girlfriend or wife as their student. End of story.

MANY women have had wishes to be his girlfriends – and haven’t managed to arrive there. I hope bitterness is not a motivation factor here in propagating slander.

People have different VIEWs on Sogyal Rinpoche or any lama, priest, person they meet. That is natural. People see any action differently and judge what they see in their own way. I hope people would give each other some room in this area. Opinions and reactions can also change in the course of time when one truly learns to know a person.

Sogyal Rinpoche’s intent is to help people. It’s sad if any – who might benefit from the teachings – are put off by this page filled with slander. I hope people would seek the answers in the real world, rather than in this page, which has nothing to offer but same rumours from 15 years ago. Ask senior students in Rigpa, if you are in doubt. Ask untill you are satisfied with the answer and can give up your fear. There’s nothing to fear.

LikeLike
Conor O'Conur, on 2 May 2010 at 6:26 pm said:

bye bye bella, bella bye bye! Bye bye bela, we aint gonna cry (ii-i I I II)
Hello Mary How are you oo oo oooo oooo oooh?
Peace Sister We is winnin!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 27 April 2010 at 6:03 pm said:

You can do your job by alienating the very people you want to reach. Well done!

LikeLike
Jb, on 27 April 2010 at 11:25 am said:

“I wish I would go away. I wish Pema and JB to go away too.”

Well deary, while you cant control your external world (Pema and JB), you can be damned sure that you yourself are here by choice. Your choices and wishes can be unified if you just go away; then we can get on with doing our job and you can get on with yours in more appropriate arena

LikeLike
JB, on 26 April 2010 at 8:37 pm said:

Kapasi, we agree! b Neither of us is on any ‘side’ Your above mail seems to be little more than a weak attempt to consolidate a very juvenile us v them mentality in this discussion. Can we stick to the issue of Sogyal Rinpoche and his abuse of his position and disciples? This is not about personalities, its about actions (and results!)

Do bear in mind that Rigpa ALREADY runs a relatively large publicity juggernaut that is geared to creating the impression that all in the garden is rosy. Those of us here who speak of things differently are doing so to give people the WHOLE truth, not just one side. You seem to be here in an attempt to deny the public any access whatsoever to the facts already established.
fair play? From my side, I believe so. From your side however, you appear to be assuming a posture similar to the one the Catholics held before the abuse scandal broke. Learn from that experience-Just as a beach ball leaps further out of the water, the more you submerge it, the truth that outs will invoke significantly more disgust the more you try to bury it. Buddhism and free speech are compatible, not contradictory.

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 26 April 2010 at 7:04 pm said:

Give it a rest, love.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 26 April 2010 at 6:39 pm said:

Did I call you a liar? I called somebody else a liar.

It’s a bit tricky if you say you know things to be true, but you don’t say how or what are the things, it’s also quite useless. It’s like you can’t back up things.

I wish I would go away. I wish Pema and JB to go away too.

I would wish Tara and Kapasi and people who have whatever – good or bad – experiences to tell – to remain.

LikeLike
JB, on 26 April 2010 at 6:31 pm said:

All we need to do now is get back to the issues, instead of complaining about personalities and tactics.
bella, i wish you would go away-you havent said anything new for weeks-still fishing, insulting. Tara-the aggression you percieve may well have basis in reality but when someone repeatedly calls you a liar over issues you know to be true, it becomes exasperating

LikeLike
bellaB, on 26 April 2010 at 3:25 pm said:

So sorry for repeating my sentences.

If nobody noticed I did try to make you people see Pema’s slander.

If she was genuine somehow I would have listened to her. But, since I see it very clearly that she throws all kinds of stuff, almost swear words to make things seem more and more horrendeous, I feel I must stand up for something – for fairness sake. I just don’t like to listen to her. I don’t know if anybody else is interested in asking her to explain about finacial abuse in Rigpa. I would really be interest in knowing about her informants. (I think she doesn’t have them, just talking). You say I sidetrack, but I actually respond to things that are thrown in the air here.

JB – paranoia, I agree.

I’m very pleased that Tara came. If you had come earlier, you would have been taken my load from others… I was attacked by many individuals many times. There was no-one from the “positive -Rigpa-experience side”. But my fierce response was to Pema’s ugly words. If you can’t understand that, I’m sorry.

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 26 April 2010 at 2:23 pm said:

“I’m NOT involved at any level in rigpa spin and consider myself to be quite genuine and open-minded, so i’m glad some people picked up from that in my posts, as i found it quite difficult to respond.”

Yes, that came across. It is hard to digest all this stuff, it’s true. Welcome, Tara.

LikeLike
Tara, on 26 April 2010 at 9:44 am said:

thank you !!

LikeLike
Pema, on 26 April 2010 at 9:18 am said:

Hi Tara,
I’ve done a mea culpa for pouncing on you and I hope you accept that it is sincere. There has been so much blood-letting during the time I’ve been trying to deal effectively with Sogyal, I guess I am inclined to over-react. The vilification, threats, character assaasination etc etc that have been thrown at me have forced me to develop a very thick skin. Here one poster consistently flames me with all manner of personal insults. In order to deal with this and other obstacles associated with being a consistent whistle blower I use language which makes people understand that I am determined to bring this campaign to a successful conclusion. Thankfully I have allies. I don’t think I could continue without them and I do not want to let them down.

LikeLike
Tara, on 26 April 2010 at 9:07 am said:

just saw my typo in case i’ve fed any paranoia !!

I’m NOT involved at any level in rigpa spin and consider myself to be quite genuine and open-minded, so i’m glad some people picked up from that in my posts, as i found it quite difficult to respond. anyway, i think it’s best to move onwards.

LikeLike
Tara, on 26 April 2010 at 9:03 am said:

I’ve been away from this for a couple of days as to be honest, i was finding the whole discussion a bit stifling for lots of reasons, so it’s interesting to see the discussion above. I guess it’s a very emotive issue and everyone has strongly held views and different experiences. I do think if there’s to be real dialogue here including lots of opinions, the pouncing needs to stop or at least be better managed. The idea of looking at people’s ip addresses and so on is a level of paranoia that i just can’t believe. I for example post from my laptop and sometimes my husband’s laptop – should i stop in case i’m now thought of as two people ?!! i came here for a reason, to find out as much information as i could as like i’ve said before i’ve had a very different experience which i’m trying to reconcile – do you have any idea how confusing and painful that can be and then to have people jumping on you when you’re still in the midst of that confusion ? I’m involved at any level in rigpa spin and consider myself to be quite genuine and open-minded, so i’m glad some people picked up from that in my posts, as i found it quite difficult to respond. anyway, i think it’s best to move onwards.

LikeLike
Miaow, on 25 April 2010 at 6:35 pm said:

Woof!

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 6:08 pm said:

Maybe we could change Name Changer’s name to Shape Shifter.

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 6:06 pm said:

Hey Pema, respect to you too, for admitting when you sometimes get it wrong. Bella reminds me of those meetings where one person just goes on and on and on and doesn’t shut up. Often the problem then is a poor chairperson. In this case, it is rather more difficult, for if someone wants to play the troll you can’t really stop them. But my god, it is tedious.

LikeLike
Pema, on 25 April 2010 at 4:40 pm said:

Er — did I controdict myself there? I do skim read odd sentences that stand out in the bella avalanche — ones that jump out at you because they are daft beyond belief — even by Bella standards.

LikeLike
Pema, on 25 April 2010 at 4:37 pm said:

I agree re Tara — I think she is genuine and that there was some over-reaction. Mea culpa. I agree re Bella — but her game is pretty obvious and I salute Name Changer for being the only person here who is willing to persevere with her. I don’t read her, nor do I respond to her. Well, not directly. In some cases she is so ludicrously off beam I slide in a snide aside. Still trying not to devote too much time and energy to this but it does seem worthwhile to keep up the momentum.

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 4:14 pm said:

Ok. I am just exasperated with reading Bellab and the minute someone new comes on, they are met with paranoia and distrust. I don’t like all this ‘let’s ask the webmaster’ business. If Rigpa wants to come on and spin, well let them. They have as much right to post here as you and I-isn’t it about freedom of speech. To start threatening revealing IP adresses and so on, seems particularly stupid. Personally, reading Bella b and Tara, the differences were miles apart. Tara was open minded. Our name changing friend is doing a good job, but jumping on every newcomer who raises their voice is not helping IMO. I would like to see Bella (mod edit) be quiet (end mod edit) and hear from others-be they devotees or otherwise. As it is, the only person talking is Bellab and Name-Changer…(and you and me intermittently). L8ers.

LikeLike
Pema, on 25 April 2010 at 2:43 pm said:

Hey Kapasi — you and I are on the same side of the fence. Please lets not argue among ourselves. I think our multiple personality disorder friend is doing a great job. I don’t see him as paranoid — but he doesn’t take himself entirely seriously. I think its a matter of style that creates the differences. I have been called to task by Buddhists many times for being a blunt instrument. When trying to deal with Christopher Hansard on RR (unsuccessfully) I pussyfooted very carefully with abused women over an extended period of time. It didn’t make the slightest difference. All of them bottled out after dithering and wasting my time for weeks on end. Now I am convinced it is useful to take a tough line with Sogyal. I don’t need any more evidence. I have enough already. It would be wonderful if his victims could find the courage to speak out collectively using their real names — but the chances of that happening are virtually zilch. If they could recall their own misery, multiply it by 1,000 and amplify it to fill the Albert Hall that would be effective in taking our little fat sadistic sexual predator permanently out of circulation. But again, I’m not holding my breath.

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 2:09 pm said:

O FFS, you and your paranoia. No wonder you keep changing your name.

LikeLike
Miaow, on 25 April 2010 at 1:37 pm said:

PS Maybe we can ask the webmaster if bellab is using the same electronic address as tara to clarify-we already know I have a multiple personality disorder. Actually, Im pretty sure she wouldnt, since her predecessor, Lets be fair, was outed for doing just that.

LikeLike
Miaow, on 25 April 2010 at 12:41 pm said:

good luck

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 11:24 am said:

I’m not assuming you are a man..but as you’ve said a friend of yours was abused by him, then saying the women themselves should take action does not mean I have assumed you are a man.

You can post under as many names as you like, but some of us can see it is one person. I just feel it gives a lie as to how many people are posting here. It seems to me, having posted here and having followed this site, we have about 3 regular posters.

You don’t mind jumping to conclusions about new posters like Tara, and making wild accusations about her taking over from Bella and giving it the Rigpa spin. If I hadn’t posted here before, I am damned if I would want to speak out here. It is a paranoid environment, and you are playing a big part in it, by constantly changing your name. To my eye, it looks stupid, rather like being in a room where someone walks out and returns with a false moustache or false beard, or a patch over one eye.

Hence why I bowed out of this forum, and why I am bowing out again. Bella b has bored me rigid with her endless diatribes and denials, but you’re coming in as a close 2nd. It’s stale as hell in here.

Good luck though, I just wish you’d clean up your own act a bit.Just my opinion. That’s it for a few more months, from me.

LikeLike
Miaow, on 25 April 2010 at 10:56 am said:

You complained about this before-its the message not the medium. Names are convenient for those who make ad hominem attacks; a moving target is harder to hit.

You have also aired your ‘kid gloves’ approach before: I personally prefer such pejorative terms as ‘little fat man’ to ‘woman beating, manipulative sexual abuser’, though both are equally accurate.

Women are posting on the net (you assume I am a man?) and I am certain that several have been to Inform; Dominique C actually gave a talk there several years back and Inform are obviously well aware of Sogyals ‘tantric’ shenanigans-why not contact them and ask? In short, your advice has been taken. It is working, slowly, assisted by such sites as this. In time, the media will go for this-wait until the Mohan Singh case is resolved, for instance, a perfect juncture for the Press to do a feature on sexual abuse in Buddhism. It might make a pleasant change from the Christian focus of the media on abuse at the present.

Focusing on posters names doesn’t strike me as being high on the list of priorities. Exposing sexual, physical and psychological abuse are.

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 10:11 am said:

JC/BC/Miaow-etc etc. See how confusing it is when you keep changing your name?

LikeLike
Kapasi, on 25 April 2010 at 10:09 am said:

The Anon posts were all mine bar the one beginning ‘I think your long essay…” which is Bellab. If you read my post under ‘Anon’ which is directed to Bella you would see they were different posts.

I hold to what I said in my post-you keep using pejorative terms about SR and you alienate a lot of people. Not sure where you want to go with all of this, but if the French media won’t touch it and the English press won’t, then what next?

My feeling is that the women themselves need to take action, whether that is putting it on the internet or going to somewhere like Inform.

Cya.

LikeLike
Miaow, on 25 April 2010 at 9:16 am said:

OK-there are two more names for you-still all liars?

LikeLike
Pema, on 25 April 2010 at 7:55 am said:

Someone has not bothered to read the item quoted from Les 3 Mondes carefully. They have got th wrong end of the stick. For starters, Denise is a woman. How do I know that? I know because its her real name and I have been in correrspondence with her for 2 years. The item itself is a report by Denise on her PRIVATE intervierw with Soggy, which she asked for in order to explain her reasons for leaving the 3 year retreat. It was Sogyal who slagged off Chogyal Namkhai Norbu (and then subsequently went grovelling to him, begging to teach at Merigar). A word of caution — you enter the lion’s den here. There are sharp people around who do not allow mistakes to go un-noticed. They will pounce on you with the faintest qualm and even call you a little fat man if they feel like it. BTW — Denise was not the person who led the exodus from the 3 year retreat. The person who led was Guy Durand. Also his real name. Also fearless in his determination to bring Sogyal to justice.

LikeLike
Miaow, on 24 April 2010 at 9:59 pm said:

Oh BTW, ‘Anonyomous’ and ‘bella b’, its ‘conversing’ not ‘conversating’. Funny how you both spelt that wrong eh?

LikeLike
Miaow, on 24 April 2010 at 9:57 pm said:

“Think about incest-think about a child abused by their father-they still love their father. I don’t think you really get it. You deserve Bella b”.

How very telling-I have encountered a number of incest vicitims who dont love their father and would rather he was dead. however………..
No one who has been abused gets the sharp end here. This space is reserved for the outing of manipulative ego maniacs who abuse. ‘Little fat man’? Come on. Anyone who abused by this man would think I was being sympathetic to hear him referred to so unscathingly.

As I say though, its not about his height or his waist, its about his abusive behaviour, behaviour that a ‘big tall’ man might have the guts to admit to.

I would suggest you watch a few Morecambe and Wise xmas specials, you know, Eric Morecambe and his best mate Ernie, who he described as ‘short, fat and hairy’. (Actually, SR does look a teensy bit like a Tibetan Ernie Wise-even more so now. But Ernie didnt dye his hair so there the similarity ends.)

I think we may have another tactician on our hands?

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 24 April 2010 at 8:20 pm said:

“he is a man, he is little, he is fat.
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”
call him Buddha, call him abuser; either way, he is a little fat man.”

If you don’t see it, then so be it. I imagine a lot of people reading that would recoil as I do. It’s unnesecary and I can’t imagine anyone who had been abused wanting to tell their story to you. Think about incest-think about a child abused by their father-they still love their father. I don’t think you really get it. You deserve Bella b.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 24 April 2010 at 8:18 pm said:

BellaB, are you the one in a meeting who dominates all the time? The one who won’t let anyone else talk? You have spent months repeating yourself ad nauseum, as if your feelings on the matter were so much more important than anyone elses.

Do take a back seat for a little while-I am certain other people might have something to say, if only you would just pipe down.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 24 April 2010 at 7:07 pm said:

I think your long essay by someone who is claimed to have left retreat after 10 months is a bit dodgy. It’s not really an interview. I can not imagine that ‘interview’ having happened: there’s no logic. If the man was angry or disappointed at SR, it should be visible somehow in the interview.

But instead he is side tracking to Namkhai Norbu which has nothing to do with the whole issue. Why are they not conversating about his reasons for him leaving the retreat? I would imagine SR pressing quite hard on someone threatening to leave the 3 year retreat – for his own sake.

The structure of the story feels unbelievable, I have to say. That is why I said it sounds bizarre. I have heard about this rumour elsewhere – not in the internet – and the story I’ve heard doesn’t reflect this ‘interview’. I can’t see the difficult questions asked nor answered. It’s more like the persons own pondering about some issue.

LikeLike
JB, on 24 April 2010 at 6:54 pm said:

he is a man, he is little, he is fat.
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.”
call him Buddha, call him abuser; either way, he is a little fat man.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 24 April 2010 at 4:39 pm said:

I’m really not sure calling him a ‘fat little man’ is very helpful. I think a lot of people won’t come forward as there seems to be no objectivity on the part of those who want to see him own his actions. Whilst I daresay there is reason to be rude about him, I feel it is wholly detrimental.

LikeLike
JB, on 24 April 2010 at 3:58 pm said:

Well, at least people might respect him for admitting his human weaknesses. That would be a step forward for the little fat man.
It would also place him higher in the miralty stakes than groups like the FWBO and NKT, both of which have complex histories of abuse and manipulation. They seem to think the best way to weather the storm is to deny everything. Good news is, the Catholics tried that too.
Ultimately though, he wont do it. Thats why people like us have to do what we do, painful and uncomfortable as it is for ourselves. Ultimately, truth is the most important thing. if I get a bad name for telling the truth, I think I can live (and die) with it. On the other hand, a life of lies will certainly end in misery.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 24 April 2010 at 1:17 pm said:

The sad thing is that if he came clean, confessed and resolved not to paw young women again, then he’d gather a load more support. Tiger Woods is back playing golf, people love those who own up to their addictions, make a public confession and get help and resolution. Look how coke addiction helped Kate Moss’s career!

LikeLike
JB, on 24 April 2010 at 11:23 am said:

Hey, I made it up! Use it if you like-no copyright issues.
Peas be upon you too sis. (unless youre being sarchastic in which case, this means war!)

LikeLike
Pema, on 24 April 2010 at 9:46 am said:

Ma salaama JB — your eloquence is breath-taking. S**t covered boomerang — superb!

LikeLike
JB, on 24 April 2010 at 9:16 am said:

In short, I have to listen to your view but not you to mine. If someone sees something differently from you, THEY are necessarily wrong, and the difficult points that you feel uncomfortable with, you refuse to address (because it sound ‘bizarre’)

Like i said, this site is for ALL sides/ views to be expressed, not just one. You reject what you cannot accept and assert that only your view is true.

I DONT WANT YOU TO RESPOND TO ME AND I DINT THINK ANYONE ELSE DOES-you never do, you simply reject criticism (even when based on evidence) and continue your claim that Gods job has been taken over by HH Sogyal.

Look. Dzogchen is good. Nyingma is good. Dharma is good.

Screwing disciples however is wrong. Actions have consequences. Its payback time.

What caused all this furore was not Mary F, nor this DI site, nor the other commentators who have posted here, nor the pieces in various broadsheet newspapers. The person who threw this particular s==t covered boomerang was your teacher himself. Like everyone else, now he pays the price AS what goes around comes around. Its not others inflicting retribution; its Sogyal’s own actions which are haunting him. If he gets accused of abuse repeatedly, from various sources, its because he has been abusive. It is not a hate campaign-karma takes care of everything!
If you believe in Free Speech, you will not continue simply rejecting everything, every time anyone writes here.
I preferred it when you admitted that SR could well have been screwing his students but it was all a very long time ago so it doesnt matter anymore.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 April 2010 at 8:36 pm said:

JB, if you want other people here to respond to a specific sentence or word, then try to underline that. If you send along written text (by whom?) I can pick those things I have something to say about.

I’m not going to dwelve into some stuff that sounds bizarre to me. (All the interview was a bit strange, but I could only react to 1-2 points to clarify).

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 April 2010 at 8:27 pm said:

You know JB, there are as many views on SR and his behavior as there are people. Your view is not necessarily the authentic one – nor I claim to have the absolute truth.

If I view an event which Pema calls ‘RITUAL public humiliation’ as something totally different, then I guess I can see things the way I see them? Or should I put Pema-glasses on or let Pema brainwash me into seeing things her way? I have my own glasses and experiences.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 April 2010 at 8:23 pm said:

I comment on what’s written here by OTHER people, so ask them to stick to the issue, for G*** S***!

LikeLike
JB, on 23 April 2010 at 7:49 pm said:

F%s sake-stick to the issues! All this page is for is to inform the public about the other side of SR (You know, free speech, freedom of info etc.)

Your sole intent seems to be to be deny everything and undermine everyone who is critical of Sogyals past behaviour.

On the other hand, I and others here have invited others to read the critical stuff AND check out Rigpa for themselves. Thats freedom.

Outright denial of all criticism at all costs is not the way to allow people to make their own decisions. Nor is constant smoke screening to bury the issue in text. Its deceptive and dishonest.

Seems Buddhism in the West is adopting the same policy the Catholics tried for quite a while. Look at them now.

Maybe if people had the balls to admit they made mistakes and apologise but that would NEVER happen (I mean, look at those cavemen go, kicking those Catholics!)

So where do people find the other side of the story, the WHOLE uncomfortable truth, not the sanitised Rigpa version? I guess its here, isnt it? This is free speech is voiced. And you want us all to shut up and stop raking up all this ‘old news’?

Not bloody likely mate. If the people here shut up, thats 30 odd years of abuse and SR gets off scot-free. If this was the Catholic Church, at least those in power would have the balls to admit their misdemeanours. But for Buddhists, we hide the truth. So people with a history of abuse continue to teach.

Maybe I shouldve been a Catholic; looks they have a monopoly on honesty at the moment.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 April 2010 at 5:54 pm said:

“If you condone ritual public humiliation you have lost touch with your moral compass. So has your friend. But perhaps neither of you had one in the first place. Sogyal attracts damaged people and exploits them to the max.”

Again, an interesting word: RITUAL public humiliation

What is that?

SR doesn’t give private audiences to students, so it happens in the public, if he wants to push someone’s buttons. I don’t think his motivation is exploitation. I don’t believe it, no matter how many times you say it.

Damaged people…? Aren’t we all damaged, in one way or another? For some the wounds are a bit more hidden – and it takes some digging to get in touch with the painful spot that one grasps at.

In a way, if SR chose to push my painful buttons, maybe it is at least a bit less frightening if he did it in front of many people than in some dark corner whispering in my ear. One has the Sangha as a support – and also one has SR as a support. If someone was to press my buttons in order for me to change and learn, I’d rather it was SR or someone I know than some stranger, who I don’t trust. SR considers his students as his family, so there’s some intimacy there, no matter if it is in the shrine room with 200 other students around.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 April 2010 at 5:42 pm said:

I don’t understand these claims about not being able to receive teachings from other lamas…

Once a woman asked (or announced) she wanted to start following another lama. SR said: “which lama?” And after the response he said: “It’s okay. He’s a good lama.”

In Rigpa all through the years other lamas have taught Rigpa-students. Sakya Trizin, Minguyr Rinpoche, Ringu Tulku, Tsoknyi Rinpoche, Trulshik Rinpoche and many many others.

http://www.rigpashedra.org/

At the moment there are 15-20 people in Nepal studing in shedra with various Tibetan masters and Khenpos.

Where do you get this information?!!

When I asked from 2 other Nyigma lamas, that if I became their student, could I still go to Rigpa? Their answer was: No. Perhaps tradition is that you don’t jump from one thing to another – so you don’t get too confused. Choice is always at the end of the day a student’s choice. No-one can force anybody.

LikeLike
JB, on 23 April 2010 at 5:08 pm said:

The blog site in French was crudely translated on this site some time back-here it is.
http://bouddhanar.blogspot.com/2008/08/allgeance-au-seigneur-sogyal-tmoignage.html

The autocrat has banned Tibetan openness of the faithful.

Rigpa members are not allowed to follow the teachings of other traditions. This prohibition is shocking even for Tibetans. In Tibet it was natural to seek instructions from several lamas: Shardza Tashi Gyaltsen, a famous Dzogchenpa, received teachings from 24 various teachers. In addition, Sogyal proclaims the misogyny (of the Tibetan tradition) without giving up the “droit de seigneur” of manipulative gurus. Followers, humiliated by a despotism of another age, have written to the Dalai Lama * to inform him of the wanderings of the Lord of Lerab Ling. They await the response of religious and political leader of the Tibetan diaspora.

Other Dzogchen masters do not prevent their disciples from receiving the teachings of other masters in order to deepen their knowledge of Dharma. Devotion should certainly not be legitimated by promises or intimidation by a guru. For example, being told you that if you do not meet certain requirements, you will not have access to any teachings. This is an obvious form of manipulation.
In any event, devotion to a teacher should be based on his actions, and each must show discernment.
On 23 May 2007 I had an interview with Rinpoche (at his request because I had exited the 3 year retreat Lerab Ling, after 10 months). The following excerpts concern his sex with a young woman, and the notions of exclusivity and devotion.

‘Everyone here says you are ‘awake’, you’re in the view .’
.
He nodded and after a moment of silence, he added:
The Vajrayana always brings obstacles. (He claimed it was the girl that had made propositioned him.)
So I said:
– But since you are awake, how is it that you have been unable to rise above the obstacles?
After a silence, I focused on what he said about his teachings. He said, inter alia, that “the disciples who went to the Dzogchen Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche were the rejects of other sanghas ” I told him I did not agree.
I also asked:
Why do you need to constantly repeat your teachings are the best and that you have documents from Dudjom Rinpoche that prove that you are good and reliable? He said that this was because some students wanted to know what kind of man he was.
Thereafter, I expressed my perception of devotion:
For me, the profound Dharma through study, reflection and meditation induces a certainty, greater motivation and stability conducive to true devotion.
To which he replied:
You are too independent for this kind of retreat.
Devotion and sexual abuse
Sogyal Rinpoche says that complaints about his sexual abuse are rumors. Of course, it can be argued that in terms of relativity, all is illusion, and that in absolute terms, nothing exists, neither self nor spirit. However, we know that this illusion occurs by virtue of interdependence and is still tangible. So how do we reconcile the relative and absolute terms in everyday life? What of the suffering caused to western girls, new to Dharma? Are they not too emotionally vulnerable to engage in sexual practices, purportedly ‘initiation’?
To tolerate deviations to avoid breaking the samaya and preserve the Dharma reflects a misunderstanding.
Addiction is a tragic flaw, especially on the spiritual plane. I think it is good to step back and recognize the dynamics of an organization and find out whether or not there is manipulation. The packaging may be more or less subtle, but nevertheless, once the desire for enlightenment is exacerbated, this can result in tensions and foolish behavior.
Reality Check
Rinpoche gives much importance to rumors, but why if they are unfounded? For example, he took the trouble to send a delegate to the sangha in Montreal to demonstrate that everything was ‘just rumor’. Why spend so much money, time and energy on rumors? A totally ridiculous and wrong strategy which led to the departure of some members, given the inconsistency and lack of transparency of the delegate and the staff responsible for the Rigpa center of Montreal.
Was the visit to stem the exodus of disciples and encouraging the return and repent of dissidents?
Is it not naive to believe that Rigpa, and Sogyal’s teaching Dzogchen represent an end in itself? The lessons of wisdom are excellent tools on the course, I agree. But it is not necessary to retain a teacher who does not correspond to our values.
For me, I am very grateful to have received the teachings of the texts and shédras, meditation and study will continue to be part of my everyday life, but outside Rigpa. ”
Denise, 2008
Addenda
In a letter adressed to the Dalaï Lama i Octobre 2007, plaintiffs of Lérab ling stated :
“Furthermore, we affirm the need for equality between the sexes in all aspects of Buddhist theory and practice.”
” We also want to bring to your attention the non-respect of women and sectarian attitude of Sogyal Rinpoché (ridiculing women during his teachings, not allowing to seek teachings from other masters outside Lerab Ling, obligation to secrecy, many constraints, use of fear and psychological pressures, not allowing criticism, etc.).”

LikeLike
Pema, on 23 April 2010 at 3:25 pm said:

If you condone ritual public humiliation you have lost touch with your moral compass. So has your friend. But perhaps neither of you had one in the first place. Sogyal attracts damaged people and exploits them to the max.

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 23 April 2010 at 2:33 pm said:

My friend is one of those receiving training and he has nothing to complain. He is a rare and a free person. There’s nothing much that could shake him in the first place. SR has done it a twice – and I think it’s good for him too. Makes him think. But it’s also notable that even SR can’t make him do things he doesn’t feel ready for.

SR has said many times that it’s impossible to make Rigpa into a cult, because people are so stubborn. They don’t obey… This is just a response for your Brainwashed -theory.

LikeLike
Pema, on 23 April 2010 at 1:47 pm said:

For older students read brainwashed zombies. For training and learning read sado-masochism. There is no justification for treating fellow human beings in this way. Alongside the sex abuse, Sogyal’s self-indulgent, spoiled brat lack of respect for his sangha is a gross perversion of the Buddhist moral code — any moral code for that matter. It represents a complete departure from basic human decency….and people still see him as a guru? Make ya wanna cry!

LikeLike
Tara, on 23 April 2010 at 12:26 pm said:

I understood the public humiliation was for older students, who had given permission for this as part of training and learning, that’s explanation i was given anyway. i’ll try the translate tool -thks. yes lots of pretty young women in rigpa.

LikeLike
Pema, on 23 April 2010 at 11:36 am said:

I agree that post Janice Doe Sogyal became more discreet about his promiscuity. Most of the action these days takes place at his chalets at Lerab Ling. This probably accounts for the fact that people who have attended Rigpa retreats for many years, minus close encounters with Soggy, have not noticed the sexual shenanigans. But surely you have noticed the way he publicly humiliates his acolytes? And surely you have noticed the very pretty young women in deisigner Barbie Doll outfits who always accompany him?

LikeLike
themadhair, on 23 April 2010 at 11:22 am said:

The website Les Trois Mondes isn’t available in English is it – I don’t speak French.

It is not ideal but you may be able to manage navigating the site by visiting this address:
http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=1&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Ftroismondes.canalblog.com%2Farchives%2F2007%2F10%2F07%2F6443357.html&sl=auto&tl=en

LikeLike
Tara, on 23 April 2010 at 11:08 am said:

It’s all so tremendously sad and painful for everyone involved and very hard to get your head around to be honest. The website Les Trois Mondes isn’t available in English is it – I don’t speak French. I understand this is a more recent case from Lerab Ling ?? Devestating really.

LikeLike
Pema, on 23 April 2010 at 9:45 am said:

It is indeed sad that many kind and sincere people have been deluded into seeing Sogyal Lakar as an authentic teacher. The fact that they will be traumatised and confused when the truth is revealed beyond doubt — is colateral damage which I would personally prefer to avoid. Alas — is cannot be avoided. Students of Trungpa R and Thomas Rich back in the 80s suffered similar distress. So too did students of Kalu R when June Campbell told her story. So where does the buck stop? IMHO with Sogyal, Trungpa and Kalu because their unacceptable behaviour caused the problem in the first place. As Guy Durand articulates on Les Trois Mondes, Buddhist people who feel it their duty to tell the truth are not doing so out of revenge, spite, jealousy or bitterness — but simply because they see the need to highlight corruption, so that in the long term the dharma will continue to flourish. It is the people who ignore abuse who are harming the dharma and will ultimately be the main causative factor in the distress of their fellow sangha members. The longer the dirt festers beneath the rug — the more the impact when it is finally brought to light. PS JB — Sogyal’s abuses continue unabated to this day. They did not stop post Janice Doe. Like all addicts he needs ever-stronger doses in order to get his kicks.

LikeLike
JB, on 23 April 2010 at 9:03 am said:

I wonder if the answer might be something to do with wealth, reputation or status?

LikeLike
JB, on 23 April 2010 at 9:01 am said:

People seem to be construing Rigpa, Buddhism,Sogyal Rinpoche, and Sogyal Rinpoche’s abusive behaviour as the same thing.
I personally have nothing bad to say about Buddhism. Nor do I have that much to say about Rigpa (most prominent Buddhist groups in the West have a very un Buddhist obsession with wealth and power, so nothing new there then). As for Sogyal, he is just a wealthy Tibetan who, for political and financial reasons, was designated a tulku in his childhood. Lucky him, though once again, preferential treatment of the children of the rich, a fundamental immoral flaw in the Tibetan system of choosing tulkus, rears its ugly head-Who runs Shambala now?
That leaves us with Sogyals behaviour. That for me is what is under scrtiny here,nothing else.
Most of Sogyal’s dodgy and abusive behaviour happened before the overwhelming majority of posters here were around (bella, the most prolific poster here, for example, has only been around for ten).
Critics like myself and MF on the other hand have been around for three or four decades. We also both have immediate experience of the effects of Sogyal’s behaviour, having seen the dame and fallout it has caused in a number of different instances.
Everyone should feel free to praise Rigpa, Buddhism and so on; it is their right. However, there is the issue of truth (the whole truth, warts and all). We KNOW that what we are saying is true.
However, those with less experience see fit to come here to defend Sogyal Rinpoche for behaviour he engaged in before they got involved with him. I think we can safely say therefore that we are ALL telling the truth. Of course you havent seen abuse-you werent chosen as a victim and, as soon as MF started to expose the behaviour it went underground. I know this to be true. I happily swear on my children’s lives that I know for a fact that Sogyal has used his status as a Buddhist teacher to procure women for sex. Thats what I feel is wrong, thats what most people who know anything about cults and New Religious Movements think is wrong, and thats what society considers wrong-Relgious teachers should not have sex with their disciples becuase there is an imbalance of power in the relationship. Its called a breech of fiduciary care (Look it up)
Strikes me that some of Sogyals students have bought into the Tibetan trip just that little bit too far. Yes, follow the Dharma; make offerings to the teacher, and meditate. But did we really need to import the institutionalised sexual abuse that existed in Tibet vis a vis rich tulkus and their prey. No thanks; thats one Tibetan custom I dont want: not for me, nor my children, nor anybody elses children. It is wrong, it was wrong and, it will be wrong.period.
I would advise people to go to Rigpa to meet Dharma and different Dharma teachers. I would not point them to Sogyal as a qualified master because I KNOW how he has abused his position and have seen the damage he caused to people I loved.
Nothing against him, he will pay the price. But the behaviour is wrong and people need to know the truth. It may be ‘history’ but so what? Its relatively recent history and remember, we study history so as not to make the same mistakes. What do you want to do then: hide the truth? Why?

LikeLike
Tara, on 22 April 2010 at 10:16 pm said:

thanks bella for re-posting – i couldn’t find the tigerlily one when i was looking for earlier as i didn’t have the patience to keep searching for too long !! it’s two completely different perspectives and it’s useful to read them in parallel i agree. i have like andy found Rigpa people and particularly the people at Dzogchen Beara to be kind, authentic, helpful people and i would be heart-broken to see the work of Rigpa and Dzogchen Beara been harmed by this campaign to raise what is been discussed here. i wish i knew what the best way to bring some sort of resolution to all the issues been discussed here was.

LikeLike
Andy, on 22 April 2010 at 8:19 pm said:

Ive been to Dzogchen Beara and had a wonderful experience. They were hosting a visit from a Buddhist teacher outside of Rigpa. Everyone I met there was generous and kind with a sincere spiritual practice. I would be sad if the place or those involved working within Rigpa was disturbed in any way. There are better ways of revealing the truth of SR behavior than attacking them.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 22 April 2010 at 7:56 pm said:

2 stories – are we going to vote whose story is true and whose not? I guess people have to decide for themselves if they ever can on these grounds, in the internet.

#Tiger Lily, on July 6, 2009 at 1:49 pm Said:

I have been in contact with Mary Finnigan for a number of years now and have given my permission for her to use my statement of my experience of Rigpa and Sogyal under a pseudonym, Last year she brought to my house the young woman mentioned above who told me of her own time as an attendant “dakini” to Sogyal. I was profoundly shocked. Her account rang true because I had been a girlfriend of Sogyal’s many years ago and knew what he could be like and how the devoted students of Sogyal would cover up his behaviour. What really shocked me was that she and the other women were encouraged to think of themselves as Consorts. Call girls would be a more appropriate description. I cannot go into further detail here of her account, only to say that it is serious stuff and the only conclusion that I can draw is that Sogyal has become deluded from all the adulation he has received over the years surrounded by yes-people,
For me personally it is very sad. i have suffered a great deal as a result of realising that all my good intentions were wasted on supporting Rigpa. His addictive sexual behaviour. (I can only understand it as being just that) has cast a sorrowful shadow upon the Tibetan spiritual tradition. It is appalling that he is endorsed by senior Lamas who give him credibility and thereby trap vulnerable women in a thoroughly dysfunctional and distasteful relationship with him. For his sake as much as anyone’s, people really should speak out before any more harm is done.

#Survivor, on July 6, 2009 at 8:13 pm Said:

Dear friends,
I wouldn’t normally respond to posts on the internet and certainly not tell my personal story, as I’m about to. But this time there seems to be a need for that, even though it’s painful for me to tell it.

Just to give you the context: When I began to study with Sogyal Rinpoche about 17 years ago, I was a young woman who had been considered especially attractive since being a young girl. It’s a bit awkward to say something like that about oneself – but here I just want you to know where I was coming from: being a beautiful young woman also meant to constantly have predators around and having to be on guard.

And I was especially on guard, because I had been badly traumatized. As a child – actually I had been brutally gang-raped at age 8. Needless to say that I had grown extra sensitive antennas to any sexual vibes coming towards me and always erring on the side of feeling threatened.

On top of that, my father had been quite abusive and I grew up with a constant fear of abusive males in general.

So At the age of 23 I had already had one mixed experience with a Buddhist group. But after attending a talk by Sogyal Rinpoche in Berlin I knew I wanted to study further with him. In a short time I became quite close to him, often spending periods of time alone with him in my home and other places. If Sogyal Rinpoche had even remotely resembled an abusive sexual predator, I would have smelled that right away and left feeling sorry for his students.

But instead I haven’t felt unsafe around him for a single instant. Noone has ever shown such profound respect for me nor treated me with more love and kindness. Just through this, Rinpoche disarmed my patterns of shame and self-hate again and again. Having a keen sense of what each individual needs, he has always been especially gentle with me, allowing me to heal in my own time. And – just in case you were wondering I was never his lover.

Sogyal Rinpoche saved and healed my life with his wisdom and kindness. He constantly inquired about why I was so fearful and in pain all the time – and then he didn’t get tired of showing me ways to heal, until I truly got it.

The reason I have decided to come forward with my story should be pretty obvious. The Sogyal Rinpoche that I met is nothing like the portrait painted by some of the people posting on this website.

My story is far from unique. While it is true that there are many women around Rinpoche, there are also many men. I know them all. All of them feel that Rinpoche has tremendously benefited their lives and has never caused them any harm. In fact, there are literally thousands of people who can say that Rinpoche has helped them enormously. I can’t say that Rinpoche never behaves in a provocative fashion; I can only say that I never saw him act in a way that was not based on compassion and care. I believe I have spent enough close personal time with him to state it definitively.

LikeLike
Tara, on 22 April 2010 at 3:25 pm said:

Hi Pema, thanks and I’d like to define once more and never again that I’m not part of a Rigpa spin team, i’m just an ordinary person with a different experience. I’ll have a look for the other posts you mentioned that include up to date infromation. If the French media are so difficult, have you tried the UK or Irish media as I would have thought they’d take it up.

LikeLike
Pema, on 22 April 2010 at 2:12 pm said:

Tara et al. I’ll define once more and never again:
*The abuses I refer to cover the period 1973-to date.
*For confirmation of this please refer to posts by Tiger Lilly in a previous thread.
*I will not discuss any recent evidence in detail or by name here. I have given many broad brush strokes in innumerable posts.
*I have corroborated testimony from many sources in audio recordings, electronic media and on paper.
*No doubt you and the rest of the Rigpa spin team will be delighted to know that despite 2 visits to Paris, repetetive email alerts and persistent phone calls by me and my collaborators, so far the French media has turned blind eyes and deaf ears to the scandal that is happening on their territory.
*We will persevere. A Buddhist academic and author who lives in France tells me that unless it happens to involve politicians or the RC church, in general the French media is not concerned about sexual abuse. Shame on them.
We will persevere.

LikeLike
Tara, on 22 April 2010 at 1:58 pm said:

Great. I find it difficult to reconcile my experience with the stories of abuse – that’s not saying i don’t believe or disagree, just saying i haven’t had anything but a good experience with Rigpa and Sogyal Rinpoche. In the same way that my mother continues to go to Church in a Church which has had its share of abuse stories, which she never was aware of – i hope the distinction i’m making is clear. I would think it would be useful for everyone if what is talked about here was published, discussed and debated so everyone can have some sense of closure, rather than the current situation which isn’t achieving much for anyone. My experience is one thing, what is said is another, someone elses’s experience is also another, beyond a discussion here, what should or shouldn’t happen ? It seems to be me when i read much of this stuff that it all relates to 20 years ago which is a long time ago – are any of us the same person we were 20 years ago ?? I’ve seen Sogyal Rinpoche discuss the issues raised here first-hand and have been profoundly moved by how he spoke – if it wasn’t anything less than authentic, I would have twigged it.. I’ve been around enough situations to see real emotion as opposed to stock responses or cover-up – that wasn’t there in my opinion. I’d love to know what is the objective of this particular and other discussion threads on these issues if it’s never going to be resolved completely for anyone. That’s just my opinion and it’s not directed or derogatory at anyone else and accept fully that others may have different views.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 22 April 2010 at 9:22 am said:

My opinion: I didn’t notice abusiveness, but helping and protecting (myself).

LikeLike
JB, on 22 April 2010 at 8:44 am said:

OK lets discuss SRs abusive behaviour since this is not personal.

LikeLike
JB, on 22 April 2010 at 8:43 am said:

OK< if its not personal, lets discuss issues around SRs abusive behaviour. Thats what this forum is for.

LikeLike
Tara, on 21 April 2010 at 11:19 pm said:

not the intention or how i’d see it. the abuse is difficult to address in a proper spirit of dialogue if the space for dialogue is so mean-spirited and that’s not critical of anyone in particular but just how this space is been held in general. 20 years ago is the past in everyone’s language as far as i know. no-one is getting personal.

LikeLike
JB, on 21 April 2010 at 6:53 pm said:

Well, its like a little coral of ad hom attacks all gathered together, isnt it? It looks quite effective: several different postings agreeing with one another on the merits (or otherwise) of ones critics. Sadly however, none of this addresses the issue (ABUSE BTW), abuse which you seem to have no answer for except to state that your critics are “Holding grudge over things from 20 years ago” (Same argument again-its all in the past and has nothing to do with now) Other than that, just personal attacks

LikeLike
Tara, on 20 April 2010 at 8:54 pm said:

Bella, i think you’re right – it’s all about the motivation !!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 20 April 2010 at 7:02 pm said:

Sadly I thought about it all after I wrote that above here. I forgot that the motivation of some is not to find out the reality, but (total) destruction. Therefore there can’t be a discussion, because the goal is set. The holder of this project is not going to open up for change.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 20 April 2010 at 6:43 pm said:

If I was against abuse, I would be really pleased to hear from people that they are (no longer – if ever) witnessing abusive stuff.

If you can’t accept that people witness against the claims from the past without putting them down as ‘damage limitation’, puppets, poodles, spin or whatever, then the discussion of PRESENT day events can’t take place.

Holding grudge over things from 20 years ago without telling details looks like holding on to anger and flaming that anger with newspaper articles from 20 years ago (same content in the new ones). I understand bitterness in general can continue over centuries between families, nations etc. but it also prevents from seeing the reality today. I want to see today, because I don’t have any negative experiences in Rigpa so I don’t have a reason to hold anything against him personally (or through my friends or through people I’ve met).

New students in Rigpa can’t perhaps relate to the accusations because those customs of getting personal interviews or private time with SR are not happening. It’s extremely difficult to get into contact with him: you must have a good reason and even then other people are going to be around.

Doesn’t it sound like a good system for you if you are in fear of abuse? If I were you, I would feel a bit relieved from this kind of information.

LikeLike
Tara, on 20 April 2010 at 1:30 pm said:

Not at all – i’d love to discuss issues but find it difficult as it’s not excatly an open or inviting place for discussion and it’s actually quite difficult to discuss with people when they seem to be primed to be mean, attack etc at the slightest provocation – that’s honest feedback, if you’re really interested in dialoguing, you’d take that feedback in the spirit in which it is meant, which is in the futherance of dialogue. I’m not attacking messengers – just saying it’s difficult to hear them amongst all this aggression and nastiness. Tell me the abuse that’s happened plainly as the briefing document is all over the place, a cut and paste of various articles – what is the current status of these issues and is anyone pursuing in the real sense beyond the nebulous world of discussion boards and internet chat rooms ?? Please do tell me as I really do want to know and would find some real discussion useful.

LikeLike
JB, on 20 April 2010 at 12:24 pm said:

Please focus on issues and not personalities. Your whole post is an attack on individuals projected characters. We are here to document the extent of abuse that has occured at the hands of SR not agree on who is nice and who is not. You are shooting messengers

LikeLike
Tara, on 20 April 2010 at 9:11 am said:

I came on here to have a genuine discussion and honestly that’s not possible ’cause of the nasty atmosphere that’s on here, i felt it was worth saying, It doesn’t make for a good discussion – I am more than aware that we’re talking about sexual and emotiional abuse which is why i feel it’s important its discussed in an appropriate way. I’m not involved in Rigpa or Rigpa spin as you call it, I simply have a different experience and I came on here to discuss but the whole atmosphere of discussion is so nasty, there is no dialogue. I wasn’t aware anyone needede an invite to a public forum – if it’s a closed club, you might want to post that somewhere prominent on the site. Just because my contribution is different than yours or talks about the spirit of the discussion as well as the substance, that isn’t whinging, that’s actually dialogue. Also saying everything that needs to be said has been said is closing things down – what’s the point of having a discussion forum then, just close it down and publish. I have no agenda or role here and came here as a genuine person but the vitrole and viciousness that both of you have displayed really makes me wonder how compassionate or helpful you might be to a person in the distressing situation of leaving a cult – would you be busy shouting them down, bulllying them and name-calling to help ?? it might be something worth considering as you choose to pontificate further and judge everyone else’s experiences and contributions.

LikeLike
JB, on 20 April 2010 at 8:58 am said:

My sentiments entirely. Were talking about sexual and emotional abuse, not fluffy bloody bunnies.

LikeLike
Pema, on 20 April 2010 at 8:50 am said:

Dear Holier Than Thou Tara. No-one invited you into this forum. You are free to leave at any time. So please stop whingeing about what goes on here. Everything that needs to be said has been said. Your contributions echo Rigpa spin and do not impress or influence me — or anyone else who knows the truth about the sadistic sexual predator Sogyal Lakar.

LikeLike
Tara, on 19 April 2010 at 10:55 pm said:

I certainly wasn’t ridiculing anyone either – i just stated what i thought was a fact that all the articles referred to the particular case of janice doe and that other cases referred to on this website and others aren’t referred to specifically in the articles cited, from my recollection of reading. why is everyone on this site so quick to see something in comments that isn’t there ?? Is it really necessary to use the allegory of the Holocaust in this discussion ?? It’s not helpful or respectful to anyone. When things start to get nasty and derogatory on these boards, whatever the discussion, that’s when i really start to wonder about where the dialogue is to be found.

LikeLike
JB, on 19 April 2010 at 7:38 pm said:

Yes, you mean because you dint see the camps or the ovens personally, the Holocaust cannot possibly ever have happened. Youve already said this many times. Its a bit like deductive reasoning-cabbages are green, my socks are green, therefore my socks are cabbages. Yeah, I can see that.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 19 April 2010 at 7:11 pm said:

If you refer to me ridiculing, I haven’t done it. I’m ridiculing slander, if you missed the point. Slander is not truthful therefore that can be without hesitation ridiculed.

Tantric offers sound ridiculous to me: they bring into my mind some cheap striptease performer or prostitute. SR is not exactly trying to please people, therefore he is not ‘offering’ such services – or at least I would be greatly surprised if he did. Since you, I or the journalists haven’t been present in the bedroom of SR, those words can be ridiculed especially when they sound rediculous. Writing such things without directly refering to anybody’s words one can only think of as product of one’s fantacy. Is my point clear enough now?

LikeLike
JB, on 19 April 2010 at 4:23 pm said:

” they’re all related to the Janice Doe case as I understand it”.
I think you’ll find that even the first article on the J Doe case lists others.

Atmosphere is in the mind. Your comments are certainly welcome, in the interests of fairness and free speech IMHO. Its just when people start ridiculing abuse victims that things turn nasty.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 19 April 2010 at 2:54 pm said:

One can always transcribe spoken audio stuff. Make it available.

LikeLike
Tara, on 19 April 2010 at 12:49 pm said:

No, I don’t think the online archives go back that far.

LikeLike
Pema, on 19 April 2010 at 9:53 am said:

The BBC Radio 4 item was a package on the Sunday programme. It contained a clip of a woman describing her horrific sexual experience with Sogyal. I doubt you would be able to obtain a transcript now because it was broadcast in 1995.

LikeLike
Tara, on 19 April 2010 at 8:54 am said:

Ok, I’ll keep an eye out for the publication. Yes, Penn & Teller not great but some of their other stuff is good. Chomsky is good on feudalism though and how our society often idealises such societies, even though reality if very different. I have no intention of isolating people as hostile – that’s just my experience and that it feels like people are ready to jump all over you at the slightest thing. I’ve never called anyone a liar or fantasist. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen isn’t surely a representative slogan for a place called Dialogue Ireland, that’s funny. I’ve read the articles you’ve llisted with exception of BBC one – do you have a link for that one ?? they’re all related to the Janice Doe case as I understand it. I’m not an angry person, a Rigpa head or anything like that, just ordinary person with a different experience and I think my feedback is worthy of consideration, as much as anyone else’s and my feedback is that the atmosphere on here is nasty at times and if it’s a place to encourage dialgoue, such an atmosphere is not at all appropriate for that.

LikeLike
JB, on 19 April 2010 at 7:50 am said:

I believe publication will be early next year? Penn and Teller is a bit of a dodgy reference-saw it-bit too hate filled towards the DL rather than on feudalism itself.

Please do not isolate critics here as hostile. If you check back you will see that they have been repeatedly ridiculed and insulted and accused of racism, jealousy, xenophobia and the like repeatedly. Supposed victims have been referred to as liars and idiotic fantasists.

If someone repeatedly throws back everything you say to them and yet continues to debate, they should expect the temperature to warm up. If one cant stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

I think we are at an appropriate juncture to relax a little now. As you acknowledge, allowing people to see both sides of the story for themselves is the best way to do things; not to bury criticism every time it rears its inconvenient head.

As to the invitation to publish, bear in mind all of the following:

The Janice Doe lawsuit. There was no evidence so Sogyal paid $ millions to put the lid on it.
Don Lattin — US agency journalist
Several local newspapers in California
Mick Brown – The Sunday Telegraph magazine
The BBC
The Irish Sunday Times

A number of these sources are referred to in the briefing document on this site. These should be enough to keep people going until the book comes.

LikeLike
Tara, on 18 April 2010 at 8:54 pm said:

i don’t want or need anyone’s sympathy – that wasn’t my motivation or intention, again a discussion board misses nuance. I was just trying to point out what a clumsy tool this can seem for the issues that are been discussed here. The issue you’ve raised now of wealth in Tibet before the invasion and so on is a much bigger one than Sogyal Rinpoche and it’s been discussed elsewhere by people as diverse as Penn & Teller and Noam Chomsky. That’s politics and not relevant to the point at hand and it’s a bigger issue than Buddhism, as it’s about how a whole society was structured along feudal lines. I can’t answer your question of so many women, so little time or not ?? as it’s not been my experience and that’s all I have to refer to. Again, I ask the people here who have evidence publish and broadcast now – meet Rinpoche when he’s here in the summer and then we might have a full discussion.

LikeLike
JB, on 18 April 2010 at 3:45 pm said:

Ad hominem basis to your attack-focus on the factual evidence. Cold, yes. Without feelings, no.
You appear to be going for the sympathy vote.
Look. Sogyal has been a naughty boy. He might teach the supreme path of Dzogchen but what goes round comes round. And its payback time. People need the whole story, warts and all.-Cromwell was a t%%t but he fought for my right to voice my opinion in this country about the whole class game. Now we get someone importing the same shit into our religious vista centuries later.The rights of the rich to do as they wish, The hellraisers club etc (And no its not a class thing, its about the abuse of class)

This is just the dying throes of that last generation of abusive Tibetan princes, who got what they wanted when they wanted it? What do they say: 97% of the wealth in Tibet before the invasion lay in the hands of twenty families (Its a few more now and more widespread;) So many women, so little time or not?

LikeLike
Tara, on 18 April 2010 at 12:46 pm said:

I have read facts and evidence here and elsewhere – i just don’t like how you engage with people on the discussion boards that’s all, i’m sorry if you don’t like to hear some facts yourself but your manner on the discussion board comes across as really rude and aggressive, surely not something to be encouraged if you want to engage with people. that’s not an attack, just some honest feedback. frankly, if someone was feeling at all vulnerable or looking for answers on some particular group, this wouldn’t be the place to come as you all seem to too quick to jump all over people and their contributions. it’s really mean.

LikeLike
JB, on 18 April 2010 at 12:36 pm said:

ad hominem attack-focus on facts/evidence

LikeLike
Tara, on 18 April 2010 at 11:46 am said:

i’m happy to discuss, more than happy but uncomfortable with how aggressive you all seem to be – honestly, that’s what it feels like in my opinion and if you truly want to engage and discuss with people who have a different opinion, that might be some feedback to take onboard. The use of snide titles like the honourable lady is also not helpful, it may have been an attempt at humour but it failed and came across to me as mere snideness. I appreciate all opinions are welcome but how you react and engage with those opinions is also hugely important if you are to hear everyone.

LikeLike
JB, on 18 April 2010 at 11:38 am said:

I refer the honourable lady to the answer I gave previously.

Hypocrisy IMO is condemning others for the very acts you commit yourself. For pointing out this inconsistency, I am demonized? Old tactic, demonization of critics.

This is a place where ALL are welcome to express opinions, from both sides of the debate, not one or the other.

People have a right to hear you and everyone else on this board. If this even playing field is not to your liking and makes you feel uncomfortable, you are quite right, better not to ‘discuss’ (That is if ‘discussion’= outright denial)

LikeLike
Tara, on 18 April 2010 at 10:44 am said:

i’m not a hypocrite -thats a fairly big judgement to make about someone you’ve never met or talked to. i don’t think the discussion board format makes for a real discussion that has real interaction or nuance. i didn’t wade in here for anything, i just wanted to give my experience and i’ m sorry it isn’t what you’re looking for, i really am. again, i suggest if there’s so much publish and broadcast or at least go to dzogchen beara ’cause this discussion board is going no-where. i can see why people who’ve had a positive experience don’t post here ’cause you don’t really engage – you just preach and come down hard on people who’ve had positive experiences – and accuse them of been under rigpa instructions. it’s crazy, i’m just an ordinary person who’s attended rigpa for a number of years, i have a normal life, a normal job and just came on to share my experience – end of story. i’m sorry if you feel i’m slagging people off or anything like that but responses are so filled with vitrole it’s hard to know what to say to people and frankly, i think it’s just waste of time to have any further discussion here.

LikeLike
JB, on 18 April 2010 at 9:50 am said:

“i’ve lived through enough in my life to realise it’s wrong to force people to believe what you believe”
I think youll find critics here have repeatedly suggested that individuals should exercise their freedom, read critical writings on SRs conduct and visit Rigpa and decide for themselves. You wade into this forum telling us you dont think anyone is telling what you consider to be the truth.
Only when the one sidedness of this hypocrisy is pointed out, you change to the more open approach advocated here by ‘critics’ Then you slag them off for ‘forcing people to believe what they believe”. Yeah, hypocrisy.

LikeLike
JB, on 18 April 2010 at 9:24 am said:

“part of the law suit was not to talk because it was settled”

is there something wrong with you? if you cant see what this means it indicates youre not using all your intellectual powers to work this one out.

Look: I do something wrong to you. You sue me. I agree to pay you x amount (I see John Cleese just spent 3500 quid on a taxi) on the condition you keep your mouth shut. We call it ‘hush money”

LikeLike
JB, on 18 April 2010 at 9:21 am said:

“you can see fantacies and speculation there. It’s allowed for a journalist.”
Phew, what a relief! You can phone the Guardian if you like and tell their legal team they are no longer needed.
Wake up bella-if a journalist fantasises he gets his ass sued (poor wee donkey)
The reason for the distinction between Mohan and Sogyal? Time, size of organization, apparent credentials, use of extreme force-its obvious (unless you know nothing about the Mohan case) The bad news for Sogyal is, once Mohan is convicted Journos may well start looking for more Buddhist abusers-after all, theyve done the Catholics now-In the interest of treating all faiths equally……Not if but when.

LikeLike
Pema, on 18 April 2010 at 8:24 am said:

Surely you must have realised by now that its a waste of your time and energy to *fish* for names, locations and other detail on this board? I have no intention of revealing any recent evidence — but I have said several times that I have it on disc and on paper. Of course I’m a liar. Of course everything here is libellous. And of course the reason Sogyal hasn’t sued is because he is a bodhisattva. Believe any of this and you stand out as magnificent examples of why spending 15 years with Rigpa is also a waste of time, energy and lots of money.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 18 April 2010 at 8:10 am said:

Those newspaper articles are based on same information, weather they date back to a few years or 20 years ago. If you read the articles carefully, you can see fantacies and speculation there. It’s allowed for a journalist.

It’s a fear of most people: drawn into a cult, being abused mentally, sexually or financially. It’s EASY to get your fantacies going. It’s easy to start writing ‘extra’ on these grounds, especially if you cannot interview the people involved (part of the law suit was not to talk because it was settled according to Let’s Be Fair).

Where is the true story of Janice? Don’t tell me you know it: I want to read it. It’s not in the newspaper articles – obviously. I have lost my blind faith towards journalism long ago. Journalists are only human beings with some writing skills.

Why the chapter “Is it time to tell your story?” so empty on this site? Why in the case of the lately arrested ‘lama’ Mohan there’s plenty of stories? Why people would be more afraid to tell their story about SR than Mohan? There’s no reason (except the stalkers of course).

LikeLike
Pema, on 18 April 2010 at 7:45 am said:

Er — ” a few pieces by Mary Finnigan”.
The Janice Doe lawsuit. There was no evidence so Sogyal paid $ millions to put the lid on it.
Don Lattin — US agency journalist
Several local newspapers in California
Mick Brown – The Sunday Telegraph magazine
The BBC
The Irish Sunday Times (recent)
Insubstantial stuff this –just repeating rumours. No lawyers involved checking for factual accuracy. And Sogyal has never sued. We all wonder why. Do you?
No of course you don’t, because you are tapping away on your keyboard either at Rigpa or under instruction from Rigpa. How do we know this? We know it because you are repeating the same old damage limitation lines that have been trotted out since 1994.

LikeLike
Tara, on 17 April 2010 at 10:42 pm said:

i agree totally – let people read, discuss and listen and talk and make up their own minds – i agree totally. I made up my own mind, it’s a different opinion obviously from yours, based on my experience but i agree 100% people should make up their own minds, based on all the facts, everything they can read here and elsewhere and what they can hear and experience at rigpa, what they can hear and experience elsewhere. I don’t use caps in replies ’cause it’s actually really rude, it’s the typing equivalent of shouting at someone and i don’t think my contribution merited that response. i simply came on here to share my experience and opinion. you can’t say without knowing me how or when i made up my mind – it certainly wasn’t the process you just described. if you think i just want people to believe what i believe you’re totally wrong, i simply want all the information out there and that might actually include something positive. i’ve lived through enough in my life to realise it’s wrong to force people to believe what you believe – it seems some people on this website have that idea. i have no agenda beyond wanting to share my own experience, which has been positive. i’m just bewildered i guess that if you guys have all this information why hasn’t a serious newspaper article, book or tv documentary been done ?? that would seem to me to be a lot more effective than a few discussion boards. there’s been a few pieces by mary finnegan and a few discussion boards but nothing more substantial than that – if you really want to expose your truth, why not do something really meaningful and impactful like publish or broadcast or at the very least go to dzogchen beara when sogyal rinpoche is there ??

LikeLike
bellaB, on 17 April 2010 at 10:07 pm said:

“Bella, we are all BEING here. We are all alone, together. Your fight is to convince others that nothing critical of SR is true. Why not trust your own experience and let others trust theirs, based on their having assessed all aspects of this case, not just that provided by Rigpa OR commentators here. Your unwillingness to do this is what led to repeated responses here (and your replacement perhaps?)”

My fight is that above in your mind. I have been here since I got really annoyed by Pema’s slander. She has been – obviously – hassling for decades with her incredible stories. I don’t know if anyone is willing to listen to her.

I don’t want any abuse to exist on the planet. Like Tara I have never seen or heard anything. My good friend lives on a retreat site. He never even heard of anything. That is my battle: keep reality of present day Rigpa here.

My replacement? Do you really think I’m a good PR person for any organization? Thank you for your wishful thinking, but think again.

LikeLike
JB, on 17 April 2010 at 9:59 pm said:

Yes,its all JUST poison.Look, youve read this stuff and youve been to Rigpa and made up your own mind (but not in that order) Now let others do that: read both sides and make their own decisions. Otherwise, youre doing exactly what bella did-“I havent seen it so its not true”. Allow people to make their own judgements based on all the evidence, positive AND negative. Thats freedom of thought, not ‘Believe what I say, everything others say isnt true’ Its not too difficult to see that the approach you advocate is totally opposed to freedom of thought.
Thats not an insult, its a fact! ALLOW OTHERS TO MAKE UP THEIR OWN MINDS USING THEIR OWN JUDGEMENT.

LikeLike
Tara, on 17 April 2010 at 9:34 pm said:

hi, i’ve read all the evidence/allegations here and elsewhere on rick ross and other sites,i’ve talked it though with a good number of people, i have gone to rigpa and not just dzogchena beara to be love bombed as you describe it. i’ve never had that experience to be honest !! i don’t know bella and have no great desire to know her, i simply came on the site to see what the discussion was like and to add my comment but the way that people who express a view contrary to the views expressed here, are spoken to is terrible – it’s not a good place to have a discussion. all i’ve been trying to say is that my experience of rigpa and sogyal rinpoche over 15 years has been totally different to what is described here. that’s it. bella – i don’t know you but nice to meet you. i can’t see the point in having a discussion here any further as the whole thing is just so poisoned and people who give a different story are just talked down to and insulted, from what i can see.

LikeLike
JB, on 17 April 2010 at 9:09 pm said:

The solution, darlings, is for people to read the evidence/allegations here AND go to Rigpa and decide for themselves, not simply to go and get ‘love bombed’ at Dzogchen beara. That way they are not blinded by propaganda from either camp (and it teaches SR to exercise a bit more caution, caution which appears to have been thrown to the wind for some years if several commentators here are to be believed)

Bella, we are all BEING here. We are all alone, together. Your fight is to convince others that nothing critical of SR is true. Why not trust your own experience and let others trust theirs, based on their having assessed all aspects of this case, not just that provided by Rigpa OR commentators here. Your unwillingness to do this is what led to repeated responses here (and your replacement perhaps?)

As for Tara not knowing who bella is, actually, if you need to know, most of us worked out exactly who she is and where she is based some time back. If you like, you can talk to her privately by email. Then you”ll very probably realise you DO know her, you just didnt know you knew her;)

LikeLike
bellaB, on 17 April 2010 at 8:25 pm said:

Thank you Tara for BEING there. I have been a lonely fighter on this board – and tired of it.

Seeing people in real life is the only solution: I think you are right there.

LikeLike
Tara, on 17 April 2010 at 5:40 pm said:

it’s just a thought but maybe people that are writing here with questions and details of what happened to them or colleagues should attend dzogchen beara in the summer and ask these questions of sogyal rinpoche and rigpa – it would seem to be a more fruitful thing to do than this constant discussion on discussion boards and internet. i think that might be a good thing ’cause then there can be a real discussion.

LikeLike
Tara, on 17 April 2010 at 5:19 pm said:

no, not bella’s replacement – i don’t even know who bella is, i was just interested to read what was on and my experience is different. i never said anyone was a liar and yes, i’m a few years too young to remember profumo affair. i’m just giving my experience, as lots of other people have. i know things don’t just take place in the shrine room and i’ve been in rigpa centres all over the world and seen rinpoche in many different environments, including private centres. i agree the message is more important than the messenger – that’s a fairly fundamental belief for me actually. i just felt i had to say something as the picture been painted here is so radically different than anything i’ve experienced.

LikeLike
JB, on 17 April 2010 at 9:29 am said:

PS Tara
are you bella’s replacement?

LikeLike
JB, on 17 April 2010 at 8:25 am said:

Please also feel free to read the briefing document at the head of this page, a document comprised of significant information which is in the public domain and remains unsued.

Congratualtions on finding your faith-donr forget, its the message thats important, not the delivery boy.

LikeLike
JB, on 17 April 2010 at 8:20 am said:

Thank you, Sogyal Rinpoche devotee for your neutral portrayal of the situation ‘as it really is’ as you put it.
Please be aware, those here speaking of first hand experiences are not liars. Those who have seen it happen to colleagues are not liars.The journalistic writers of various pieces in the media have not been sued. The book authors who have written on this case have not been sued. The abuse which took place went further underground around the same time as you became a Rigpa member. One colleague of mine, for example, was abused in 1985. She is a lovely down to earth girl. The salt of the earth. Fortunately not damaged too much on the surface, though it has turned her against the Dharma for this lifetime.

“I have never seen anything like the behaviour described on these boards”

It took place at various locations but NOT in the shrine room.

“i asked lots of questions even of Rinpoche himself and i got answers.”

You are probably too young to remember the Profumo affair, where a leading politician claimed never to have slept with prostitute Christine Keeler. When questioned as to why Minister Profumo denied ever having slept with her, Miss Keelers response was “Well, he would say that wouldnt he?”

In future, feel free to raise questions here, the same questions you raised with Sogyal. See if the answers are the same. If they are not, count the victims and work it out for yourself

LikeLike
Tara, on 16 April 2010 at 9:43 pm said:

I’ve been attending Rigpa Courses for about 15 years, have attended retreats at which Sogyal RInpoche has taught and I have never seen anything like the behaviour described on these boards. I don’t work for Rigpa, even in a voluntary capacity as I have a fairly busy full-time job which leaves me little time for anything else – just to say that before someone jumps on me to say I work for Rigpa in any capacity, i don’t !! i have however benefitted immensely from the courses I’ve attended and I’ve seen Sogyal Rinpoche at retreats, both in large groups and much smaller groups and i’ve never seen anything that would make me uncomfortable. I’ve known about the stories that have been going around since the US case and upon learning about it, i asked lots of questions even of Rinpoche himself and i got answers. I have history in this area, which would have set off alarms in my head at any sense of abuse so it was important for me to do so. I don’t know why Rigpa doesn’t address the things that are been said here head-on because honestly all it is is people talking on an internet forum, unsubstantiated stories, malicious gossip and stories. If i had any indication from my own experience and that of others within Rigpa of any untoward, i’d be gone in the morning but i’m staying as the teachings have helped me immensely and i’ve never in my 15 years met anyone with any link to any of the issues you’ve described here. if it’s so systemic, you’d imagine in that timeframe i would – i started out in Rigpa in my mid-twenties. I wish that the people discussing things here would stop complaining and spreading slanderous rumours and see things as they really are.

LikeLike
eiadio, on 15 April 2010 at 8:46 pm said:

“I don’t approve of abuse but I am not willing to judge SR on your terms, since I don’t have any proofable knowledge.”

Isn’t this a line from the holocaust denier’s bible?

“So whatever you say about him, I have my own experiences that talk louder to me than someobody’s stories in the internet.”

Thank you Ms Braun. I believe he is also very loving to his Alsatians (Dont mention Jews)

LikeLike
eiadio, on 15 April 2010 at 2:48 pm said:

And as for the people who write about their first hand experiences of abuse at the hands of Sogyal, what about their writings and their feelings: are they valid or is it ALL fantasy? If it is fantasy (because its on the internet), then what about your experiences, which I only know via the internet?According to your line of argument, your own feelings must be based on fantasy, since they were expressed on the internet. And just like you, those who write here also have their own experiences-so who is a fantasist and who speaks the truth?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 15 April 2010 at 1:45 pm said:

I am tired of fighting and arguing. I have work to do also (no-Rigpa lated for your knowledge…)

I don’t approve of abuse but I am not willing to judge SR on your terms, since I don’t have any proofable knowledge.

For me he has shown great talent as a teacher, he has wisdom, he is not stupid – why else people listened to him, if he was someone who has nothing to say or nothing to manifest? Of course Pema and you will say he has copied all from Patrick or someone else. If he was really ignorant and stupid he wouldn’t even be able to copy ‘the right stuff’ since he wouldn’t be able to think what is relevant and what not.

At a time when I was thinking greatly about these issues (5-6 years ago), I saw a dream about him while I was on a retreat. I wouldn’t want to share it with you, since you can only think negatively about him. For you the dream doesn’t mean anything. For myself it gave me the answers related to abuse I wanted to have. I feel safe. On retreats I tend to see many strong dreams about him. Some may say dreams are irrelevant, but for me those dreams were always related to the issues I was going through. They were vivid, logical and alive. At teachings he answered many of my questions without me asking them.

So whatever you say about him, I have my own experiences that talk louder to me than someobody’s stories in the internet. Especially if I see lying in between those stories, they lose relevance to me completely.

LikeLike
eiadio, on 15 April 2010 at 8:22 am said:

So bella, is your silence a sign that you too disapprove of Patrick knowingly presiding over the abuse for years without saying anything. We know you dont care about the abuse itself, which was all down to gullible young women’s own stupidity-youve already said so. Can we now take it that you have no problems with people who stand by and do nothing when abuse is rampant.
Actually ,theres no need to answer that: your attitude towards victims of abuse and the perpetrators is already clear.No thanks.
I guess it makes total sense really. All gurus are different, manifesting different appearances to fit the needs of their disciples. In Sogyal’s case, this means that such followers will necessarily be tolerant of abuse within the teacher disciple relationship. Sadly however, this appearance is no burning off of bad karma as in the case of Marpa and Mila, or Tilopa and Naropa. There, suffering was deliberately inflicted to purify obscurations. In this context Im afraid, it has just been some podgy little grey haired Tibetan rich kid getting laid, all in the name of Buddhism.

LikeLike
eiadio, on 15 April 2010 at 8:21 am said:

So bella, is your silence a sign that you too disapprove of Patrick knowingly presiding over the abuse for years without saying anything. We know you dont care about the abuse itself, which was all down to gullible young women’s own stupidity-youve already said so. Can we now take it that you have no problems with people who stand by and do nothing when abuse is rampant.
Actually ,theres no need to answer that: your attitude towards victims of abuse and the perpetrators is already clear.
I guess it makes total sense really. All gurus are different, manifesting different appearances to fit the needs of their disciples. In Sogyal’s case, this means that such followers will necessarily be tolerant of abuse within the teacher disciple relationship. Sadly however, this appearance is no burning off of bad karma as in the case of Marpa and Mila, or Tilopa and Naropa. There, suffering was deliberately inflicted to purify obscurations. In this context Im afraid, it has just been some podgy little grey haired Tibetan rich kid getting laid, all in the name of Buddhism.

LikeLike
eiadio, on 13 April 2010 at 4:12 pm said:

the names have been changed to protect the innocent. Quite right though,Patrick’s lack of response is deplorable, Patrick is not. Ah well, ‘Big fish, small pond’ (but growing!), I guess. Sort of cheapens it all though, dontcha think?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 13 April 2010 at 3:22 pm said:

Blaming Patrick for no response, but going on living as he did.

Hey, why am I conversating this with someone called eiadio, when I was refering to speeches by Pema and BC? Did either of them change their id? Eiadio can’t know where I’m refering to because I’m not refering to sayings by him/her.

LikeLike
eiadio, on 13 April 2010 at 7:38 am said:

don’t know if the defense mechanism, anger, is partly a good thing, a protection, but at some point it becomes destructive to our lives).DEFENSE MECHANISM? WHO IS ANGRY?
These comments came out from me in reference to people now blaming Patrick. Anger can cloud people’s view on others. But of course you can have your views
PLEASE POINT TO THE EXACT REFERENCE WHICH ‘BLAMES’ PATRICK-WHERE IS IT?

LikeLike
eiadio, on 13 April 2010 at 7:36 am said:

“It’s also tiring to drag a load from decades ago for yourself too?”

No Im not tired, I drag a 2500 year old tradition behind me plus, I hope, what history has taught me. That’s the value of history you know; not making the same mistakes again, yes?

Anyway, methinks I have slipped under the influence of someone who is trying very hard to change the subject and overload the thread with distraction. ITS ABOUT ANY GURU, IN THIS CASE $OGYAL, USING THEIR STATUS TO SCREW/ABUSE/MANIPULATE DISCIPLES. Thats not how a decent person behaves and it is morally wrong.
READ THE BRIEFING DOCUMENT-LEARN YOUR HISTORY

LikeLike
bellaB, on 13 April 2010 at 5:06 am said:

I also wanted to say that I still think it was morally wrong from my friend to act as she did, but now I can see why she was doing that. I also realized that I had changed, she had changed: we were no longer the same people, therefore I didn’t feel the need to drag my anger into my present life, which was fine as it was (when I looked at my life, not my past and anger solely).

Giving up hatred and anger is not easy. After years it becomes so integral part of how we define ourselves, that it seems like one doesn’t seem to be able to exist without it. There needs to be someone to be blamed, because it gives me a foundation: I’m not that whose actions I blame. I’m completely another. (And I must say from my personal experience that that blaming and anger does prevent me from seeing my own actions and judge them. I don’t know if the defense mechanism, anger, is partly a good thing, a protection, but at some point it becomes destructive to our lives).

These comments came out from me in reference to people now blaming Patrick. Anger can cloud people’s view on others. But of course you can have your views. I just suggested maybe it’s good to go meet those people after 20 years and see.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 13 April 2010 at 4:43 am said:

No, you may think whatever you want and need of him. I have no clue what’s your experience. You can be as angry as you are. I don’t mean to but down your emotions.

I just said things and people might learn and change. It’s also tiring to drag a load from decades ago for yourself too?

LikeLike
eiadio, on 12 April 2010 at 10:20 pm said:

“That anger clouded me from seing her needs and her reasons for her behavior.”
Ahhhh So, if i understood Sogyals needs and the reasons he was screwing his disciples Id be able to “forgive”(?) him or consider his behaviour acceptable?
Sorry, thats wrong too!!

LikeLike
eiadio, on 12 April 2010 at 9:12 pm said:

Angry? When did I say I was angry? No, I just refuse to stand by and watch abuse in the name of a wonderful faith. Anger? No. Like Prince Far I, I have chosen the path of righteousness. Like I said, its not Sogyal, its Sogyals behaviour.Nice try though-you had me thinking i was angry for a second-almost forgot what we were here to discuss.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 12 April 2010 at 8:10 pm said:

Maybe visit Rigpa after 20 years or so – might get a different view of the people you talk about.

Things change, always… I was once really angry at a friend for 2 years. Disappointed in that person. One day I did some practice and I could get over my anger. I wasn’t even consciously a ‘Buddhist’ then (if I’m even today…) I just sat with my anger for 2,5 hours. Surprisingly it helped. In the evening I met her and I couldn’t find a trace of anger in me. We are even now friends. That anger clouded me from seing her needs and her reasons for her behavior.

It might help you to release the anger, even though you may not forgive or accept SR. He might have changed, but you will not be able to see that… ever.

LikeLike
BC, on 12 April 2010 at 1:47 pm said:

‘Poor’-I dont think so. And as to ‘smiling humorously’, I suspect his emotions might be very different when it finally emerges as to how much he actually knew; how about ‘frowning guiltily”? I miss people that stand up and call a spade a spade, not those who will sacrifice their morality for the sake of a comfortable existence. Live now-pay later!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 12 April 2010 at 12:57 pm said:

Poor Patrick Gaffney, if he knew your minds and talk… but he seems so egoless anyway that I’m sure he would just smile humourously. I miss people like him.

LikeLike
BC, on 12 April 2010 at 10:50 am said:

I wonder; there’s money in this stuff, you know. Ask June C!

LikeLike
Pema, on 12 April 2010 at 10:44 am said:

Yes — Dominique Cowell was there too. She has subsequently got very cold feet.

LikeLike
Pema, on 12 April 2010 at 10:43 am said:

No that was me! Mike Garde was there and has been harrassing me ever since to finish a book project I was keen on at the time. Now I’m more interested in depth-charged investigative journalism.

LikeLike
BC, on 12 April 2010 at 10:41 am said:

Oh no, now I remember, it was the other Dominque.

LikeLike
BC, on 12 April 2010 at 10:39 am said:

Didnt DS spill the beans at an Inform gig a few years back? What happened then?

LikeLike
Pema, on 12 April 2010 at 8:56 am said:

Patrick is not alone when it comes to bodies. I know where some but not all are buried. Dominque Side knows where most of them are. Patrick’s ex Bunny knows a lot too. So too do many of the early wannabe Tib Budhs in London in the 1970s. So too do several ex “dakinis”. And yes — I agree the underlying impetus has always been $$$$$££££s.

LikeLike
BC, on 12 April 2010 at 8:47 am said:

And now you can probably guess why he doesnt get the ritual humiliation. Silence is golden (but so is shite sometimes).

LikeLike
BC, on 12 April 2010 at 8:46 am said:

And he knows exactly “where the bodies are buried”. I have a lot to fear when I die but I am afraid the skeletons in poor Paddy’s closet far outweigh mine and will haunt him for more than just a lifetime. Presiding over the whole debacle for years and saying nothing: can’t think why?$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

LikeLike
Pema, on 12 April 2010 at 8:19 am said:

“see P Gaffney”
When I first encountered him he was a weedy, shy Cambridge undergrad. Very smart but terribly insecure. Since hitching his star to Soggy he has grown in stature to the extent that he is the only acolyte who is not subjected to ritual public humiliation. Patrick is the brains behind Rigpa. Without Patrick Sogyal would probably still be living in a squat in north London.

LikeLike
BC, on 11 April 2010 at 7:05 pm said:

If you’re smart, you’ll talk to Raymond. That’s the butler. You can learn a lot from him. He knows where the bodies are buried.”1940 Citizen Kane
See P Gaffney

LikeLike
BC, on 11 April 2010 at 7:03 pm said:

“What did K tell you about her relationship to SR? Exact words if you can remember after 20 years?”

Hey b, thought you were only around for ten years; how come you know bout stuff from twenty years back?
And youre willing to compare notes; someone even told you that there was no tantric coercion for the K quickie, hence your question.

I guess questions are being passed back to SR now aNd this is just the way he’s trying to wriggle out of it. I can hear it now “Yes, of course i screwed her. I’m no monk! ( already tried that; didn’t work!) But I didnt offer to give her a tantric experience” (read “Yes, I smoked it but never inhaled”) Fiduciary care. Unequal relationship with a supposed foundation of trust being exploited-OK no tantra, but still BANG OUT OF ORDER.

LikeLike
BC, on 11 April 2010 at 5:05 pm said:

Wow, now were really rattling cages: someone wants to talk specifics over something that happened so long ago, and they want to compare notes. Obviously not an insider then.

No, your right. As Im sure you will recall, that one was just a quickie while the charisma had only just kicked in. There were no promises of enlightenment.

However, SRs ‘healing value of a screw with him’ theory has been reported elsewhere, and he has certainly used the offer of ‘a tantric experience’ to compromise impressionable disciples of the opposite sex on a number of occasions.

Remember please. K is only one example. There are many more.

Report back and ask for advice on how to proceed. Cant wait!

LikeLike
Anonymous, on 11 April 2010 at 1:54 pm said:

It’s not B” because I think those stories about Mohan are VERY descriptive.

Your ideas of tantric experiences are your fantacy.

What did K tell you about her relationship to SR? Exact words if you can remember after 20 years?

LikeLike
BC, on 11 April 2010 at 12:31 pm said:

Not only that, the Mohan case is just the same=Offering someone a tantric experience or ‘healing’ sex, SRs big chat up line, or illuminating someone with ones ‘organic penis’ (not quite sure where Mohan got that one?) Its all the same-that is ritualised sexual abuse.
So your comment “I read a thread about Mohan. There are MANY detailed descriptions from women. About SR I can’t find such stuff. It’s strange” is bullshit.

LikeLike
BC, on 11 April 2010 at 9:34 am said:

Sorry, but AFAICS this is a blatant attempt by a Rigpa ‘poodle’ to ascertain how much information critics of Sogyal Rinpoche have.

Doesnt the name ‘Janice Doe’ mean anything to you?
You do understand why someone might use that name?
In the UK and US testimony is often heard with the person giving testimony’s identity hidden, even placing them behind boards. Why?

If Pema says she has evidence I too would like to see it in the public domain.However, I prefer it when the names are changed TO PROTECT THE INNOCENT

LikeLike
bellaB, on 10 April 2010 at 4:49 pm said:

BTW when I read about Mohan, I noticed very similar accusations (and tactic?) in accusing SR. If one doesn’t give detailed description of the abuse (like some women told in the thread about Mohan) then I feel that someone is not exactly knowing what has actually happened but putting many ideas together without grounding in reality. I get that feeling about this.

Better than offering generalizations is to describe. That will make people take things to heart. If one is unable to provide descriptions then I think the person may feel frustrated and angry when I ask for it. Don’t blame me for the lack of information.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 10 April 2010 at 4:42 pm said:

What about the financial abuse? Or is it ‘made up’?

LikeLike
Pema, on 10 April 2010 at 10:00 am said:

Not just “having sex”. There is testimony on record of extreme depravity and violence.

LikeLike
BC, on 10 April 2010 at 9:57 am said:

Just to clarify-THIS THREAD IS ABOUT REPEATED ALLEGATIONS OF ABUSE AGAINST THE TIBETAN BUDDHIST TEACHER SOGYAL RINPOCHE. DOWN THE YEARS, HE HAS BEEN REPEATEDLY ACCUSED OF HAVING SEX WITH DISCIPLES.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 7:22 pm said:

I have to say that I’msurprised how badly you (intentionally?, I think so) read me. We live in different worlds. Whatever I say you don’t get it. Vise versa.

If I ask you to explain, I get all this criticism towards my personality, so you are equally unable to discuss the matter.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 9 April 2010 at 6:19 pm said:

I have repeatedly told WHY and WHAT I criticize in her comments (lies about financial abuse etc.) so I was thinking it’s pretty obvious what I meant.

As I already said, ”This wasn’t even expressing disagreement, it was just a personal attack that offered no opinion or comment or insight.” Good luck trying to defend the indefensible.

Therefore it’s criticism towards her profession too.

Personal attacks ≠ criticism.

IF you are against Buddhism MEANS: you may or may not be against it’s YOUR choice.

I do have to say that I find this attempt to backpeddle quite amusing. Please continue.

I have tried to correct the false accusations (slander) as I can.

Because insulting someone personally, and their profession, is correcting falsities. What you claim to be doing and what you are actually doing are suffering a serious disconnect.

If you think I resemble a Scientologist, then I say again “I don’t get it”.

You resemble Tory when she was posting aggressively in her heyday. The same style of personal insult, the same twisting of the words of others and the same silly rationalisations offered for you transparent conduct. It is pretty obvious bellaB. If you don’t like the comparison then stop personally insulting people and stop twisting the things they post. A good example of your twisting is this:

therefore I think you lack understanding if you compare Scientology to Buddhism

This would be the forth or fifth time I have had to restate this, but nowhere in any of my posts have I compared Buddhism to Scientology. What I have done is compare you and your actions bellaB to Tory and her actions. The same love of personal attacks, the same inability to deal not just with criticism about your respective groups but the very existence of such criticism, the same inability to read what others have wrote and accurately represent them and the same prolific fervour in your postings.

https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/the-college-of-psychiatry-of-ireland-invites-dialogue-ireland-to-their-agm-28-1-10/

I think the quote “We know of many cases from Scientology, Tony Quinn, a variety of “Buddhist” groups functioning in Ireland, not to mention the whole area unregulated therapy, New Age and Next Age practitioners that are evidence of this.” shows how you are twisting things yet again bellaB.

A lot of people have expressed disappointment with my decision to allow bellaB to continue posting on this blog. When we get such an illustration into this sort of mindset as we are on this thread it must be worth it. Admittedly we have taken the scenic route with the many detours away from the topic at hand, namely whether SR is abusing his authority to bed people, but you just do not get this type of thread without being willing to take a detour or two.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 2:29 pm said:

I read a thread about Mohan. There are MANY detailed descriptions from women. About SR I can’t find such stuff. It’s strange.

Then I also found this comment by Rangdrol:
“As a Tibetan Buddhist practitioner I am not saying that there has never been any sort of abuse to these women, but here, it seems that one particular woman has accused not just one person, but many in the Tibetan community, and there is no proof that 9 out of ten of these people ever did anything. If Mohan is such a bad apple, why is there no mention of it in any of the news sources. I want to be able to believe people, but I cannot and will not summarily believe what someone says, without them backing it up.” http://forum.rickross.com/read.php?5,15128,page=16

Now there seem to be a news article about the arrest of Mohan.
I still wonder if that ‘woman’ Rangdrol is talking about is the same one I’m thinking of?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 1:55 pm said:

Pema ‘knows’ it all, so I would like her to answer:

what is the finacial abuse all about?

LikeLike
BC, on 9 April 2010 at 1:50 pm said:

PS Its all about SR screwing disciples and, apparently, some dodgy financial dealings too!

LikeLike
BC, on 9 April 2010 at 1:48 pm said:

I wonder if somebody is starting to worry about how much evidence we actually have, especially when they know it is soon to be published.Hmmmm?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 12:11 pm said:

I would still like this to be replied (and not others to cover up Pema – like I’m contantly blamed to be doing about SR):

Like finacial abuse? So, what is the finacial abuse all about?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 12:08 pm said:

“By contrast comments from yourself like “and Pema, how do you perverse your journalist ethics? (Oh, no… now I remember: that was the secret liberty of your profession…)” were just sheer ad hominem. This wasn’t even expressing disagreement, it was just a personal attack that offered no opinion or comment or insight.”

It was meant for HER, not you. I have repeatedly told WHY and WHAT I criticize in her comments (lies about financial abuse etc.) so I was thinking it’s pretty obvious what I meant.

Isn’t it a well known fact that the yellow papers especially are creating stories out of nothing to draw money from news addicts? It’s part of journalistic ‘ethics’ that you can twist the truth and events to create a better story. Therefore it’s criticism towards her profession too. Somethings not allowed or accepted between ordinary human relations are accepted in the newspaper business.

Another MIS-understanding:
“If you are against Buddhism, be my guest.” IF you are against Buddhism MEANS: you may or may not be against it’s YOUR choice. I do not know IF you are or not, therefore I have no saying about it. I have no clue if you are against it or not, therefore your understanding “themadhair is against Buddhism” is false about me.

I haven’t said anything about this: ’you are insulting my religious beliefs’. I have tried to correct the false accusations (slander) as I can.

If you think I resemble a Scientologist, then I say again “I don’t get it”.

Did you READ what I have said about my world view?

I said all belief systems are man made. Therfore I with my own ‘faith’ or world view don’t claim to possess the absolute truth about the universe. I have my view and my experiences like anybody else. Therefore I cannot be offended by your beliefs or whatever your view of Buddhism is. BUT I could criticize myself about Scientology for the same reasons as you might (?), therefore I think you lack understanding if you compare Scientology to Buddhism (which you or someone else on this site does in another thread about psychology and sociopaths):

The College of Psychiatry of Ireland invites Dialogue Ireland to their AGM 28.1.10

LikeLike
themadhair, on 9 April 2010 at 11:40 am said:

Did Pema give any ad hominems to SR?

No. An ad hominem is when a personal insult is used instead of an argument. Pema, by contrast, has presented information she believes to be true and has used that information as the basis for her comments on SR. Whether that information is true or false doesn’t change the nature of what she said, which was not an ad hominem.

By contrast comments from yourself like “and Pema, how do you perverse your journalist ethics? (Oh, no… now I remember: that was the secret liberty of your profession…)” were just sheer ad hominem. This wasn’t even expressing disagreement, it was just a personal attack that offered no opinion or comment or insight.

It is a pretty obvious difference bellaB. It is somewhat surreal to watch you try to conflate these two things.

And since I’m ‘Tony-like’

It is Tory. Might email her this thread since she has been mentioned a few times now.

If you are against Buddhism, be my guest.

And here is another classic example of those Tory-like comments. Somehow you have managed to equate ‘SR should not be abusing his position’ + ‘bellaB is deliberately twisting comments’ with ‘themadhair is against Buddhism’.

It is worth emphasising this point. At Tory’s height she would repeatedly attempt transforming criticisms against the Scientology organisation and its practices, and any comments regarding her attempts to handle them, with ’you are insulting my religious beliefs’. So, apparently, thinking Buddhist teachers should not use their authority to inflict abuse, and the pointing out of off-topic and illogical fervent defences from folks like your good self, is being against Buddhism.

Yeah, I really can’t understand your views about me.

Sure you can. You have twisted my comments on this thread into being attacks on Buddhism, you are by far the most prolific poster on this blog, you simply cannot leave any little comment go and you have done pretty much nothing by distort and seek out conflict and hostility. Now, if you were my shoes with all the above, you’d reckon you had it pretty much sussed.

So this SR fella? He a bit of a womaniser then?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 11:13 am said:

¨Pema, could you still care to answer this (after the last song published here):

Like finacial abuse? So, what is the finacial abuse all about?

LikeLike
BC, on 9 April 2010 at 11:08 am said:

Hey! You over there, I know about your kind
You’re like the Independent Network News on Channel 9
Everywhere that you go, no matter where you at
I said you talk about this, and you talk about that
When the cat took your tongue, I say you took it right back
Your mouth is so big, one bite would kill a Big Mac

You talk about people, you don’t even know
And you talk about places, you NEVER go
You talk about your teacher, from head to toe
I said your mouth’s moving fast, and your brain’s moving slow

You’re the instigator, the orator of the town
You’re the worst when you converse, just a big mouth clown
You talk when you’re awake, I heard you talk when you sleep
Has anyone ever told you, that talk is cheap

Talking is the one thing, that you can do best
You told the cavity creeps, to watch out for Crest
You never have the story, right and exact
And then you always try to bore me, with your yakkity yak

Everyday youre online fighting someone off the street
And you’re always fighting someone you know ya can’t beat
Then you wonder how, you got in this mess
Just think of what you said, then take a guess

You’re always spreading rumors, whether bad or good
You’re the damn Walter Cronkite of the neighborhood
The Barbara Walters, and the Howard Cosell
You always come around, with a story to tell

Said it’s everybody’s business that you love to mind
And talkin to you, is like dropping a dime
You’re spreading the word, like it is your job
You should be a stool pigeon, who works for the mob

A big blabbermouth, that’s what you are
If you were a talk show host, you’d be a star
I said your mouth is big, size extra large
And when you open it, it’s like my garage

You always like to gossip, like a little girl
You talk so damn much, it’s outta this world
When you’re reincarnated, in your second life
You won’t be a man, you’ll be a nagging wife

Twenty-five hours, eight days a week
Thirteen months outta year, is when you speak
I’m tired of listening to the garbage you talk
Why don’t you find a short pier, and take a long walk

You talk too much You could be, out of breath
You talk too much Man youd still be naggin me to death
You talk too much Tired of hearing you speak
You talk too much Eight days a week
You talk too much Then you never shut up
I said you talk too much Why don’t you ever SHUT UP!!!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 10:54 am said:

Like finacial abuse? So, what is the finacial abuse all about?

LikeLike
Pema, on 9 April 2010 at 10:12 am said:

For the benefit of the Rigpa spin machine and whoever else checks out this board I would like to make it clear that everything I say about Sogyal Lakar and Rigpa is sourced from at least two and usually more corroborative statements which I have on record, mostly as audio recordings but in some cases as paper documuments.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 9:46 am said:

From the truth-telling Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Structure of the argument

An ad hominem argument has the basic form:

Person 1 makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person 1
Therefore claim X is false

I don’t say anything against Pema, because I don’t like her. I have said things against her, because I know that she is lying and creating slander. I have made a list earlier on what I call slander, so I will not repeat myself.

Pema’s share of slander include:
– financial abuse: she has no clue
– porn (?)
– cigars (I have never seen him smoke)
– alcohol (he has said he can’t drink alcohol)
– putting down SR as a teacher, even though she doesn’t herself have any qualifications to judge about it. High lamas do respect SR and his qualities. They keep coming back to teach in Rigpa, again and again.

Since she does it in a manner which is vast and continuous in a propagandist style – and she herself regard herself as a possesor of authentic information without providing ANY real information, I say she is lying. That has nothing to do with her person.

Therefore it’s not ad hominem.

Themadhair continuously claims that I resemble someone called Tony from Scientology. If I ask clarifications, he avoids responding by saying ‘I try to distract the main issue’. Maybe then better not to distract the main issue with Scientology, if one doesn’t want to explain themselves about it.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 9:06 am said:

Then avoid Michael Lyons.

And did you notice any insults others and yourself threw at me? No. Because I’m the ‘bad guy’ and can be told whatever you wouldn’t say to others.

LikeLike
BC, on 9 April 2010 at 8:57 am said:

Unpicking all of the previous post, Im afraid each of the five paragraphs is an ad hominem attack.
BTW bella, Michael Lyons’ case is exactly what is meant by ‘ritualised sexual abuse’.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 9 April 2010 at 8:07 am said:

Take this wonderfully Tory-like comment:

and Pema, how do you perverse your journalist ethics? (Oh, no… now I remember: that was the secret liberty of your profession…)

Was this really saying anything against what Pema wrote? Or was this simply a contentless ad hominem looking for a fight or at least a reaction? Quo erat demonstratum?

Thanks again. Did Pema give any ad hominems to SR? Yes or no? Does she prove her sayings in any way? No. It’s just mouthing. I wish she gave one simple example of an event or misuse of any bank account to back her ‘stories’ up, but how would she be able to? DShe doesn’t have access to financial stuff in Rigpa, and therefore can’t say anything about it, but she keeps on telling like ‘she would know’… it’s a tactic to fool people like yourselves.

And since I’m ‘Tony-like’ (whoever that is on the planet) for you, I don’t know what to say. But we have our karmic visions and if you have closely studies Tony then I guess anything can start looking like him: weather you know people or not. I can’t help you with that.

If you are against Buddhism, be my guest. I have lots of friends who are not Buddhists. My family is not religious but they still don’t think of me as lunatic, since I’m not pushy towards others and their beliefs, because I think all is anyway man made belief systems. Yeah, I really can’t understand your views about me. It seems like you don’t read my posts really but just have your Tony-glasses on…

LikeLike
Pema, on 9 April 2010 at 8:02 am said:

From The Sun newspaper
Seems familiar…..

‘Mumbo jumbo’ guru on rape rapBy STAFF REPORTER

Published: 08 Apr 2010
A BOGUS guru raped and sexually assaulted SEVEN women disciples he lured into his cult over ten years, a court heard today.
Michael Lyons, 52, who styled himself as spiritualist and healer Mohan Singh, duped the vulnerable victims into believing he had links with the Dalai Lama, jurors were told.

But in fact he was a “sexual predator” who used devotees of his cult to recruit new members who he would sexually assault if he found them attractive, it is alleged.

Prosecutor Philip Katz told Wood Green Crown Court in north London that Lyons tricked the women into believing he could “completely change their lives”, and claimed he was an osteopath and acupuncturist.

He added Lyons would come across as “charismatic, charming and reassuring”, but before long his behaviour turned “controlling, aggressive and sinister”.

The court heard Lyons used his followers to pressure newcomers into spending time alone with him in a bedroom so he could “massage”, heal or treat them.

Often they were plied with strange drinks and vitamin pills.

As he raped his victims Lyons spouted “mumbo-jumbo” to them, telling one woman he had an “organic penis”, the court heard.

He told another that she was a “tiger and a dragon”.

Mr Katz said that the victims were often “disorientated or exhausted” when the rapes or assaults took place.

The court heard that Lyons would try and convince his victims they had suffered sexual abuse in the past and that he could help them become “enlightened”.

He even convinced one woman to emigrate from America and forced another to have “very painful” acupuncture.

If the victims broke free from his control they would be bombarded with threatening emails, texts and phone calls which initially prevented many from reporting the attacks, the court heard.

Mr Katz said: “The defendant was a sexual predator masquerading as a healer and guru.

Advertisement

“For many years he has been at the centre of a group of followers, overwhelmingly women, which we say actively operated as a cult.

“This cult targeted vulnerable women who were recruited and then drawn into separation from friends, family and jobs.

“In the process some of these were raped and sexually assaulted.

“Many of these women were interested in alternative or spiritual lifestyles and all were vulnerable for a variety of reasons.

Lyons denies five counts of rape and three of sexual assault involving seven victims from 1998 to 2008.

The trial continues.

LikeLike
BC, on 8 April 2010 at 8:34 pm said:

PS ‘Dharma’ is frequently translated as ‘the law’ in both Hinduism and Buddhism.

LikeLike
BC, on 8 April 2010 at 8:33 pm said:

“Therefore ‘absolutes’ in ordinary level of life and culture doesn’t exist. People and cultures are not absolute in any sense… Just visit a few bigger monasterios in India: you’ll see the life and reality within a system. No absolute there.”

Probably been to many more monasteries than you in India m’dear. My experience? Well lets just say, if you were a teacher and you started screwing your students all over the place, your feet wouldnt touch the floor.
PS Thats what SR has been doing and that what this thread is about, not some place 6000 miles away.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 8 April 2010 at 7:15 pm said:

So why Pema is allowed to publish all her slander and if I try to say anything against it, it’s a distraction?

Correct me if I am wrong here, but your last comments to me were deliberate distortions of what I wrote, and those distortions were an attempt to accuse me of attacking Buddhism. I pointed out to you what you had done, and why this tactic was eerily similar to those used by Scientologists in similar situations. And now you come back with this? Yes bellaB, you really do remind me of Tory when you twist and distort like this.

There must be some person in your well known Scientologists circles who remind you of Pema or BC or others?

Well…yeah. People don’t stop being people just because they entered a particular group. Most Scientologists are pretty normal when discussing topics unrelated to Scientology. Mention anything critical of Scientology of the Scientology organisation however and they can sometimes go ‘TR’ on you. At this point the tone changes and the manner is almost looking to provoke hostility. Unwarranted self-victimisation is quite common, as is portraying any and all criticism into either a personal attack or an impingement on religious freedom (and the variants thereof). Jumping wildly from topic to topic is also quite common. So far neither BC nor Pema have been anything like that. Pema has held her ground firmly when pushed, but has pretty much kept her responses to what other people actually said. BC is pretty shrewd, and they certainly know how to get their point across.

Take this wonderfully Tory-like comment:

and Pema, how do you perverse your journalist ethics? (Oh, no… now I remember: that was the secret liberty of your profession…)

Was this really saying anything against what Pema wrote? Or was this simply a contentless ad hominem looking for a fight or at least a reaction? Quo erat demonstratum?

Wot was this thread about again? Some chap called SR who may be doing some bad things?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 8 April 2010 at 12:11 pm said:

So why Pema is allowed to publish all her slander and if I try to say anything against it, it’s a distraction? Because I’m a stupid cult member? Why other people can talk about ‘distracting stuff’ but they are not all the time criticized for it? Why they are not refered to Scientologists? There must be some person in your well known Scientologists circles who remind you of Pema or BC or others?

I have not denied abuse nor said: ‘yes, I know SR has abused’. I think it’s pretty obvious the events or details are not public information. How Tony or whoever said about his ‘teacher’? Did he say: I don’t know or did he say ‘I know’?

LikeLike
themadhair, on 8 April 2010 at 11:47 am said:

Well, I didn’t say THAT. Maybe I can blame you for twisting my words.

It is was very clear that you tried to accuse me of linking Buddhism to Scientology, and this accusation was an attempt to portray me as attacking your religion. Been there, done that and worn the T-shirt to boot. Even your backpeddle over this is done in an almost prophetic similarity to Magoo’s style.

It was deliberately dishonest of you to misrepresent my comment as I elaborated in my last post. But that is all you seem to be doing. The issue is whether SR has been abusing his authority as teacher to perpetrate acts of abuse. When Magoo deflected and distracted it was obvious. When Trini deflected and distracted it was obvious. When you deflect and distract it is obvious.

To repeat – The issue is whether SR has been abusing his authority as teacher to perpetrate acts of abuse.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 8 April 2010 at 11:38 am said:

“And yes — Soggy has perverted Vajrayana vows for his own sexual gratification and financial gain since 1973.”

and Pema, how do you perverse your journalist ethics? (Oh, no… now I remember: that was the secret liberty of your profession…)

LikeLike
bellaB, on 8 April 2010 at 11:17 am said:

“This is a thoroughly Western interpretation. This vow, is part of the panchasila, the pratimoksha vows which are common to all of the orthodox Asian traditions, and ARE absolutes. Is the vow on not killing a ‘guideline’? No; rather it is a very specific commitment never to take the life of another, a vow that, once broken, is lost and must be taken again.”

Buddhism is not a religion of LAW that people put on top of each other.

Buddha gave advice how to avoid bad karma. Therefore ‘absolutes’ in ordinary level of life and culture doesn’t exist. People and cultures are not absolute in any sense. Paradise doesn’t exist here. Just visit a few bigger monasterios in India: you’ll see the life and reality within a system. No absolute there.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 8 April 2010 at 11:11 am said:

Whenever ex-members of Scientology tell of abuse they suffered when in the Scientology organisation, such as been pressured and bullied into debt for Scientology courses, current Scientology adherents almost invariably respond with “you are attacking my religion”. It doesn’t seem to matter what allegation is made by ex-members, or from any critics who suffered the fair game policy, the retort is always the conflation of “you are attacking my religion”.

Well, I didn’t say THAT. Maybe I can blame you for twisting my words.

If you compare me to some person of any cult, you could compare me to a Christian cult member.

If you compare me to a Scientologist cult member, I’m immediately thinking about the well-known cultic and abusive tendensies of that organisation: psychological tests which puts people into some hierarchical course system. The higher you are, the more you pay for your courses (the sums are really high). Financial and psychological abuse, brain washing is quite evident in that system.

Those things are not similar to any Buddhist organisation. So, therefore Scientology seem a bit hars comparison to me. And when ever you do that, I’m going to ask you to define better. (‘Cause I can’t understand).

LikeLike
Pema, on 8 April 2010 at 10:11 am said:

Final words from Corboy.

To the extent that any guru lets him or herself be marketed as a celebrity, the more that public image becomes artificial, parasitic and demands more and more energy for it to be maintained.
Greed for money? How are the account books handled?
Greed for expensive and lovely items? Greed for a building too expensive for the resources of the sangha?
If there is greed for money, its very tempting to accept offers from persons or grant agencies who have money from dirty sources.
If you’re too eager to market your books or your guru, this means hanging out with PR agencies and publishers that are profit driven and that drags you further into the jungle of afflictive emotion, rather than liberating from it.
Again and yet again, I will say that a true teacher does not let him or herself become the focus of intoxicating personality cultism and will assertively discourage this. And a good teacher will be able to live and socialize outside of a structured, courtly environment and not need to huddle behind an entourage and can respond to unprogrammed questions.
And give good answers, not resort to a giggle.
And especially if a guru can speak fluent English he or she should not need to giggle and scratch and exhibit distracting eccentricities. If you have been in the west and enriched by westerners for decades, learn to sit still and reciprocate the trust and respect given to you by your western listeners.
Do not infantalize them and then bitch that westerners want easy, baby food dharma.
If a guru enjoys tax free status from Western democracies, that means those who pay taxes are indirectly subsidizing that guru.
And…that means that guru had better reciprocate with basic respect and good behavior and acknowledge he or she is interconnected with Western democracy and respect those of us who do not want to be treated like peasants and who consider the old droit de seigneur (right of the baron to shtup the girls) out of date and not at all appropriate for a guru.
Not even if the guru claims to teach tantra.

LikeLike
Pema, on 8 April 2010 at 8:25 am said:

Coprboy is from a Zen background, but very much a modern American Buddhist. In this context he was referring to the type of secrecy you highlight in your last paragraph. Cultish, paedophile secrecy. Unhealthy for everyone — not just Buddhists. And yes — Soggy has perverted Vajrayana vows for his own sexual gratification and financial gain since 1973.

LikeLike
BC, on 8 April 2010 at 7:45 am said:

“keeping secrets is to lie, which runs counter to the precepts”
I am afraid the commentator shows no awareness of the higher practices of Buddhism and the associate vows. Perhaps the term ‘Sa Ngak’ or Secret Mantra gives a clue? In short, not to keep certain practices secret is to break ones vows.

“Committed Buddhists take vows to beware of misusing sexuality. However, these are guidelines, not absolutes”

This is a thoroughly Western interpretation. This vow, is part of the panchasila, the pratimoksha vows which are common to all of the orthodox Asian traditions, and ARE absolutes. Is the vow on not killing a ‘guideline’? No; rather it is a very specific commitment never to take the life of another, a vow that, once broken, is lost and must be taken again.

However, despite the lack of basic knowledge of Buddhism, the previous commentator certainly demonstrates clear insights into the manner in which Buddhism, the cult of th guru and hype have sometimes combined, both in the East and the West, to create an abusive environs, abuse which remains hidden because of ‘the need for secrecy’. This latter secrecy however, is the paedophile’s cloak, ‘Daddy’s little secret’, a vile distortion of a profound practice which SR appears to have relied on for protection for years.

Resting now-talk doesnt cook the rice.

LikeLike
Pema, on 7 April 2010 at 5:11 pm said:

More from Corboy on RR — with his permission.

We honor forms and ceremonies but only if these same hierarchies forms and ceremonies support the practice of everyone, regardless of age, wealth, and no matter how humble. No practitioner should be objectified and used for a gurus gratification if young and beautiful.

And keeping secrets is to lie, which runs counter to the precepts. Energy devoted to keeping a leader’s secrets, to creating a PR image of a leader that is different from private truth drains away energy that could be spent on practice and generates a long tangle of affliction–the very jungle Buddha offered tools to free us from..Buddha did not mean to create a new jungle in which we were to become trapped!
Committed Buddhists take vows to beware of misusing sexuality. However, these are guidelines, not absolutes. I personally interpret it to mean, among other things, I vow to beware of taking what has not been freely AND CONSCIOUSLY OFFERED.

This excludes anyone who is in a state of intoxication, and is less than consciously adult. Anyone drunk, or who is intoxicated by guru mystique and therefore is not adult, even if he or she feels adult, is not a proper partner, even if they beg for it.

Two…any time a liason must be kept secret, that wounds the sangha and also wounds the more vulnerable partner, even if at one time that partner seemed to make advances.

A true teacher, no matter what his or her tradition will never allow his or her personality to become the focus of intoxication.

And this falls under the heading of the buddhist precept that forbids ‘darkening mind and body of self and other with intoxicants.’ Charisma and PR are to me, just as much intoxicants as crack cocaine. So is the greed and haste generated by marketing practices and hype.

I offer this as someone who is a layperson, intends to remain so and has no intention ever to teach.

LikeLike
Pema, on 7 April 2010 at 3:45 pm said:

re-posted from http://www.rickross.com

Without a climate of accountablity, a climate of accountability that is part of normal media coverage, Buddhist leaders will lack a very important restraining principle.

What I call the Stanford Cookie Experiment may account for many cases of guru greediness for power, wealth and a sense of entitlement to use the sanga for a sexual supermarket.

What can seriously aggravate this is a lack of what I call a normal day to day climate of accountability from both sangha and outside media. Gurus all too often only get scrutiny after trouble erupts. But prior to damage reports, they often lack accountabilty–coddled by an entourage, respect and even grovelling obseqiousness from media, and the luxury of answering only questions they choose to answer.

And, often the troubled sangha whines, ‘But why trash the three jewels by telling all this to the secular media?’

Answer to that from Corboy: Because, all too often, people DO try, loyally, to remedy a misbehaving guru by trying to institute reform within the sangha and the misbehaving guru will disgrace them, the misbheaving gurus senior and favored entourage members bar access and slander the people trying to tell the truth, and that means there is no mechanism within the sangha to set limits on the guru and remedy the troubles. Anyone seeking reform finds that the only way to be heard to is to leave the conspiracy of silence that characterizes the sangha and either contact the secular media or create a media outlet of ones own–a blog or website–which is usually hounded by trolls from the troubled sangha.

(It should be noted that a troubled guru is all too often surrounded by what looks like a decadent royal court, with a privy council of enablers and serfs who scrub the floors and take out the garbage. It should be kept in mind that Buddha could have lived as a prince, but chose to leave his palaces and the pleasures of courtly life, and took to the road with a beggars bowl. He did not teach so as to legitimize his successors living like
pampered maharajahs dressed in gold and brocade. )
By contrast, secular elected politicians are the butt of jokes* and in most cases, journalists ask much tougher questions of secular politicans than of lamas and rinpoches–except that these high ranking lamas and rinpoches ARE political leaders–they often are princes and barons in exile.

*(an old one. “When is a politician lying? Answer: When his/her lips move.’)

Tibetan Buddhism and its leaders are now chic and come from what I personally call, a part of the world that is ‘fashionably oppressed.’ The attention given by the media tends to be adoring.

I cannot forget that the high lamas and rinpoches functioned as princes and barons in their old territory and resemble White Russians in exile who longed to return and reclaim their confiscated estates.

Instead, theyve done a most successful job colonizing the western imagination. And, friends, thats the way to build an empire, or regain access to a lost empire–always begin by colonizing the imagination of others so that it would be literally unthinkable for them to see anyone but you as rightful leader.

This does NOT mean that the Chinese behavior toward Tibet and her people and culture is anything less than awful. It is simply that this has gained media attention and
advocacy from socially empowered persons and celebrities in the West.

But this means that Tibetan leaders who misbehave and traditional misogyny are not given the close scrutiny that should always be given to anyone who wields vast power.

At this time, no one has yet created a normal climate of accountability for leaders of the Tibetan diaspora comparable to what the Popes of Rome have to deal with.

By this time, there exists an advocacy organization for Catholics wounded by clergy abuse, named SNAP.

But there exists nothing comparable to aid wounded members of the Tibetan Buddhist community. One dare not question the lamas and rinpoches for then you get screamed down that youre being hard on Tibetans who fled Chinese atrocities, you are risking going to Vajra hell, and your guru equals your practice and how dare you defile the Three Jewels, blah blah.

There is no structure within Tibetan Buddhist tradition by which social roles and the exercise of authority can be analyzed objectively and this empowers anyone who misbehaves and happens to be in a position of authority.

By contrast, Lord Acton, a loyal Catholic, was raised in a western milieu in which philosophy and even theology had created a way to analyze power and social roles objectively.

This enabled Lord Acton to be loyal to Catholicism, yet disagree with Papal Infalliblity and enabled Lord Acton to write the words,

‘Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.’

and to see what happens if someone has been randomly assigned to a leadership position for even a time limited period, read what I have termed the Stanford Cookie Experiment.

Some persons are not content with cookies. They feel entitled to grab for sexual outlets, rather than cookies.

And if someone has been in power for decades, with no climate of accountablity, the effect will probably be far more extreme.

The Stanford Cookie Experiment

Quote:
Gaining power puts the powerholder at increased risk of misdoing.
Let us look at the Stanford Cookie Experiment.

I first learned of this experiment from reading a book, written by Robert I Sutton, a professor of management and engineering at Stanford University, entitled The No Asshole Rule:Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t.

let us look at Professor Deborah Gruenfeld’s experiment–what I term the Stanford Cookie Experiment. I believe that scholars of cults and dysfunctional organizatins need to place this experiment alongside Stanley Milgram’s Obedience to Authority Experiment and Philip Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison Experiment.

This experiement demonstrates how a leadership role, randomly assigned, has a tendency to trigger swinish bad manners in otherwise normal persons.

The way the experiment worked (and it was replicated a number of times)
subjects were assembled into a group to do a shared task.

*At random, one subject in each group was assigned the role of overseeing and evaluating the others’ work–randomly assigned to a leadership role.

During the experiment, a plate of cookies/biscuits was brought in.

Time and again, those subjects randomly assigned to the leadership role, tended
to do the following:

Took more cookies (greed)
Chewed with mouths open (lapses of ordinary good manners)
Got crumbs on their faces and left crumbs on the table (messes for others to clean up)

Thus, random assignment to a brief, time limited leadership role had a potent effect–increasing the probability that the promoted subject’s manners would deteriorate.

Now…these were persons who had not sought the leadership role. By contrast, the persons who interest us are those who are driven to desire power, desire fame, spend years seeking ways to market themselves, hone their persuasive skills, and once they become leaders of personality centered groups, are waited on, insulated from consequences, and have enablers making excuses for them.

Imagine the Cookie Experiment going on for ten years or more.

The experiment was done by Professor Deborah Gruenfeld of Stanford University–her
speciality has been researching the effects of putting people in positions of power where they lord it over others.

LikeLike
Pema, on 7 April 2010 at 12:26 pm said:

“theological discussion tends to fog the serious problems in these types of situations”
Agreed.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 7 April 2010 at 12:20 pm said:

That puts me right I suppose.

You already have my email, but I don’t think sending me that information would serve any useful purpose. Whether or not SR is authentic/genuine Buddhism or not doesn’t concern me as much as whether he is abusing his position as teacher. If anything a theological discussion tends to fog the serious problems in these types of situations.

LikeLike
Pema, on 7 April 2010 at 11:56 am said:

” I don’t think any of SR’s harshest critics would doubt his mastery on Buddhism.”
Oh yes they would. This one for starters. Sogyal was never trained as a lama, never does retreat, never meditates and knows eff all about Dzogchen. He plagiarises other teachers and regurgitates his pickings as his brand of Buddhism-lite to his naive devotees — who are misled by continuous hype into believing that they are getting the genuine article. Those who experience an epiphany leave Rigpa — often in droves. Sadly they are usually replaced by another wave of gullible innocents who fall under the spell of his undoubted charisma (on throne, not off it) and part with their hard earned cash on a regular basis in order to be led by the nose into la-la land.. How do I know this? From personal experience and from listening to many other fugitives from Rigpa. Also from several highly respected academics who happen to be my friends. Madhair if you email me privately I will tell you their names.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 7 April 2010 at 11:40 am said:

Maybe you themadhair are in strong connection with them (ed-Scientology), since you seem very interested in them.

Well…yeah. Google my nick and you’ll see.

What were the EXACT similarities you, themadhair, saw in Buddhism and Scientology?

Here is a good one for you. Whenever ex-members of Scientology tell of abuse they suffered when in the Scientology organisation, such as been pressured and bullied into debt for Scientology courses, current Scientology adherents almost invariably respond with “you are attacking my religion”. It doesn’t seem to matter what allegation is made by ex-members, or from any critics who suffered the fair game policy, the retort is always the conflation of “you are attacking my religion”.

On this blog the concerns over Rigpa have been solely to do with SR and his alleged exploitation of women under his tutelage. This narrow focus has been repeated ad nauseum, and I don’t think any of SR’s harshest critics would doubt his mastery on Buddhism. And how do you phrase your question to me bellaB? You frame it as Buddhism v Scientology. It is not just dishonest reframing, but deliberately dishonest. The comparison I drew was between your attempts to handle criticisms and Tory’s attempts to handle criticisms. It is ironic that you seem to have objected to this comparison by replying with a line of reasoning that Tory herself trotted out many times.

It is this sort of twisting facts and words, to turn every critic comment into some sort of slanderous attack (when one is not present) so you can play the persecuted victim, that reminds me so much of Tory.

Here is some more fodder for. You can paint this comparison as Buddhism V Christianity if you want. I’m drawing a comparison between you and Trini in this thread:

Irish Catholic comment on Christina

What was this thread about again? Something about a Buddhist teacher being accused of exploiting his authority?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 7 April 2010 at 7:50 am said:

Can’t one have a simple Easter holiday – even being a Buddhist – without huge speculations?

I don’t approve of abuse.

I wouldn’t want to be part of such a thing. I’ve had my own fair share in my youth from just ordinary men. From then on I have learn’t to stand up for myself quite strongly.

I don’t want to judge SR because I don’t know what has happened. I don’t know reasons or events.

If I don’t blindly trust newspapers in what ever they write, it’s because I have – again – my own fair share of a manipulative journalist twisting my words and printing B***. I called the main editor and that journalist doesn’t write in that paper anymore.

I think it’s pointless to discuss with people who refer Buddhism to Scientology. I think any Buddhist will see that and therefore the status of this page is also a bit more visible to people too. I’m sorry, but this discussion could go on for eons without any change. Best to LOOK with your own eyes, see what YOU see and let others see what they see. I will never see myself as a Scientologist, sorry.

Maybe you themadhair are in strong connection with them, since you seem very interested in them. I never was. And I never lost my savings for any Buddhist organization. Buddhists don’t make psychological tests on people and they don’t analyze people.

What were the EXACT similarities you, themadhair, saw in Buddhism and Scientology? How learned – or prejudiced are you?

LikeLike
BC, on 6 April 2010 at 2:15 pm said:

Its of note what happened on the NKT wiki page, where dedicated multiple users were all using one NKT computer-they were outed for this. It is also of note that, like L Rons boys, both the NKT and FWBO appear to have dedicated teams to deal with criticism on the web-take a look at the wiki pages on either of them, or better still try posting some critical info-it lasts less than an hour usually.

It is only sad that wiki eds dont pay as much attention to these deviant Buddhist NRMs as they do to Scientology, particularly in light of their conduct mirroring that of Scientology eds for so long.

Ive also noticed to some ‘driven’ individuals posting on Sogyal’s wiki page.Sadly, while it is generally a useful medium for factual and historical info, when it comes to cults and NRMs, last man standing always wins and the info is usually heavily biased due to input from fanatics who preech the Middle Way but then fall into very extreme views. Still, I guess free speech is relatively new and Buddhism is a 2500 year old tradition-so lie away, supressors of the truth.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 6 April 2010 at 12:12 pm said:

You never know for sure BC.

It can happen that members within a group take the task of defending their group in forums like these, and with this type of fervency too. It doesn’t always have to be ordered or conspiratorial. The best example of this I can think of is Magoo from the alt.religion.scientology newsgroup.

Tory ‘Magoo’ Bezazian/Christman was an OT7 in Scientology when she launched head on into the newsgroup. There was periods where she posted so furiously and fervently that some thought the account was being used by multiple members of OSA (Scientology’s division that ‘handles’ problems). That wasn’t the case, and it transpired that her interaction with critics set in motion the series of events that lead to her leaving Scientology.

It is strange, but I see quite a lot of resemblance to Magoo here….

LikeLike
BC, on 6 April 2010 at 11:03 am said:

Well bella, were you told to shut up?

LikeLike
BC, on 4 April 2010 at 8:23 pm said:

Deathly silence-Is it because you opened your mouth and made it very obvious that SR has been using Rigpa to procure women for sex (some of whom stayed behind)?
Is it because, as a so called supporter of womens rights you made it completely obvious that you have no issues at all with the sexual abuse of women by a supposed Buddhist master (which is, according to you, their own fault)? Well bella? Looks like its better you say no more-the damage you are causing is limitless-I wonder, did you realise or were you told?

LikeLike
BC, on 1 April 2010 at 5:11 pm said:

Immorality will destroy the Dharma
Presentation of the precious Dzogchen teachings to the unqualified will destroy Dzogchen.
Yeah,Sogyal’s been great for Buddhism-if youre a Yellow Hat!

LikeLike
BC, on 1 April 2010 at 10:06 am said:

Actually, you have demonstrated the very thing i fear most-Because the teacher has loose morals and cant distinguish between the moral and the immoral, The student doesnt care about morals and has no ability to perceive the difference between right and wrong. Remember please-Though Guru Rinpoche’s view was like the sky, his actions were like grains of barley.’

No morality=no concentration= no wisdom=no compassion=not for me.

LikeLike
BC, on 1 April 2010 at 9:06 am said:

‘”I was asking for help (I didn’t know SR) and he abused me in that moment.” For me it’s simply too hard to believe such idiotic event taken place’

Here you simultaneously reveal how out of touch with the nature of abuse you are and also how contemptuous you are of the victims. The scenario you ridicule as fantasy is actually exactly what happens in abuse cases such as the Sogyal one; it is a textbook con line. Moreover, for you, anyone that could be taken in is an ‘idiot’. So abuse viciims are abused because of their own stupidity.

“If SR has a relationship to a student then I really don’t care”

Nor does anyone else if that relationship has each partner acknowledging one another’s equality. However, and get this clear, IT IS COMPLETELY INAPPROPRIATE FOR ANY TEACHER TO USE HIS FOLLOWERS LIKE A HAREM. Even if there were no abuse of position, this would still be wrong. This is precious Tibetan Dharma-not a 60s shagfest for some poor Tibetan rich kid. (I suppose I will now be portrayed as being driven by class jealousy)

“There are still ex-girlfriends around him (I believe), so that is a good sign: they can be friends. Therefore not everybody feels abused.”

Thats right, not everybody feels abused.Just the ones that feel abused.But I guess that was their own, idiotic fault anyway. Fancy being duped by mass hysteria, projected charisma and the promise of a tantric experience with a living Buddha.How naive. Idiots.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 1 April 2010 at 4:39 am said:

These comments about SR seem so unrealistic, that is why I’m not likely to believe. I was asking for help (I dodn’t know SR) and he abused me in that moment. For me it’s simplyu too hard to believe such idiotic event taken place. Unknown people and so on…

If SR has a relationship to a student then I really don’t care. I wouldn’t be the girl, but if someone wants – then fine. I don’t want someone to judge about my boyfriends either. They can, but I don’t necessarily care in that moment.

Let’s drop it. I want to think about things in wide scope and not just jugde the relationships between T & S in general. There are still ex-girlfriends around him (I believe), so that is a good sign: they can be friends. Therefore not everybody feels abused. <I'm also friends with some of my exes and their present partners, because there was something deeper, a friendship, in the first place.

LikeLike
BC, on 31 March 2010 at 4:15 pm said:

So you see me as thinking from a Western womans viewpoint. I agree. From a Western womans viewpoint, getting laid by a teacher on the understanding that it is going to ‘raise your consciousness’ is what we ordinary mindless Westerners call ‘sexual abuse’ Dakinis floating around, basking in the sunshine emanating from SRs butt might define it slightly differently but we ‘worldlings’ just cant seem to get it right.

“Of course it’s difficult if the woman can only see the divine stuff in the lama” Yeah, that would make it their fault.

“There should be always trust in relationships.” That way, people dont go to the Press when they realise theyve been shafted in the name of de lord!

LikeLike
bellaB, on 31 March 2010 at 3:19 pm said:

No,

I think it’s much more so, that you yourself are only able to see things from
a) Western point of view
b) Womens point of view from the outside

Duped? Well, I can’t say if that has been the case.

Rape is not the same as relationship between teacher and a student.

Of course it’s difficult if the woman can only see the divine stuff in the lama, which prevent them from seeing the male and human in them. I wonder if such females were really the first ones to take a step towards a relationship.

There should be always trust in relationships. If the woman or man is abused (whatever that is) thene there’s of course something wrong. I’m sure SR has girlfriends that have remained as his friends (and students), so things can’t be that black and white.

LikeLike
BC, on 31 March 2010 at 9:27 am said:

So what youre saying is that women who think that they might have been duped into an abusive relationship with someone they had placed in a position of trust, first really need to take a long hard look at themselves and their motives before blaming anyone else for their pain. Nice.
Rape victim: “IVE BEEN RAPED”
Police:”Are you absolutely sure you werent asking for it?” Yeah. Nice.

The rest is bull-youre trying to distract from the issue. Acxtually, your inability to see the stupidity of much of what you say is quite revealing on many levels. Wake up-this is the 21st century

LikeLike
bellaB, on 31 March 2010 at 5:24 am said:

Well, it didn’t say anything about the buying or why it was settled, so it’s not necessarily true at all. Those things can be settled for dozens of reasons.

If it was settled and in case SR had harmed the woman (unintentionally, obviously) then, like I said elsewhere, do you think settling was really possible if SR or the woman didn’t APOLOGIZED to eachother? If she was able to settle, why can’t you?

If I was seriously harmed by someone, no matter what, I woudn’t give in about the law suit. In a way you even make the woman sound dishonest or morally weak, if she can be bought out from it. But that’s only my opinion.

I have been thinking. Don’t worry.

When I read the stories in the American Buddha, I even started to laugh at some point (in one of those stories), when a woman told us that she was looking for sexual relationships with lamas, and SR wasn’t supposed to be her only play mate. I don’t want to be too sceptic but even today women (of age 25-40 and older too) circle around lamas and some would like to be their partner. If someone would end up there and later that relationship would end, it would be an extreme HIGH for the woman who got her impermanent place there, but also extreme LOW when the relationship was ended. I’m not sure if the reason for the women to have the HIGH is the Serious Love, or just the attractive charisma of the male and ego boost for themselves. I would like women to ask themselves those questions too. What is the genuine motivation behind their own actions? Lamas we have already judged to the bottomless hell in our minds, so maybe turn the discussion around a bit at some point? I see that other side, from the women’s perspective, happening in other Buddhist circles and I’ve talked about it with women. I’m a woman too, you know?

It doesn’t mean that I would ever start laughing if someone person to person told me their story. If it was honest, I would feel genuinely bad for them if they were hurt.

The good side of these discussions is that women also get a bit awake and think twice what they are doing and what are the possible consequencies.

Of course lamas should think too. I just realized while being in the East that the Tibetans don’t have so serious apprach to sex as we. The Tibetan men I’ve met are light hearted about sex and quite childish in regarding it too. In their culture evil is not related to sexuality. Of course there are moral codes and so on there too, but the original sin stuff doen’t make that whole thing ‘gloomy’ in their minds and ‘eternal punishment’ mentality doesn’t seem to exist either.

LikeLike
BC, on 30 March 2010 at 9:52 pm said:

Like I said, read the document, ask around. Make your own opinion based on your own experience, not from pro or anti SR propagandists who obviously have perspectives AND agendas.

LikeLike
BC, on 30 March 2010 at 8:24 pm said:

BEST-SELLING BUDDHIST AUTHOR ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ABUSE
By Don Lattin
San Francisco Free Press November 10, 1994
$10 million civil suit filed in Santa Cruz by a woman who says Sogyal Rinpoche, author of the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, “coerced” her into an intimate relationship.
With the blessings of the Dalai Lama, a group of American Buddhist women have launched a campaign to expose the alleged sexual misconduct of a prominent Tibetan lama and best-selling author.
Sogyal Rinpoche, author of the Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, is accused of “physical, mental and sexual abuse” in a $10 million civil suit filed last week in Santa Cruz County Superior Court.
According to the lawsuit, an anonymous woman identified only as “Janice Doe” came to Rinpoche for spiritual guidance last year at a retreat sponsored by the Rigpa Fellowship meditation center in Santa Cruz, but was “coerced into an intimate relationship” with the Tibetan guru.
“Sogyal claimed (she) would be strengthened and healed by having sex with him and that to be hit by a lama was a blessing,” the lawsuit states.
The suit — which accuses Rinpoche of fraud, assault and battery, infliction of emotional distress and breach of fiduciary duty — also charges that the Tibetan lama has “seduced many other female students for his own sexual gratification.”
Sandra Pawula, spokeswoman for the Rigpa Fellowship of Santa Cruz, one of many meditation centers in the United States, Europe and Australia, declined to comment about the allegations, but said that Rinpoche is not married and does not claim to be a celibate monk. Rinpoche, who lives abroad, could not be reached for comment. The lawsuit follows a letter-writing campaign to the Dalai Lama by American women concerned about alleged sexual exploitation by Rinpoche…
“What some of these students have experienced is terrible and most unfortunate,” said Tenzin Geyche Tethong, the Dharamsala-based secretary to the Dalai Lama.
Jack Kornfield, founder of Spirit Rock Meditation Center in Marin County, was among a group of two dozen Western teachers who discussed the sexual misconduct of Buddhist teachers with the Dalai Lama last year in India.
According to Kornfield, the Tibetan Buddhist leader told the Americans to “always let people know when things are wrong. Put it in the newspapers if you must do so.”
Another woman allegedly abused by Rinpoche, Victoria Barlow of New York City, said she is “disgusted by the way the Tibetans have manipulated the reverence Westerners have for the Buddhist path.”
Barlow, 40, said she first met Rinpoche in the mid-1970s, when she was 21, and that she was sexually exploited by him during meditation retreats in New York and Berkeley.
“I went to an apartment to see a highly esteemed lama and discuss religion,” she said in an interview with the Free Press. “He opened the door without a shirt on and with a beer in his hand.”
Once they were on the sofa, Barlow said, the Tibetan “lunged at me with sloppy kisses and groping. I thought I should take it as the deepest compliment that he was interested and basically surrender to him,” she said.
Sources say the Tibetan Buddhists were trying to handle this issue within their community but decided, especially after the Dalai Lama made the comment about going to the press, to go public now.
SEXUAL HEALING
by Mary Finnigan
From the London paper, The Guardian, 10/01/95
The Tibetan lama Sogyal Rimpoche is being sued for $10 million in the United States by a woman who alleges sexual harassment, coercion and abuse. Sogyal (Rimpoche is
an honorary title meaning Precious Jewel) has been teaching Buddhist meditation for more than 20 years, with a world-wide following and meditation centres known as The Rigpa Fellowship in London, France, Ireland, America and Australia. He is the author of a best-seller, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, and appeared in Bertolucci’s film Little Buddha. The Rigpa Fellowship in London has issued a letter informing its members that a suit has been brought against Sogyal Rimpoche. Although he is not a monk, and has not taken vows of celibacy, he is accused of using his position to obtain sexual favours. Allegations like these threaten to blow a hole in the aura of asceticism and austerity surrounding Buddhism in the West.
In the late 1960s, western hippies seeking spiritual enlightenment were drawn to the Tibetans’ exuberant, colourful style. Tibet was seen as a Buddhist Shangri-La — a far cry from the reality of a country under repressive Chinese occupation. In the seventies, rumours started to circulate about other globe-trotting Buddhist gurus, who were said to be seducing their students and behaving more like spiritual barons than spiritual mentors, exercising droit du seigneur among their followers….
Although not all Tibetan teachers are monks – many have renounced their vows and some are from non-celibate traditions – if a sexual relationship arises, the imbalance of power in the teacher-pupil relationship can lay the student open to abuse. Many Buddhists see this as a contravention of the moral code which frowns on all actions that cause harm. At a conference of western Buddhist teachers in India last year, the Dalai Lama urged delegates not to be afraid of criticising corrupt gurus. “If you cannot find any other way of dealing with the problem,” he said, “tell the newspapers.”

Last year, an American woman and former pupil of Sogyal decided to bring a civil case anonymously, and were allowed by the court in Santa Cruz, California, to use the pseudonym Janice Doe. She says in her suit that she approached Sogyal at a time of a time of confusion, shortly after her father’s death. According to the suit, Sogyal told her that “through devotion and his spiritual instruction, she could purify her family’s karma”. The woman alleges he seduced her the next day, claiming that she would be “strengthened and healed by having sex with him”.
However unconvincing such an argument may sound, the Zen priest Yvonne Rand, who is counselling Janice Doe, points out that the relationship between guru and disciple is one of power and submission. People who seek guidance from a spiritual master want to believe what he or she tells them.
“Many women who seek out spiritual teachers come from dysfunctional families. They may have experienced physical and/or sexual abuse, had no father or bad father relationships, and so is looking for a good father. This creates blind spots in their perception of a teacher.”
Rand is emphatic that such high risk relationships rarely benefit both parties. This opinion is shared by other women who have had sexual liaisons with their gurus. “I was touched by his need for me,” says one, who had a long relationship with a lama, “but it was difficult and strange, in no way a normal relationship. It fuelled my fantasies about having special qualities, but he debunked them. I felt empowered by him but though he treated me with respect, I was always aware he had other lovers.”
Another woman speaks of the confusion that arose from being first a humble devotee, then an exalted sexual partner, then back in the ranks again. “I felt used,” she says “He put his needs above mine.”
More recently, a young English woman attended a residential retreat. She thought she had been singled out for special attention only to discover that she was being invited to join a harem. “At first I was flattered, and very open and trusting. He encouraged me to fall in love with him – but I realised that he was toying with me. I noticed several other young, pretty women going in and out of his apartment, when I confronted him with this; he dropped me for the rest of the time I was there.”
Did she learn anything from her intimacy with the guru? “He gave me good advice, but I am left with a hangover of pain and confusion. I also have doubts about Buddhism. If anything, I have learnt to be more cautious.”
Rand and the British Buddhist teacher Ngakpa Chogyam Rimpoche share the view that the majority of westerners sign up too quickly with their gurus and find themselves in a much more intense relationship than they had bargained for. This is especially true of Tibetan Tantric Buddhism which, at an advanced level, incorporates sexual union into spiritual practice.
Rand believes that westerners often fail to make the distinction between a teacher who helps along the way and a guru who is an enlightened being. “Some Tibetan lamas do not see themselves as accountable in the western sense of the word,” says Ngakpa Chogyam. “They get blown off-centre by too much adulation.”
This potential for adulation makes it vital that teachers accept responsibility for the well being of their students. Responsibility must include, if not celibacy, then extreme care with sex. According to psychologist Deborah Clarke, everyone who enters into a spiritual or therapeutic relationship is vulnerable to exploitation.
“I’d be furious if a guru made a pass at me,” she says. “They should all know by now that people with that sort of power have a moral and ethical duty not to abuse it.
Below is the personal testimony of one of Sogyal’s close personal assistants who ran one of Riga’s European centres for several years, before leaving after becoming increasingly disenchanted by Sogyal’s actions.
In the mid 80’s, during my seven years with Rigpa and 4 years as founding director of a national Rigpa branch, I had slowly discovered that Sogyal Rinpoche had sex with very many disciples. Even though I was very close to SR, it took me some time to notice the obvious. Even though I am a professional counsellor, it took me quite some time to notice it at all, and then it took me even more time to take action. First, at the same time I was shocked and kind of amused, I had mixed feelings about it, because in the beginning I saw that some women tried to get him. First I thought, they are mature woman, they know what they are doing, and I simply am too inexperienced in the exotic ways of Tibetan Lamas to be able to judge. It was much later that I heard stories and saw things which were not based on consent, and saw that he was cheating all the time on the women. Also I noticed that he had sex with young students who just had come to Rigpa retreats for the first time.
There was the harem, and the women seemed to be able and ok with their role in the game. At least I wanted to believe this, still trying to see SR as a holy man. On the other hand, I always found obstacles to consider SR as my guru. I considered myself at that time more like a Buddhist manager and some kind of assistant to SR, rather than as a disciple of his. I could see Dilgo Khyentse or the Dalai Lama as true masters, but SR appeared to me to be just a teacher who teaches Buddhism, or more likely a salesman who sells Buddhism. When I was in charge of my national Rigpa branch, I always exaggerated his qualities in the flyers I produced. I said to SR: either you are true and good and people will find out themselves, or if not they will also find out. So don’t tell them what they should think or how good they should think about you. True quality will speak for itself. With me, he accepted such words, but I heard my successors had to write up his qualities.
I confronted Sogyal first jokingly, then half-heartedly, with my concerns about his behaviour, and I said to him that as a therapist I knew about the transference phenomenon: students see the teacher as kind of a father figure, so sex with the student is psychologically seen as incest. Also, that in the West, the relationship between teacher and student, or priest and the parishioner, must be kept pure, and does not allow for intimate relationships involving sex in any way. He was not amused, and tried to avoid the subject, but he first tried to justify his sexual behaviour spiritually.
First he said that because he is one of the incarnations of Padmasambhava, and that Padmasambhava had many “spiritual consorts”, he would be somehow entitled to do so. Then he played the cultural card: in Tibetan culture women are seen as Dakinis, and they would happily serve the Lamas for enhancing their spiritual power and so on. I am ashamed, but first I wanted to believe all this. I was brought up in a prudish, bourgeois Catholic environment. I was used to playing roughshod with the truth, and to idealize and respect people of position even more than supposedly “holy” men. My spiritual and emotional hunger made be blind to my own values and my professional standards – at least where the standards of the Lama were concerned, however, fortunately not in my own work.
For some years I was blinded by my position of power. I felt that I was establishing a very well-run organisation together with other dear friends which was benefiting many people. I was happy. I was in a very special position. I honestly tried to use my position to the best of my ability. I felt I was chosen, and because of karmic connections with Sogyal, I was finally realising my full potential.
The bitter irony is that because other students saw me as a rather independent, seemingly critical, and reasonable person and because of my professional status as a psychotherapist, some people viewed me as endorsing Sogyal. In fact they envied my special access to SR. I could no longer ignore what was happening. On one occasion Sogyal wanted me to lie on the phone to a woman, who wanted to contact him after having had sex with him but had found that he was in bed with another woman. I refused to be a party to his affairs. He became very angry and yelled at me, but I was not impressed. Basically, he always treated me very well. He seemingly respected me, but now I think he was clever enough not to treat me badly like some of the other students so I would remain loyal. He gave me the feeling that he appreciated my views at least as long I helped him to please the audience and the students. But he never was open to criticism concerning his personal behaviour. Also, he never answered any of my personal spiritual questions. I got more and more the impression that he simply could not answer them. Also, when I attended sessions where he should answer questions from his students, he often gave very stupid answers, and showed that he had not much understanding of what people were really asking. Sometimes he ridiculed people to cover this up.
One of the worst things I experienced was at a winter retreat in Germany. A long term student of his was in emotional distress and asked in obvious pain, vulnerability and confusion for his help, and he forced her to speak louder and then to come forward to the stage where he put her down completely. In my view, he was totally afraid of her, and could not deal with the situation at all. But instead of putting her into safe hands, he tried to save himself by putting her down and ridiculing her, and then played the strong teacher who can deal with everything. That same night, we had to rush her to the emergency ward of the nearest psychiatric hospital with a nervous breakdown and a psychotic seizure.
As a therapist and as a student, I was horrified by his behaviour and his complete lack of compassion and skill. Before I left Rigpa, an American woman told me confidentially and in great distress that she had just lost her husband and had come from US to France to SR to get help, and that SR, during a private audience, had tried to violently force her to have sex with him. Fortunately, she managed to escape being raped. She left the retreat in even greater despair and completely shocked. This was the worst incident which I heard at first hand.
SR did not respect any limits: he had sex with most of the wives of the leading students at Rigpa. I tried to keep myself and my private life out of his. I tried not to get mixed up with his affairs. Sogyal had a classical harem, and he knew all the tricks to make the obvious invisible, or if that did not work, to change the context of the students’ values, giving the whole thing a spiritual excuse, and abuse fears and naivety, or the good belief of his students to get what he wanted. It’s 12 years ago since I quit Rigpa, so I have no first-hand information of SR’s activities now, but I must say I have little doubt that everything is the same today, because I consider him an addict. He is hooked on sex and power.
When I have more time I will write more professionally on the psychology of the guru-student relationship and of abuse. What interests me most is why people “allow themselves” to be abused and what hinders them to see the truth. And how to help others to discover their own truth, and how to stop people like SR from going on.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 30 March 2010 at 6:13 pm said:

“No sorry bella, this is fact. the Janice Doe payment meant the abuse allegations didnt go to court.”

What about YOUR propaganda? Where’s your evidence he has paid anything? Give the facts, nothing less.

LikeLike
BC, on 30 March 2010 at 8:36 am said:

Ive read all posts on the SR threads.

Your explanation in your opening paragraph actually sounds as if it came directly from SR himself “And it was HER decision” Yeah, just like him. Urr, imbalance of power/failure to provide fiduciary care?.
As for your tirade against MF, I find most of what you say unrecognizable in her postings in various guises, because of the way in which twistedly portray it

However,
“SR bought his way out of court (you don’t know it; maybe the woman was lying and couldn’t bare to go to court. Also possible..)”
No sorry bella, this is fact. the Janice Doe payment meant the abuse allegations didnt go to court.

“We, the students”???Representative status, unofficial.
“Stalker”! There’s another!Think “Slander is that when you try to see the negative in everything. But it’s your mind.”
I have as little time for you as you have for me b. However, there are fundamental flaws in your narrative. I like the reasonable approach though: so far ,you hadnt tried that!

There is nothing to say here anymore since, as your previous post suggests, you are totally closed to the possibility of SR ever having done wrong. Much of the evidence in the public domain thus far is in the briefing document on this site. Ive read it and I know what i think.
People need to be left alone to read for themselves and make their own decisions. I believe you dont want them to do that so you deny everything-thats why I m here: freedom of information. My advice to everybody, read the document, ask around. Make your own opinion based on your own experience, not from pro or anti SR propagandists who obviously have perspectives AND agendas

LikeLike
bellaB, on 29 March 2010 at 11:57 am said:

There can be various reasons why somebody could be angry and even revengeful at SR. Reasons may vary from having lost their spouse, because the wife chose Dharma instead of family life. The abuse is tricky to judge if you don’t know the details. Just being SR’s girlfriend doesn’t mean she was abused. Of course the boyfriend might not like it if the gilrfriend takes off with someone else, but such is life. And it was HER decision. But there might be other type of cases, which I don’t know.

You haven’t been following this site from the date I have joined so you don’t know that my opinions are based on today and my main target for criticism is Pema’s slander.

With SLANDER
I don’t mean stories about SR and women, because I can’t say if they are true or not.

I MEAN the other stuff creating this black picture of Rigpa where
– students are brainwashed
– students are stupid and can’t think for themselves
– in Rigpa the main focus is to keep people in a cult, draw as much money from them as possible (like the scientologists)
– where money in Rigpa is going? to cigars, porn (even though it’s free in the internet) and alcohol. How much alcohol can a person consume is a wonder…
– Rigpa’s money is not at all directed to Tenzin Gyatso Institute to preserve HHDL’s life work
– it’s neither going to the poor and small monasterios in India
– Rigpa doesn’t want to help people. Main goal is to abuse them.
– SR drinks alcohol (which he doesn’t)
– SR watches porn (who knows? Maybe YOU watch it, maybe I watch it?)
– SR smokes cigrars (Tibetan Buddhism doesn’t support inhaling smoke, because it blocks the channels and energy)
– SR is unqualified as a teacher
– SR’s life goal is sex related
– other lamas are idiots when they regard him highly
– SR bought his way out of court (you don’t know it; maybe the woman was lying and couldn’t bare to go to court. Also possible..)

Slander is that when you try to see the negative in everything. But it’s your mind.

What I DON’T call slander are the stories related to women. I cannot know the truth behind those stories. All I can do is try to evaluate the stories, try to find the nature of the relationship etc. Unfortunately I don’t see many of such available. Internet is not full of them, like you claim. Most are circulated again and again.

It’s okay if you talk about some abused women. It’s best if you don’t say their names, because saying that will prevent you from telling the story.

I have not said I KNOW that someone was abused or not. I have argumented only on the basis if I see a story to hold credibility or not. When researching rape victims police listens to the stories to find out details. The more detailed description a victim is able to tell, the more police believes the story to be accurate. You know, rarely, but sometimes woman can accuse someone for no reason.

Since I don’t say I hold the factual evidence on these cases, I cannot be told by someone to talk here. If I was told or asked by someone, I would have to say: NO, those didn’t happen, wouldn’t I? But since Rigpa is not a Chinese communist party, we the students are not told what to speak and what not… I think I’ve heard enough of the poodling and cult stuff.

If you have something reasonable to add, please continue. I have to say I still wouldn’t post anything personal here. It’s a pity, but a fact. Stalkers do exist.

LikeLike
BC, on 29 March 2010 at 10:53 am said:

The reason I am unwilling to post specific details concerning the individual you name is because of the need to protect the identity of the abuse victim.This is normal protocol.

Thank you for your admission that you were not around when the abuse was at its height: one wonders how you therefore find yourself qualified to comment on the issue.

“jealous racist abusive simpleton” I only have said you are simpleton” Oh well thats OK then. Actually, you need to read your posts-you seem to have forgotten the numerous ad hominem attacks you have made on all those who have posted here in support of the abuse claims.

“Your activity is harrassment”-Tommy Davis, senior Scientologist spokesperson describes critics as “harassing” Scientologists for their ‘religious beliefs’
See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5bvURMglSE
From 1 min 25 onwards.

Thank you for listing the three people who have stuck by SR (one dead) through thick and thin. Its amazing how far people will use the idea of the greater good to justify continued allegiance, particularly in the face of such continuous criticism.

“Everybody seems to ‘have seen it all happening’ but nobody is able to describe what they have seen…. hmmm. A bit bizarre. How do you explain that?”

There are repeated descriptions of the abuse listed across this site and elsewhere on the internet.Plus in the international media. How do you explain that? A bit bizarre?

LikeLike
bellaB, on 29 March 2010 at 10:05 am said:

“Thank you for your admission that youve only been involved with Rigpa for ten years (a thoroughly inadequate time to master the Dharma and a period which means you were not around when SRs abuse was at its height.”

No, I wasn’t there. Never said I was. Now I’m there and you are not.

“Oh, and the last bit-I am a fearful fantasist who thinks too much? Isnt that another ad hom? Is that really the best you can do? Distracting with personal insults? Thats a pure Scientology tactic daahling.”

Yes, and on top of it I said WHY I think so: because it seems impossible to have a dialogue with you.

“jealous racist abusive simpleton” I only have said you are simpleton. sorry. Read my posts. But you said you don’t want to, so why are we posting stuff here one after the another?

I agree: we are judged by our actions. Your activity is harrassment. Are you proud of it?

Yes: I wasn’t there when the law suit was done. I’ve never said I was. Dominique Side was – and she still is after 35 years in Rigpa. Patrick Gaffney was. Ian Maxwell was, but now he is unfortunately gone to the next life. They all seem very sharp people, no poodle-types.

Too bad you said the name Kelly, since you can’t now tell her story, can you? (Your ex-girlfriend maybe?)

Everybody seems to ‘have seen it all happening’ but nobody is able to describe what they have seen…. hmmm. A bit bizarre. How do you explain that? Are they suddenly struck by lightning, or what?

LikeLike
BC, on 29 March 2010 at 9:55 am said:

I have read all your posts. This one, like many of the others, starts with a personal attack. So far I am a “jealous racist abusive simpleton”.

Thank you for your admission that youve only been involved with Rigpa for ten years (a thoroughly inadequate time to master the Dharma and a period which means you were not around when SRs abuse was at its height.

“Brainwashing”? First mention Ive heard of it.-Oh I get it, Im supposed to be claiming Rigpa brainwashes people. Where exactly?Please direct me to the mail where I say this.(Can’t? Of course not. I have never said it)

Oh, and the last bit-I am a fearful fantasist who thinks too much? Isnt that another ad hom? Is that really the best you can do? Distracting with personal insults? Thats a pure Scientology tactic daahling.

We are not judged on who we are. Rather we are judged on how we behave. Look past the hype and charisma at the documented acts of your guru and maybe you will understand why people are reacting in the way we are.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 29 March 2010 at 9:28 am said:

You are just a simpleton. I ve said eons ago I’m a Rigpa student. Have been almost 10 years. Is that so difficult to grasp?

If I worked in Rigpa, which I don’t, would it matter at all since they are MY opinions?

If you think that Rigpa is brain washing people or telling them what to do or say, you know: think a bit harder. They have other work to be accomplished – related to dharma.

For me it seems that you measure everything from your own fears, ideas and fantasies. It’s even impossible to conversate, because dialogue is impossible. You are too defensive for your own good – to be able to think and have a dialogue. Dialogue is something where you read my posts. If you are not willing, then that is hardly my problem. Then: DON’T ask questions.

LikeLike
BC, on 29 March 2010 at 9:02 am said:

Even in your dying throes, you still try to discourage ‘women’ (actually I think you’ll find abuse is not a gender based issue) from ever revealing their stories here, on a site where people come for information on abusive teachers and their religious groups.

Your deliberate attempt to portray keeping the public informed as to the actualities of SRs abuse as well as the ongoing calculated operation to cover it up as a gender based ad hominem attack on yourself is pitiful.

Couldnt give a toss about your gender, his gender or my cats gender. The aim here is to expose abuse. Your suggestion that ‘women’ (gather round and lets kick a few men and blame them for all our problems Kill all men= enlightenment?) do not post here has the sole aim of concealing abuse.

You call me an abuser? Yours is the state of mind which presided over the abuse in the Catholic Church for centuries: deny, denigrate, attack but NEVER, EVER admit that there is any truth to the allegations.

And that is why there is so little point in you posting here-Everything youve said, youve said before. Nobody believes you bella, not because of who you are,or because of your gender, or because of exactly where you come from, but because of what you are: a Rigpa plant, a pawn in a damage limitation exercise which is becoming increasingly nasty as the truth emerges.

LikeLike
BC, on 28 March 2010 at 8:53 pm said:

Getting a bit too close for comfort, am I bella? I have sussed you and outed you as a Rigpa plant and you claim Im threatening to reveal your ID?No dear, its what you are and not who you are I am interested in outing. You seem to be confusing the two. I couldnt give two flying *** what your name is; that information is only of value inasmuch as it helps me identify what you are and who is turning your handle.And we now know who that is.
The abuser attack is so ironic, considering who and what youre defending. Fight fire with fire eh?
I am happy to be blocked-my job here is done.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 28 March 2010 at 8:25 am said:

I was tired of trying to correct your fantasies about me and twists of your twisted mind. If you don’t believe what I say, then why should you ask anything from me? If I thought someone was lying (or twisting my words, like you) I wouldn’t bother wasting my time in their presence.

If all this page comes down to this that women are THREATENED (again and again) to be revealed for their identity which they wanted to keep hidden, then I truly DON’T recommend any women – who may have been abused – to write their personal stories here.

BC, you have the traits of an abuser. Limitless… Would it be correct to ask them to block you for good?

LikeLike
BC, on 28 March 2010 at 7:39 am said:

28 March and no sign of ‘every 5 minutes bella’ after it was alleged she was here as part of a Rigpa damage limitation exercise and was in reality a long term, unpaid Rigpa worker (see above). It is interesting to note that one so intent on undermining ANY allegation made against her teacher Sogyal Rinpoche by repeatedly claiming his critics were liars, jealous, racists, deluded etc, should disappear with such speed once it was made clear that her true status was becoming increasingly apparent. Further evidence of bellas degree of involvement will be published here,should it prove necessary. In the meantime, I’ll finish there.

LikeLike
BC, on 25 March 2010 at 9:16 pm said:

w

LikeLike
BC, on 24 March 2010 at 3:19 pm said:

Nuff said

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 March 2010 at 8:32 pm said:

Please, continue…

LikeLike
BC, on 23 March 2010 at 8:25 pm said:

Oh, and then theres the complete denial of anyone at Rigpa being in any way interested at any level etc etc. One doesnt need to read textbooks on deflecting criticism to work out how to respond to bad press, does one?

LikeLike
BC, on 23 March 2010 at 8:14 pm said:

“I’m involved with Rigpa only a few weeks a year.”
365 days per year. Weekends = two sevenths of 365=52 days equals only four and a half weeks= “A few weeks” Thus ‘a few weeks per year’ and every weekend mean pretty much the same thing.
Particularly after your statement that you get your ‘pay check from ordinary work’ one could easily assume that actually, you work for Rigpa each weekend on a purely charitable basis.

“If I was ’sent by’ somebody here, they would probably use an English speaker, someone who talks in a polite manner etc. I’m in no way a good representation person. (I have some self criticism after all…)”

They tried that (remember ‘lets be fair’?) But when it became clear that he was ‘poodling’, you suddenly and miraculously appeared from nowhere, no longer using a Rigpa computer but somewhere else, far away, even speaking a different language! How could ther possibly be a conection? (Alternatively, ask yourself how youd play it if you were outed as a a semi eloquent english speaking male in one part of the world. Think about it.

” ‘the protector of females from abuse’”
Is this an attempt to curry favour with wimmin everywhere/?You seem to be trying to portray me as some sort of abuser. How strange. We call it the pot calling the kettle black.Think about what you are supposedly defending-its significant.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 23 March 2010 at 5:08 pm said:

Whatever I say, you don’t listen. I’m writing this to the other readers.

I get my pay check from ordinary work – not from Rigpa.

I’m involved with Rigpa only a few weeks a year.

I write here as a private person. I’ve told about my writing here to one single person in Rigpa. He lost interest in reading the stuff quite soon, because there was nothing new: just the repetition of same stuff.

Do you think I want to put a sticker up on my front: look – I tell all my personal stories here. See me!

If I was ‘sent by’ somebody here, they would probably use an English speaker, someone who talks in a polite manner etc. I’m in no way a good representation person. (I have some self criticism after all…)

I said I don’t want to talk to you. What do you want from me as a person? Intimidate me? You, ‘the protector of females from abuse’.

LikeLike
BC, on 23 March 2010 at 9:19 am said:

Hey bella. I have now come to the conclusion that you are a Rigpa worker. I am now sure of this. Considering this, it is hardly surprising that you respond in the manner you do. The only remaining question is are you acting of your own volition or has this task been delegated.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 22 March 2010 at 11:00 am said:

Good idea for the site keepers is to go even ONCE visit the place and the teacher. He is scary, but not THAT scary.

LikeLike
Pema, on 21 March 2010 at 8:36 am said:

I ain’t doing it mate. Its a job for the Irish who live in Ireland. If they care enough they will. let’s see how it works out.

LikeLike
themadhair, on 19 March 2010 at 6:44 pm said:

Wittering on about newage versus organised religion…

I seem to have missed that bit.

Rather, advertising his forthcoming “teachings” in Ireland plays into the survival stretegies devised by the Rigpa spin team.

Not really. By having as much relevant information as possible in one place we allow people the opportunity to make up their own minds. Those familiar with this blog already will have already seen the other side so to speak. Having this content may, through the magic of google and/or random browsing, attract even more people to this site and all the content therein.

Please tell me how you can justify extolling the virtues of organised religion…

Pretty sure this isn’t what has occurred. There is little doubt that many people are feeling increasing disillusioned with the more mainstream religions for the reasons you cite, and it is often through this disillusionment that many of these people seek out groups that they feel can offer them something (including such groups that may do them harm). This is not extolling any virtues, merely an acknowledgement of the situation many find themselves in.

Surely an internet networking campaign could pull together enough people to take their tents to this beautiful spot and stay for a couple of days in June plus banners, loud hailers etc:?

Ning is pretty good for setting up a free networking site:
http://www.ning.com/main/createyourown
Let us know how it turns out.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 19 March 2010 at 6:03 pm said:

But I’m still going there since I have no evidence on the accused stuff happening. I only have evidence about huge changes in the way I see our existence because of his teaching.

LikeLike
BC, on 19 March 2010 at 2:54 pm said:

Yes but please remember to warn those who might have chosen this particular group to escape from the terrible effects of sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic fathers, that they may well be jumping out of the proverbial frying pan, straight into th fire.
Q What is the difference between sexual abuse at the hands of a Catholic priest and a Buddhist teacher?
A None, the second one is just brushed a bit further under the carpet.
Funny the similarities: the abuse, the years of denial. In the end though, the truth has outed for the Catholic Church in Ireland. What kept it off radar for so long however was people just like bella.

LikeLike
bellaB, on 19 March 2010 at 2:09 pm said:

I have always enjoyed the peace in Rigpa retreats at Dzogchen Beara – and will come back again and again. I don’t mind you being there Pema… :)

LikeLike
Pema, on 19 March 2010 at 10:56 am said:

Wittering on about newage versus organised religion is not going to make the likes of Sogyal Lakar pack his bags and head for the hills. Rather, advertising his forthcoming “teachings” in Ireland plays into the survival stretegies devised by the Rigpa spin team. And — I wonder if someone at DI has taken leave of their common sense? Please tell me how you can justify extolling the virtues of organised religion in the light of:
* Centuries of sexual abuse by RC priests and hierarchical cover-ups?
*Millennia of vicious cruelty, prejudice and sectarian violence perpetrated a la Spanish Inquisition from various Xtian denominations — but mostly the church of Rome?
*The Taliban
*Wahabi Islam
*Dubya and his cronies. Never forget that the USA was run by a bunch of fundamentalist Xtian fantasists who believe they are the chosen ones.
The only approach that might serve the useful purpose of giving Sogyal and his cronies a nasty jolt is to organise a demo at Dzogchen Beara, timed to his arrival. Surely an internet networking campaign could pull together enough people to take their tents to this beautiful spot and stay for a couple of days in June plus banners, loud hailers etc:?

LikeLike

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Dialogue Ireland

Important posts

Dialogue Ireland

External Links

Recent Comments

Dzogchen Beara, Ireland, 3 – 11 July 2010: annual retreat with Sogyal Rinpoche

339 Responses

Leave a comment

Rigpa

Categories

Dialogue Ireland

Important posts

Dialogue Ireland

External Links

Recent Comments

Dzogchen Beara, Ireland, 3 – 11 July 2010: annual retreat with Sogyal Rinpoche

Share this:

Related

339 Responses

Leave a comment

Rigpa

Categories