Buddhism, Triratna

by tenpelSeptember 27, 201612:04 pm

FWBO / Triratna – Sangharakshita – Cases of Sexual Abuse

…ultimately, the way a group reacts to allegations of misconduct may be a better indicator of its underlying dysfunction than the content of the allegations themselves. – Christopher Hamacher

At the Western Buddhist Order men's ordination course, Guhyaloka, Spain, June 2002. © Upekshaka. Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/upekshaka/191534187 — Sangharakshita (Dennis Philip Edward Lingwood) at the Western Buddhist Order men’s ordination course, Guhyaloka, Spain, June 2002. © CC BY 3.0 / Upekshaka / More…

The BBC reported on September 26, 2016 about how sexual abuse in the FWBO (Friends of the Western Buddhist Order) – nowadays Triratna Buddhist Order (TBO) – happened under the guise of claimed »spiritual friendship« and to help »make spiritual progress«. The BBC spoke to three former members who explained that they were pressurised into engaging in sexual activity with the leader and founder of the FWBO/Triratna Buddhist Order, Sangharakshita (Dennis Lingwood).

One of the persons being abused said, »It was abuse of trust really, because I was a very sincere, perhaps naïve young man wanting to practise Buddhism.« One man said he was under the legal age of consent for homosexual sex at the time. While some followers believed that the leader of the group made a sacrifice in engaging with his students in a sexual relationship, Elie Godsi, a clinical psychologist who has been an expert witness on a number of high-profile abuse cases, said: »This is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group.«

Those living in the UK can also watch directly the BBC’s »Inside Out East« documentary in which Jo Taylor examines allegations of historic abuse at the Padmaloka Buddhist Retreat Centre (Triratna Retreats For Men) (first 10 minutes).

One good thing in that context is that at least FWBO/Triratna is beginning to acknowledge the power and sexual abuse and is talking about initiating steps to prevent future abuse. I read some reports in the past from men being abused by Sangharakshita and responses by FWBO/Triratna members. At that time I felt there was a tendency to still whitewash what happened by claiming the sexual relationships helped them.¹

However, there are also many traces of dishonesty by Triratna that show that the group is far away from a sincere reappraising of their past and an honest communication of the current situation. For instance, Triratna claimed to the BBC “Sangharakshita stepped back from any official role in the running of Triratna in 2000.” But Triratna runs a charity called Uddiyana whose stated purpose is the “support and assistance for Urgyen Sangharakshita … enabling him and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide”:

Data for financial year ending 31 December 2015

Triratna Buddhist Community (Uddiyana)

Income £146.0K Spending £57.2K

Aims & activities
Support and assistance for Urgyen Sangharakshita, founder of the Triratna Buddhist Community (formerly FWBO) – enabling him and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide. These activities include meditation and Buddhism, social work, body work, cultural activities and support for residential spiritual communities and ethical businesses.²

Other worrying examples of dishonesty, denial, whitewashing, in-house counselling, emotional blackmailing of victims, unhealthy power structures, safeguarding policy installation, or victim blaming can be found in the comment section. For instance, the claimed safeguarding policy were put in place only after Triratna (TBO) learned the BBC were investigating them (similar to the removal of the video on their website claiming that sex between teacher and student was acceptable, inspiring and entirely discretionary). Katherine Hopper (Munisha), a diligent defender of Triratna, is the TBO’s communications head and at the same time TBO’s chief safeguarding officer. An upcoming post will address some of these tactics and behaviours. Dennis Lingwood (Sangharakshita) issued a personal statement in Dec. 2016.

On 30. January 2017 Glenn’s Story was posted on YouTube. Glenn is talking openly and honestly about the abuse that happened to him aged 16 with Padmaraja at the Croydon Buddhist Centre.³

¹ To understand the harm such abuse can bring you can read the Guardian report The dark side of enlightenment from 1997 which reports the sad story of Matthew, a talented Oxford graduate who rejected careerism in the mid-1980s and joined the FWBO and who committed suicide.
Of tremendous help for me to understand sexual abuse in the context of a power differential (priest-parishioner, psychologist-client, teacher-student) is Peter Rutter’s (MD) »Sex in the Forbidden Zone«. I can highly recommend to read that book and to take it to heart.

² See: http://beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1046398&subid=0

³ Fourteen days after its publication the video was set private.
I have added the link to Croydon Buddhist Centre so that people can know it is in reality a Triratna Buddhist Centre and that Triratna is FWBO. It is important to be transparent about name changes and who they are. I invite someone from Croydon Buddhist Centre and Triratna to comment on the similarities between what the order head Sangharakshita was teaching and doing with what Croydon order head Padmaraja was teaching and doing.

Last edited on Feb 19, 2020

775Comments

Add yours

1

NO NAME on September 27, 2016 at 2:51 pm
Reply

The ’safeguarding‘ policy they put in place came only after they learned the BBC were investigating (like the removal of video on their website claiming that sex between teacher and student was acceptable, ‚ inspiring‘) and is ENTIRELY discretionary. Every aspect of it refers complaints straight back to within the organization, even where criminal behaviour takes place. IMHO there can be no genuine safeguarding without external scrutiny and if a centre learns residents have been having sex with children, the first people to call should be the police. (In the case of the center featured, two cases of minors have been swept under the carpet, the police stating they were unable to prosecute due to lack of third party corroboration … Again, while they claim they have learned from their mistakes and changed, none of the ever increasing number of victims coming forward has EVER received an apology or been compensated. In short, their response has been cosmetic rather than genuine and the whole exercise has been geared towards further concealment rather being about initiating change. On the other hand, as soon as the programme aired, they began removing videos on their site that referred to sex between teacher and student. So change is occurring, albeit your force rather than will So, all in all, best to keep warning people …
- 2
  
  tenpel on September 27, 2016 at 3:36 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you, no-name.
3

NO NAME on September 28, 2016 at 8:13 am
Reply

One of the principal problems in this situation is that many of the senior, long term members involved in running the group are either themselves implicated in the abuse ( be it by copycat behaviour or by helping with the continuing cover up) or are intent on preserving the status quo because the continued existence and stability of the group relates directly to their own continued high status and/or their own future financial wellbeing. In other words, they don’t want change because change would require that they come clean about the past and would mean they lost money and status.
Until the Order/ Triratna have the moral fibre to PUBLICLY admit that mistakes were made, that the abuse was widespread and replicated, that they repeatedly lied to hide this, and apologise PUBLICLY to and compensate victims, then the stench of the contradiction between truth and self serving propaganda will continue to haunt them.
Essentially, this is a battle for truth that will only be won when the honesty and openness of the many genuine seekers who follow Triratna is matched by honesty and openness at the top, from senior OMs such as Dhammarati, Munisha, Vishvapani ( ‘Thought for the Day’ Buddhist voice and one of the principal apologists for the behaviour of the past) Kulananda (Michael Chaskelson) Subhuti. It would also help if people like Maitreyabandhu were told to stop the continued teaching of Sangharakshitas abuse facilitating ideas surreptitiously, even after years of being told that such ideas are a) not Buddhist and b) harmful to innocent minds. Regardless of this, he continues to teach this stuff
Perhaps they are waiting for Sangharakshita and his victims to die for this phase of their development to pass. Realistically speaking, it will only pass when their own power games come to an end, when they have the balls to stand up and say ” Yes, we f—–d up, yes we lied. But we are sorry now and we are trying to changeI doubt wery much that this will happen despite the fact that they have millions in assets, I doubt that their victims will see a single penny. After all they have mansions to pay for, glorified monuments to their chequered past which are, in truth, luxurious retirement homes for the old guard- meanwhile abuse victims suffer in poverty as a result of the psychological wounds they inflicted
Perhaps it will take the death of two generations rather than one, to bring about real change I. The FWBO/Triratna. At the moment though, they are still trapped in trying to hide their past ( their admissions have been only to a sanitised version) and preserving the status of the group and their own within it.
4

Mettaman on September 28, 2016 at 10:20 pm
Reply

Thanks to contact in Adhistana for telling the truth, even if they cannot yet write it down, be true to themselves or speak as they find. It was good to hear of this dilemma as it does show understanding of suffering. Some order members apparently, even some in senior positions, would dearly love there to be an apology as it would put an end to their suffering and that of victims. According to OM the order have been advised not to apologise by their legal team as this could lead to compensation claims against the order’s assets and mansions …..
- 5
  
  tenpel on September 28, 2016 at 10:36 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you Mettaman. If true, it is really poor behavior and very sad “not to apologise … as this could lead to compensation claims against the order’s assets and mansions”. If true, it follows assets and mansions are more important for Triratna than the well being of those been harmed by their leader or organisation. So the materialists within Triratna seem to be victorious over those who seem to have a more spiritual or more compassionate approach / practice …
  - 6
    
    NO NAME on September 29, 2016 at 5:53 am
    Reply
    
    Unfortunately for them, their claims to have “learned from the mistakes of the past” and admission that they “now realise sex between student and teacher is not skilful” will be enough to convict Lingwood and start the compensation ball rolling.
    I note that legal eagles (vultures?) are already circling round the dying leader and his sycophants
    How sad
7

Mr on October 1, 2016 at 12:30 pm
Reply

I’m not sure fear of compensation claims is the main sticking point. It’s certainly nothing I’ve ever heard discussed, but anyway the Order has no legal existence and each Centre is a separate charity. Maybe someone could sue and bankrupt Padmaloka, which is where much of this went on, but it would have no repercussions on any other centre. At root the problem is that Sangharakshita feels no need to apologise and now although mentally acute is so old, frail and blind that no one feels inclined to push him on the matter. However, even if he were well and people did, his views are quite clear and he is unlikely to change them.
- 8
  
  tenpel on October 1, 2016 at 6:10 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you. This sounds reasonable.
  - 9
    
    NO NAME on October 2, 2016 at 6:46 am
    Reply
    
    Yes, it sounds reasonable but it is the smoke and mirrors tactic famously employed by numerous cults to escape being held responsible “the Order has no legal existence and each Centre is a separate charity” come on Tenzin, think NKT- it’s the same trick
    .”I’m not sure fear of compensation claims is the main sticking point. It’s certainly nothing I’ve ever heard discussed” ah yes, deductive reasoning ” I’ve never seen New York so it clearly doesn’t exist. Of course you’ve never heard it discussed: it’s totally unethical and not Buddhist. Not the sort of thing the inner circle discuss with underlings, for very obvious reasons.
    As for who to sue,Nouri defence is another smokescreen. Lingwood has amassed a huge personal fortune and no amount of moving sums around into centre funds will escape the future of a phorensic accountant. Again, the blatant and juvenile attempt to invoke compassion and decency towards the poor old blind man is an appeal to western sentimental thought. From a Buddhist perspective it would be better for Lingwood to suffer the consequences of his actions now, while he is still human, rather than doing so in the lowest hell reserved for those who abuse in the name of the dharma. Was Sangharakshita motivated by such lofty ideals when he was writhing around ejaculating on his victims? If good intentions ensure good outcomes, what was his. motive when he engaged in acts that led to multiple sucides?
    Tenzin I’m surprised at you being taken in by this stuff. It’s standard NKT politic.dont forget, after the damaging effects of the guardian article in 96, who did thee NKT turn to for assistance in restoring their image? The FWBO. When a third of the NBO membership left over the offer of the NBO to allow the NKT membership, who orchestrated their reinstatement? The FWBO
    That’s why the uk NBO is now a laughing stock in uk Buddhist circles and so many members have subsequently failed to renew their membership. The NBO is besmirched by its reputation of being run by cults, for cults
    - 10
      
      tenpel on October 2, 2016 at 7:19 am
      Reply
      
      From the legal point of view it’s a fact that each NKT centre has his own legal existence – as a separate charity. However, there is also a legal a legal existence of the NKT itself. I don’t know if this is also the case with Triratna.
      - 11
        
        NO NAME on October 2, 2016 at 9:08 am
        Reply
        
        According to its charity docs, Triratna (uddiyana) exists to SUPPORT AND ASSISTANCE FOR URGYEN SANGHARAKSHITA, FOUNDER OF THE TRIRATNA BUDDHIST COMMUNITY (FORMERLY FWBO) – ENABLING HIM AND HIS OFFICE TO GUIDE THE ACTIVITIES OF THE TRIRATNA BUDDHIST COMMUNITY CENTRES AND MEMBERS WORLDWIDE
        Try arguing for its non existence in a court of law with stuff like that all over the web
        And again it’s a smokescreen, here designed to distract from the fact that Lingwood is still very much alive and liable to prosecution! This is no longer a question of if but rather of when. I can assure you Dennis will soon be receiving a letter. What a strange predicament, where those who have helped cover up this abuse for decades are now quite probably praying for him to pass away. The bad news is, you can’t slander a dead man so, even if the Order manage to protect their mentor from prosecution, his passing will result in the allegations they have suppressed being widely publicised. I think it’s called between a rock and a hard place
        
        12
        
        tenpel on October 2, 2016 at 6:41 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you No name. Very helpful!
        
        13
        
        Mr Anon on October 3, 2016 at 8:58 am
        Reply
        
        I’m probably a bit out of the loop these days, but I clearly understood that each centre is an independent charity. I don’t think Sangharakshita set up the FWBO like that at the time to avoid any legal consequences of his sexual activities. If you were to argue that you may as well also say all the books he ever wrote, all the seminars he gave, all the talks and dull scholarly papers he read out, were merely a cover for his sexual appetite. Frankly I think there are probably easier ways to find sex! Where I would agree though is that Triratna hasn’t been entirely transparent in its handling of this issue, even now. For obvious reasons this is only ever likely change after Sangharakshita’s death and even then I have my doubts, given the key position Sangharakshita, his system of practice and his legacy is still likely to hold in the Triratna world. The other thing it shows very clearly is that he didn’t get very far on the Buddhist path, or at least not as far as the fourth and fifth fetters. That itself is no crime, but is probably not the basis from which to be the key central teacher of a Buddhist movement.
        
        14
        
        tenpel on October 3, 2016 at 3:37 pm
        
        Hi Mr. Anon, you mention here a key criticism which was part of three concerns that former ex-FWBO and I sorted out in our discussions.
        
        The three main concerns were: 1) blind spots at the leader side, 2) more or less coarse or subtle encouragement to ONLY follow FWBO – all you need to attain enlightenment is to follow the FWBO – though there is no sign or indication whatsoever, that the FWBO has produced an enlightened being … moreover, its leader is carried away by very basic desires as well as distorting the Dharma to justify his own (homo-)sexual needs, 3) it is unclear what the lineage of transmission is of the FWBO because its a compilation from here and there combined with some inventions, and the question is, what spiritual power does the FWBO “lineage” really have to enable deep transformation?
        
        A result of those discussions with ex-FWBO was also, that all of them found the FWBO files too extreme and exaggerated. That’s why I’ve never linked them on my websites or blogs – except this time at the end of the post. As an outsider, for me its extremely hard to judge all of this.
        
        15
        
        NO NAME on October 3, 2016 at 8:49 pm
        
        They may claim the Files were ‘extreme or exaggerated’ but NONE of the allegations in the Files were ever disproven and the vast majority of them were established as true. Sangharakshita s teachings on sex, women, the family, Christianity etc are entirely heterodox
        I would ointment out that many posters who are seemingly neutral have attacked your site for being extreme and exaggerated. The lesson?ball is not what it seems
        Have you ever read the FWBO Files?
        
        16
        
        Mr Anon on October 4, 2016 at 7:55 am
        
        It’s been years since I read the files, but from what I remember it’s not the facts of who did what to whom and when that were the issue, but the demonisation of Sangharakshita and one-sided portrayal of the FWBO that didn’t wash. It was such a crude caricature, a hatchet job – that was its weakness. Knowing Sangharakshita a little he strikes me as a very complex multifaceted man. He’s not the public persona he likes (and many of us like him) to present, but nor does he need to file down his horns every morning or tuck his tail down the back of his trousers. I know you are very angry with him Mark (I assume) and I understand why and that’s fair enough. You are never going to get an apology off the obstinate old so and so though and nor are you likely to destroy the movement he founded. We may do that ourselves out of our own stupidity. That remains to be seen and given all that is good about Triratna I hope we manage not to!
        
        17
        
        NO NAME on October 4, 2016 at 12:04 pm
        
        Glad to see that you don’t have a problem with the facts in the Files (that Sangharakshita had sex with multiple victims, all the time claiming it would lead to their enlightenment, that the family is ‘the enemy of the spiritual community, that women are spiritually inferior, that homosexuality is superior to heterosexuality)and btw it was not the back of his trousers S needed to tuck his tail into,it was the front. “Complex and multifaceted” he may well be, as are many sexual abusers. However, that is not a defence in a court of law where the man rightly belongs.. The subtle ad hominem attack you attempt to impose on the debate by claiming the Files author demonised S is an attempt to hide the fact that he/she was perhaps just someone who saw immoral and illegal acts being perpetrated in the name of dharma and felt someone should be held to account- it’s called ‘moral indignation’ and the search for justice.
        You are right about there being good things about Triratna, as indeed there are about the curates egg, but you are wrong to assume I am Mark Dunlop ( who has posted here in the past using his own name, having nothing left to conceal after years of personal attacks on him from Order members- oops, you did it again!
        Nobody wants to destroy the Order. All that is needed is justice for the victims of abuse, of which there were dozens, if not hundreds.
        The knock is coming: not if but when.
        
        18
        
        Mettaman on October 12, 2016 at 12:17 am
        
        Mr Anon, you say it’s been years site you read THe FWBO Files. I suggest you read them again as so much is as true now as it was then and more stories have co e to light since. Metta.
        
        19
        
        Mr Anon on October 4, 2016 at 8:02 am
        
        Hi Tempel. I’d agree with you about points 1 and 2. However, I don’t think you need a lineage in that Tibetan sense to progress on the path. You just need a simple, clear exposition of the Buddha’s teaching and a system of practice. I think Triratna does bring in too much from outside and can end up confusing people about the Dharma [I know members of the Order who seem not to have a clue!], but at the same time if you look it’s all there. As for our system of practice – a lot of members of the Order have looked outside that framework to make significant progress and this is a big point of discussion in the Order.
        
        20
        
        tenpel on October 4, 2016 at 9:43 am
        
        Thank you Frenzy, Mr Anon and no name for the discussion and your contributions.
        As this blog aims towards to give proper information to enable people to think for themselves instead of condemning others or creating a caricature of others. I appreciate your input and thoughts and I hope that readers find these useful and that it helps them to make up their own mind.
        
        21
        
        James Eyre (@James_Eyre) on November 19, 2016 at 4:45 am
        Reply
        
        For better and for worse, dead people can’t defend themselves or witness their accusers.
    - 22
      
      tenpel on October 2, 2016 at 6:39 pm
      Reply
      
      Hi No name. I only replied briefly this morning to the first point because I had no time to read the full comment. My problem is that I don’t know enough about the FWBO though I had discussions with former long-term members. I have also read some of FWBO members’ accounts where they portrayed the abuse as something positive which I can’t nor will buy in – though I remember an article by a Austrian writer who could see it rather lightly and was not too angry. However, not even he claimed it was good for him. He discriminated: at least those paedophile priests gave them some attention, didn’t ignore or beat them up as other priests did.
      
      So my restraint is coming from my ignorance about the situation and by being cautious not to project the NKT stuff – which I think I know rather well – onto the FWBO. That’s why I am open to collect different statements or comments like gathering information to see things more clearly in the future.
- 23
  
  NO NAME on October 2, 2016 at 10:34 am
  Reply
  
  ps “Maybe someone could sue and bankrupt Padmaloka, which is where much of this went on, but it would have no repercussions on any other centre”
  This is another version of the Croydon smokecreen [IT all happened only at one center,a long time back and at the hands of one person”]
  Luckily, my Shabda collection which runs back to the mid 80s, makes reference to abuse in Croydon, Dublin, Brighton,Bristol, Sydney, to name but a few http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/ShabCol2.htm#Croydon
  In fact there are numerous references to abuse at numerous centers, at the hands of numerous OMs So, there are plenty of assets to go round, dont you worry.
  Now that the truth is out, more people are coming out of the woodwork, not all from Padmaloka. So your compassionate concern that there might not be enough compensation to go round is thankfully misplaced.
  The game, as they say, is finally up. Vultures are circling and preparing for a feeding frenzy
  JUSTICE AND KARMA PLAYING OUT TOGETHER
  Wear the yellow robe
  But if you are reckless
  You will fall into darkness
  
  Dhammapada 22:2
24

learninglive2 on October 1, 2016 at 8:09 pm
Reply

Q1. Has anyone in the order received disclosures of alleged sexual abuse involving anyone under the age of consent?
A. Yes – For example, all who received and read Shabda 2003. Anyone, who was told verbally or in writing about this at any time is in receipt of a disclosure of sexual abuse.
Q2. Was it / is it illegal to have sex with someone under the age of consent?
A. Yes. Sangharakshita and others, according to the disclosure(s), had sex with person(s) under the age of consent.
Q3. If Sangharakshita / others had sex with someone under the age of consent, did he / they break the law?
A. Yes.
Q4. What should the order do if they realise at any point that someone has broken the law?
A. They refer to Social Services and the police and hand over the safeguarding files that they have been keeping meticulously and confidentially about the concerns.
Q5. What if it is not recent?
A. The safeguarding team follow the same ethical and professional procedures as above as did the Anglican safeguarding team in the case of Bishop Peter Ball.
- 25
  
  tenpel on October 1, 2016 at 8:45 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you!
26

Mettaman on October 2, 2016 at 2:32 pm
Reply

The Bishop Peter Ball report has many similarities with actions / ‘spiritual teachings’ and resource materials connected to Dennis Lingwood / Sangharakshit and FWBO/Triratna /The Buddhist Centre http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-34466842
- 27
  
  tenpel on October 2, 2016 at 6:43 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you Mettaman.
28

frenzy on October 2, 2016 at 8:53 pm
Reply

Der Tenpel,
Hello Tenpel.
I apriciated your reference to Peter Rutters ”sex in the forbidden zone”
It should be made oblicatory in the Triratna ordination proces.
Although he takes a man-woman perspective, it could easily be translated to general dynamics between spiritual teachers and spiritual aspirants attending classes, retreats, reading their books etc.

In his book Peter Rutter, Jungian psychoanalyst MD, explains why sexual encounters between spiritual teachers and their ‘devotees'(/one on the recieving end of the teaching) are so damaging, not only for the woman(/spiritual aspirant) , but for the man(/teacher m/v) as well. Women(/spiritual aspirants) usually succumb to these seductions because they are unable to maintain their personal boundaries due to past psychological wounds, often the result of childhood abuse (or neglect), and they are taken advantage of when they are most vulnerable and trusting, when they are seeking emotional and spiritual healing. It is widely recognized that a woman (/spiritual aspirant) in this dependent position, under the influence of a teacher’s spiritual authority, is incapable of free and full consent. In her(/his) desire for the healing of past wounds, she (/he) depends on the integrity of her(/his) teacher to keep her (/his) welfare inviolate and not to reenact the sexual (/emotional) abuse (or neglect) that she may unconsciously elicit from him.

Rutter says that the violation of this sacred trust causes the same emotional damage as incest relationships; there is the same imbalance of power, admiration of the symbolic father, and the inability to displease him or believe he would hurt her. And this is compounded by the devastating spiritual betrayal that can permanently undermine her faith.

Sexual harassment, almost by definition, comes out of a power relationship. To coerce people into sexual definitions of situations requires a definite imbalance of power of some kind. Such situations are extremely widespread: they include families, workplaces, residential institutions of all kinds, therapeutic relationships, and religious contexts. The power available in religious contexts includes emotional power and intellectual power – the power to define the meaning of an event.

For the teacher, this unethical and immoral violation of a woman’s(spritual aspirant’s) trust is often seen by him as a loving act that promises mutual fulfillment, and he is in denial of the suffering he causes. Because the relationship is inherently dishonest and manipulative, even if the woman (/man) has initiated it and wants it to continue, the love, intimacy and healing he is seeking usually remains illusively unattainable, often compelling him into a succession of equally empty and unfulfilling liaisons. This compulsive, self-destructive behavior only increases his disconnection from himself and others.

I found this online on a (US) website in regard to clergy abuse :
”Adult victims of sexual exploitation by clergy often don’t see themselves as victims. Without wider public awareness of the extent and impacts of this form of sexual violence, adults who have been sexually victimized by a beloved priest, pastor, minister, rabbi or other clergy will remain the “silent majority” of clergy sexual abuse victims, suffering in their shame and self-isolation.”
”Many people, including the victims themselves, often label incidences of Clergy Sexual Misconduct with adults as ‘affairs’. In reality, they are an abuse of spiritual power by the religious leader.”
”Sexual violation by a therapist, doctor, or clergy member is not about sex; it is an abuse of power, authority, and trust inherent in the relationship”

It says also:
”Sympathy and understanding for child victims of sexual abuse flows more readily than that accorded to adults. Adults are often presumed to have colluded in, or even caused, their victimization …”
”societal need to find a scapegoat for the loss of a beloved pastor(/buddhist teacher) can cause congregations(sanghas) to re-victimize victims, their spouses, children, and even suspected “whistleblowers”
And : ”in some states “consent” to sexual relations cannot be used as a defense”

I wonder what the situation is with clergy abuse laws in the UK?

My point is: what is the damage that get’s done in a community where the great leader is exused for his sexual abusive behaviour, with him actually saying he did not feel he was the teacher… and without apropriate consequences having been offered to victums.
What about the deep rooted effects on ethical socialisations. If there is a lack of actual sensetivety and awareness around this topic, even though some ethical quidelines now have been formulated and suggestions have been made they are allready for may years blablabla… if indeed complaints are refered straight back to within the organization… this does not really offer anything substation regarding safeguarding.
- 29
  
  tenpel on October 3, 2016 at 12:40 am
  Reply
  
  Hi Frenzy,
  thank you.
  
  For me Rutter’s text is extremely good because a) he shows the delusional dynamics of a situation which results in sexual abuse in the context of a person with higher power to a person with lower power (power differential) and how both sides will suffer from it b) he is explicit about the harming results. Any person (or organisation/leader) who is downplaying the destructive nature of such relationships should definitely read it in order to wake up – though they are most often so carried away that they would rather find reasons to downplay or white wash the damage …
  
  I agree also with that adult victims of sexual exploitation by clergy are often not regarded as victims – which I think is extremely ignorant. (I had discussions with people who excuse power or sexual abuse of adult students as a mature / free decision of an adult.) Only ignorant people who don’t have a clue how such sexual exploitations are based on manipulations + exploiting the spiritual hopes and faith of open spiritual seekers and what harm this creates can take such a stance.
  
  In the case of Triratna or other cases like the Pagode Path Hue in Germany/Frankfurt, the spiritual leader manipulated their students by claiming they need these sexual relationships with the leader for their spiritual progress. They twisted the Dharma: Sangharakshita by claiming the heterosexual student would be blocked to enlightenment by his aversion to homosexuality (what a shameful, embarrassing, distorted twist on the Dharma as well as on the student!) or in the case of the Pagode, that sexual relationships are part of the monks’ trainings and to heal the wounds of child abuse the monks should have now sex with the leader as part of the healing process (how perverse is that?!) Before such exploitive processes, a lot of manipulations have already taken place. If you either have love for human beings (you want really their good) or love for the Dharma (you want to really use it to change yourself or help others to improve to more freedoms) how can you ever do such things? But those teachers set up a whole distorted system and their students carry it on. Its a up-side-down rotten system. If people can’t see that, they are blind. (This is how I see that. But I work also on cultivating compassion for such blind people …, if they can’t see that, I can’t violently open their eyes…, there is no need for anger, they are temporarily totally blocked to see…)
  
  I think, the deeper problem with these cultish groups or cults is, that the amount of rottenness it carries is just not seen by the followers – maybe they are just too close to it or they may fear to question their whole spiritual life and in whom and what they have placed all their energy, hopes, lifetime, money, faith – hence there is a tendency to play things down and to whitewash what happens.
  
  I mean, if you really love human beings and the Dharma, how can you ever do that???
  
  BTW, in Germany, sexual relationships between therapist and client are prohibited by law. A (state licensed or university educated) therapist will face legal punishment if he has sex with any of his clients. There is reason why this is so. But those manipulative spiritual leaders who see themselves often even as on higher levels than well educated psychologists, can do as they please because there is just no law for them. They are operating in a legal gray zone. Nevertheless, the damage is the same. The moral failing is also the same.
30

NO NAME on October 3, 2016 at 8:04 am
Reply

I see the section on sex and the FWBO http://response.fwbo.org/fwbo-files/response30.html on their website designed to rebut the accusations of sexual abuse made in the FWBO Fiiles currently links to an error 404 message. It is quite clear that the reason this section has disappeared temporarily is so it can be rewritten in amore honest and open way ( or to put it another way, so the lies can be removed)
The order have a history of hiding behind re edits of incriminating material they previously posted.
Here’s an example of how they used the same tactic to discredit the FWBO Files author by basically lying to suit their needs -thank heaven for screen grab
http://britishbuddhism.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/triratna-buddhist-community-friends.html
- 31
  
  tenpel on October 3, 2016 at 3:27 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you. The o-site can be still accessed by the wayback machine:
  http://web.archive.org/web/20071005122042/http://response.fwbo.org/fwbo-files/response30.html
  
  III Theory and Practice
  d | Sex and the FWBO
  [QUOTE:] Persons involved at a more superficial level might find it genuinely difficult to accept what goes on within the inner circle of the organisation, but the fact is that once a person becomes an Order member (and in certain cases, even before), efforts may be made to convert the said person from heterosexuality to homosexuality. (p.19)
  
  [ANSWER:] The FWBO Files makes two serious charges in relation to sex and the FWBO: firstly that it teaches that homosexuality is superior to heterosexuality, and second that members are “converted” to homosexuality through coercive psychological means. Both of these charges are untrue. In the absence of evidence for these charges within the public domain, The FWBO Files constructs a wholly fictitious sense of an “inner circle” where such attitudes are actually found, though remaining invisible.
  
  When I get it correctly from talks with ex-FWBO, and also the tiny bits I read from Sangharakshita or on FWBO blogs very long ago, indeed, it looks that FWBO via Sangharakshita taught homosexuality is superior to heterosexuality. However, I don’t have any written proof or evidence for this claim. So, “no name”, can you quote statements or sources that give evidence to this (as well as for the other claim)?
  - 32
    
    NO NAME on October 3, 2016 at 8:52 pm
    Reply
    
    All you need to do is read the FWBO Files and you will see for yourself The quotes are all in there
  - 33
    
    NO NAME on October 3, 2016 at 9:49 pm
    Reply
    
    Outline of FWBO teaching on sex
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/OutlineSex.htm
    FWBO teaching on sex is quite convoluted (as documented below). In outline:
    
    1 Women are lower on the evolutionary scale than men.
    
    2 Heterosexual relationships are generally the result of projection and neurotic attachment. The couple is the enemy of the spiritual community.
    
    3 The nuclear family, as a breeding ground for neurosis and child abuse, is an ‘enemy to be destroyed’. Single-sex communities and right-livelihood businesses provide a better basis for developing spiritual friendship and becoming a ‘true individual’.
    
    4 Homosexual relationships (‘Greek love’) are actively encouraged as a medium of spiritual friendship, and as a means of overcoming conditioning.
    
    These ideas are not necessarily taught openly at public centres. The more radical aspects are generally only introduced once order members feel confident that a newcomer has made a genuine commitment to the FWBO. It is a sort of ‘bait and switch’ technique – the FWBO at first teach real Buddhism, and then introduce their own stuff later.
    
    The ways in which the FWBO attempts to justify these teachings as genuine Buddhism is discussed in more detail in The FWBO Files in the section: ‘The Doctrines of Sangharakshita and the FWBO’.
    
    The ‘Sexual Manipulation’ section of this site provides examples of the above teachings on sex. Some items are fuller versions of certain quotes cited in the Doctrines section of the Files, others are from new material published subsequent to the Files. It comprises the following pages:
    
    Women lower on evolutionary scale than men (2,000 words)
    Some quotes from the book ‘Women, Men and Angels’
    
    Lower Evolution & Higher Evolution (500 words)
    Spiritual hierarchy (1,000 words)
    Some quotes from FWBO publications, explaining how these concepts are understood within the FWBO
    
    Sexual projection (1,700 words)
    Four extracts:
    1. from a seminar in which Sangharakshita suggests that men should develop their own inner femininity, rather than projecting it onto women, in order to become free from (hetero)sexual desire.
    2. from a magazine article, in which Tejananda extols the benefits of FWBO single-sex communities as a way to overcome any ‘tendency to over-identify with one’s “male-ness” or “female-ness”‘.
    3. from a book by Subhuti, on the benefits of single-sex activities in minimising sexual projection and polarisation.
    4. a dissenting view from a non-FWBO member.
    
    Neurotic and non-neurotic sexuality (300 words)
    A short extract from a seminar, in which Sangharakshita defines a non-neurotic sexual relationship as one in which neither partner would be upset if the relationship were to break up.
    
    Couple as enemy of spiritual community (1,400 words)
    This page provides the context for the quote: ‘The “couple” is the enemy of the spiritual community’, cited in The FWBO Files at note 34
    
    Single-sex community as assault on existing social set-up (900 words)
    This page provides the context for the quotes that families are
    ‘a really massive source of conditioning’ (Files note 33) and:
    ‘the single-sex community is probably our most powerful means of frontal assault on the existing social set-up’ (note 38), and
    ‘If you set up communities, you abolish the family at a stroke’ (note 39)
    
    Shabda short extracts (450 words)
    Shabda collection 1 (4,000 words)
    Shabda collection 2 (3,000 words)
    Comments by order members on the Guardian article, power relationships, and the promotion of homosexuality as superior to heterosexuality. Originally published in the FWBO’s order magazine, Shabda, and compiled by two (now ex) order members for open circulation.
    
    Shabda short extracts contains links to following pages
    Subhuti Shabda quote: Homosexuality as kalyana mitrata (Files note 52)
    Jayamati’s letter & Subhuti B’ist Vision p143
    Jnanavira’s letter & Tricycle quote & 2 Ratnotara quotes & Kovida report
    
    Fear of homosexuality double bind (650 words) (cited in Files note 51)
    An outline of Sangharakshita’s views on homosexuality and spiritual friendship.
    
    Conventional morality vs. Natural morality (800 words)
    How the FWBO sees these two different kinds of morality.
    - 34
      
      Mr Anon on October 11, 2016 at 4:30 pm
      Reply
      
      In the end I think the only bit that holds water is the fact that heterosexual sex tends to lead to families and all the responsibilities they involve, so if you want to practise full-time but don’t want to give up sex it’s kind of handy to be gay. Personally, I can vouch for the difficulties of practising in the household life and understand why the Buddha went forth from all that, but I wouldn’t try to be gay to avoid it!
      - 35
        
        Mettaman on October 21, 2016 at 8:25 pm
        Reply
        
        Mr. Anon, you have with your comment of 11 October reconfirmed to me how ingrained Lingwoodism is in Triratna devotee, as you reconfirm, in cool, throw away sound bites, his teaching that homosexuality is preferable to heterosexuality in terms of spiritual path without giving up sex. Can you not see how ‘it’s kind of handy to be gay’ reduces sexual orientation to a casual item or commodity? It sets gay sex up as the handy ideal. Also, you seem to bemoan that you are in a family situation, with huge echoes of Sangharakshita’s taped monologues. What a shame for your family’s wellbeing that your commitments seem to lie ultimately with Sangharakshita and his order. What a shame that you are / were beset by being heterosexual. What might your wife / partner and family or a non Triratna person, think of what you just wrote? That the family you have is something you would have ideally avoided? Poor you that you are lumbered with spiritually inferior possibilities because you wanted sex? WIth a woman? So much of Lingwoodism reduces a partner to ‘a sexual relationship.’ I would not wish my sister – or brother – to be dating down the dead end Triratna street. I feel sorry for your family as you do not seem to understand just how impersonal this ideology is.
        This ideology surely must lead to profound conflict for many men and women in Triratna, whose natural inclination is towards loving committed partners or indeed to having a child. Your comments above are Sangharakshita’s ideas .. still devoid of real people, real love and real consequences. Indeed, I am getting info that mitra at Padmaloka are being advised that they need to leave their families to make spiritual progress and that a German order member also on a Padmaloka event, wants to interview female partners of prospective order members to essentially vet them for compliance. This does not surprise me as I know that Padmavajra at Padmaloka tells mitra, especially the young men, some misogynistic ‘true’ stories from Buddhist scriptures to spiritually scare them off relationships and to alienate fathers from children and women. Maybe you have heard him deliver these, following very much in Sangharakshita’s misogynistic footsteps. Maybe you do not appreciate the extent to which this ideology affects you.
        Have you shown this thread to your family / siblings /parent?
        
        36
        
        tenpel on October 21, 2016 at 9:56 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you Mettaman. You raise a very important point which – as far as I can see – is the reduction of another human being to an sexual object or of complex human relationships to mere sexual relationships … I was not aware of this!
        It could be that the reduction of human beings and good, fulfilled and rich partnership in favour of a mere sexual activity towards a preferred object of sexual desire lingers behind all of these ideas SR/Dennis and his closet students spread or installed in TBO.
        If you read The Guardian piece of how Mike Dunlop told how SR/Dennis sexually abused him, its not about having a good partnership or a good human relation its just about sex and seeing a sexual object in the other … You find the same in the documentary Holy Hell. Not being able to have fulfilled, rich and sustaining partnerships is one thing but to establish this inability as the preferred model for followers, isn’t this quite dangerous – because you ask others to develop the same limitations as you have yourself? What’s so enlightened or spiritual here?
        
        37
        
        NO NAME on October 22, 2016 at 9:03 am
        
        To support mother and father, to cherish wife and children, and to be engaged in peaceful occupation — this is the greatest blessing.
        Buddhas words from the Mangala Sutta
        The family is the enemy of the spiritual community
        Dennis Lingwood aka Sangharakshita
        
        Lingwoods deception was to claim that the advice the Buddha gave to monks about the limitations of family life was blanket advice for ALL Buddhists, lay and ordained. This fallacy is further perpetuated by the TBO description of themselves as ” neither lay nor ordained” (note also the arrogant. portrayal of themselves as “the community of committed Buddhist practitioners”, the implication being that other Buddhists are not ” committed”)
        This is why TBO is so dangerous. Unwittingly/ intentionally in Lingwoods case, through great arrogance and ignorance, they have created a movement which has at its heart, deep seated sentiments of hatred for the family and feelings of the inferiority of the traditions which they claim to be the distilled essence of. TBO is therefore destructive of both the family and traditional Buddhism
        This is what becomes increasingly apparent the more one reads Katherine Hopper/ Munishas ( who I believe to be mr Anon) defences of TBO – She has an excuse for everything. Hence her role as TBO communications head ( and, ridiculously, chief safeguarding officer)
        I am reminded of Gary Beesleys comparison of the NKT as ‘ cuckoos’ Beesley wrote a book the NKT forced the withdrawal of entitled ‘ the cuckoo in the peacock palace’ as well as authoring the FWBO Files. The point about the. cuckoo is it lays it’s eggs in the nests of other birds, replicating he size and colour.of the hosts eggs.As soon as it is born,, the cuckoo kills all its siblings and eventually turns on its parents, once they have outgrown their usefulness.
        Beesley was vilified for years by FWBO and NKT seniors. And yet the central assertions of both his works ( that the NKT was a Chinese backed cult, a tool in the CPC war against the Dalai Lama and that the FWBO was a sexually abusive, anti family misogynistic cult set up by its leader to procure young men for sex) all turned out to be true. Yet both cults branded him a liar and a trouble maker
        It looks like the chickens are coming home to roost for both organizations.
        Another name to be added to the apology list?
        
        38
        
        tenpel on October 22, 2016 at 12:52 pm
        
        Lingwoods deception was to claim that the advice the Buddha gave to monks about the limitations of family life was blanket advice for ALL Buddhists, lay and ordained.
        
        100% agreed!
        
        39
        
        tenpel on October 22, 2016 at 12:55 pm
        
        … from the Reddit discussion with respect to the TBO description of themselves as “neither lay nor ordained”:
        
        I looked at the Triratna website, it says they are:
        “Neither monastic nor lay, we are simply Buddhists”
        
        Not being monastic means they are not qualified.
        Not being lay means they are not serious.
        And that entire sentence seems disingenuous.
        
        »For the person who transgresses in one thing, I tell you, there is no evil deed that is not to be done. Which one thing? This: telling a deliberate lie.«
40

frenzy on October 4, 2016 at 7:41 am
Reply

Hello, tenpel thank you for your reply.

In this video you see sangharakshita reflecting on the (un) skilfullness of sex itself. Very disturbing in the light of the ”abuse under the guise of claimed »spiritual friendship« and to help »make spiritual progress«.”

It shows Sangharakshita saying sexual relationships and friendship are mutually quite incompattible and that he tends to think, after a lot of thought, there is something essentially unskilfull about the sexual relationship. Also he says ‘one of the things that i i have observed and what really appalled me is ”the fact of the sexual exclusiveness of sexual relationships”. He says he thinks it is really without foundation you can have a genuine friendship and sexual relationships with one and the same person.

It is unfortunate the FWBO files in are a style that makes them sensitie to critics.
I found the letters of resignation of Yashomitra, Prasannasiddhi and Sthiramati extremely skillfully formulated.
Praise for Mark Dunlop, also in his account online, to give some more insight in the actual effects of such accumulation of trauma on a human being.
- 41
  
  tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 2:03 am
  Reply
  
  Incredible – not what he says, I agree with it – but in light of what he did so many times!
  
  Can you link to the letters of Yashomitra, Prasannasiddhi and Sthiramati and more by Mark Dunlop?
  I agree, “praise for Mark Dunlop”! because it is extremely brave what and how he reported about his experiences to The Guardian (I read only this piece so far). Such whistle blowers are so rare because it is so hard to develop that bravery, clarity and to have the self-esteem to report about this – even with your real name!!!
  - 42
    
    frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 9:03 am
    Reply
    
    Re Tenpel: I don’t agree with you, i think he makes ridigulous presumtions, i dont see how they are buddhist either. I think he is talking merely about his own inabilities and that his observation are v poor .
    Indeed contextualised it is even more spooky…
    
    Here are:
    Yashomitra’s open letter.
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/Yashomitra.htm
    Sthiramati’s letter to Mahamati.
    http://triratna-news.blogspot.nl/search?updated-min=2010-01-01T00:00:00Z&updated-max=2011-01-01T00:00:00Z&max-results=6>
    Prasannasiddhi to Dhammarati and Order members.
    http://triratna-news.blogspot.nl/2010/07/sid-and-his-trousers.html
    And from Mark Dunlop
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/MarkDunlop.htm
    - 43
      
      tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 9:14 pm
      Reply
      
      I meant I agree that spiritual friendship in the sense of an elder guiding or supporting a junior in the spiritual path and sexual relationship don’t go together. Do you think otherwise?
      - 44
        
        frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 9:24 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you. I see, with your interpretation of it is clear what you agree with. I didnt see Sr nor Subuthi refering to sexual relationships as in sexual relationships between a senior and a junior, but in general.
        
        45
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 9:58 pm
        Reply
        
        I interpreted it that way.
    - 46
      
      tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 9:15 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you for the links. Will read the content in the next days.
      - 47
        
        frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 9:57 pm
        Reply
        
        Content second link, from 2010.
        
        Dear Mahamati,
        
        I am writing to ask you to withdraw my name from the Order list, etc. As I expect you know I have had nothing to do with WBO/TBC activities for well over a decade now, and minimal involvement for some time before that, and I wish to make it clear that this position is a matter of choice rather than forgetfulness on my part. I have regarded myself as no longer a part of ‘the Order’ for a long time and it is now probably overdue for me to make this absolutely clear to all concerned.
        
        My decision to do this is, amongst other things, connected with the subject of various materials now in the public domain, most notably the self-deceiving document “Conversations with Bhante”, and the character of the collective response over the years to the issues that are raised therein. While I fully accept the well-meaning and good faith of members of the WBO/TBC, there is also a collective self-deception at work in connection with certain past events and present attitudes which I regard as deleterious to the welfare of all those involved, past and present. I would summarise my concerns as being focused in the areas of sexual misconduct, inadequate boundaries and cultic or controlling group behaviours, compounded by the lack of informed and truly moral leadership on how the Order should understand and respond to these problems, as shown for example by your and Subhuti’s rapturous endorsement of “Conversations…”. It is particularly damning that no-one addresses the crucial factor of the breach of fiduciary duty and teacher-disciple boundaries. Everyone inside the WBO/TBC, it seems, is engaged in denial of how destructive such behaviour can be and has been.
        
        I note in a recent document that Sangharakshita laments that a resigning member does not write to him as his preceptor. He clearly does not understand that where he has ‘cashed in’ his spiritual status for personal sexual gratification, no obligation remains on the part of the ordinand.
        
        I have written about aspects of all these issues at some length but here is not the place in which to go into further detail. I do understand that many members believe (or is it hope?) that by remaining uncritical of Sangharakshita’s sexual misconduct and other aspects of TBC/WBO behaviour they are exhibiting a kind of spiritual strength. Unfortunately this is not the case, and they are merely exhibiting their indifference to the moral issues raised in these areas, and clinging cravenly to the identities given by their often lengthy membership of the TBC/WBO.
        
        I hope you are able and willing to reflect on the truth of what I have written.
        
        With my best wishes,
        
        Andrew Skilton (ex-Sthiramati)
        
        I would be most grateful if you would publish this letter in Shabda so that other members of the WBO/TBC are unambiguously informed of my position.
        
        48
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 10:01 pm
        Reply
        
        Respect! Well said well said.
        
        49
        
        frenzy on October 30, 2016 at 4:15 pm
        
        Some extracts fom Yashomitra’s letter, 2003, also here much clairity and courage. Sorry for taking words out of context, but they seem essential bits.
        
        ”In my experience we in the order maintained a conspiracy of silence. (…) Sangharakshita was held up as the embodiment of the Ideal, as the Buddha in our midst.”
        
        ”In the absence of there being anywhere else to turn to glimpse the Ideal, Sangharakshita being the sole Teacher to the whole Order, in order to hold onto the Ideal it was necessary repress the awareness of what he (and others) was doing. This was a massive psychic split which continues to have its repercussions.”
        
        ”People have talked in terms of a blind spot. That seems to have been the case, though the term itself is not weighty enough to communicate the seriousness of the matter.”
        
        ”Many people were damaged as a result of the way things were. This is not simply an unfortunate consequence of the immaturity of the Order and the individuals within it. It is a disaster for those affected in that kind of way. The place that you believe offers you a safe refuge, in which the Ideals of Wisdom and Compassion, of spiritual friendship, are repeatedly upheld and proclaimed, becomes a place in which you are manipulated, undermined and used. That is a disaster. The world turned upside down.”
        
        ”Present and future generations rely on the ethics of those who tell us what has happened for a truthful account.”
        
        50
        
        frenzy on October 30, 2016 at 4:20 pm
        
        From Prasannasiddhi, with respect:
        
        ”I also believe that he was misusing the natural power and authority of his position as a spiritual teacher, and the love and devotion engendered in me in relation to him in that position, to meet his needs for sex and intimacy in a way that was unskilful.”
        
        ”Counsellors that I have seen, including a counsellor from Survivors UK, consider that the above equates to a form of sexual abuse.”
        
        51
        
        frenzy on October 30, 2016 at 5:05 pm
        
        And much gratitude to Mark for writing with such specifics about his personal struggle that reflects the ”damning” personal consecuences. And for developing ”that bravery, clarity and to have the self-esteem to report about this”.
        
        Some extracts here, with respect.
        
        ”One day in the spring of 1986, I was reflecting how much I missed D, when there was an unexpected welling up of emotion and I began crying. This had a purgative effect, and I began to feel strongly that my heterosexual nature, and in particular the associated emotions of love and affection, were true and genuine human feelings, and not some kind of blind perversion, as I had come to believe during my time in the FWBO. My emotions had been stirred up a month or so previously when I had read ‘Jane Eyre’ for the first time, and I believe this novel may have acted as a catalyst.
        
        Begining to see through the FWBO
        This crying episode marked a turning point in my relationship with the FWBO. The tears soon gave way to anger and revulsion, and over the next few weeks and months, I gradually began to see that there were significant dangers in the FWBO’s distortion of traditional Buddhism.”
        
        ”Unfortunately, the personal process of coming to terms with my experience in the FWBO continued to become even more difficult and stressful. It was very difficult to articulate my feelings and thoughts. The only outside reference I had at that time was the novel, Jane Eyre, but it was difficult to relate this book, or its meaning to me, to Buddhist teaching or to anything else. It was difficult to explain to other people how reading it had profoundly changed my perspective on Sangharakshita’s teaching about human sexuality and about the dangers of ‘love’ as a neurotic projection, and how this had caused me to question the whole ethos and practice of the FWBO as an organisation. I became obsessed with unraveling my experience in the FWBO, and began to experience bouts of anger and depression over my seeming inability to effectively articulate my concerns.”
        
        ”I felt very frustrated that the allegations I had made in my article (published as an insert in Shabda May 1987), had been met with such indifference by other FWBO members. To express my anger and frustration over this, in June 1987 I broke two windows and did some other minor damage at Lesingham House, hoping that this might prompt order members to take more notice of the concerns I had expressed. Shortly after, Sangharakshita emerged from his office in a rage, and began haranguing me in front of about half a dozen order members: ‘You think the whole world revolves around you! and ‘We’ve been so-oo patient with you’ and ‘It is still not too late for you to turn the corner.”’
        
        ”Seeking medical help
        In October 1986, I first saw my GP about my depression and anger about my experience in the FWBO, and over the next ten years or so, I was referred to a number of specialists in the Norwich area. Two of these, both counselors for sexual abuse victims, were sympathetic, but the other psychologists and psychiatrists I saw all seemed to regard me as an obsessive individual who should put their past mistakes behind them and get on with the rest of their life. This kind of ‘blame the victim’ response tended to increase my anxiety and depression, and was probably harmful rather than helpful.”
        
        ”I also went outside the NHS and tried hypnotherapy and some other therapies, (…) Howerever However, my contact with Dr T did provide a lifeline at the time, and her experience with other ex-cult members and her understanding of the processes involved in cult membership, together with reading books by ex-cult members such as Steven Hassan, subsequently gave me a basis from which to begin to understand my experience in the FWBO and to gradually escape its shadow.”
        
        ”For some years now, I have been classified by the Benefits Agency as ‘incapable of work’. The doctor who assesed me for the Benefits Agency said that a friend of his from University had become involved with a different cult, and now exhibited exactly the same symptoms as me.
        
        I continue to feel deeply frustrated at my inability to do anything much to counter the FWBO, and I experience anxiety and depression about my seeming inability to explain to people what goes on within the group or to persuade people to take my concerns seriously.”
        
        (…) the group itself seems incorrigible. No admissions of unethical behaviour by any current FWBO member have been made, and the FWBO continues to deny that the problems at their Croydon centre, exposed by the Guardian article, have ever affected other centres or other individuals.”
52

Mr Anon on October 4, 2016 at 7:43 am
Reply

Sangharakshita’s approach to gender is to say the least unusual. While on the one hand there are his views about the different spiritual aptitudes of men and women, on the other he founded an Order where both genders have the same ordination, with women ordaining other women, running their own retreat centres etc. So there is good along with the “bad” or at least probably profoundly mistaken. Also as far as I am aware it’s not that Sangharakshita’s views on gender are subtly slipped in after beginners have been lulled into a false sense of security, but more that they are almost universally ignored or indeed rejected. As far as I can see most members of the Order of either gender simply don’t agree with him. While still holding those views he is not insistent that the rest of us do, so we sort of get on with it, slightly awkwardly.

As for single sex activities. When I first came along there was the “single sex ideal”, which at some point lost its “L” to become the “single sex idea”, because even if you agree with the benefits of single sex activities it’s hardly an ideal. Personally, as a practising heterosexual I find single sex activities more straightforward. Indeed, there seems to be something helpful about just being with members of your own gender when on retreat whatever your sexual orientation. Presumably that’s why monastic traditions tend to split the sexes. However, mixed events are fine too.

As for all the Greek love stuff from the seventies and eighties and the promotion of homosexuality as a way to deepen spiritual friendship, that too has been dropped, even though I imagine in a few very isolated cases some version of it probably still goes on. I am sure Sangharakshita was sincere in all that, but equally sure a degree of rationalisation and a strange combination of manipulation and naivety were in play. It’s quite plainly absurd – nothing the Buddha would have recommended and nothing a Buddhist movement should be promoting. I think this, which is expressive of what strikes me as a split between Sangharakshita the extreme idealist and Dennis the man with strong sexual and emotional needs, that is key to most of the movement’s more cultish elements. Still to this day we are not wholly honest about it, or about Sangharakshita. If that ever does happen, it will only be after his death.
- 53
  
  Mettaman on October 5, 2016 at 2:57 pm
  Reply
  
  On ‘The Triratna Story’ on Amazon Review: Stanley writes:
  Top Customer Reviews
  
  1.0 out of 5 starsTrouble with sexual tension
  By Stanley on 1 Oct. 2016
  Format: Paperback
  This is a fascinating book for many reasons and should be considered seriously as it has been recently described by Triratna as, ‘our detailed, official history.’ I personally find it fascinating, primarily for its emphases and omissions.
  Take chapter 6: Trouble with Angels for example. Vajragupta starts by setting a broad basis for the events and developments that he is about to describe by sketching out the cultural and political milieu in which they took place. In his sketch he includes an apparent appreciation of ‘gay and lesbian liberation’ and ‘attitudes to sex and gender’. He then goes on to describe the emergence of the single-sex idea within the FWBO as it was then. The narrative that ensues covers a range of motivations that informed the spiritual logic and perceived benefits behind the setting up of single-sex communities, businesses and retreats. This range of motivations includes the possibility that, ‘the men were more easily attracted to Sangharakshita, and he could relate more easily to them’ on p73 to women’s ‘lack of skill and … unfamiliarity with hard physical labour’ on p74.
  One facet that appears to be agreed upon is that single-sex communities, businesses and retreats avoided ‘complex and potentially messy dynamics around sexual attraction and projection’ (p77). Also that they, ‘reduced anxiety around the whole area of sex, needing to impress women, and compete with other men’ (p72). Having cast his net so wide and considered such a wide range of gender types and sexual persuasions, how did Vajragupta – and in fact the FWBO itself – come to focus so exclusively on the provision of conducive and non-distractive contexts for the spiritual practice of heterosexual men and women only? Why are the spiritual needs of gay men and women apparently not being considered and catered for? Surrounded by the same sex at home, at work and while on retreat, what are gay men and women to do with their sexual tension? Amid all the sophisticated and deeply considered contexts for spiritual development, how come no comparably conducive situations were set up for gay men and women? How did this apparently hetero-centric world develop, especially considering that the man on top, Sangharakshita, is a gay man himself? How strange that they should place such an emphasis upon heterosexuals? What a confusing omission to not cater for the spiritual needs of gay men and women.
- 54
  
  Mettaman on October 5, 2016 at 3:03 pm
  Reply
  
  Top Customer Reviews
  
  1.0 out of 5 starsTrouble with sexual tension
  By Stanley on 1 Oct. 2016
  Format: Paperback
  This is a fascinating book for many reasons and should be considered seriously as it has been recently described by Triratna as, ‘our detailed, official history.’ I personally find it fascinating, primarily for its emphases and omissions.
  Take chapter 6: Trouble with Angels for example. Vajragupta starts by setting a broad basis for the events and developments that he is about to describe by sketching out the cultural and political milieu in which they took place. In his sketch he includes an apparent appreciation of ‘gay and lesbian liberation’ and ‘attitudes to sex and gender’. He then goes on to describe the emergence of the single-sex idea within the FWBO as it was then. The narrative that ensues covers a range of motivations that informed the spiritual logic and perceived benefits behind the setting up of single-sex communities, businesses and retreats. This range of motivations includes the possibility that, ‘the men were more easily attracted to Sangharakshita, and he could relate more easily to them’ on p73 to women’s ‘lack of skill and … unfamiliarity with hard physical labour’ on p74.
  One facet that appears to be agreed upon is that single-sex communities, businesses and retreats avoided ‘complex and potentially messy dynamics around sexual attraction and projection’ (p77). Also that they, ‘reduced anxiety around the whole area of sex, needing to impress women, and compete with other men’ (p72). Having cast his net so wide and considered such a wide range of gender types and sexual persuasions, how did Vajragupta – and in fact the FWBO itself – come to focus so exclusively on the provision of conducive and non-distractive contexts for the spiritual practice of heterosexual men and women only? Why are the spiritual needs of gay men and women apparently not being considered and catered for? Surrounded by the same sex at home, at work and while on retreat, what are gay men and women to do with their sexual tension? Amid all the sophisticated and deeply considered contexts for spiritual development, how come no comparably conducive situations were set up for gay men and women? How did this apparently hetero-centric world develop, especially considering that the man on top, Sangharakshita, is a gay man himself? How strange that they should place such an emphasis upon heterosexuals? What a confusing omission to not cater for the spiritual needs of gay men and women.
55

frenzy on October 4, 2016 at 7:53 am
Reply

I forgot to say this video was posted online by Clear Vision Trust, Triratna’s online video/ library, whose website shown also in te BBC item.The Clear Vision Trust is an audio-visual media project run by members of the Triratna Buddhist Order (formerly the Western Buddhist Order). It says on their site they:
•produce high-quality resources for schools
•develop engaging resources for young Buddhists
56

NO NAME on October 4, 2016 at 8:52 am
Reply

The quotes below shed light on the way gay sex was promoted as a path in Triratna they come from the internal FWBO newsletter which was and is considered secret, for members only
Shabda short extracts

Some statements by order members about the promotion of homosexuality as superior to heterosexuality, from the FWBO’s order magazine, Shabda

‘It does seem that many of the most successful Kalyana Mitras have an erotic interest in their mitras. � Some, of course, are predisposed to this attraction, others have deliberately chosen to change their sexual preferences in order to use sex as a medium of kalyana mitrata – and to stay clear of the dangers of male-female relationships without giving up sex.’
(Subhuti, September 1986, p125). See fuller context for this quote.

‘Certainly there was a “culture” of homosexuality within the Movement at that time…I certainly felt a pressure to “become” homosexual … ‘
(Arcismati, December 1997 p14)

‘Homosexuality was encouraged. It was seen as better than heterosexuality.’
(Sanghaloka, December 1997 p24)

‘I wanted to talk about homosexuality and how it can have clear spiritual benefits and advantages over heterosexuality, and how such an idea is not like seventies furniture – once fashionable, now clearly silly as some Shabda reportings in have suggested – but a persuasively arguable point and in many cases true.’
(Maitreyabandhu, June 1998)

‘I know that a significant number of heterosexuals have, one way or another, found themselves persuaded into homosexual acts with more senior or experienced members of the Order during their involvement with the FWBO.’
(Tejananda, July 1998)

‘The real beauty of a sexual relationship between an Order Member and a Mitra is that if the OM is sufficiently mature then the other person stands to gain considerably from the experience. This was the basis for the famed Greek model of love between the older man and the younger one which served that society so well for so long. �
‘Tejananda’s final point is that we should be careful not to “alienate the vast majority of its (Society’s) members by engaging in, or condoning behaviour which they would find morally reprehensible and utterly repugnant”…. he is quite right to point out that such bigotry does exist and that we must be very careful not to inflame ignorant passions by introducing such radical concepts too abruptly and without the opportunity to carefully explain the context that surrounds these ideas and principles. Thus one would need to be discreet in negotiating these principles with the general public.’
(Jayamati, August 1998, pages 58-59) See Jayamati’s letter in full

‘Tejananda uncritically takes as empirical sexual categories which are in fact ideological and should be subject to interrogation �. Tejananda is wrong to suggest that there is a “heterosexual” majority of Order Members for whom same-sex attraction “isn’t relevant”. It’s ridiculous to say that “homosexual overtures” should not be made to “mitras who are heterosexual” in any circumstances. � Is sexual preference fixed?’
(Jnanavira, August 1998, page 61) See Jnanavira’s letter in full
http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/ShabShort.htm
- 57
  
  Mr Anon on October 4, 2016 at 12:51 pm
  Reply
  
  I wonder whether it would help to extend an open invitation to everyone who felt hurt by all this to come to an event for Triratna Order members who are open to hearing their stories and offering their apologies. I know the only apology that would really count would be from the direct actors, especially Sangharakshita, but at least in the former case that’s not going to happen so how about a second best? Otherwise this will just run and run, and for what purpose? Call me naive but I can’t think of any other way forward.
  - 58
    
    tenpel on October 4, 2016 at 1:44 pm
    Reply
    
    Since I was not hurt by the Triratna Order or Sangharakshita I can’t comment on that.
    Based on my own experiences of power abuse and what I read it contributes to the healing process if the damage is acknowledged and an honest apology is been made. Another important point is to see reforms and means that such things can’t happen again. These three things in Buddhist context are extremely rare as far as I can see and to work on this / to make that happen would be a great step forward, I think. However, such a meeting as you suggest needs a professional counselling or mediation.
    - 59
      
      Mr Anon on October 4, 2016 at 8:49 pm
      Reply
      
      I agree with you Tenpel that if such a thing were ever to happen there would be a need for professional counselling or mediation.
  - 60
    
    NO NAME on October 4, 2016 at 5:44 pm
    Reply
    
    I suspect a public apology would be a minimum requirement, along with clear explanation of what for
    An apology behind closed doors is playing the old game of keeping things under wraps
    However, there is the question of criminal behaviour, a question that can only be addressed in a court of law
    - 61
      
      Mr Anon on October 4, 2016 at 8:56 pm
      Reply
      
      Yes I can see the case for such an event to be made public. As for possible legal consequences, I haven’t a clue. I know that a court case for underage sex against a former Triratna Order member was recently thrown out due to lack of evidence. As for Sangharakshita, while I have heard he slept with people below the age of consent at the time, I haven’t heard of anyone below the current age of consent (16). Quite what that means legally now 30 years or so down the line, I don’t know.
      - 62
        
        NO NAME on October 5, 2016 at 10:44 am
        Reply
        
        It’s actionable ( retrospective consideration says if they were underf the age.of consent at the time, it remainsillegal even if the age has now changed) as indeed is s ex with people over the age of consent if there was a breech of fiduciary care. There are multiple admissions in Shabda of sex with young men under the age of consent
        It’s worth looking at the. Bishop Peter Ball case since it is very similar in terms of how the abuse occurred and how it can be redressed
- 63
  
  tenpel on October 6, 2016 at 10:03 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you very much No Name. Incredible! (I lacked time to read all the comments and just glance through some of them.)
  
  What a distortion of the teachings. You declare your sexual preferences (which are based on sexual desire – or as Gandhi would put it “carnal desires”) as the supreme or preferable way. For what? Did you transform the desires by this “method”? It looks like it was just a tool to make these desires mainstream and to find people who support you to get the objects of your desire – in that case of young men (or even boys when I understand it correctly) by setting up a system that can sustain you with the young men (or boys) you need to consume to find personal gratification. Clever pedophiles do it that way too.
  
  Like with Rigpa, for me, this is just bending the Dharma to fit your desires instead of using the Dharma to overcome your desire. On top of this distortion you tell your (naive) followers (ignoring the pain of the people being hurt by the abuse of power or sexual abuse) that this is the better way and a great help for the (abused) students.
  
  —-
  
  Interesting point, according to the Pali texts the Buddha himself has never ever spoken about homosexuality told me someone recently. A researcher wrote a PhD about it. But no problem for later unenlightened followers of the Buddha to declare their own (or their leader’s) sexual desires as a way to enlightenment. I don’t know if I should laugh or cry…
  
  But what is even more amazing how these Subhutis, Jnanaviras, Jayamatis etc. you quoted here, pick up and even defend that deluded idea of Sangharakshita that has no basis in Buddhist scriptures instead of questioning and rejecting it. The “the famed Greek model of love between the older man and the younger one” and “the real beauty of a sexual relationship between an Order Member and a Mitra” has seriously harmed a lot of people – at least one of them committed suicide … If you read these things and put them side by side with the suffering of people who have been manipulated (against their will) into sexual relationships or in other ways, the delusion behind it should become obvious.
  
  After Matthew’s death, his mother found two letters he had written to FWBO members after he left but which he had never sent. In one he wrote: “I have felt manipulated all the way by people who have allowed themselves to be manipulated. I am now out of reach of all that ghastly sales talk … [it was] a petty totalitarian state, an Orwellian Albania with its own Big Brother.” In another, he said: “I could never return to that ghastly concentration camp atmosphere with its force-fed dogma and drip-feed friendships … where reason and individual experience are crushed by people who expect total submission before any real friendship or recognition is gained.”
  
  Matthew was seen for two years by a clinical psychologist, who was in no doubt of the detrimental impact the FWBO had on him. He concluded in his report: “Matthew’s problems as to a large part resulted from the traumatic effects of his experiences whilst he had been a member of the FWBO … talked about them with great bitterness. He told me he had decided shortly after entering the FWBO community that he was unsuited to stay there; however he felt trapped and unable to leave as he had fallen under the influence of his tutor, a man he later came to see as being an exceptionally skilful manipulator of other people.
  
  “Matthew felt that the senior members of the community attempted to deliberately break up his identity, in order to get him to accept the fundamental principles and practices of the community. He tried to resist this process and therefore entered into a prolonged period of psychological conflict with them. He feels the community attempted to alienate him from his family and from women, and that direct attempts were made to encourage him to practise homosexuality. He stated that he did not indulge in homosexual practices, although attempts were made for him to do so both by using inducements and by using threats.
  
  “In my opinion Matthew’s three-year residence in the FWBO had extremely harmful psychological effects upon him … I have no doubt that this inability to cope with rejection [of losing the job shortly before his suicide] from others directly stemmed from the years of psychological abuse and rejection he had experienced whilst he was a member of the Buddhist community.”
  
  http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/Guardian.htm
  - 64
    
    tenpel on October 6, 2016 at 10:18 pm
    Reply
    
    BTW; how and what Mark Dunlop reports about his experiences with Sangharakshita in the same Guardian article resembles for me the reports we got from monks being sexually manipulated and abused by the former abbot of the Pagode Path Hue in Frankfurt.
65

frenzy on October 5, 2016 at 6:43 am
Reply

I think in case of disfunctionality within the organisation external scrutiny and pressure is crucial.
For victums of power abuse incl disempowering dynamics in the organisation in dealing with this external aknowlegdement will be crucial for their healing proces.
Though obviously the organisation (and individuals involved) ‘s aknowledgement of the damage done, the boundary crossing, neglectancy in the dealing with it, which involves again power abuse, would be helpfull. As well as genuine apologies and indeed to see reforms and means that underbuild the aknowledgement, incl certain consequences to help reclaim boudaries.
External proffesional mediation might be hepfull at some point, wether focussed on restoring confidance in the group/organisation or not. There is obviously a point where this is not realistic anymore…
66

frenzy on October 5, 2016 at 12:53 pm
Reply

I wanted to ask Tenpel about his experience with the NKT Survival Platform. Has this been supportive? I imagine it can be a good way for people in (or who have left) a specific (buddhist) group to be able to exchange with, find an ear, aknowledgement and support with their specific issues.
Thank you.
- 67
  
  tenpel on October 5, 2016 at 5:36 pm
  Reply
  
  Hi Frenzy, I lack time for a good and thorough answer – but its an important question, so I’ll try to give a brief and accurate as well as nuanced account.
  
  I became member of the NKS (New Kadampa Survivors) rather early and followed it I think for about two years. It was very useful right from the start BUT the NKT people tried by all means to undermine it. For instance they subscribed as members and posted NKT views and tried to undermine people’s judgement and stories by proselytising them to NKT’s pov – making them even more insecure than they already were. The NKT trolls’ behaviour saw a lot of distrust, and made it also a somewhat / partially unsafe space. (They also tried to convince Yahoo to shut it down.)
  
  Then there were people who really asked openly but sounded like those NKT trolls. So it was very hard for the moderators to judge who is an NKT troll and who is a genuine seeker (of “the truth” about NKT). Therefore it was very hard to make the forum a save space and unjust might have been done to one or another person. (I remember we also thought initially M. – a very known NKT critic now – is an “NKT troll” but we gave her a chance … she could just not express herself differently at that time than in the NKT newspeak or NKT language… – you are so “brainwashed” if you totally committed to NKT, its unbelievable, and it takes a lot of time to “deprogram” yourself!!!)
  
  However, things settled over time and people shared very very moving stories which helped people to understand their own experiences and stories better as well as to see that certain patterns of destructiveness manifest in different countries and at different places. From that pov, I think it was extremely helpful. People also understood, I am not alone, others had similar, the same or even more horrific experiences, and in general (besides a few) people answered by expressing understanding, giving consolation, which you would not receive within NKT nor usually by outsiders because the latter don’t understand or can’t understand where you are …
  
  A few people left disappointed. I was a bit concerned about that and I contacted one of them. But he replied that everything was ok. Though he left the forum disappointed, he said, this had rather to do with where he was in his process at that time, and he sees the benefits now he got from the NKS forum.
  
  I had to leave the forum at one point because it took me too much of my time and energy. Later I thought it might have been better if we had professional counsellors as moderators because it is extremely hard to find the right balance to stand with the negative experiences, to give space to them, to encourage to speak them out, and to let resonate these within the group – not oppressing them or denigrating/downplaying them, just to listen carefully – without falling into the extreme to create a self-circling negative spiral in which you are somewhat blocked to go ahead in your process. At the end, though self-help groups can be extremely beneficial, as long as the members have not been healed, how much can they contribute to the healing of others in the same situation? Also certain NKT patterns (like dominating or patronising others) manifested and stirred the wounds of members. So the benefit was also limited here and there, I think … That’s why later I thought, to have a professional mediator/ counsellor in such a forum might be a big advantage and could improve the benefit and outcome for members.
  
  Maybe other NKS members – who were really NKT followers – can tell what their experiences were in the NKS? These are just my thoughts.
  - 68
    
    frenzy on October 6, 2016 at 4:02 pm
    Reply
    
    Thank you for the above reply.
    Its good to hear it has, despite the difficulties, nevertheless had a supportive effect.
    I can see how it would be good to have a proffesional mediator/counsellor involved.
    And that one would have to take into account that sensitive information might leak as it would indeed be difficult to keep it save from ”infiltration”; that’s a tricky one.
    - 69
      
      tenpel on October 6, 2016 at 9:19 pm
      Reply
      
      Yes, exactly. Thank you!
70

Mettaman on October 6, 2016 at 11:09 am
Reply

I am sorry to hear of your damaging experiences with NKT and how they also harmed NKS, Tenpel. I hope that you continue to rise above those who sought / seek to harm.

Those in positions of power FWBO / Triratna do not want external ‘interference’ and they will continue to slap it down whenever they can. Safeguarding documents are worth nothing unless there is external scrutiny. The safeguarding officer is also their media and communications person. Thanks to contact in Adhisthana for advising us that Munisha has recently apologised (to an order member only forum) for referring to Sangharakshita / Bhante as blind instead of visually impaired. Her motivation, she wrote, was to protect Bhante from having to give an interview to BBC. If the safeguarding officer(s) are this close to someone, they cannot be impartial. This shows how ’empty’ the organisations safeguarding cosmetics are. Too little, too late by those implicated, I am afraid.

A contact at Adhisthana also mentions the young German mitra, who Bhante / Sangharaskhita had a sexual relationship in early 2002 / 2003. This is also apparently on the order only forum in connection with the order’s media statement. One female order member writes that she has seen a recent mail / letter written by the young German mitra in which it is very clear that Sanghrakshita was involved in sexual activity with the young man. Senior order members maintain that Sangharakshita has not broken his golden kesa vows, which he was wearing at the time. Oral sex and mutual masturbation are sexual activity. This was yet again the leader and Teacher having sex with a mitra. Why does Sangharakshita and those around him (not the person talking to us, though) want to prolong the myth of Sangharakshita being celibate since mid 1980s? He does claim this in ‘Conversations with Bhante’ of 2009 and also says he never kept his sexual relationships secret. Why do the order not confess now? They do know.
Unfortunately, Yashomitra;s letter of 2003 must have taken their minds off what Sangharakshita was up to with a mitra in Birmingham in 2OO2 / 2003.
Just tell the truth, people. For your own sakes as well as the sake of those harmed. Metta.
- 71
  
  NO NAME on October 6, 2016 at 12:24 pm
  Reply
  
  Yes, no doubt Munisha et al are patting themselves on the back for ‘getting away with it’ again, lying to the BBC to avoid embarrassing truths ( though this will no doubt be glossed as looking after poor old bante.) and the knowledge that Lingwood was having sex with unwilling but gullible students carried on until at least 2002 will be no doubt conveniently overlooked For Munisha tthe most important thing, more important than the truth, is to protect the reputation of the order and its founder ( very Buddhist.) I would put money on it they are all writing to each other, congratulating each other on , once again, managing to perpetuate the great deception
  Of course there will be genuine voices, but they are not listened to because somebody somewhere has got too much to lose, too much invested, and the truth might damage whatever treasure that might be ( reputation, pension, status)
  If only they would realise that all they need to do is admit the truth, apologise publicly to the victims and compensate them for the abuse they endured. It’s as simple as that! Why not just do the right thing? It might cause loss and damage in the present but in the long term it would be a clean sheet, a fresh start And all this horrible mess that keeps coming back to haunt them would finally go away. If they don’t, it will just keep coming back to haunt them
  - 72
    
    Mr Anon on October 11, 2016 at 4:25 pm
    Reply
    
    I write on the Order forum to which you refer and I and others have pointed out that the response to the BBC’s questions was not entirely transparent and on various grounds. Firstly, although it is technically true that Bhante passed on the headship of the Order many years ago (I don’t off hand remember the date), he has since renamed the Order and more recently decided to refound it explicitly as the community of his disciples. So if he can rename and refound the Order it’s only technically the case that he is no longer it’s head. As far as his health permits he is the teacher, the de facto head, and the source of all authority, including that of the Preceptors College whose original membership he appointed.
    
    Then secondly there is the case of the German mitra. One thing I should say is that the man had no problems with the sex then or now. It was the fact that Bhante wanted to keep it secret he found so disturbing. As for Sangharakshita’s celibacy, he argues that as he was no longer able to have sex (following his prostate removal in the 1980s) and therefore did not orgasm, he was technically not breaking the precept. I am not sure there is anyone in the Order who takes that very seriously. But what some of us do take seriously is the picture the mitra’s letter points of a very lonely, vulnerable old man. I personally don’t blame him for wanting the intimacy. I couldn’t begrudge him it, but I do think transparency is essential. I also think it essential we collectively recognise all the good he’s done, the harm he’s done, his limitations and strengths as a human being and just leave it at that. I don’t want to disavow him, or reject him, but I do think the Order needs a realistic appraisal of its founder and that we will in effect at some point have to re-refound ourselves as a community of Dharma practitioners founded by Sangharakshita but not bound by the limitations of his teachings and attainments, his behaviours and his psychology. So it’s a subtle process we will need to engage in. For me rejection and idealisation are both utterly out of the question.
    - 73
      
      Mettaman on October 11, 2016 at 11:08 pm
      Reply
      
      THnak you for confirming that Sangharakshita is still in a powerful position and that he changed the name from FWBO promoting Buddhism to Trirtana promoting Buddhism as presented by Sangharakshita. THis explains your internal disputes over which order those ordained before 2010 were actually in.
    - 74
      
      Mettaman on October 11, 2016 at 11:33 pm
      Reply
      
      MR Anon, I can see that you are struggling to make sense of this. I understand that you love Sangharakshita. Love may be what is making you blind to him and yourself.
      Sangharakshita had active oral sex and masturbation sessions in 2002 and or 2003 with the young German student disciple mitra, 50 years his junior, who had been somehow been given to him – By whom? – as a personal driver, hand maiden and cook in his BIrmingham annex, a familiar situation for previous consorts, companions …. The young man was also in awe of him, starved of any chance to even meet women in the house and must also have been desperate to give and receive affection. It is an inherently abusive relationship, whether the parties recognise it as such or not, in a community that was already complicit in such abuses. THe demands for secrecy then and now compound the abuse.
      I feel great pity for the lost and lonely figure that is Dennis Lingwood and wish that he and you would enable Sangharakshita to drop the masks, pretences and pretensions that perpetuate tragedy for himself and others, including those who remain complicit in prolonging the denials and abuses.
      WHat staggers me is the lack of wondering how the young German guy might be feeling and how he might be faring. WHere is HE? How is HE? What responsibility does the order have for HIM? And all those who have gone before him … sexual partners, who spoke out … some sooner, some later and some not at all, because to do so might render them homeless and friendless … or bring up stuff from the past that is too painful to deal with. DOes the order owe them anything?
      - 75
        
        Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 5:27 am
        Reply
        
        Hello Mettaman. Please excuse any errors in this piece as I am typing on a tablet. I think “love” in any personal sense would be stretching it. I like the man in some ways, respect him in some ways, and am very critical of him in others. People are in contact with the former mitra and are concerned about him. As far as we know he is in good nick these days. I have never met the man. I would take issue with you to some degree though about the Order’s part in this. The reason why Sangharakshita wanted to keep his relationship with the guy secret is that his seniormost disciples had strongly advised him to desist from sexual activities as indeed as far as we know he had done since the late 1980s. I don’t have the impression that anyone “procured” this young man for Sangharakshita. He simply left Windhorse Trading, went to live at Madhyamaloka and developed a friendship with Bhante. Being a handsome young chap it went from there. There is some dispute over the order of events but I remember this as happening during Sangharakshita’s first attack of sustained insomnia. He was in a terrible state a lot of the time and I cannot help but feel sympathy for that, just as I feel sympathy for the young guy who found himself in a secret relationship with himself teacher.
        
        76
        
        Mettaman on October 12, 2016 at 9:57 am
        Reply
        
        Thanks for your replies, Mr. Anon. It is interesting to note your responses to ‘love’. Devoted love as a follower in terms of worshipping his image and prostrating to him as a budding Urgyen Padmasambhava is what I was drawing attention to. THis is blind love. maybe you do not do any of those things?
        In Conversations with Bhante he claimed in 2009 that he has been happily celibate since the mid 1980s. HE himself said this if Mahamati and Subhuti are to be believed. Have you read it? The no mention of any sexual activity with the young German guy, who I found out yesterday is called Bjorn. He is prepared to tell his story.
        
        77
        
        Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 3:21 pm
        
        I am perfectly aware of this and as I mentioned above I have heard Bhante’s rationale for his position and don’t think it holds water. To be honest I am not into prostrating before the image of any real flesh and blood human being whether or not they have bedded dozens of their disciples. Archetypal figures are another matter – I have found that sort of prostration helpful in a way that’s difficult to explain. In essence, although I respect a lot of what Sangharakshita has done and actually quite like him in many ways, I am not his devotee and am concerned that the Order is being refounded against its will as the community of his disciples. However, I am not alone in this – when surveyed I think something like 80% (and I may be wrong on the figure!) of members of the Order did not want to see themselves as Sangharakshita’s disciples – and this is not simply or mainly to do with the man’s sex life.
        
        78
        
        Mettaman on October 12, 2016 at 10:26 am
        Reply
        
        I like and respect some men and am critical of them in others. They do not form the focus of my devotional love and I am not placed in the invidious position of trying to excuse their actions and behaviours, whilst prostrating myself in front of their image. Maybe you do not do these things.
        You seem to be placing blame here, or at least responsibility, on the fact that he was told to be celibate?? In Conversations with Bhante in 2009 HE said that he had been happily celibate since mid 1980s and actually encourages his followers to follow his lead …. Have you seen his hierarchy of sexual states? Have you read CwB? Easily available via google. No mention of young German guy.
        Being a handsome chap … it went from there???? I laughed out loud just then In utter disbelief that you can write this without any comprehension of what this imparts.
        
        Actually, I would like to ask who decided to put a handsome chap in such close personal contact with Sangharakshita. Shouldn’t Sangharakshita have been protected from being exposed to the sexual tensions he claims distract heterosexual men from their spiritual practice?
        I am pleased that Sangharakshita is a warm, safe place where people care for him. If people really cared for him they would help him tell the truth and release him from later suffering. Where are those who suffered / suffer long term due to being ideologically and sexually experimented on?
        I found out yesterday that the young German guy is called Bjorn. He is prepared to tell his story.
        
        79
        
        NO NAME on October 12, 2016 at 1:43 pm
        Reply
        
        So the guy lied AGAIN and you believed him AGAIN.Its the same old story’s ,lie upon lie upon lie
        Anyone who lies so habitually, never mind sexually manipulates students, is a habitual violator of morality and. Is.not a Fit guide
        Pick n mix your Buddhism if you must, but remember all the traditions agree for a person to be.a fit.teacher he must maintain pure morality
        If the roots are poisoned, the flowers are poisonous
        
        80
        
        frenzy on October 12, 2016 at 1:58 pm
        Reply
        
        There seems to be a layer in your above expression of sympathy and understanding, namely the layer of abuse, that is not fully adressed. This thus becomes part of conceiling and dismissive dynamics.
        
        81
        
        NO NAME on October 12, 2016 at 3:21 pm
        
        Yes I noticed the sympathy card being played , the appeal to tthe emotions
        Doesn’t wash
        
        82
        
        frenzy on October 12, 2016 at 4:10 pm
        Reply
        
        ”People are in contact with the former mitra and are concerned about him.”
        From the available accounts of (for example) several Om’s who resigned over thus related isses it seems there has been and is a mixture of concerns which in reality (in your own acurate wording) involves dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say.
        I also do understand your effort to keep a broader picture and positive connection…
        Though a communal need for this can easily lead to a distortion of some peoples reality in regard to suffering due to lack of healthy boundaries, to disempowering dynamics, resulting in people getting ‘sacrificed’ for the homogenety, and other needs, of the group. It is not difficult to see how this causes primary trauma (which allready accumulates on itself) to significantly intensify.
      - 83
        
        Mettaman on October 12, 2016 at 9:42 am
        Reply
        
        You write concerning Sangharakshita’s view that he has remained celibate because he did not orgasm In bed with his ‘grandson’-aged student disciple cum attendant / handmaiden. What does “I am not not sure there is anyone in the order that takes that very seriously” mean? If someone does not take Sr view seriously, then they must hold the view that he has broken his vow of celibacy and thus made the young man out to be a liar. Those not standing by and up for the young man are compounding cunning linguistics to protect the image Sangharakshita and those around him, including yourself, wish to publicly project and protect. It is refreshing to see you exploring your views of Sr here and being prepared to wish him to be seen as possibly fallible. I hope we can continue to a testing ground for your one sided views, that currently filter out anyone who challenges Sr and the orders version of events.
        If sex was only sex if an orgasm occurred, then a female or male victim of rape would not be able to claim they were forced into sex. If a seventy five year old Dharma teacher actively engaged in oral sex with a Student disciple young enough to be his granddaughter and asked her to keep it a secret, would that resonate with you at all? Would you still want him and yourselves to believe that he had not tecahnically been sexually active? The speech precepts are being made a mockery of as far as all this see concerned.
        Yet again, I have to ask how has the order supported any of those, who have spoken up about their real life experiences? I hope that Sr remains in a place where he is looked after and cared for. I also hope that he is held to account at some point. I wish more than this for those who have been harmed psychologically and emotionally by Sr and his ideology, sexual needs and cover up semantics. Anyone continuing to publicly support his stance on his claim to be celibate is perpetuating the power dynamic and the abuses. Please translate not taking his views on celibacy seriously into an active concern for those on the receiving end of damaging ideologies and sexual traps, past and present. THe long term effects of sex in the forbidden zone are well documented … as are the long term effects of all forms of sexual abuse and subtle power manipulations. Metta.
        
        84
        
        Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 3:37 pm
        Reply
        
        Hi. You obviously haven’t understood my meaning. I think Sangharakshita was rationalising big time re Bjorn and so I think do most members of the Triratna Order, although I suppose I should qualify that in that I haven’t surveyed all 2000 of them!
        
        85
        
        Mettaman on October 12, 2016 at 10:14 pm
        
        WHere does ‘. I think Sangharakshita was rationalising big time re Bjorn’ leave Bjorn? What / were / are the consequences of such rationalisation , institutionalised rationalisation, on Bjorn? Or indeed on previous sexual partners, who Sangharakshita remembers not having sex with?
        
        86
        
        frenzy on October 13, 2016 at 8:17 am
        
        Indeed: rationalisations are also part of the powerdynamics , part of the ”dissing, belittling, and dismissing”. Very intimidating dynamics seen the power differential between the victums and the abuser (s) (s – as it includes all kind of power abuse in the cover-up )
        What then happens is the victum breaks up more and more and is now even more easy to be pathologised.
        There will be gréy aknowledgement, but lack of consequences as/when there are no safeguarding structures, (grievance and reconsiliation) procedures and no external scrutiny.
        Manupilation will be used to keep twisting reality for the ‘protection’ of the group identity.
        So, Bjorn good on you man!
        
        87
        
        frenzy on October 13, 2016 at 8:30 am
        
        Forgetting a very powerfull powertool: ignoring. Silence. Quite a maddening one.
- 88
  
  tenpel on October 6, 2016 at 2:20 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you Mettaman. These are important information.
  
  I am a bit amazed to see that Sangharakshita is referrred to as Bhante, which means venerable, an address which is only used for Buddhist monks or Buddhist nuns (properly ordained according to the Vinaya) and not for lay people.
  
  I totally agree with you, “safeguarding documents are worth nothing unless there is external scrutiny.” Its totally unconvincing and insensitive – if not ridiculous – when the safeguarding officer is also their media and communications person!
  
  And when I get it correctly the organisation lied to the BBC claiming Sangharakshita is blind though he is only visually impaired. This doesn’t sound like the transparency, honesty, clarity and great will to clarify abuse as it is needed in such cases. I’ve not heard of or seen any organisation who was able to fix their problems of abuse relying only on themselves.
  - 89
    
    Mr Anon on October 11, 2016 at 4:33 pm
    Reply
    
    I think the cultic aspects of the movement still hold, but there’s a lot of us who like to think we’ve outgrown or seen through all of that without feeling the need to resign. Why not? Essentially because there’s a lot good in Triratna, especially the web of friendship built up over decades. I think we can evolve into something better.
    - 90
      
      tenpel on October 11, 2016 at 8:21 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you for that. Its hard for me to judge all of it but as an outside observer I want to share a story of a former FWBO follower which lends creditability to your last point, spiritual friendship (not in distorted the sense as discussed here and as it happened/happens also in the FWBO/Triratna).
      
      One day in a Tibetan Buddhist group a participant got strong backaches – sth. like a prolapsed intervertebral disc. He could not move. Though the members called an ambulance, nobody accompanied him to the hospital or took care beyond calling the ambulance. After that – when I remember correctly – called him either or asked him how he is doing. When he one day came back he spoke about this experience and commented: in the FWBO this could not have happened.
      - 91
        
        frenzy on October 11, 2016 at 10:09 pm
        Reply
        
        ”When he one day came back he spoke about this experience and commented: in the FWBO this could not have happened.”
        But much worse did happen tenpel…
        
        92
        
        tenpel on October 11, 2016 at 10:31 pm
        Reply
        
        Yes. Thank you Frenzy. You’re right.
        
        93
        
        Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 5:34 am
        
        I’m not sure ignoring someone when they are ill is more or less serious than the sexual stuff. In a sangha or indeed any community, caring for each other is key. Otherwise we may as well give up because our practice counts for very little indeed. Think of the Buddha and the Case of Dysentery.
        
        94
        
        Mettaman on October 12, 2016 at 9:46 am
        
        Someone who is ill definitely needs to be cared for and looked after. There are physicalM illnesses and psychological illnesses.
        PLease explain, if you will, how you are linking this to sexual stuff …. ? Metta
        
        95
        
        frenzy on October 12, 2016 at 10:57 am
        
        Mr Arnon you say: ”In a sangha or indeed any community, caring for each other is key. ”
        But/and:
        ”What we have been guilty of though is dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say.”
        
        There is no doubth there is a lot of good, but maybe this is not the time for emphasizing that…
        The bottom line is there is an extremely disfunctional history having a large implact still on the current situation in Triratna in regard to abuse and safequarding.
        
        96
        
        Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 3:46 pm
        
        I’m not sure any Order Member would take the risk of going to bed with a student these days. It’s a definite no no. As for caring for each other, I was specifically referring to looking after people when they are ill, weak or old. As for the “dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say”, very little of that goes on in any crude way – so I think I may have given the wrong impression. Most Order Members would try not to do that. But when the group identity is challenged some do indulge in a variety of this. Generally it is subtly done, but done nonetheless. Indeed I’ve been on the receiving end of it myself. However, to be fair, I have also had the experience of questioning more or less everything about Sangharakshita and the Order and having been on the receiving end of kindly listening, at the end of which my friends are still my friends. So as far as spiritual communities with cultic tendencies go, we are pretty good.
        
        97
        
        frenzy on October 12, 2016 at 9:21 pm
        
        It has been stated that Sr will not apologise for something that caused and is still causing suffering as he was under the impression it was consensual and he, in CvB, stated that he didn’t feel like he was relating to them as the teacher.
        With this standard of criteria nothing is going to be considered boundary crossing.
        There are no actual procedurers for adressing things or consequences for boundary crossing behaviour, how are such mentioned (no-no) boundaries then confirmed!?
        
        98
        
        frenzy on October 26, 2016 at 9:39 pm
        
        Mr Anon, I would like to ask you could you tell us some more about what your presumsion is based that you are ”not sure any Order Member would take the risk of going to bed with a student these days”?
        What would be the risk you mention..?
        
        I wrote on the 12th ” that it’s a definite no no (your words) these days seems in line what Triratna’s statement is in the BBC item. From when on in your experinece? Has there been a written polocy?”
        
        You express a strong opinion about the safeguarding situation saying that ”given the anarchic structure of the movement with its legally independent centres, it’s also difficult for “head office” to impose anything. The more I think about it though, the more I see that given our past, we really do need to make them as compulsory as we can.”
        
        Though you say: ”As far as I understand it, and I admit to having only followed this topic very sketchily, there are guidelines that have been developed, but not everybody even knows about them.”
        
        I find it odd , as you seem to know so much about Triratna, in regard to legal stuff, to the alligations made, events in the past, and you find it of great importance that Triratna faces it shadows, goblins or whatever, that you followed this topic only sketchily.
        
        99
        
        Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 3:55 pm
        
        Again – I was referring in the former to looking after people when they are sick, or old and in the latter to the way some of us at times respond to things that threaten group identity. We also do respond a lot better than that much of the time.
        
        100
        
        frenzy on October 12, 2016 at 8:16 pm
        
        Then we agree on the ”dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say when the group identity is challenged” ”and the indulging in a variety of this.” and that ”Generally it is subtly done”.
        
        That ”it’s a definite no no.” these days seems in line what Triratna’s statement is in the BBC item. From when on in your experinece? Has there been a written polocy? It is not alighned with my experience. And there are still no means to adress things, as in procedures / structure / willingness / consquences let alone external scrutiny, still the same powergames. We must be moving in different circles.
101

Mettaman on October 6, 2016 at 5:58 pm
Reply

Concerning Vishvapani: Vishvapani was also consulted on the drafting of the Triratna media statement. On his own blog, Wise Attention, he is very concerned about cover ups and group think.. This piece and the comments thread also indicate, in my opinion, his blind spots regarding his Teacher and his own group: http://www.wiseattention.org/blog/2012/09/14/hillsborough-cover-up-and-group-think/

Does anyone else have other concerns about this piece?

In his letter to Norman Fisher (available on fba) Vishvapani states quite clearly that some of Sangharakshita’s / Bhante’s disciple ‘lovers’ were below the age of consent and did not feel they could say no.
.
Concerning Sangharakshita: Sangharakshita, btw, is known by many names including Bhante and Urgyen. Urgyen Sangharakshita is now also the title of yet another Triratna-linked a charity, easy to google, generating almost £50,000 to allow Sangharakshita and his office to guide the Triratna Buddhist Order. In their media statement, the Triratna media team say that Sangharakshita stepped back from leadership in 2000. They do not, however, say that he lives on site with several of them in a mansion (formerly Coddington Court / http://www.Adhisthana.org costing £5.9 million) and that he has a large sum of charitable funds to guide the organisation. One only has to look at the format of Shabda to see that he is still King soon to be Padmasambhava.
Metta.
- 102
  
  tenpel on October 6, 2016 at 9:27 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you too for this information!
  
  At the moment I don’t have time to read Vishvapani’s piece you linked. I was the whole day busy with my former cult and how they spread or are promoted by media and politicians (unwillingly) in Germany due to a lack of information / knowledge – even our foreign minister visited them in July. Will try to read Vishvapani’s piece next week.
  - 103
    
    Mettaman on October 7, 2016 at 12:14 pm
    Reply
    
    That sounds like a very similar situation, tenpel. I am happy to read your links in German. In the UK, the BBC, government departments incl religious affairs and education have unwittingly promoted Sangharakshita via their education porthole Clear Vision Trust. Many teachers have also unwittingly promoted the group because it is very difficult to see that FWBo is Triratna is The Buddhist Centre is Clear Vison is Karuna Trust is Breathworks is Uppandya …… is Sangharakshita aka Bhante aka Urgyen aka Mahasthviara aks Dennis LIngwood from Tooting. There is an interesting Dutch article and thread which I will link. Boehddischesdagblad. Ich wuensche Ihnen Mut und Erfolg. Mfg Metta
    - 104
      
      tenpel on October 7, 2016 at 12:38 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you.
      
      If you can read German, maybe you can read e.g. this:
      http://blog.buddhistische-sekten.de/?p=396
      
      or this comment http://buddhistische-sekten.de/Gedanken_Gruppenleiter_Aussteiger_Aussenstehender.html
      
      One of the young men being abused by the former abbot gave as a feedback of what I wrote in the latter article that the mechanisms shown reflect exactly his situation – he said its as you’ve told my story. And this article was based on the Guardian article (Mark Dunlop) as well as other cases I heard or read of or followed via media etc …
      
      Let me know what you think about it.
      
      I think, the UK has a general problem with Buddhist groups due to their libertarian attitude which often leads to a “I don’t care” attitude. The NKT – which can be so harmful to people! – has made their ways into the most sensitive places of the UK society and are able to recruit new members (and probably future victims) in those places which include chaplaincy, schools, mindfulness classes but most dangerously the NHS. Here on my blog to women contacted me whose husbands were sent by the NHS to a local NKT center “to learn to meditate” because this would help them “to heal”. Both of them are non religious, one had a problem with alcohol the other was physically disabled. For me this is so wrong like sending people to Scientology to heal or to learn meditation. Its insane for me, totally crazy. The NHS will only produce more damaged people they have later to take care of …
      
      NHS officers as well as psychologists being totally uninformed, still recommend NKT meditation classes to their clients – even to those who were harmed by the NKT and need counselling to heal from the damage the NKT caused …
      
      Based on that, it is understandable (though not a good news) that “the BBC, government departments incl religious affairs and education have unwittingly promoted Sangharakshita via their education porthole Clear Vision Trust”.
      
      I think the UK Buddhists have really to fix something!
      
      In Germany authorities are more restrained and careful when it comes to religious groups. Though gradually a similar tendency seems to unfold (which is also based on a younger generation of journalists with no clue about religion or cults) and my own former cult group gets unwittingly promoted by e.g. the public state tv (even in a channel for children), or known media such as TAZ or FAZ etc, or our German foreign minister Frank Walter Steinmeier visited them in July 2016 etc. However, if you contact them and or if you contact the state run or Christian cult authorities, they are open to listen and to consider the criticism … One journalist openly admitted that she never had the idea that cults or cultish groups could exists also in Buddhism. In general, the public has still a very naive image of Buddhism and Buddhism in the West …
      
      The other religions have trouble with their public negative images, Buddhism has trouble with their public positive image 😉
      - 105
        
        NO NAME on October 7, 2016 at 2:42 pm
        Reply
        
        In Germany you have the DBU to regulate things. In the uk, all we have is the self appointed, non representative NBO, with its tiny shrinking membership because nobody trusts them And who are the movers and shakers in this group?Triratnas Munisha and the SOKA GAKKAI UK rep.And who supported them until a big fallout over the HHDL demos? The NKT! So, you report the cults to schools or government and who do they ask for advice? The NKT, Triratna and SGI
        And these players have also manipulated themselves into power at the EBU.So it’s a.pan European problem, not just the uk
        
        106
        
        tenpel on October 7, 2016 at 11:34 pm
        Reply
        
        Yes, we have the DBU and the DBU is not dominated by FWBO, NKT and Soka Gakkai – the latter two are not even member of the DBU. The NKT request for membership was refused many years ago. There was a discussion about SKI membership but when I remember or got it correctly – I have to check that – it was also refused because they don’t accept the main statement (Bekenntnis) of the DBU. BTW, also Bon applied to become a member and when I remember correctly, they were accepted …
        
        However, though we have far better conditions the DBU doesn’t regulate all things BUT they do a lot of good things. They run for instance an education for school teachers, and a study program with teachers from different schools and traditions so that no group is promoted via the DBU. This is very good because people learn from the start variety instead of being drawn (or even indoctrinated) with the views of one group.
        But, so far (because of a change of the DBU board, different priorities etc.) the planned Ethical Charter and Ethics’ Council did not manifest and there is no move whatsoever to make it manifest. That’s why, it looks like, I am now busy to get into contact with non-Buddhist established institutions … because the DBU won’t manage it to install something sane and save.
        
        —
        
        People reported about the NBO that when NKT followers complaint to the NBO about abuse or bad behaviour / problems in the NKT the NBO forwarded these requests to the NKT members of the NBO. What can I say, if true, I think this is totally insensitive and speaks for itself …
        
        You are also right that the EBU has a lot of guru centered groups somewhat dominating the EBU. However, there are also some good people there, the question is, is the EBU just a another ship to promote and make controversial groups mainstream? I can’t comment on that but I know and spoke with a Anthropologist who works in the EBU and there are also a lot of good things he reported …
        
        107
        
        tenpel on October 7, 2016 at 11:56 pm
        
        BTW, no name, one of the most used search term for finding this blog post about triratna is “triratna guardian 2016”. Is there anything written by The Guardian in 2016 about Triratna that could be of high interest for people who used google’s search engine?
        
        108
        
        frenzy on October 8, 2016 at 7:29 am
        
        That maybe shows a lot of people are very interested in the Guardians answer to the BBC item..!
        
        109
        
        NO NAME on October 8, 2016 at 8:58 am
        
        Not yet!
        
        110
        
        tenpel on October 10, 2016 at 1:07 pm
        
        One of the vice presidents of the The World Fellowship of Buddhists (WFB) is accused of having sexually abused a refugee child http://www.augsburger-allgemeine.de/bayern/Zen-Priester-soll-Fluechtlingsjungen-missbraucht-haben-id39296982.html
        
        He is also a rather loose but good Dharma friend of mine – he helped me and others in the context of cults and the first meeting about Buddhist cults in Germany of the German Buddhist Union (DBU) was in his temple. I need time to digest that … He has been arrested.
        
        111
        
        NO NAME on October 10, 2016 at 7:50 pm
        
        And the difference between him and the group in this thread is his board of trustees immediately publicly admitted that the allegations were probably credible. That way, the story is out in the open.and the problem can move towards resolution. In Triratna the problem is hidden and just lingers on and on, eating away at the groups credibility
        
        112
        
        tenpel on October 11, 2016 at 1:30 am
        
        Yes, you’re right! Good point.
        
        113
        
        Adamo on October 11, 2016 at 4:32 am
        
        In case, he has abused one or more children, he can still admit and apologize and try his best to work towards any help for his victims.
        
        If he really regret his deeds, he could do a lot. He could be a good example of an abusive person who regrets.
        
        114
        
        Mettaman on October 11, 2016 at 12:56 pm
        
        He has acknowledged his sexual relationships with his students, but clearly wants all to believe that Greek Love, homosexual sex with many unattached partners and avoiding boundaries between teachers and students is The Dharma. The order have been forced into getting some safeguarding policies, but they have no external point of contact, so are useless. THey Rae currently just window dressing with no follow through possible or even intended. JUst like JW and Scientology are fighting safeguarding with all their might. Keeping it in house is the order of the day. THe order control their own publication house and therefore control the narrative. Let’s hope the narrative is moved away even more from order control, so that victims’ truths can be shared even more effectively as has been happening more recently due to tremendous efforts from a few, who refuse to be bystanders. MArk Dunlop has bourne this burden for so very long and been vilified. Gary Beesley has been telling the truth for 20 years but been vilified. SO many have been scapegoated for speaking out or speaking up for those who spoke up or who were harmed. Maybe the tide is turning. It seems as though that now is the case. The order could also apologise for continuing to create the conditions where such abuses could take place and in which the narrative of those in power drowned out the voices of those who spoke up. The Boeddhistisches Dagblad on line is also running this story and a very dynamic comments thread. ‘ Ujarin’ Is digging a large moral hole, possibly legal one, for himself and Triratna.
        
        115
        
        Adamo on October 11, 2016 at 4:22 pm
        
        @mettaman
        
        My comment relates to the case of the german Zen-Monk, see cooemt of Tenpel of Oct.10.
        
        Sorry, if its unclear.
        
        116
        
        Mr Anon on October 11, 2016 at 4:41 pm
        
        To be fair Mark Dunlop was vilified in part for breaking windows at Padmaloka and generally the attitude encouraged in the Order is one of compassion or metta to its critics. It’s not that, as far as I know, anyone has ever been in anyway threatened for speaking out. That would be utter anathema. So you see I think we’re kind of ok….for a Buddhist community with some strongly cult characteristics. What we have been guilty of though is dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say.
        
        117
        
        frenzy on October 11, 2016 at 10:04 pm
        
        Mr Anon,
        
        You wrote ”generally the attitude encouraged in the Order is one of compassion or metta to its critics. (…) ”What we have been guilty of though is dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say.”
        
        That is a total contradiction.
        
        You wrote ”It’s not that, as far as I know, anyone has ever been in anyway threatened for speaking out. That would be utter anathema. ”
        
        ”As far as you know”. That i understand.
        For the probable fact that probably quite some people left traumatised (or remained, damaged) i feel the word anathema might be in place.
        
        118
        
        Learninglive2 on October 13, 2016 at 11:35 am
        
        I have seen a manipulative email written by a long term order member to his spiritual friend, also an order member, ordering him to leave his wife and family or leave Triratna. The date was early this year, 2016. The writer criticised the recipient for questioning Sangharakshita’s integrity and blamed his wife for manipulating him into Listening to ‘malcontents’ I.e. Those who alleged harm and abuses.
        
        I am so sorry to hear of the Augsburg arrest. I hope that you, Tenpel, are managing to work through your responses to the arrest and allegations.
        
        119
        
        tenpel on October 13, 2016 at 2:52 pm
        
        Thank you Learninglive2 and all others who commented.
        At the moment I lack time to follow the discussion. (I didn’t read the last 20 or so comments.)
        
        What you write here, LL2, about this manipulative email is very helpful for me. It helps me to see things in perspective and to get a more “realistic view”. What you write rather approves that there is still a lot of energy to cover up, to manipulate or to white wash things – also approved by the fact how the BBC was deceived by Sangharakshita’s “blindness”. Seen in context, its unlikely – if not unseen – that an organisation will really deeply change as long as their dealing with abuse doesn’t include external experts / organisations that really help to clean things properly up. The reason is, there are too many people who have benefit of the status quo. Such people might issue criticism only for the sake of pseudo-councelling – to silence outside critics or people being harmed. If Triratna would be healthy and if there would be clarity, I think, there would be people who are able to step back, asking: “What have we done, what have I done to make these abuses and suicide(s) possible? What are the driving forces of it?” Identifying Sangharakshita and his most committed students as the main forces for it – students who hail his distortions and abuse as “the way of the greeks” etc. – they should point out these distortions as perversions of Buddha’s teachings, perversions that cause harm and are just the expression of the sexual attachments of Sangharakshita and nothing else. Where are there strong inner-Triratna opposing voices or forces that expose these manipulations, distortions as what they are? If they are non-exisztent, then I think, the organisation might be, indeed, still very very sick – run by a blinded leadership.
        
        With respect to Augsburg. Let’s see. The police arrested him already in July(!). They only do this, if the allegations are heavy and there is danger for repetition, escaping or cover ups.
        
        Tomorrow and Tuesday I will meet with people from authorities on cults to get a better connection. I realised that you cannot contribute to a more informed public (enlightenment) when you only rely on Buddhist head organisations (like the German Buddhist Union, DBU) or if you run some websites or blogs. You have to network with the organisations who work on it already for years. I changed my mind and will focus now more on this. In the past others and I put a lot of energy to get the DBU to engage (Ethical Charta, Ethical Council) – all wasted time as I can see now. If a Buddhist head organisation doesn’t care really, individuals have to do it. In the UK there are also individuals who do the work with respect to FWBO/Triratna/NKT and the like. Luckily there is also INFORM as a well respected academic institution.
        
        120
        
        tenpel on October 13, 2016 at 8:23 pm
        
        Just as a thought … maybe the claimed self-purification with propounded new boundaries and ethical standards of Triratna without outer experts/organisations who control and help to install it + actions that change things right at the top, is comparable with the illusion within the FIFA to get rid / heal their corrupt structure and modes of behaviour …
        
        121
        
        Adamo on October 13, 2016 at 4:18 pm
        
        “With respect to Augsburg. Let’s see. The police arrested him already in July(!). They only do this, if the allegations are heavy and there is danger for repetition, escaping or cover ups.
        
        Tomorrow and Tuesday I will meet with people from authorities on cults to get a better connection. I realised that you cannot contribute to a more informed public (enlightenment) when you only rely on Buddhist head organisations (like the German Buddhist Union, DBU) or if you run some websites or blogs. You have to network with the organisations who work on it already for years. I changed my mind and will focus now more on this. In the past others and I put a lot of energy to get the DBU to engage (Ethical Charta, Ethical Council) – all wasted time as I can see now. If a Buddhist head organisation doesn’t care really, individuals have to do it. In the UK there are also individuals who do the work with respect to FWBO/Triratna/NKT and the like. Luckily there is also INFORM as a well respected academic institution.”
        
        With al lmy respect to the DBU-people who work hard and sincere, I met over the last 4 month 4 people, who contacted the DBU, with the intention to talk about ethic, regarding abusive teachers.
        
        NO RESPONSE at all.
        
        From my feelings, there is a big gap between all those well written contributions in the DBU-Magazine,
        and what happens really there. A mechanism of repression or so.
        
        So I consider Tenpels new approach very logical and promising.
        
        122
        
        tenpel on October 13, 2016 at 8:26 pm
        
        That there is no response has to do with the current leadership as far as I can see.
      - 123
        
        Mettaman on October 7, 2016 at 5:35 pm
        Reply
        
        Danke. Yes, I recognise the same traits and the institutional complicity in FWBO.
        The second piece uses Sangharakshita as an example of abuse of power. The stockholm syndrome theories are very interesting, too.
        I agree that positive images of happy Buddhists stop many from thinking critically. Two years ago, I would never have been able to imagine what I now know. The sects and cultic groups are tarnishing Buddhism. Being uneducated about Buddhsim, most of us do not know enough to smell and spot the rats. We cannot tell if a group is really safe or an unsafe one with a benevolent facade. Hopefully, pieces like the BBC piece and continued exposure via blogs such as this will help educate more of us about the NKT, FWBO / Triratna and others.
        By the way, Das Buddhistisches Tor Berlin is a Trirtana Centre. One of Sangharakshita’s elders, Padmaraja, who is completely devoted to Sangharahita led a recent workshop there. I have recently seen concerning video footage in which he tells a story, which encourages men to ignore their own child to develop spiritually. He uses very negative vocabulary to describe the mother and the baby and very positive vocabulary to describe the father, who succeeds spiritually by ignoring his own crying child. This is on the Padmaloka webiste and was part of a workshop for young men aged 18 to 35. Slowly, slowly the same seeds get sown in the heads of many who are attracted to this group.
        
        124
        
        tenpel on October 7, 2016 at 11:52 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you. Can you send a link to the video? I would really like to see and watch it!
        It would be again another twist of the teachings because especially mothers are so deeply praised and hold in respect in Mahayana Buddhism. There is also the Sutra of the kindness of the parents, The Filial Piety Sutra, and there it is been told the total opposite as Padmaloka tells it. The mother is kinder than the father because SHE sacrifices her own spiritual progress for the welfare of her child! So again a Triratna teacher twists the teachings and misinforms people placing men higher than mothers …
        
        —–
        
        I agree with what you wrote about the lack of wisdom or intuition to “smell and spot the rats” etc.
        
        —–
        
        In general, I think its also important to see, that Triratna has also kind people (as the NKT and other groups too). I met some Triratna followers (after they left Triratna). All of them follow now different groups or teachers and they didn’t report any real or deeper damage (unlike NKT). So it looks to me, Triratna is – as long as you don’t become or are manipulated to become the sexual prey for the desire of the leader (or anyone) of the group, the damage can be also low if it exists at all. (Pls correct me if I am wrong.)
        
        125
        
        frenzy on October 8, 2016 at 7:26 am
        
        Ofcourse the group has many nice people.
        I am sure (/aparently) also Sangharakshita is (experienced as a) very nice (person).
        Although in the BBC item, I personally felt no sympathy for him as apposed to Mark who seemed indeed very nice and sincere.
        
        Anyhow i feel it is good to stay aware that and how damage done is woven into the structure and socialisations, into the teaching and all the different aspects of the orginisation, including sangha dynamics.
        Ofcourse ”damage done can be low, if (experieced) at all”… as long a you are not the victum of their powerabuse.
        The bottom line is their is an extremely disfunctional situation in Triratna in regard to abuse and safequarding.
        
        126
        
        NO NAME on October 8, 2016 at 12:24 pm
        
        “So it looks to me, Triratna is – as long as you don’t become or are manipulated to become the sexual prey for the desire of the leader (or anyone) of the group, the damage can be also low if it exists at all. (Pls correct me if I am wrong.)”
        Tenpel, you keep making statements like this. Basically what you are saying is “I dont know all the facts, and please correct me if im wrong, but it looks to me, based on my limited and partial understanding, as if membership of the group s not harmful”
        Im sorry but I think that is an ill judged, ridiculously sweeping statement to make. People have died, some are in therapy, others suffering long term psychological illness. The group is now on the police radar and on the verge of legal proceedings. The BBC just broadcast a piece about 4 men who are suffering long term confusion after their involvement.Litigation looks highly likely
        So I would advise that you avoid making such statements before you have a much deeper understanding of the group. The very fact that they continue to lie about their leaders eyesight in order to avoid public scrutiny should be enough to help you understand that there is still something very wrong with the order and its leadership
        
        127
        
        tenpel on October 8, 2016 at 8:30 pm
        
        No name, there is a difference in what people who followed NKT have reported to me and what followers of FWBO/Triratna have reported to me. I can’t deny that.
        
        As I said different times good experiences (or not being harmed) is never a “proof” that harm or bad experience or sexual abuse don’t exist. Good experiences and bad experience, harm and benefit can and will always coexist in cults. And there are also some people who are not harmed by cults and even people who only benefited – e.g. drug addicts when they leave the organisation after they got rid of their addiction and before they are poisoned by the distortions of the Dharma or the manipulations of the group … or loosely affiliated members etc.
        
        I agree with you, “The very fact that they continue to lie about their leaders eyesight in order to avoid public scrutiny should be enough to help you understand that there is still something very wrong with the order and its leadership”.
        
        128
        
        frenzy on October 9, 2016 at 6:50 am
        
        You potentially can get very damaged, that’s the problem.
        And it’s not just one thing you can pin it on; that’s what makes it so hard to adress and so damaging also.
        I was very pleased with your thread. It has been supportive and it’s bringing more information into the world. Thank you!
        
        129
        
        tenpel on October 9, 2016 at 6:59 am
        
        Thank you. Yes, that’s the point, you can get very damaged potentially.
        
        Thank you also for your feedback and to all who contributed to make the thread supportive by sharing their knowledge and views/experiences.
    - 130
      
      frenzy on October 7, 2016 at 4:01 pm
      Reply
      
      https://boeddhistischdagblad.nl/nieuws/75273-75273/
131

Mettaman on October 6, 2016 at 6:10 pm
Reply

Correction: His title is Urgyen Sangharakshita in this charity. The trustees are using their real names. One is now not surprised to realise their order names: http://opencharities.org/charities/1046398
132

NO NAME on October 6, 2016 at 6:12 pm
Reply

“I am a bit amazed to see that Sangharakshita is referrred to as Bhante”
YOU HAVENT HEARD THE HALF OF IT!They also call him ‘Mahasthavira’ [reserved for monks with 20 years pure moral discipline-When he didnt even hold a valid ordination and repeatedly broke the monastic vows] and even URGYEN, implying he is a manifestation of Guru Rinpoche! One Order member even declared, with regard to his sexual abuse of dozens of young men, “I came to believe that his explorations should become legend, something like Padmasambhava and his consorts”. Thats how deluded these people are. It shows how little they know of real dharma too, and how duped they have been by his lies
- 133
  
  tenpel on October 6, 2016 at 9:22 pm
  Reply
  
  Oh Buddha. I can only quote Hamlet, “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”
  Thank you for sharing this because this indicates for me how far the delusions have gone and how much the system behind it might be upside down.
134

medi richardson on October 9, 2016 at 7:58 am
Reply

They are a cult with very vulnerable people joining them. This man has yet to apologies for his unethical acts. The greatest danger is that he does not realise this and his arrogance carries him forward without self awareness and honesty.
- 135
  
  NO NAME on October 9, 2016 at 1:29 pm
  Reply
  
  Sangharakshita =Donald Trump
  Abused position of power to exploit others sexually then fails to acknowledge
  Triratna diehards are like republican voters who remain true to their leader despite his misdemeanours
  Republican Party =laughingstock of American politics
  Triratna =laughingstock of western Buddhism
136

NO NAME on October 10, 2016 at 8:09 am
Reply

“Yeah, I just can’t control myself. I see a beautiful….. And I grab them by the…… I just have to……them. And you can, you can do anything you want when you’re a ………”
Trump……..or Sangharakshita?
And people say there is nothing wrong at Triratna?
Testimony from former devotees clarifies that Sangharakshita was sexually exploiting young men, some under the legal age of consent from the mid 60s until 2003. And his followers place his image on a shrine and bow down to him and chant his praises on a daily basis. A worthy object of veneration? I would not let this person near my family pets, never mind my children. And his followers lie to protect him while his perverse doctrines on the family and relationships are paraded in schools across the uk. Shame on those who perpetuate this. Shame on British Buddhists for allowing this abuse to continue for so long without doing anything about it
Be aware, the knock on the door WILL come. The evidence is being collected and the legal professionals are preparing their case.The authorities are waiting to be given the go ahead. The game is up if they are going to distance themselves from his deplorable actions, the time is now
- 137
  
  Mr Anon on October 11, 2016 at 5:02 pm
  Reply
  
  That’s way too jaundiced a view of a man who has written dozens of books, given hundreds of talks, and dedicated decades to the Buddha Dharma. He has ordinary human needs and clearly didn’t realise the consequences of his actions. Whether his image should be on our shrines is moot. Personally though as he is our founder for better and worse I think I am happy to honour that. As I’ve said before, knowing him a little, I think he is all sorts of things – highly intelligent, well read, obstinate, very kind, and sometimes rather proud and touchy. It’s dangerous being a leader of anything for any length of time. We see it in politicians who if successful generally succumb to a tendency to inflation. To be the head of a spiritual movement for nearly 50 years, with thousands of people projecting onto you and with no direct peers to keep your feet on the ground, is bad for the health. It’s something people should avoid, unless I suppose if they are enlightened and he certainly has never claimed to be that. I remember once, at I think FWBO Day 1987, he looked around the hall and said he thought many if not most people present would go further than him and if they didn’t he would have failed as a teacher.
  
  If you personally were hurt by Sangharakshita, NO NAME, then I can understand your anger, which must be magnified by the fact that he won’t acknowledge that his actions may have harmed you, let alone apologise for them. However, it doesn’t mean that he or even less the movement he founded is complete pants (or indeed pants down!). It just isn’t like that, at least not in my experience.
  - 138
    
    frenzy on October 11, 2016 at 10:16 pm
    Reply
    
    Mr Arnon, you wrote ”If you personally were hurt by Sangharakshita, NO NAME, then I can understand your anger, which must be magnified by the fact that he won’t acknowledge that his actions may have harmed you, let alone apologise for them. However, it doesn’t mean that he or even less the movement he founded is complete pants (or indeed pants down!). It just isn’t like that, at least not in my experience.”
    
    Can you Mr Arnon: really understand his anger..?
    I say: first things first.
    It is the typical Triratna ignorance that you are displaying here.
    - 139
      
      Mr Anon on October 12, 2016 at 3:51 pm
      Reply
      
      I can understand it as far as I can ever understand another person, especially someone I’ve never met. That should be kind of obvious!
    - 140
      
      NO NAME on October 13, 2016 at 8:28 am
      Reply
      
      Doesn’t mean it’s “complete pants”? It’s rotten to the core, founded on lies by a liar and sustained by lies. It is a boys club, gentlemen only (or ladies only [second class]) It sounds lovely to surround oneself with friends who share the same views and care for each other ( excellent) but it’s just that; a group of like minded individuals who are willing to practice communal blindness with regard to everything about their leader, his behaviour, sexual abuse, isolation of dissenters etc etc etc parading as a genuine Buddhist tradition It’s fake, counterfeit, plastic and is only held together by those with vested interests in personal power and.those they manage to hide the truth from
      Thank heaven for the dissenters
      - 141
        
        Mr Anon on October 14, 2016 at 8:11 am
        Reply
        
        It would be easier all round if it were simply like that. It’s not that there aren’t clearly elements of truth in what you write, but to me it looks like you caricature the worst aspects of our and his past and to a more limited degree present behaviour, ignore most of what’s good, and therefore present a hugely distorted picture. You also ignore the current tensions within the Order between Sangharakshita and the Preceptors College, who are currently very concerned to safeguard what’s termed as his legacy, and many of the rest of us – including the majority who rejected any definition of their relationship with Bhante as that of disciples. We are the Order too, just as much as they are. Some of this attempt to “safeguard the legacy” is expressed a little mystically, taking the name Adhistana (the relatively new Order HQ) and seeing it as a place from where Bhante’s grace waves can flow. While I think he does have an aura about him, some of which genuinely connects to his practice….. overall I find this sort of attitude embarrassing and indeed rather dangerous. The other aspect to this is his teachings and system of practice. A lot of that is fine, but I don’t buy the whole package for various reasons and let’s say my own practice and now that of hundreds of Order members has benefited hugely by looking outside our traditional system. Indeed, some of us (not me!) now seem to have progressed considerably beyond where Sangharakshita has got if we judge him by his actions. Actually, it’s all too complex and subtle to do justice to in a few paragraphs (or indeed one long one!) here. Let’s say to reduce everything done over half a century to sex doesn’t work, no more than it does to whitewash all that and pretend it wasn’t really damaging to some people. We live in a messy world and for me part of growing up has been to realise and accept that, and deal with it rather than decide “No, it’s all white”, or “No, it’s all black”! Overall, I tend to think this community worth sticking with. I may regret aspects of my involvement, but not the basic thrust, and certainly not the vast network of friendship and connection built up over decades. That really is precious and I am grateful for Sangharakshita for having made that and all the rest possible despite the failings you will probably now want to re-emphasise!
        
        142
        
        frenzy on October 14, 2016 at 1:49 pm
        Reply
        
        You might have a couloured view as a lot invested. Good luck to you man but you seem to be outnumbered here though.
        
        143
        
        frenzy on October 14, 2016 at 2:01 pm
        Reply
        
        I meant outnumbered in a need to keep such a broad perspective. It is not at all about the article anymore. How about taking Elie Godsi, the clinical psychologist who has been an expert witness on a number of high-profile abuse cases, serieus. He said: »This is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group.«
        Really you must see that your input it quite provocative in the light of this..?
        
        144
        
        tenpel on October 14, 2016 at 7:11 pm
        
        I agree with her »This is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group.«
        
        145
        
        Learninglive2 on October 14, 2016 at 9:42 pm
        
        I agree here, too … ‘it is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group.’ It has nothing to do with spiritual development however many hundreds of books Sangharakshita Dennis has written and had printed by in house Windhorse or however many hundreds of hours of lectures Sangharakshita Dennis delivered to devotees, who had fallen in awe of him, which have since been disseminated by in house media and however many prostrations have been done to the hundreds of framed photographs of Sangharakshita Dennis created by Dana contributions …
        It is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group … even if he has managed to convince most or many that it was spiritually beneficial. PLease read Tenpel’S posts on sex and spiritual manipulation. OR ‘grooming under the cloak of spirituality’ as in the recent court case of Bishop Peter Ball, who so many loved and adòred and who had also founded his own order.
        Mr. Anon, thanks for sticking with this discussion as it cannot be easy. I admire your stickability. And the fact that you have listened and moved towards interlocutors on some points. P!ease keep considering the non-devoted stance of those offering advice, opinions and fact on the thread and please keep moving towards a compassionate understanding of Sangharakshita’s victims. He, and those who emulated him, did not target all. THose often most vulnerable in some way were his targets. ANd they too at their most vulnerable were devoted to him and had often given their all before he took more. metta
        
        146
        
        Mr Anon on October 15, 2016 at 7:20 am
        
        There is no doubt that Sangharakshita used his position to have sex with lots of young men and that some of them felt and still feel damaged by that. I also think he rationalised this philosophically by referring back to “Greek love”, the normality of student-teacher, older-younger man relationships in the classical world (and from what I have heard in Buddhist monasteries down the ages). I can also see how the entire single sex “ideal”, “principle” and now merely “idea” suited him as a gay man, while at the same time recognising the value of some separation between the sexes. Monasteries are generally single sex for a reason! However, to reduce his entire life and work and the history of Triratna down to sex is absurd to nth degree. This is where some external critics of Triratna lose the sympathy of members of Triratna. There is enough to legitimately criticise without dissing the whole thing!
        
        And then we need to look back to the time all this began. Homosexuality had only recently been decriminalised – the love that dared not speak its name was starting to emerge from the closet. A man like Sangharakshita, brought up in pre-War working class South London, would most likely have had a complex and troubled relationship with his own sexuality. It would not have been anything easy to come to terms with or even be that aware of. Then after spending the war in India and another 20 years there, he comes back to the West, either a virgin or even if you believe the rumours he has always denied, not very sexually experienced. What does he meet? The counter culture, the hippy revolution. “Turn on, tune in, drop out”. Our society was being shaken up as acid, psychedelic music and all that went with it blew away the dregs of Victorian morality.
        
        So this Theravadin bhikku while teaching the Dharma as best as he was able, attracted lots of young people. He grew his hair, stopped wearing robes in daily life, took acid a few times, smoked dope, and had sex. He seemed to really like the sex and has said he had a very high drive. So he carried on. We can’t really call it “experimentation” – that’s him and us rationalising it. He simply enjoyed it. Most people were fine with it, some damaged. He was and is blind to the damage and I don’t condone that at all. However, we also should be wary about applying our modern ideas of “sex in the forbidden zone” anachronistically to what went on then. Personally I remember at university in the eighties, some of the tutors had reputations for bedding their women students and at the time nobody thought twice about it. Things have changed. In some ways this is clearly for the better, but I am also a little wary of heading too far down that path. Puritanism is best left dead and buried. So while I think sex between teachers and students is probably best banned, at least while they are still in that formal relationship and for all sorts of reasons, I baulk a bit at the level of hysteria generated. Also from what I have read and from my own experience as a child with all sorts of repressed stuff swirling around in the family (but never in any way acted upon) I feel that in most cases most of the harm done by any of this derives from the emotional charge given to it. The heavy guilt is passed back and forth between the “perpetrator” and the “victim”. So I feel a balance needs to be found where we can be honest, open, realistic and unhysterical about sex, while at the same time protecting people in power relationships (guru-disciple, tutor-student) from being manipulated and abused. And we must remember that it’s not just tutors that manipulate students for their own ends, but vice versa. It’s complex.
        
        Overall, having spent a little time with Sangharakshita down the years I do think he rationalises his actions and desires and that he is not always honest with himself or others. He is proud and touchy at times, and certainly obstinate, but also very generous, empathic and kind. He’s a person, maybe not the ideal person to have founded a Buddhist Order, but that’s the one we’ve got. And I repeat, I don’t think it would be good either to disavow and demonise him, or slavishly follow and idealise him. To misquote the founder of another religion: “Let he or she who has committed no sexual indiscretions cast the first aspersion”.
        
        147
        
        tenpel on October 15, 2016 at 12:42 pm
        
        The question is indeed to put things into context. This includes the question if it is appropriate to reduce Sangharkshita’s entire life and work and the history of Triratna down to sex.
        
        So, good food for thoughts.
        
        However, I strongly disagree with your assertion that “in most cases most of the harm done by any of this derives from the emotional charge given to it”. I heard this position also from a Tibetan Buddhist teacher. But from all what I have read, watched and heard of people who experienced to be manipulated against their will into sexual relationships with a powerful person, the harm is experienced without emotional charges of a given society / views of a time. I read and heard reports from people who spoke up after many years (sometimes after 20 years or longer), having not spoken to any one or just their wife – but the harm effected or even ruined their whole emotional life, it ruined their self-esteem, their capacity to learn, sometimes it ruined also their whole working lives. It blocked their growth, their maturation, it interfered with their wishes to have enjoyable and balanced relationships and most often ruined it ruined all relationships etc.
        
        I think you should take really time to read, listen to or to watch documentaries about sexual abuse – though it’s a movie even then movie “Spotlight” could help you to understand better the SUFFERING of those being effected by sexual abuse – sexual abuse based on the the abuse of trust or human needs for warmth or affection or some attention. I think you have really to take time to understand the dynamics of abuse before you can genuinely comment on it or been taken seriously by those who have a better understanding of such dynamics and harm. Your comment – which is primarily a long long excuse for Sangharakshita’s harmful behaviour – neglects the suffering of the people being damaged. Instead to open up for their suffering you defend Sangharakshita and put humans being harmed by the abuse of power and faith in a box. Their suffering comes according to you from emotional charges – which means the hysteria of a Victorian society. I my view, you twist reality here. IMO, you rationalise the harm by comparing given events with historical accounts like tutors at universities “for bedding their women students”. As the US election and the recent speech of Michelle Obama show, there is a history of sexual harassment, sexual predatorship by men, of grapping women at their body or genitals but this history is no justification for current bad modes of behaviour – modes of behaviour that most often deeply harm or hurt others and which can effect in a negative sense their lives and mentality deeply.
        
        In Germany psychologists can’t have sex with their clients/patients – even for 10 years after the relationship has ended. There are legal laws who prohibit that. There are also ethical boards and councils etc that take care that these legal laws are followed. According to your logic this must be based on hysteria or Victorian Puritanism. Well, you missed to get aware about the harm of the abuse of power. There is so much research and there are so many testimonies … you seem to continue the arguments of the sexual predators.
        
        Now, when it comes to man and young boys or teenagers. It is a projection that the young men want to have sex with the older man. There are again scientific accounts about this. Pedophiles project their own desire onto their objects of desire and rationalise and think the boy has seduced them. But the boy didn’t seduce the older man – its the older man’s projection or rationalising when he claims that – so do the scientists say and I agree with that.
        
        As you have interwoven personal remarks I do this too. When I was young, there were these older men in the shower of the public swimming pool who offered to wash my back. I’ve never liked it and said no. There was a man who when talking to me tried to stroke the place of my trousers which rose his interest. I felt totally disgust and reported him later to the police. All these episodes of people (all men) trying more or less lightly to sexually getting sth from me were not nice but disgusting. These men – older than me – did not evoke my interest but repulsion. Unlike people of your peer group – of the same age. People with whom I talked about this agreed. Luckily there was nobody who lured, manipulated or exploited my human needs for warmth, affection, or attention for their personal gratification against my wishes as Sangharakshita and other sexual predators have done it to the faithful or needy, abusing others faith and openness or needs to meet their own sexual desires. Such things have nothing to do with Buddhist teachings and you need a skewed personality to not respect the boundaries of others, manipulating and exploiting them.
        
        Therefore, I don’t subscribe to your point of view and regard them either as white washing attempts or quite ignorant.
        
        Oh, interesting
        
        And I repeat, I don’t think it would be good either to disavow and demonise him, or slavishly follow and idealise him. To misquote the founder of another religion: “Let he or she who has committed no sexual indiscretions cast the first aspersion”.
        
        I take this deliberately personal (without being offended by it), because this is an attempt to put my (and other’s) efforts here in a box, repressing right criticism or right view.
        
        Neither do I demonise nor idealise Sangharakshita. I’ve never ever manipulated anybody into a sexual relationship with me before I became a monk. Nor have the vast majority of monks or nuns I know, and I myself, after having become ordained have had sexual relations with anybody. Nor do others I know, or I myself, manipulate others or abuse religion and people’s faith to get from anybody personal sexual gratification. I know what to do and what the boundaries of others and myself are and so do others.
        
        I’ve not written any line here to throw a stone either, to denigrate Sangharakshita or to get personal gratification by pointing out the wrongs of others.
        
        Sorry, Mr Anon, but it appears to me that a partisan attitude might block your view onto what we discuss. It might be useful to listen, read, watch, study for a longer time dynamics and the harm of power abuse – be it emotional, financial or sexual power abuse. Otherwise I don’t see much of a basis of a fair discussion that includes the point of view of people who have been deeply harmed by these abuses. It’s not about a Victorian attitude it’s about HARM through the abuse of power & faith and how members of such systems which enables power abuse contribute to and sustain such harm by their lack of awareness, bias or ignorance.
        
        148
        
        tenpel on October 15, 2016 at 2:22 pm
        
        BTW, a high percentage of those having been sexually abused, manipulated or exploited against their will highly likely abuse later in their life also others.* There are statistics about it. Therefore a “victim of abuse” also needs support to not become a perpetrator of abuse later in life. That’s why clarity and therapy is of highest importance. Seeing this connection I wonder what Triratna will be for a place in the future when those being harmed as we well as the leadership rationalise the abuse as “spiritual beneficial” for most of them? This lack of clarity and interpretation of events might be a fertile field for the continuation of an unsafe structure that enables further abuse and prolongs the history of abuse within Triratna.
        
        * I think this has to do with a confusion created by the experience of sexual abuse that leads to a distorted perception about the boundaries of self and others… (In prison I have to do also with men who abused children as well as who were victims of sexual abuse when they were children, this gives me some background for that thought…)
        
        —-
        BTW, yesterday at the cult authority (EZW) it was just nice to meet people who understand what you are speaking about. They have 50 years of experience. Nowadays, those who want to become Christian priests have to pass psychological tests. These tests check if they are capable to take on the role of a celibate priest or not. If not, they are not accepted to become celibate priests.
        
        When I told that an adult woman justifies sexual exploitation by Sogyal as sex between adults, they immediately understood how wrong and ignorant this view is. They also encouraged me to find structures within Buddhism/ the German Buddhist Union (DBU) to address these problems and to continue to work on the realisation of an Ethical Charta and an Ethical Council within the DBU. I agreed. I lost my patience and will pick those topics up again… Though it might take longer to go through a rather new Buddhist Western institution which is much dominated by two groups whose teachers like to have sex with their students (Nydahl+Sogyal). Thinking of the generations to come, why not leaving a well prepared field that is safer than it was for me and others? Actual, that the group who worked on the Ethical Charta and an Ethical Council has fallen into a deep sleeping mode has also to do with the sickness of one member, change of board, new priorities – and politics of course. Its rather complex but it can be solved, I think. The EZW offered to help us Buddhists in that process – very nice, very kind!
        
        149
        
        Learninglive2 on October 15, 2016 at 5:37 pm
        
        Indeed, Mr Anon has constructed a long, long apology for Sangharakshita. It reminds me of the narrative, deemed the official history of Triratna called ‘The Triratna Story’ by Vajragupta. Free on line now and included ..well, managed more like very carefully … at a strategic point in mitra study (grooming into acceptance of the narrative). It also reminds me of the long, long apology written by Vishvapani of BBC Radio 4 Thought for the day. https://www.freebuddhistaudio.com/texts/read?num=FBA97&at=text&q=zen&p=3
        In this letter – free on line- to Norman Fisher in New York … THis is the fairytale version of the abuses of power and faith.
        Some order members still refer to ‘the myth’ of abuse, particularly in reference to those who spoke out first and still even blame junior partner victims for being involved with more than one senior order member…. at a time when kalyana mitrata through the medium of sex was being presented as spiritually significant and spiritually beneficient for aspiring ordinands … The abuse was endemic, woven into the Dharma as presented by Sangharakshita.
        Interestingly, the most recent man to speak out about the psychological damage done to him following a sexual relationship with Sangharakshita was 50 years his junior and also in awe of him and also in a situation where he had given up everything else for the FWBO and Sangharakshita. HIs mind collapsed when he told the truth to order member DHarmaghosha at Madyamaloka in Birmingham. THe young German guy is now an embarrassment to the order because he is saying he isn’t not complaining about being involved in oral sex wth Sangharakshita, with Sangharakshita being the active one. He has suffered because he was told by Sangharakshita to keep their sexual relationship a secret. AT the time Sangharakshita was wearing the golden Kesha and had in Conversations with Bhante .. freely available on line … told his interviewers Mahamati and Subhuti that he had been happily celibate since the mid eighties. THe young German guy has experienced many of the psychological and relationship fallout that Tenpel quite rightly profiles as characteristic of post abuse fall out. Do you know where the young German guy is, Mr. ANon? He is certainly not in good nick.
        
        150
        
        tenpel on October 15, 2016 at 6:44 pm
        
        Thank you Learninglive2. Very helpful comment and background information for me.
        
        Maybe there is an opportunity to meet the German man or that he writes a comment here or even a testimony which could be posted separately? I would be much interested to listen and to understand better the Triratna organisation from the perspective of a person being harmed. So far I met only ex-FWBO who were not really harmed by sexual abuse or the abuse of power.
        
        What I’ve read and heard from current members so far doesn’t ring really true / authentic / honest / transparent / based on a deeper understanding etc. to me. Though there is a type of admission to what has happened to a certain extend, there is also a tendency to make it lighter than it is and to play down the harm been done to the faithful disciples or students.
        
        It seems, also that there is not any critical inquiry about the left overs and current residues of power and sexual abuse … In light of the lie to BBC about the “blindness” of Sangharakshita, I seriously doubt that there is the level of honesty, clarity and thorough critical inquiry it needs to overcome the distortions and manipulations and structures that enable(d) the abuse of power for a very long time.
        
        151
        
        Mr Anon on October 15, 2016 at 8:10 pm
        
        Thanks for all those comments. I genuinely find them interesting but don’t have the time to explore anything very much right now. Maybe though I should reiterate that I am not seeking to excuse anybody, just get my head and heart around the issues. I am certainly not in any way denying that the people who complain of being damaged are in fact damaged. That would be wrong.
        
        152
        
        Frenzy on October 15, 2016 at 8:20 pm
        
        Tritana does indeed not attempt to conceil the actual sexual activity between teachers and students as such… but the (by nature, slowly, escalating) damaging effect. And cóntributes, by all sorts of indeed distortions and manipulations and structures, to more escalation and thus an incease of damage.
        One (the victum of power abuse) cannot resore a healthy boundary situation being lower in hiërachy; one has no power, certainly over group dynamics…
        Important for healing (besides change on an organisational level) is i think to gain more awareness in the dynamics. Your clarity and effort are a great contribution.
        
        153
        
        Mr Anon on October 15, 2016 at 8:21 pm
        
        Actually re: “Your comment – which is primarily a long long excuse for Sangharakshita’s harmful behaviour – neglects the suffering of the people being damaged. Instead to open up for their suffering you defend Sangharakshita and put humans being harmed by the abuse of power and faith in a box. Their suffering comes according to you from emotional charges – which means the hysteria of a Victorian society.” I don’t do this. I am not putting anybody in a box and don’t defend Sangharakshita’s actions. I have repeatedly said I think he rationalises his actions and that teacher-pupil relationships are best banned. I was simply trying to say that sex happens in a context. While in one society something is acceptable and we don’t think much about it, in another it is anathema. To imagine that sex is some objective thing that has an objective effect utterly outside any culturally given norms of behaviour is I think mistaken. And more generally I think our society has become hysterical and we are actually harming the people we wish to protect by loading too much onto it all.
        
        154
        
        Mr Anon on October 15, 2016 at 8:40 pm
        
        And finally I agree with you about the lack of honesty in the official response to the latest TV programme. Sangharakshita is not entirely blind, more like partially sighted. However, he does not meet people very much as he is very frail and has to martial his energy very carefully. So, in effect he really wasn’t in a state for a TV grilling – not that he is likely to have consented to it, even if he had been!
        
        155
        
        tenpel on December 3, 2016 at 7:30 pm
        
        Yes, it looks like “he is not entirely blind” see the video here from minute 20 onwards:
        
        156
        
        NO NAME on October 16, 2016 at 9:44 am
        
        Mr Anons repeated defense of Lingwood is sickening and thoroughly deceptive. It is a justification rather than a defenqQse and elsewhere appeals to pseudo Buddhist ideas to justify negative and harmful action
        For instance….
        “I was simply trying to say that sex happens in a context. While in one society something is acceptable and we don’t think much about it, in another it is anathema. To imagine that sex is some objective thing that has an objective effect utterly outside any culturally given norms of behaviour is I think mistaken. ”
        “And more generally (AND )I think our society has become hysterical and we are actually harming the people we wish to protect by loading too much onto it all.”(IN OTHER WORDS, STOP BULLYING US, YOURE BULLYING US,)
        
        You mean, it’s not all black and white when it comes to sex ( seem to remember you using those very terms elsewhere above) the rules are flexible
        
        Sadly, thigs is where you get it so very wrong for, in Buddhism there ARE moral absolutes. There IS black and white, there IS right and wrong. Sex either as a layma or , while posing as a monk- he was never ordained accaording to his own admission See ’23 years ago’, with multiple partners, underage sex, sexual assault are all prohibited by the ancient Buddhist moral codes of the vinaya
        Of course, we’ve all heard how popular the skilful means ideal is ( not to mention how useful it has become in justifying abuse) but the original scripture from which the doctrine is derived, the Upaya Sutra, makes it clear that ‘ bending the rules’ is the domain only of arya bodhisattvas ( IE on the Path of Seeing, with a direct experiential sustained perception of reality . ).It’s not an excuse for justifying neqgative acts just because you happen to have read about it in some book. And anyway, judging by his behaviour I think we can all draw our own conclusions as to whether the sexually abusive liar Dennis Lingwood has reached the Path of Seeing ( ironic the Order should be using excuses about Lingwood s ability to ‘see’ now the shit has hit the fan properly and it’s not going to go away.
        What Lingwood AND OTHERS AROUND HIM did was blatantly flaunt the moral precepts with a flagrant disregard for the vinaya and the well being of their victims and now karma has come back to bite them on the arse.
        And their excuse? Lingwood is a complex guy, with a strong sex drive(?) who wrote (rambled) many books, he is a poet, a blah, blah blah. And it was all a very long time ago ()1967-2004?) and we don’t need to think about nasty old right and wrong because if you bury your head in the sand enough and just allow yourself to be lied to by your leader and those around, everything will eventually work out fine and the nasty bogey men, mr right and mr wrong will go away and leave us alone.
        So intellectual and self preserving
  - 157
    
    Prajnacitta on June 14, 2019 at 7:30 am
    Reply
    
    Mr Anon on October 11, 2016 at 5:02 pm Reply
    
    “That’s way too jaundiced a view of a man who has written dozens of books, given hundreds of talks, and dedicated decades to the Buddha Dharma. He has ordinary human needs and clearly didn’t realise the consequences of his actions. ”
    
    In the UK, there was a guy called Jimmy Saville who sexually assaulted young boys and girls over more than a 40 year period. But he got away with it because he was such a good man, doing all that work for hospitals and raising 40 million pounds for charity. He dedicated decades of his life to raising money for charity and was awarded an OBE and a Knighthood. He even dined with the Royal Family and Prime Ministers.
    
    He also had ‘human needs’ and didn’t realise the consequences of his actions either.
    
    Your argument that good works outweigh the bad deeds done does not hold water, and is not an opinion held by Stoke Manderville hospital, Broadmoor or Leeds City Council. Or hardly anyone in the UK
158

frenzy on October 12, 2016 at 8:25 pm
Reply

That shows that what seems obvious to one doesn’t nec. seem obvious to another.
- 159
  
  Mr Anon on October 14, 2016 at 8:12 am
  Reply
  
  Indeed. It’s like the old thing about the blind man and the elephant. It depends which part you touch.
- 160
  
  Mr Anon on October 14, 2016 at 4:25 pm
  Reply
  
  Yes, indeed. This is a little like the blind men and the elephant. Their description of it will depend on what bit they touch.
- 161
  
  Jo White on November 2, 2016 at 6:35 pm
  Reply
  
  Posts taken directly from http://www.wildmind.org and answered by Scotsman Bodhipaksa, who is spreading the Dharma as presented by Sangharakshita in the USA.
  
  Sue: I was interested in your earlier post in connection with sangarakshita’s conduct. I also had read reports of sexual misconduct etc etc. hopefully he has realised the harm he may have caused ? unknowingly?. I do find it extremely unsettling to say the least to see his picture prominently displayed on the shrine in my local Buddist group meetings. To me it seems we are venerating a man who has caused harm to people in the most serious of ways possible? I respect my triratna group enormously and want to continue attending meetings and so on but this bothers me a lot.
  
  Bodhipaksa (Wilmind): Human relationships are very complicated things. If you think of many people’s relationships with their parents, for example, there’s often deep love and a debt of gratitude mixed in with an awareness of the sometimes harmful ways that parents have behaved. It’s like that with a lot of us in our relationship with Sangharakshita. Although he’s done nothing to harm me personally, I have benefited a lot from his teaching and from the movement he set up, and I respect him and feel gratitude toward him for that. At the same time I’m aware of the problems and hurt caused by some of his actions (although I wouldn’t describe them as causing harm in the most serious of ways possible.
  
  My post was blocked, I pointed out to Bodhipaksa that some people were very seriously damaged directly and indirectly e.g. family members and that the damage continues to this day. I also pointed out that his analogy of Sangharakshita as a parent is deeply deeply disturbing, given that Sangharakshita masturbated onto and frotted against his much younger disciples as spiritual practice. One would never accept this from a father; it is abusive; it is totally unacceptable as spiritual practice and in many cases illegal.
  Some of the guys were under the age of consent and were used for the power holder’s sexual gratification. Whether they were gay or straight, these guys were spiritually enticed into sex at a retreat centre. We now know that Sangharakshita was doing this at Padmaloka, according to the BBC and the three men who have so far come forward. Some of those spiritually-sexually groomed and used by Sanghrakshita emulated Sangharakshita and then sexually spiritually initiated others. Sangharakshita wrote the spiritual curriculum that allowed this to happen and men – and women – were judged on their spiritual aptitude by dint of their ability to reject opposite sex, practise same sex sex and turn their backs on their families … all in the name of Sangharakshita’s ‘spiritual friendship’.
  
  Since ‘Sarah’ posted safeguarding concerns on Bodhipaksa’s Wildmind website, he took all the comments down.
  
  Bodhipaksa has done a TEDx talk. Please note that this is not a TED talk.
  
  http://www.wildmind.org/about/about-bodhipaksa
  - 162
    
    NO NAME on November 3, 2016 at 10:09 am
    Reply
    
    Triratna seniors are stuck between a rock and a hard place as long as Lingwood survives. Remember the roasting Subhuti got for stating that S had behaved ‘unskilfully’ last time S looked like he was on the way out? Clearly senior OMs are keeping shtum and lining their nests in readiness for the post S Triratna. Remarkable that so called Buddhists, in a religion which recognizes the illusory nature of the self, should be driven by a very obvious desire for self preservation
    Of course, the big question ( after will S die before he is prosecuted) is who will younger Triratna members look to for guidance when S is gone. Those who knew about all the abuse but stayed silent or those who had the moral fibre to speak up and question their leaders behaviour? I know which I’d fresh people I’d respect.
  - 163
    
    frenzy on November 3, 2016 at 10:15 am
    Reply
    
    Hi Sue,
    Thank you for your comment.
    Also good to bring it back to the initial topic a bit more. Although IMO the issues mentioned here all seem to have some relation with this and eachother. (interconnectness Bodhispaksa…)
    
    It is interesting the comparisment made by BP beween ones relationship with a parent and a teacher.
    His line of reasoning show indeed v little psychological insight.
    In a teacher/spiritual aspirant, class or retreat attendee – dynamic the teacher can invoke feelings of (parental) tranference. there is also documentation about this. Inequality between teacher and student, and the obvious and ligitimed yearning for a teacher’s personal verification of one’s dharma understanding skews the equation of power towards the teacher.
    There is grey aknowledgent, as also BD uses here and there. In realty there is a deceptive and ineffective safeguarding situation. For the damage around such entwinement of needs and crossing of boundaries there should be consequences to help to heal the wounds and restore a sense of boundaries. This is lacking big time in Triratna.
    I understand this is difficult for you as you also, as you said, respect your group enormously. Good to keep a broader perspective and to keep questioning things.
  - 164
    
    NO NAME on November 3, 2016 at 2:46 pm
    Reply
    
    “’m aware of the problems and hurt caused by some of his actions (although I wouldn’t describe them as causing harm in the most serious of ways possible”
    It seems BODHIPAKSHA wouldn’t describe the suicides that resulted from the application of Sangharakshitas false doctrines as “serious” issues ( I believe the late eminent British psychologist listed three) ditto the serious mental illness and psychological suffering victims have endured.
    BODHIPAKSHA s sophistry is on a par with that of Goebbels in the run up to WW II. Sickening.
165

tenpel on October 15, 2016 at 4:21 pm
Reply

BTW, Frenzy, Learninglive2, no name and Mettaman, what do you think of the book written by Vajragupta and published by Triratna’s publishing arm, Windhorse Publications, »The Triratna Story: Behind the Scenes of a New Buddhist Movement«? The review by James Colman (who is this man?) on Lion’s Roar recommends it: http://www.lionsroar.com/hard-and-valuable-lessons/
- 166
  
  NO NAME on October 16, 2016 at 8:13 am
  Reply
  
  Whitewashes the Files and the Guardian articles completely, both massively important and still highly relevant issues. Propaganda
- 167
  
  NO NAME on October 16, 2016 at 8:57 am
  Reply
  
  Colemans book and this article simply repeats the official party line. He clearly made no effort to dig. They managed the same thing with Bluck AFAIR As for Coleman he strikes me as an apologist, too willing to look at aesthetics at the expense of understanding mechanics
- 168
  
  frenzy on October 16, 2016 at 2:46 pm
  Reply
  
  Hello tenpel,
  I enjoyed the review of The Triratna Story placed here previously by Mettaman. Again here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R3NKF6NQAF30VR/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1899579923&channel=detail-glance&nodeID=266239&store=books
  It gives words so adequately to the hilarious black hole in the single sex ideal.
  I much apriciate James Coleman reference to the wistleblowers.
  
  Vajragupta mentions that:
  ”the FWBO was learning that sex in the sangha could be dangerous. If one party was older or more spiritually experienced than the other, naive faith in the former as a teacher, desire for their approval, and abdication of personal responsibility could easily occur. (Frenzy: note the onesided emphasis on projection of the one lower one in hiërachy) Powerful emotions could be released as people got involved in the spiritual life. So those who were liable to be seen as ‘teachers’ (note the downplaying apostrophes) or in positions of ‘authority’ (idem) needed to be very careful. from the mid-1990s onwards, most people in the FWBO would probably (probably..?) advise caution in the area of sex and spiritual friendship. There were calls for a ‘code of conduct’, and many FWBO centres did have an agreement that teachers and team members would not proposition anyone at meditation and Buddhism classes. Beyond this, it seemed difficult to make ‘rules’, as how would you enforce them?
  
  The Triratna story does no mention abuse of power, a mentioned big lesson leared is the realisation Sr is human.
  
  It apparently has turned out to be very difficult for Triratna to create effective structures, procedures, safeguarding officers etc.
  Note: the lialibilty in this can be subjected to legal inquiry and liability claims, besides a criminal offence aproach. I think this has not been done before but it seems currents developments will make the feasability of this increasingly bigger.
  Triratna would do good indeed, as Colemans writes, to extend their praise to the wisleblowers as they hold the key to possible healing of their dysfunctionallity. Instead of telling others to embrace the mud, should they not embrace it themselves, if they really aspire a Bodhi State?
  
  Much more can and hopefully wíll be said… I think the opportunity for that here, incl your sharing of expertise and active participation in the exchange is extraordinary and of great significance.
  - 169
    
    tenpel on October 16, 2016 at 7:41 pm
    Reply
    
    Thank you.
  - 170
    
    tenpel on October 17, 2016 at 1:29 pm
    Reply
    
    There is another critical Amazon review to the book here:
    https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/customer-reviews/R1J2TFFHNV7UJW/ref=cm_cr_getr_d_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1899579923
    
    I added as a comment:
    
    From a monastic point of view – in order to avoid sexual attraction and conduct – you separate the genders. This makes sense in that context. However, here in the context of Triratna, where the leader and his followers claim homosexuality to be superior to heterosexuality and male spirituality is superior to female spirituality, and where heterosexual and gay men have been manipulated into sexual relationships with Sangharakshita to stress same sex groups appears just to be a means to promote the idea of homosexuality and the sex preferences of the leader of the group. This doesn’t make sense from a spiritual point of view, this does only make sense from the view of homosexual sexual desires. From a spiritual pov, if there is a homosexual preference it would be wiser not to run same sex groups because this stirs the sexual desires and projections of those who have a preference with this. More critical seen, the same sex groups sustain the sexual preferences and desires of Sangharakshita and can serve as a basis to recruit new boys and men to still the sexual thirst of Sangharakshita.
    
    I wonder why people can’t see these distortions and risks?
171

Frenzy on October 15, 2016 at 7:09 pm
Reply

Hello tenpel, you wrote:
”BTW, a high percentage of those having been sexually abused, manipulated or exploited against their will highly likely abuse later in their life also others. (*I think this has to do with a confusion created by the experience of sexual abuse that leads to a distorted perception about the boundaries of self and others…) There are statistics about it. Therefore a “victim of abuse” also needs support to not become a perpetrator of abuse later in life. That’s why clarity and therapy is of highest importance. Seeing this connection I wonder what Triratna will be for a place in the future when those being harmed as we well as the leadership rationalise the abuse as “spiritual beneficial” for most of them? This lack of clarity and interpretation of events might be a fertile field for the continuation of an unsafe structure that enables further abuse and prolongs the history of abuse within Triratna.”

I apriciate you formulating this with so much clarity and fully subscribe to this point of view.

My experience in Triratna involves while encountering boundary- and power abuse issues one is dependent for help on ordermembers who have also experineced power abuse themselves and/or are influenced by the general lack of clarity around such issues.
Although i am sure there is a complex of dynamics: (and not denying the good of triratna incl positive developments in this area) reality shows there is still a huge lack of awareness and a lot of confusion in thus related issues and a strong tendency towards conceiling.
This general lack of awareness and sensitivity around boundaries (and subsequent related suffering) reverberates on Triratna’s approuch to ‘safeguarding’ and there for the effectiveness of (apparent) developments in this area should really be questioned…
172

jigmeyeshe on October 15, 2016 at 8:24 pm
Reply

https://alaya.thebuddhistcentre.com/index.php/s/jzirWGf2nJVWBgD#pdfviewer

This is Triratna’s response to the BBC programme.
- 173
  
  frenzy on October 16, 2016 at 1:09 pm
  Reply
  
  When the overall safeguarding officer is a dummy all the rest has no credit…
- 174
  
  Mark on October 26, 2016 at 5:14 pm
  Reply
  
  Triratna’s response to the BBC programme may not be entirely open and honest. For example, point 11 says that: ‘Although he remains a significant guide, Sangharakshita stepped back from any official role in the running of Triratna in 2000 …’
  
  ——————————
  https://alaya.thebuddhistcentre.com/index.php/s/jzirWGf2nJVWBgD#pdfviewer
  
  11.
  Although he remains a significant guide, Sangharakshita stepped back from any official role in the running of Triratna in 2000 when he handed on his leadership responsibilities to a College of Public Preceptors, senior women and men from all over the world.
  ——————————
  
  But Triratna has a charity called Uddiyana, whose stated purpose is to enable Sangharakshita ‘and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide. ‘ In 2014, they spent £49.9K doing this guiding:
  
  ——————————
  http://beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1046398&subid=0
  
  Triratna Buddhist Community (Uddiyana)
  Data for financial year ending 31 December 2014
  Income £43.8K
  Spending £49.9K
  
  Aims & activities
  Support and assistance for Urgyen Sangharakshita, founder of the Triratna Buddhist Community (formerly FWBO) – enabling him and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide. These activities include meditation and Buddhism, social work, body work, cultural activities and support for residential spiritual communities and ethical businesses.
  ——————————
  
  So Sangharakshita has no official role in the running of Triratna, but somehow manages to unofficially guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide.
  
  Clear as mud, really.
  - 175
    
    tenpel on October 26, 2016 at 6:14 pm
    Reply
    
    Thank you, Mark. I think it would be good to inform BBC / the journalist, that they were deceived about Dennis Lingwood’s blindness and the claim to have stepped down. Can anybody do that?
    - 176
      
      frenzy on October 26, 2016 at 10:51 pm
      Reply
      
      Their statements ”we, for many years, strongly discourage sexual relationships between members of the Order and those they teach, based on lessons learned from our past” and
      ”Triratna has an overall Safequarding Officer and all Triratna centres and enterprices worldwide are expected to have Safequarding Officers and polocies” are equally deceptive.
      I wondered also: how can one be to blind to talk?
  - 177
    
    NO NAME on October 27, 2016 at 2:36 pm
    Reply
    
    Not.only that. Somewhere here, Anon states that Lingwood had refashioned the Order so that it was defined as” Sangharakshita and his disciples” So, while he is supposedly not in control, he is simultaneously calling the shots. Yet another case of the man ‘having his cake and eating it’ This also manifests in descriptions of the Order as a unified whole and elsewhere as a collection of legally independent centres. This gives them a get out of jail free card under varied circumstances
    - 178
      
      frenzy on October 27, 2016 at 7:54 pm
      Reply
      
      But you can make claims against a centre, them though being legally independent being part of an international organisation, as well as the triratna buddhist community, as a religieus chairity orginisation, for liability and/or individuals for infringing/unlawfull behaviour.
      - 179
        
        NO NAME on October 28, 2016 at 8:25 am
        Reply
        
        Ok then, hurry up, before Dennis dies. According to my understanding ( and here I rely primarily on Harvey’s text ob Buddhist ethics explanation of views on suicide and euthanasia ) it is far better that Lingwood experience the consequences of his actions now, while he can still make sense of them and regret and begin to purify them, than it is for him to simply suffer them in ignorance,as a being in the lower realms, his certain destination
  - 180
    
    Prajnacitta on June 14, 2019 at 11:15 am
    Reply
    
    Point 12:
    
    “The complexities of sexual relationships are never easy to judge, especially when
    those relationships happened a long time ago. Sangharakshita has always believed
    his relationships were consensual, and this being the case it would be inappropriate
    for anyone to apologise on his behalf.”
    
    Therein lies the nub of the problem as it is clear that DL does not understand the inherent impossibility of a relationship founded in a power dynamic to be a relationship of equals where there is the possibility of consent being given.
    
    That the senior order members write this mean that they also do not understand that no consent can be given in a relationship – even between adults of legal age for homosexual sex – where there is an extreme power differential, as between a student a teacher. Let alone, since DL called himself this, between a teenage novice and the venerable monk and great elder and Founder of an Order some 40-60yrs senior.
    
    The refusal to offer any significant repentence and apology speaks volumes.
181

Mr Anon on October 15, 2016 at 8:25 pm
Reply

“And I repeat, I don’t think it would be good either to disavow and demonise him, or slavishly follow and idealise him. To misquote the founder of another religion: “Let he or she who has committed no sexual indiscretions cast the first aspersion”.

I take this deliberately personal (without being offended by it), because this is an attempt to put my (and other’s) efforts here in a box, repressing right criticism or right view.”

I intended this as a plea for understanding of our flawed humanity rather than an attempt to repress criticism.
- 182
  
  tenpel on October 16, 2016 at 12:27 am
  Reply
  
  Hi Mr. Anon,
  my thoughts are based on my understanding of the Dharma and Dharma practice. My conviction as well as my rational argument is, if you genuinely want to cultivate a Bodhisattva attitude the foremost qualities to be cultivated are love (wanting others to experience well being) and compassion (wanting others to be free / protect others from suffering) – both especially in the long run (there is a discrimination into short term and long term benefit and harm in the Bodhisattva ethics too).
  
  From that perspective, actions not based on love and compassion are your enemies. From that perspective anger as well as attachment are your enemies too. Now following your own sexual desires/attachment and manipulating others to have sex with you though they are not interested in it, is a greedy, selfish act, that ignores the well being of others and seeks the own temporare happiness at the cost of others.
  
  The methods being applied by Sangharakshita and order members like manipulating the object of your desire by teaching pseudo-Buddhist teachings or by applying other types of indoctrination or by emotional pressure / emotional blackmailing – it is emotional as well as spiritual blackmailing based on deep egoism when Sangharakshita claims your enlightenment is blocked when you don’t open up for a homosexual relationship* with him – are just the tools to fulfil your own needs and ends at the costs of others’ wellbeing. I can’t and will never ever accept that as a correct mode of conduct.
  
  The question then comes up for me and others how deep this egoism of Sangharakshita is and how strong his altruism is? I can’t answer that question with any certainty because you must be able to read his mind to do so, however, all of the things he has done that are regarded as “good” from pov of the members of Triratna (like his books, setting up of the order and organisation etc etc.) could also be very egoistic acts. There is no certainty that these are acts based on genuine love and compassion as many might project. Most often narcissistic personalities can set up huge empires that have also some benefit for others but still, they don’t do it really for others but for their own interest or gratification/needs or ends. From a spiritual pov, if it is so, in such cases there is not even a proper basis to rejoice in such selfish acts nor to praise them.
  
  I just found this passage in “Altruism: The Power of Compassion to Change Yourself and the World” by Matthieu Ricard which highlight my thoughts about sexual desire and genuine love:
  
  Love allows us to see the other with caring, kindness, and compassion. Thus it is linked to altruism insofar as one becomes sincerely concerned for the fate of the other and for the other’s own welfare. That is far from being the case in other types of relationships related to attachment. Earlier on in her career, Fredrickson was interested in what she regards as being the polar opposite of love, namely the fact of regarding the woman (or the man) as a “sexual object,” which can have as many harmful effects as love has positive effects. Here there is an investment not in others’ well-being but in their physical appearance and their sexuality, not for the other, who is then regarded only as an instrument, but for oneself, for one’s own pleasure. To a lesser degree, possessive attachment stifles positive resonance. Feeding such attachments signifies that one is concerned above all with loving oneself through the love one claims to have for the other.
  
  * The funny point is, that there is truth in it. As long as you have aversion against anything you can say your enlightenment is blocked. But your enlightenment is also blocked by being under the spell of selfish, sexual desires which you can’t control or let go and even involve others in – ha ha ha ! 😉
- 183
  
  frenzy on October 16, 2016 at 1:03 pm
  Reply
  
  I think yor plea for understanding and sympthy for the one(s) in position of autority, power and, supposedly, fiduciary care is IMO not the priority here.
  The dynamics exposed here resemble those in dysfuncional incestious families.
184

Mettaman on October 16, 2016 at 9:50 am
Reply

This is an update on the apology situation. There has been some internal discussion, as far as such is possible, within the order. According to order member contact close to Adhisthana, one senior order member is ‘floating the idea’ to be disseminated that puts the importance of having the means and institutions (mansions and assets?) to spread the Dharma and thus reducing suffering in the world before apologising to ‘malcontents’, who did not progress spiritually and left the order. He is apparently also denying the experience of those who spoke out about sexual manipulation because they did not complain at the time it was happening. Apparently, another order member has written an account for order members only in Shabda or another order only place with title ‘Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour’ in which he apparently describes Mark D at the time the abuse must have been taking place and challenges Mark D’s later understanding of what was actually going on , reducing Mark D’s painful realisations to bearing false witness against S. One writer, possibly the same one, also writes that Sangharakshita never showed guilt or shame about having sex and that homophobia therefore had no place in the order thanks to Sangharakshita. He also says that mutual masturbation is not harmful. I think that there is a lot of tension in house for Trirtana and behind the scenes / Facade. THe communications office is largely drawing attention away from BBC issues and posting regular self congratulatory items. It must be difficult for the small number of brave order members, who do not agree with the ‘order narrative’ to speak or write up. Maybe they can do so here. Thanks to LBC (London Buddhist Centre) order member for this information.
- 185
  
  tenpel on October 16, 2016 at 7:37 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you.
- 186
  
  NO NAME on October 17, 2016 at 7:56 am
  Reply
  
  Re mutual mastutrbation
  The Orders self serving rewriting of Buddhist disciplinary codes continues. Masturbation, mutual or otherwise, is considered an infringement in both Theravadin and Tibetan Mahayana moral codes. In Japan, where generally there are no celibate monks and where the practice of pederasty was culturally endemic from an early age, individuals may practice their predilections to their hearts desire- they’ve thrown the rule book out. The result? The virtual destruction of authentic Buddhist practice in Japan
  So which path do Triratna choose? The one that preserves and protects, or the one that goes against established codes and allows for the free expression of ones desires (ooh look, it’s the sixties again!)
  No need to answer-it’s rhetorical and any answers would lack scriptural support and appeal to moral relativism ( time, context etc etc, you know ” it’s not all black and white” WATCH MY LIPS- for ordinary mortals,IT IS. THE RULES ARE WRITTEN IN THE BIG BOOKS FROM THE TIME OF THE BUDDHA not by someone who likes to have his cake and eat it and dares to make such false transformations
  And has the nerve to claim this is the Buddha’s word
  - 187
    
    tenpel on October 17, 2016 at 11:09 pm
    Reply
    
    You are right. Mutual musturbation or single masturbation is against the rules of monks and nuns. The key aim is to overcome desire and not to create rules that sustain and increase desire. Sangharakshita (Dennis Philip Edward Lingwood) should know this. Nobody has to become an ordained. However, to create rules based on own your likes or dislikes is not at all in the spirit of Buddha’s teachings and his path to freedom – the Dharma – because Dharma is what counters attachment and not what sustains or fans attachment. Or as Dromtönpa, the Tibetan main student of the Indian master Atisha, put it:
    
    “What is the difference between Dharma and non-Dharma?” the teacher Drom[tönpa] was asked by Potowa.
    
    Dromtönpa replied: “If something is in opposition to fettering passions, it is Dharma. If it is not, it is not Dharma. If it does not accord with worldly people, it is Dharma. If it does accord, it is not Dharma. If it accords with the teachings of Buddha, it is Dharma. If it does not accord, it is not Dharma. If good follows, it is Dharma. If bad follows, it is not Dharma.” – from Tsunba Jegom, Precepts Collected from Here and There (Kadam Thorbu)
    
    It should create some caution that Devadatta was the one who – unenlightened – created his own rules.
188

Mr Anon on October 17, 2016 at 7:44 am
Reply

There’s too much to go into here but to pose the question: Has Sangharakshita in effect lied at times? I tend to think so. Does this make him “a liar”, ie. a terrible creature beyond the pale, no, but it does expose his moral and spiritual limitations and failings. I suspect the fundamental, essential untruth is the tacitly held and unchallengable view that he is a spiritual giant – in his words, probably the greatest Buddhist teacher since Nagarjuna. There is clearly a dissonance, as pointed out by his last lover, between the public Sangharakshita and the private man. I think that’s the key to the whole problem. As far as I can see the cultish aspects of Triratna derive from that split. It’s where he falls down and indeed fails for instance in comparison to his friend Allen Ginsberg. The strength of the latter is that there was no visible split. His poetry expresses both his sexual desires and abandon, and his love of the Dharma, of the truth. He puts truth first and as far as I can see does not and cannot pretend. Then again Ginsberg was simply a poet, not a bhikku and not the founder of a Buddhist movement. Even if Sangharakshita had just remained a scholar and writer none of this would be so highly charged, but when you set up a spiritual movement you put yourself in a very strange position. Your followers project onto you, despite your warnings, and you end up buying it (and possibly on some level wanted or needed it in the first place). Then throw something so mundane as sex into the mix and it all goes haywire. A whole rationalised ideology emerges and people split psychologically in all sorts of ways.

And I would appreciate if you didn’t all seem to jump to the conclusion that I am making excuses. As far as I can I am trying to get a grip on all of this and although I don’t agree with all of your comments I do find it helpful to hear them.
- 189
  
  frenzy on October 17, 2016 at 4:16 pm
  Reply
  
  Mr Arnon,
  I can see and apriciate you are ‘trying to get a grip on all of this’.
  I agree it is relevant from a wisdom perspective to reflect on a person never being a complete terrible creature beyond the pale, nor on the other side being behond moral and spiritual limitations and failings.
  So you judge the deed not the person.
  Confrontation with damage through unskilfull action and negectancy done leads/could lead/should lead? to the concrete being open to hear and aknowledge the damage done by unskilful action(s) and to compensation or take on other consequences and to the desire to, as skilfull as possible, try to make amends.
  Are you with me on that?
- 190
  
  frenzy on October 17, 2016 at 9:06 pm
  Reply
  
  According to logic it cannot be put as an certainty that Sr’s ‘last ‘lover” was actually his last ‘lover’.
  As Sr, as Mr Arnon states ”in effect lied at some times”. This about this affair in 2003 or ’04, recorded in CwB in 2009. Also he said here to have no memory of having had sexual contact with at least one other actual ‘lover’, who had been under the age of consent at the time.
  
  ”Mahamati: In those few cases where people have been, at least in retrospect, unhappy about what happened, is there anything you can say about that?
  Sangharakshita: I am a bit puzzled by that. There was the Guardian article and there was Yashomitra’s letter in Shabda. Both the article and the letter contained allegations that were at variance with my own recollections, and I am therefore puzzled. In Yashomitra’s case, I remember him and being with him, being at Padmaloka and at Il Convento in Tuscany for his ordination course. I remember going for walks with him and so forth, but I have no recollection of any sexual contact with him. I find that puzzling, because I thought I remembered every encounter, even if the details sometimes elude me.”
  
  Re Mr Arnon’s ”Your followers project onto you, despite your warnings, and you end up buying it (and possibly on some level wanted or needed it in the first place). Then throw something so mundane as sex into the mix and it all goes haywire.”
  Noting that it going haywire referes to sexual boundary crossing and, according to statements and expert respons, to situations experienced and seen as abuse of trust and power. To the(Vg:) ‘dangerous relationships in the sangha’ with a disbalance in Power and Loyalty.
- 191
  
  NO NAME on October 18, 2016 at 12:09 pm
  Reply
  
  Mr Anon “There’s too much to go into here but to pose the question: Has Sangharakshita in effect lied at times? I tend to think so. Does this make him “a liar”,”
  This really shows how lost you people are. Tthe answer is “yes, it makes him a liar” try checking the dictionary definition He is a liar and you’ve been conned by a charlatan Try the duck test
- 192
  
  tenpel on October 19, 2016 at 12:09 am
  Reply
  
  Hi Mr Anon,
  thank you for you comment!
  
  I am not sure, when it is right to call someone a liar and when not. How many lies do you have to tell to be called a liar?
  I don’t know.
  
  Lying also includes to deceive others about your qualities. The biggest lie is the spiritual lie were you claim to have attained superhuman powers without having it. The Buddha was explicit about the demerits of lying for one’s spiritual attainments:
  
  One day the Buddha came to Rahula, pointed to a bowl with a little bit of water in it, and asked: “Rahula, do you see this bit of water left in the bowl?” Rahula answered: “Yes, sir.” “So little, Rahula, is the spiritual achievement (samañña, lit. ‘recluseship’) of one who is not afraid to speak a deliberate lie.” Then the Buddha threw the water away, put the bowl down, and said: “Do you see, Rahula, how that water has been discarded? In the same way one who tells a deliberate lie discards whatever spiritual achievement he has made.” Again he asked: “Do you see how this bowl is now empty? In the same way one who has no shame in speaking lies is empty of spiritual achievement.” Then the Buddha turned the bowl upside down and said: “Do you see, Rahula, how this bowl has been turned upside down? In the same way one who tells a deliberate lie turns his spiritual achievements upside down and becomes incapable of progress.” Therefore, the Buddha concluded, one should not speak a deliberate lie even in jest.
  
  In that context it is very interesting and also rings my alarm bells, when SR/Dennis is referred to as Bhante (Venerable), an address used only for fully ordained elders and it is even more alarming that, according to what you write here, he sees himself as “probably the greatest Buddhist teacher since Nagarjuna” – Oh my Buddha! Nagarjuna was seen as a 7th ground Bodhisattva who appeared on the level of a first ground Bodhisattva. What a self-perception is it to compare yourself with one of the greatest masters of (Mahayana) Buddhism? Is Dennis Lingwood also a narcissists as so many others in the context of power and sexual abuse?
  
  Thank you for sharing this information. It makes sense to conclude that “There is clearly a dissonance, as pointed out by his last lover, between the public Sangharakshita and the private man.” given the information which has been discussed here so far.
  
  Just as a side remark, I didn’t read all the comments here due to a lack of time and this comment by you I read only now!
  
  Thank you for asking me to not “jump to the conclusion that I am making excuses.” Maybe you are – as you write it – indeed in a process of sorting things out. I remember discussions in the New Kadampa Survivor forum were people sounded like NKT devotees who wanted to convince us but many of them had just to start to look on the issues from the point where they just were and so they sounded like defenders of the NKT tough this was not their motivation but they really wanted to make sense out of their experiences, the narratives and what has been said and just weren’t able to speak totally free from the NKT indoctrination.
  
  Though I can’t invest anymore so much time in reading comments and thinking carefully about them, keeping the arguments in mind etc. as I did it in the past, at least I can remind myself and take care to be more careful with my perceptions and judgements.
  
  Ok, I’ll try to be open, careful and more restrained with my perceptions and judgement with respect to what your motivation(s) is/are or might be. On the other hand, I have to confess, that I am also sceptical. The reason is that we have been deceived so many times by NKT trolls who started to pretend to be genuine seekers just to come out at one point as pro-NKT commenters. We have invested so much time in these – at the end – senseless discussions, that there is a risk now after all these experiences to become cynical, harsh, close minded, or to put others too quickly in a box etc. – not really listening to them and not assuming good faith. OK I’ll try to open up for your wish and I will take it to heart but I will also be sceptical and see how things continue to unfold …
  
  BTW, did you see the documentary »Holy Hell« by Will Allen?
  Just saw it. There were also young men, heterosexual mostly, who were coerced into a sexual relationship with the homosexual leader of the group. When words of sexual and power abuse spread for the first time via an email/letter, even one of those men who have been abused over a very long time rose up to say, that these are all lies – though he knew it was true because he was abused himself. In the documentary there are scenes where these men speak about how painful this was to have been manipulated against there will into a sexual relationship with the leader, and you can see them crying. They also tell, that they payed and even praised the leader after each abuse! I think this shows some of the dynamics of harm, self-manipulation etc but also the pain it brings.
  
  I think all followers of Triratna should watch it, and I do hope that there are people who make a similar documentary about Dennis and Triranta. The documentary doesn’t deny the good experiences either but it also doesn’t deny the harm and pains.
  - 193
    
    Mr Anon on October 19, 2016 at 7:51 am
    Reply
    
    Thanks. I am very busy at the moment but will give it a look. I’m not here to “troll” but nor am I here simply to agree. I am a committed member of the TBO and want to help it flourish – not flourish as a cult but as a Buddhist movement. If this means deconstructing a lot of the myths and fantasy around our founder, then fair enough. I think the Order and movement is heading to a crossroads and none of us know what will happen following the death of Sangharakshita. My sense, which will no doubt enrage No Name, is that there is enough good and genuine in it (which reflects our founder just as much as the bad stuff) for this community to survive and prosper. But we really do have to deal with the shadow, the goblins in the closet or whatever.
    - 194
      
      tenpel on October 19, 2016 at 10:09 am
      Reply
      
      I see. Thank you. Now I understand better. In a way for me it boils down to the question of TBO can be reformed or not.
      
      These reform approaches I know from the discussions about East Gernany before it united with West Germany and from discussions with NKT followers. These two systems were/are just too rotten or hard to be reformed really to the better. As an outsider of TBO I don’t know how rotten or hard (inflexible/ not really open) TBO is.
    - 195
      
      NO NAME on October 19, 2016 at 10:32 am
      Reply
      
      I don’t do rage
      It looks like you think the problems will go away after Dennis dies. Personally I would be more worried about the problems you will face before he dies
      As to whether you’ll be able to fix things post morten, I guess it’s a bit like cancer: even when the tumor is removed, the fact it has been in situ so long means there is always a danger of recurrence. It also depends on how far the cancer has spread before you caught it. In the case of TBO, that amounts to forty years.
      If you are gonna rebuild, you’ve got a big job ahead……and the past will always haunt you until you come clean and address the victims- people are living rough after their encounters with Lingwood: he meanwhile lives in a large mansion with its own grounds-is that fair? Or do you just blame karma- hop along now;)
      - 196
        
        Mr Anon on October 21, 2016 at 10:34 am
        Reply
        
        I think there are various factors that have made our response less than 100% honest and frank: 1) The people in charge of the movement’s official communications feel constrained to respect Sangharakshita’s views on the matter. 2) There may be, as you suggest, possible legal ramifications, I don’t know. 3) If we accept that our founder acted in such a way, ie. having sex while still publicly wearing robes or the orange kesa, that he really hasn’t really progressed very far on the Buddhist path, and that he built up a whole system/ideology to rationalise his desires, then how do we relate to him? Certainly not as the great guru whose precious legacy of teachings and practices should be preserved intact for the good of humanity. Instead, we’d have to come to a much more mature and nuanced view of him and what he has given us. This isn’t going to happen at present because he is alive and has recently announced that he has refounded the order as the community of his disciples. The Preceptors College is now busy “enforcing” that line, but being nice, liberal types (in the main) it’s all a bit muddled, so the dissidents haven’t (yet?) been stripped of their kesas. Athough I have the impression that many of them don’t really buy this new line, none of the Public Preceptors is willing to challenge the 91 year-old Sangharakshita – partly out of loyalty, partly kindness, and partly self-preservation and cowardice. When he goes though, I think the incense will really hit the fan. It will be billowing everywhere and what I hope emerges out of the confusion is total honesty about our past and a much more flexible vision of what it means to be a member of this particular Buddhist order. – Anyhow, that’s about as best as I can put it all so succinctly!
        
        197
        
        frenzy on October 21, 2016 at 10:55 am
        Reply
        
        I am sure you yourself have a sense of it having integrity and credibility Mr Anon.
        Being familiar with Triratna dynamics and rethorics myself i feel you haven’t shown much understanding and haven’t shown that you have taken the input here very serieus.
        
        198
        
        NO NAME on October 21, 2016 at 11:28 am
        Reply
        
        Thank you for your honesty Anon.
        One problem however is that former members who were victims of Lingwood are in a position where they are now strong enough and united enough to move the issue forward with the police. So I guess that leaves you/TBO stuck between a rock and a hard place. When charges are brought, if the Order are seen to have done nothing , then the senior OMs will be considered complicit in the cover up. OTOH, if they wait until he dies and the truth outs, surely the question will arise as to why nobody said anything when everybody knew. and who was responsible for the cover up
        Fortunately, the dilemma may well be resolved by the impending actions of external agencies. If not, TBO seniors will be forever damned if they do, and forever damned if hey don’t ( speak up) it’s your call. But either way, TBO is in for some serious hard times ahead. Blood on the carpet ahead at Adhistana.
        
        199
        
        Mr Anon on October 22, 2016 at 11:43 am
        
        I’ve only heard vague second hand rumours about legal concerns at Adhistana. We’ll just have to see what, if anything, comes of it.
        
        200
        
        Mettaman on October 23, 2016 at 6:31 am
        
        According to contact at London Buddhist Centre there is open acknowledgement in Facebook order groups and similar that any apology would open up gates to compensation and some order members fear that undeserving ex order members and mitra might make claims …. So, it is interesting that they may consider some ex order members or ex mitra deserving.
        Thanks to contact close to Adhisthana for reconfirming that a prominent spokeswoman for the group is willing, verbally only, never in writing, to say that some order members, including senior ones, would like to offer an apology, but that the order has been advised by its legal team not to as it would mean the loss of Padmaloka and possibly Adhisthana to settle compensation claims ….
        Thanks to an order member contact at London Buddhist Centre for his concerns that a recent sexual crime involving two mitra is being dealt with in house …. He and two women order members have apparently raised concerns about this, but their concerns have been dealt with in house. He says that Maitryabandhu and Subhuti are fully aware, as is Parami , that sexual crime is involved, but that they are dealing with this in house. The LBC evidence has, according to him, been destroyed. This may be what dealing with it in house means. The mitra involved are apparently still mitra and seeking ordination. The LBC contact is very concerned because the sexual crime involved is likely to be repeated, he says ….
        It is really positive to see that order members are now reaching out beyond the order to say what is really going on. Those who care will not be silenced.
        
        201
        
        frenzy on October 23, 2016 at 8:37 pm
        
        According to a contact it has been publically stated by an OM in respond the the BBC item, in a european country other that the UK, that when it is the teachers word against the student, the teachers word outweights the students’.
        
        ” The rules are now emphatically tightened so these things can not happen
        anymore, that is ‘taking distance’. But to judge people in retrospect, based
        on later prescribed rules is not an option. In this case there appear to be
        different truths of teacher vs. student, hence Triratna is not commencing.”
        
        ” Certainly there were different views on the topic of relationships
        between students and teachers in those years in the developing Western
        Buddhism. And many of the then sexual relations were consensual, some were
        at the time but the student later had regrets, and some will certainly have
        been under peer pressure or other inappropriate influence from the Sangha /
        teacher. But to make that distinction afterwards, and also to ask the
        teacher and to observe that in his / her experience this was entirely
        voluntary and mutual? Your word and that of the victim against theirs,
        wrongdoing it was not was according to the teacher. ”
        
        ” So for that reason any (implicit) Triratna apologies are the fact that
        the new (though in fact around 25 years old) rules altogether reject such
        relationships. Have students any evidence concerning their view of the facts
        is correct, possibly checked in criminal proceedings, then the situation may
        change. For now it is their word against the teachers-word, sorry …”
        
        202
        
        NO NAME on October 24, 2016 at 7:55 am
        
        Such an approach contradicts the fundamental principles underlying the legal systems of all democratic societies.This demonstrates the dictatorial nature of the TBO hierarchs, who clearly think they are beyond the reaches of the law. Fortunately, the law is not determined by these demagogues and while they are free to delude themselves in the above manner, their leader and those who mimicked him will be subject to the full force of the law.
        I suspect this announcement is an attempt by Lingwoods closest disciples, complicit in the cover up to reassure him ( and themselves) that they are above the law and immune from its scrutiny. Nothing could be further from the truth. When the time comes, all these illusions will collapse and they will be faced with the consequences of their actions
        
        203
        
        frenzy on October 24, 2016 at 8:03 pm
        
        The v odd thing is that the chair of this OM’s local centre says in a private mail contact that ”there are as yet no local ethical guidelines, polocy and safeguarding structures, besides the by the Buddha formulated 5 respectively 10 precepts.”
        So where are the mentioned ”new (though in fact around 25 years old) rules that altogether reject such relationships” and how are ”the rules now emphatically tightened so these things can not happen
        anymore”? How does it exist for people who feel there have been breaches of ethics..?
        Are animals are equal but there are some animals that are more equal. (just a literaly quote that comes to mind, no harsh speech intented, although the word pig i realise might feel offensive to some, it is by all means not meant that way, and with metta for the pigs also, and feeling offended would in the light of the absolute anyway also be relative)
        
        204
        
        frenzy on October 25, 2016 at 9:08 am
        
        Also according to contact:
        This OM refered, in his public comments, to speaking out about experienced difficulties and safeguarding concerns as ‘throwing with mud’, in regard to a recent situation.
        
        When the recently concerned person contacted the president of the (a large UK) centre of her prev. boyfriend, a senior ordermember, the president mentioned ”not wanting to mud the waters any further.”
        
        A third person, OM also, said about this, ”yeah he (the president) knows him well…” (sarcastically said) and ”i know what it is like… and then they move on to the next person.”(suggested: relationship in the sangha)
        
        The president of her own local centre stated that ”clearly he (the senior ordermember) does not and has never seen himself as the/your teacher”, the fundament being though she going on his retreats.
        
        The comparison was made in reference to this, by the OM stating things publically, of a relationship between a stewardess and a pilot, and suggested was that knowing of a/the powerdifferential the responsability for pos. negative consequences lies with the lesser one in hierarchy.
        
        This was a topic in the same thread where the statements were made about the teacher’s truth being more credible.
        
        The (concerned) person states she has due to disempowering escalation retreated from Triratna.
        
        There is legal activity around this.
        
        205
        
        frenzy on October 25, 2016 at 9:51 am
        
        According to contact: she was told , by a local OM boardmember of centre, who was her eventual contactperson around the issues: ”you are a wistleblower, you want to be carefull with that, for your own concern.”
        
        206
        
        frenzy on October 25, 2016 at 10:10 am
        
        My view on abuse of power and position: taking into account the complexity around sexual intimicy and the (subsequent) consequences (also: in the group) for the one lesser in authority and power, and the keeping of healthy boundaries are the responsabilily of the one in the position of authority and power. Also the responsability of the organisation; creating and maintaining healthy boundaries as well as for ethical consequences. The organisations responsability even more so when the persons in position of power and authority are not proparly mentored.
        
        207
        
        NO NAME on October 25, 2016 at 1:47 pm
        
        Some years back, when the Order claimed to have ‘cleaned up their act’, I wondered whether this could possibly be true or whether their ‘secret teaching’ had just been moved deeper into the indoctrination process, further from public view. Everything Frenzy says confirms the latter. Everything Anon says so nonchalantly confirms that poisonous ideas concerning the family, sex, the student-teacher relationship etc, persist, indeed flourish. The poisonous ideas of Lingwood et al are thus alive and well at your local Triratna centre. The question as to whether schools should be visiting Triratna centres in the UK immediately comes to mind Poisonous ideas from a poisonous mind are not good for our children. Time for a second government inquiry, this time without the assistance of Munishas QCA ‘friend’, John Keast?
        
        208
        
        frenzy on October 21, 2016 at 11:36 am
        Reply
        
        Re Mr Anon: A point you seem to have missed, for example, is that to suggest (ethical) safeguarding guidelines, protocols and officers being in place when there is nothing there is v misleading.
        
        209
        
        Mr Anon on October 22, 2016 at 11:32 am
        
        As far as I understand it, and I admit to having only followed this topic very sketchily, there are guidelines that have been developed, but not everybody even knows about them. Given the anarchic structure of the movement with its legally independent centres, it’s also difficult for “head office” to impose anything. The more I think about it though, the more I see that given our past, we really do need to make them as compulsory as we can.
        
        210
        
        frenzy on October 23, 2016 at 6:09 pm
        
        Re Mr Anon:
        The point is Triratna has stated, in respond to the BBC item:
        ”We, for many years, strongly discourage sexual relationships between members of the Order and those they teach, based on lessons learned from our past”
        ”Triratna has an overall Safequarding Officer and all Triratna centres and enterprices worldwide are expected to have Safequarding Officers and polocies.”
        This together with other statements that include both online available information as well in personal communication i conclude that Triratna is and has been claiming a safeguarding situation that is false.
        I agree that the lack in communication between, and alighnment of, meta and local is unhelpfull.
        
        211
        
        tenpel on October 22, 2016 at 6:48 pm
        Reply
        
        Hi Mr Anon, just as a feedback. When I glanced your comment for approval, I thought its a comment by no-name 😉
        I want to thank you for your input, thoughts and openness to discuss here with us. I guess its not that easy for you …
        I find what I read from you very useful and beneficial.
        
        212
        
        Mr Anon on October 22, 2016 at 7:14 pm
        
        Thanks for that Tenpel. I appreciate the feedback!
        
        213
        
        learninglive2 on October 28, 2016 at 8:44 am
        Reply
        
        Mr. Anon admits that the order have not been 100 percent honest (i.e. not told the truth) in, for example, the order’s media statement to the BBC. I strongly suggest that he and others in the order read the Nature Neuroscience article published this week on the consequences of self-serving lies, white or otherwise, and deceptions. It seems that Dennis Lingwood is indeed a master, a master at deceiving others in India, Hampstead Vihara and in his own self-styled order, where he has long deceived the trust of disciples and communities. Many reputable newspapers are following up on the Nature Neuroscience article. It would be an enlightening experience for FWBO Triratna mitra and order members to discuss this at chapter and conventions, with their leader – and themselves as complicit – in mind, as it seems he still IS the leader, despite more less that 100 percent honest depictions of him as not the leader.
        He put himself on the order’s refuge tree …. he gave himself the aggrandising titles …. he wrote everything that has created Dharma confusion and havoc for so many, including the pain that some genuine Dharma seekers are experiencing – yet again – and yet again – on the wheel of suffering concerning the sexual-spiritual manipulations he has created and a host of lies, deceptions and distortions, dating back to India. Even this week, some such as Parami and Mahamati are echoing the deception that he has been celibate since mid 1980s.
        Is it likely that Sangharakshita Bhante Lingwood actively put another man’s penis in his mouth in 2002 and 2003 and that this was non-sexual / accidental?
        Actually No.
        Is it likely that he could have done the same, for example, with Terry Delaware and others and claimed he was not involved in sexual activity?
        Probably yes.
        Is it likely that he is not being 100percent honest in not remembering that he was involved sexually with young men under the age of consent, for example, Yashomitra.
        Definitely yes.
        Is it likely that he is not being 100 percent honest in not remembering that he was involved in sexual activity with a mitra 50 years his junior?
        Definitely yes.
        Is it likely that his senior devotees and spin doctors will now need to continue the lies and deceptions because they have done so now for so long that they have also affected their brain health and functioning?
        Probably yes.
        
        http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nn.4426.html
        
        214
        
        tenpel on October 28, 2016 at 12:25 pm
        
        Ha, neuroscience approves what Bhikkhi Bodhi explained so well about Right Speech:
        
        The Buddha’s stricture against lying rests upon several reasons. For one thing, lying is disruptive to social cohesion. People can live together in society only in an atmosphere of mutual trust, where they have reason to believe that others will speak the truth; by destroying the grounds for trust and inducing mass suspicion, widespread lying becomes the harbinger signalling the fall from social solidarity to chaos. But lying has other consequences of a deeply personal nature at least equally disastrous. By their very nature lies tend to proliferate. Lying once and finding our word suspect, we feel compelled to lie again to defend our credibility, to paint a consistent picture of events. So the process repeats itself: the lies stretch, multiply, and connect until they lock us into a cage of falsehoods from which it is difficult to escape. The lie is thus a miniature paradigm for the whole process of subjective illusion. In each case the self-assured creator, sucked in by his own deceptions, eventually winds up their victim.
        
        “Cults” / groups which enable abuse of power – and thereby sexual, financial, emotional or spiritual abuse – seem to have the common characteristic to be highly deceptive systems that create and operate in a world of fuzziness which derives from skilful blends of semi-truths, with some truths and untruths. Therefore the antidote to cultish or deceptive systems is honesty and transparency. These are the real enemies of any deceptive/fraudulent system. Therefore, an honest seeker of the Buddha path, an honest admirer of the Dharma path, should ask him or herself, what are the demerits to support such systems for one’s own progress and where and when he or she might have deceived others and themselves also with lies. Truthfulness is crucial for the training – especially for Bodhisattvas. The Theravada texts list 10 perfections, one of them is truthfulness. The Buddha himself said about the demerits of lies:
        
        One day the Buddha came to Rahula, pointed to a bowl with a little bit of water in it, and asked: “Rahula, do you see this bit of water left in the bowl?” Rahula answered: “Yes, sir.” “So little, Rahula, is the spiritual achievement (samañña, lit. ‘recluseship’) of one who is not afraid to speak a deliberate lie.” Then the Buddha threw the water away, put the bowl down, and said: “Do you see, Rahula, how that water has been discarded? In the same way one who tells a deliberate lie discards whatever spiritual achievement he has made.” Again he asked: “Do you see how this bowl is now empty? In the same way one who has no shame in speaking lies is empty of spiritual achievement.” Then the Buddha turned the bowl upside down and said: “Do you see, Rahula, how this bowl has been turned upside down? In the same way one who tells a deliberate lie turns his spiritual achievements upside down and becomes incapable of progress.” Therefore, the Buddha concluded, one should not speak a deliberate lie even in jest.
        
        215
        
        tenpel on October 28, 2016 at 12:33 pm
        
        BTW, when I left my own “Buddhist cults” – this Dharma teaching by Bhikkhu Bodhi played an important role for me. It was like the key to a dynamic that was a driving force of the whole deceptive and harming processes. Later I learned from HH the Dalai Lama “honesty and transparency are the foundations of faith” – another extremely helpful instruction for me, because cult leaders tend to demand faith without laying the foundations for faith. Their lack of honesty and their lack of transparency itself undermines their students’ faith. Students who have doubts about such leaders have correct doubts because there is no foundation for faith because basic spiritual qualities like honesty are very weak or absent … Another teaching which helped me tremendously was Buddha’s teaching about Intimate friends, e.g. verse 11:
        
        (11) The devotee acquires the same faults
        As the person not worthy of devotion,
        Like an untainted arrow smeared
        With the poison of a tainted sheath.
        
        216
        
        Mettaman on October 28, 2016 at 1:34 pm
        
        Let us hope that those connected to FWBO / Triratna will copy and share your post, Tenpel, IF, and it is an IF, they understand the Nature Neuroscience article and / or Tenpel’s exposition of The Buddha’s teachings as opposed to Sangharakshita’s deeply flawed stand alone teachings. And his deceptions.
        Sadly, it seems that Buddhadasa, according to contact in Colchester Buddhist Centre, has cast Mark Dunlop and Yashomitra as the ones bearing false witness against Sangharakshita and the order because they did not immediately recognise they were being abused. It is so clear that they were spiritually enticed, with spiritual force, to meet LIngwood’s sexual needs . Years ago, an order member called Ananda wrote a description of how he was very much pushed into sexually gratifying Sangharakshita. Has anyone got a copy of that? Apparently, Sangharakshita stopped short of physical force, but tried all sorts of emotional, psychological and dramatic antics to get young Ananda to gratify him, including feigning near death experiences that only sexual activity could alleviate …He was also doing his best to split Ananda up from his girlfriend. Ananda is still in the order says Cambridge ex-order member. It would be interesting to hear how Ananda reconciles all this with Buddhism and the many allegations of spiritual abuse that keep coming out.
        
        It seems, according to contact at London Buddhist Centre, that Mahamati and Parami are now casting Bjorn as the teller of untruth. He is the German ex-mitra, who has first hand experience of Sangharakshita definitely not being celibate in 2002 and 2003. The young man was told by Sangharakshita to keep his mouth firmly shut when it came to being honest about their sexual relationship. ‘Don’t tell the others’ is what Sangharakshita told his aspirant priest junior, starved of female company and affection in misogynistic single-sex Birmingham HQ and exposed to Sangharakshita and his teachings virtually non stop, including his pro homosexuality anti heterosexuality teachings for all. When Bjorn was exhausted by keeping secrets, he told Dharmaghosha. Bjorn was powerless as Sangharakshita then blanked him for telling the others their secret and Bjorn was frozen out by others at Birmingham HQ. Like many before him, Bjorn tried to hold onto what he thought was Buddhism and what he thought were genuine friendships. He has suffered in the web of lies and deceit that are characteristic of Sangharakshita’s behaviour towards those who tell the truth about him. And the complicity of all those in the know who have done nothing. DHarmaghosah tried bravely but got quashed, says our contact at London Buddhist Centre, for questioning Sangharakshita’s assertions in Conversations with Bhante that he has been celibate since Mid eighties. DHarmaghosha got firmly told he was wrong to bring it up in Shabda by Subhuti and Mahamati.
        If Sangharakshita Lingwood, by 2016, does not understand that actively putting another man’s penis into his mouth is sexual activity, one has to seriously review what he said about his supposed non-sexual relationship with Terry Delamare and others in U.K. and / or India. Maybe he had it-isn’t-really-sex sex with young men in Young Men’s Buddhist Vihara in Kalimpong? He certainly surrounded himself with beautiful young men there, too, as many photographs and his writing can testify. And what about the stories of him being asked to leave the Hampstead Buddhist Vihara due to sexual activity in bhikku robes in the shrine room? Maybe he was having not really sex sex there, too? what about his supposed non-sexual relationship with well-under-the-age-of-consent Yashomitra? Remember too, that in Conversations with Bhante, Sangharakshita Lingwood narcissistically tells Subhuti and Mahamati that he is unlike other men in that his sexual pleasures are not confined to one bodily part…. who is to know where he experienced orgasmic pleasure in all these non-sexual relationships ….
        
        217
        
        tenpel on October 28, 2016 at 6:16 pm
        
        Who is Buddhasasa? If true, he is crazy with his arguments. Of course persons being sexually abused don’t come out with it immediately. It takes time to understand what happened to you, it takes time stop blaming yourself, to feel guilty, ashamed, embarrassed, confused etc … – its even harder to go to the public and to speak up.
        
        In general it can take between 10–20 years sometimes – even longer – to speak up. Some systems are so rotten that it can take more than 30 years until the truth comes to light. This is a reason why they changed the laws in some countries regarding sexual abuse. In some countries sexual abuse can not be charged legally if not announced in the first ten years but statistics showed that most people need longer than 10 years to speak up and scientists explained why this takes naturally so long. I can’t remember all the details but there is discussion exactly around these topics. If he or anybody argues “Mark Dunlop and Yashomitra as the ones bearing false witness against Sangharakshita and the order because they did not immediately recognise they were being abused” this only demonstrates their deep ignorance about such matters or their agenda which neglects to understand the side of the people being harmed.
        
        I mean, come on, anybody who has some common sense understands the level of deception and abuse given by the account of Mark Dunlop to The Guardian. What he shares is a common pattern in such contexts. It feels totally trustworthy. And I got quite a similar account with quite the same patterns from another context.
        
        Years ago, an order member called Ananda wrote a description of how he was very much pushed into sexually gratifying Sangharakshita. Has anyone got a copy of that?
        
        No, I don’t have a copy but would be much interested to read it or to get a copy.
        
        It is very ugly what you write here but not your writing is ugly, the actions which are described are ugly, non-dharmic, disgusting, embarrassing, painful.
        
        Maybe Bjorn or others could write testimonies? We could post them here and they could be send to INFORM. In such cases only publicity can help.
        
        5. Particular concern was expressed about unethical conduct among teachers. In recent years both Asian and Western teachers have been involved in scandals concerning sexual misconduct with their students, abuse of alcohol and drugs, misappropriations of funds, and misuse of power. This has resulted in widespread damage both to the Buddhist community and the individuals involved. Each student must be encouraged to take responsible measures to confront teachers with unethical aspects of their conduct. If the teacher shows no sign of reform, students should not hesitate to publicize any unethical behavior of which there is irrefutable evidence.
        
        This should be done irrespective of other beneficial aspects of his or her work and of one’s spiritual commitment to that teacher. It should also be made clear in any publicity that such conduct is not in conformity with Buddhist teachings. No matter what level of spiritual attainment a teacher has, or claims to have reached, no person can stand above the norms of ethical conduct. In order for the Buddhadharma not to be brought into disrepute and to avoid harm to students and teachers, it is necessary that all teachers at least live by the five lay precepts. In cases where ethical standards have been infringed, compassion and care should be shown towards both teacher and student. – Open Letter of Buddhist Teachers who met with HH the Dalai Lama
        
        218
        
        NO NAME on October 28, 2016 at 7:40 pm
        
        Isn’t it about time somebody updated the Triratna Wikipedia entry which claims that the controversy over the FWBO has attracted little public interest and makes no mention of the recent BBC programme or article? I can keep an eye but can’t edit
        
        219
        
        frenzy on October 28, 2016 at 9:28 pm
        
        http://www.wildmind.org/blogs/book-reviews/the-essential-sangharakshita
        
        Bodhipaksa writes, april 2009:
        ”I don’t think Sangharakshita has written anything in response to the critical information about him and the FWBO, although there is a video in which he discusses his sexual activities. I don’t think he’d dignify his fiercest critics with a response. There are three principle actors. There’s Mark Dunlop, who was formerly an Order member and who had a sexual relationship with Sangharakshita. Some time after the relationship ended he became increasingly bitter, and then he started his campaign. The second (the author of the FWBO Files) is Gary Beesley, who is a religious education teacher and Tibetan Buddhist. He’s never had any direct experience of the FWBO. His campaign isn’t just against the FWBO, but also against SGI and the NKT, and is a kind of personal crusade. The third is Jurgen Schnake, who runs fwbo-files.com. He also has no experience of the FWBO. Schnake has nakedly asked for money in return for ceasing his activities. I don’t think that was his initial motivation, which seems mainly to be mischievous. He’s quite happy to make stuff up, like claims that the FWBO is a branch of scientology. Unfortunately none of these people has any great regard for honesty or accuracy, and they’ll say anything if they think it helps damage the FWBO (Dunlop has accused the FWBO of murdering children, and I’ve mentioned Schanke’s alleged Scientology takeover). I’d be astonished if Sangharakshita was to address their often outlandish accusations. We’re dealing with “fake moon landing” psychology here.”
        
        Bodhipaksa removed on the 21rst of may 2016 the comments option with another article on his website.
        
        Second last comment on this thread, 17th of may 2016:
        Thank you, Sarah, for your comments. Since November last year, I have re-connected with the Triratna Movement, in one of their large Centres in the UK, after a decade of my being inactive. I have heard disturbing stories from a few young women about their recent sexual relationships with Order Members who were meditation class teachers and your words have spurred me on to raise the issue of ethical guidelines with the Centre Teams. To date, I personally have not heard any references or discussions about any such policies being in place or about challenges to Order Members who might have behaved unskilfully in this way (or any other way, for that matter!) I hope that I WILL discover that discreet, positive steps have been taken to deal with all such harmful cases and, hopefully, I will find time to return here to report any outcomes. Go well, with metta.
        
        Last comment, 17th of may 2016:
        ”Bodhipaksa, I appreciate that you are probably very busy but, if you have refused to include a contribution by (…) (about whom I know nothing and to whom I have no connection), then it seems to me that your rather cryptic response would only add to the fog of confusion and doubts about Triratna Buddhist Order & Community that are evident here and elsewhere online. Assuming that (…) ‘s comments were critical of the Movement – and even if you considered them too inflammatory or unreasoned to be worthy of publicity – I would appreciate at least some public explanation of your decision to censor, so that I can personally evaluate and maintain confidence in the open and honest transparency you seek to espouse and promote through this website.”
        
        Bodhipaksa’s answer and last comment, 25th of may 2016:
        ”Apologies to everyone who has commented here, but I’ve decided to delete all the comments on this page and close it to further comment, since it seems to be attracting some rather unhinged commenters, who I haven’t been publishing. I’m just weary of the whole thing.”
        
        220
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 1:28 am
        
        Thank you. I posted a comment there and wonder if it will be kept and how and if Bodhipaksa will reply …
        
        Bodhipaksa, why do you defame Mark Dunlop?
        
        Isn’t it bad enough and deserves compassion what happened to Mark Dunlop and others who became the victim of the abuse of power and sexual abuse based on manipulations, emotional and spiritual blackmailing (if you don’t overcome your aversion against homosexuality your enlightenment is blocked), distorted teachings (about the superiority of homosexual relationship vs. heterosexual relationships or superiority of male spirituality over female spirituality) and the deceptions by Dennis Lingwood? Isn’t The Guardian piece by Madeleine Bunting, The dark side of enlightenment, 1997 clear enough how a deceptive system, serving the sexual desires of Lingwood, is destroying people?
        
        I mean, do you have any idea or clue about the abuse of power and sexual abuse?
        
        What about recent reports by the BBC? Do you think to attack the a whistle blower and a victim of abuse is the right way for a Buddhist or any sane human being? Here is the BBC article from September 2016: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-37432719
        
        Now, despising the critics as not having “any great regard for honesty or accuracy”, why turning a blind eye on the lies and dishonesty of the FWBO/TBO?
        
        Note that just a month ago, the TBO lied to the BBC, claiming wrongly Dennis / Sangharakshita is blind and claiming wrongly that he stepped down from position in 2000. In fact, Triratna has a charity called Uddiyana, whose stated purpose is to enable Sangharakshita ‘and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide. ‘ In 2014, they spent £49.9K doing this guiding. See:
        http://beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1046398&subid=0
        
        BTW; I don’t know Jurgen Schnake but Gary Beesley a bit. The latter has done good work with respect to the NKT. The NKT has harmed A LOT of people. And it looks like NKT, TBO have some real similarities with respect to the abuse of power and exploiting and manipulating Buddhist teachings for the leader’s own ends …
        
        In my eyes, you turn turn the things quite upside down in your comment by insinuating it were rather the male students who seduced Sangharakshita or that it was a mutual agreement. It was the other way around, it was Sangharakshita who manipulated heterosexual and homosexual men to have sex with him. The objects of his sexual desires didn’t have a wish for it as many of them said very clearly.
        
        221
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 9:09 pm
        
        Btw, Gary Beesley is author of the FWBO files. FWBO and Munisha know that.
        
        222
        
        frenzy on October 28, 2016 at 9:35 pm
        
        Maybe the writer of these two critical comments,Jean, could find us here to report any outcomes.
        
        223
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 1:32 am
        
        Hi Frenzy, what “two critical comments” are you referring to?
        
        224
        
        frenzy on October 28, 2016 at 9:49 pm
        
        He has got a sense of humor too.
        http://www.wildmind.org/about/fwbo%22%3Ehttp:/www.wildmind.org/about/fwbo%3C/a%3E%22%3E%3Ca
        
        225
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 1:34 am
        
        The link doesn’t work, Frenzy …
        
        226
        
        frenzy on October 28, 2016 at 10:38 pm
        
        227
        
        Stephen on October 28, 2016 at 10:40 pm
        
        Re: Sangham saranam gacchamiFriday, 29 January, 2010 12:07
        From: “zenandthecity” Add sender to Contacts
        To: fwbo@yahoogroups.com
        In the light of Sangharakshitas recent attempt to elucidate on his sexual activity with younger O/M’s, which surely reflects some of his meaning about Sangha, eg. as the founder and head off the order, how can you separate his behaviour from his ideology…. which is reflected in the mitra course, its important to remember what these young men went through. What you have is a contrast between the emotional immaturity of the founder and the ideology he thrust upon the Order.
        How can you trust the ideology?
        
        here is Ananda’s (a respected senior O/M) account of his relationship with Sangharakshita
        
        Ananda writes: ‘But then something very strange and disturbing began to happen. I wasn’t being given any special powers: instead my teacher began to show signs of serious un-guru-like behavior. He started getting upset when I didn’t want to visit him; he seemed to get very jealous of my inviting a certain girl round to stay with me, and he worked himself up into a lather when I refused to sleep in his bed on the few occasions when we went to Haslemere. I found this very upsetting, mainly because he was showing signs of being dangerously human, having emotional and physical needs, being angry, crying, showing irritation, being distinctly bitchy on occasion, and so forth. But also because he was teaching me non- attachment, and yet here he was showing all the signs of attachment to me. Things came to a head on our last visit to the cottage, when he asked me to sleep with him and I decided I’d be buggered if I was going to be Bhante’s bum-boy, to use the
        immortal phrase, no matter what pressure he put on me, subtle or otherwise.. That night I underwent every conceivable kind of guilt trip, even wondering if I was going to be responsible for Bhante’s imminent death, as he was working himself up into such a state, crying, whining, moaning, sobbing, imploring – everything except threatening. (I could never imagine him doing that in a thousand years). I don’t remember too clearly, but I don’t think either of us got any sleep that night. I do remember feeling let down, cheapened, almost physically dirty, and I’d have given anything for that not to have happened. But at no time did he exert any direct kind of pressure or suggestion that I should do it for the sake of my spiritual health: he simply had an overwhelming desire that he could not gainsay, and he saw no reason why he should.’
        
        Back to top
        View user’s profile Send private message Send e-mail
        
        228
        
        tenpel on October 29, 2016 at 1:40 am
        
        Thank you for sharing Ananda’s account of his relationship with Sangharakshita!
        
        Though its horrible, I and others need to read that to get a better understanding of the amount of delusions, manipulations and distortions…
        
        229
        
        frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 8:23 am
        
        Hi Tenpel, in regard the link you say doesnt work, it says:
        
        Error 404 – page not found
        Sorry. You have requested a page or file that no longer exists. Perhaps, in a sense, its existence was always illusory..
        
        Anyway not as ilusionary as he thought.
        
        230
        
        frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 8:32 am
        
        Re Tenpel:
        I refered to the two critcal comments copied in my comment of the 28th, they were both by a person who called herself Jean.
        
        231
        
        frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 11:17 am
        
        The by Jean mentioned Sarah found her way to this thread.
        https://dialogueireland.wordpress.com/2011/07/25/fwbo-commentary-by-bbc-insight-into-their-ways/
        
        232
        
        frenzy on October 30, 2016 at 7:43 am
        
        Re Tenpel again around your question: which comments?
        
        I will past them here isolated, as i find it so important because it brings together IMO the connection between the undealt issues from the past, the misleading safeguarding situation and impact on todays reality for at least some people.
        Taking it can take some years before people even start to realise the dynamics or for escalation to unfold, taking into account how complicated it all is to come forwards with such experiences, with all the differnt dynamics (incl some dependency), it is not unikely that what has so far come to light is only the tip of the iceberg. I think you are right that it takes a lot of self esteem and clarity.
        It is confusing also when you are in such a complex boundary crossing situation and dependency situation or are deaing with the consequences/fall out of a previous relationship and the references are to homosexual manupilations, v large age differential, things that append far way and long ago…
        
        So i hope people will read this below bit of text well, and let sink in what it implies.
        
        Second last comment on this thread, 17th of may 2016:
        Thank you, Sarah, for your comments. Since November last year, I have re-connected with the Triratna Movement, in one of their large Centres in the UK, after a decade of my being inactive. I have heard disturbing stories from a few young women about their recent sexual relationships with Order Members who were meditation class teachers and your words have spurred me on to raise the issue of ethical guidelines with the Centre Teams. To date, I personally have not heard any references or discussions about any such policies being in place or about challenges to Order Members who might have behaved unskilfully in this way (or any other way, for that matter!) I hope that I WILL discover that discreet, positive steps have been taken to deal with all such harmful cases and, hopefully, I will find time to return here to report any outcomes. Go well, with metta.
        
        233
        
        frenzy on October 28, 2016 at 8:54 pm
        
        It wasn’t really sex.
        He didn’t feel he was the teacher.
        It didn’t happen at all.
        It happened in the past.
        It’s been openly discussed and aknowleded.
        It wasn’t exploitative.
        It wasn’t the teachers fault.
        He wasn’t deceiving anyone by wearing robes as we are neither lay nor monks.
        He is still alive so we can’t be totally honost/adress this.
        But Triratna has learned from their mistakes and has long strongly discouraged blabla and has an overall safeguarding officer and all centres are expected to have safeguarding officers and procedures.
        Thus: théy are bearing false witness…
        
        234
        
        frenzy on October 29, 2016 at 9:43 am
        
        Meaning: so théy (Triratna; Buddhadasa / Mahamati / Parami (actually a woman) say: théy, Mark/Bjorn are bearing false witness. Thus giving ground /permission als for the dismissing of basically all boundary crossing complaints!!
        According to contact refered to on 25th of october, she was told by OM contactperson: ” ‘it’ is nothing compared with what Sr did, that is our enheritance.”
        
        235
        
        NO NAME on October 29, 2016 at 10:51 am
        
        Regarding the error 404 message, this is standard FWBO Triratna practice. When the British Buddhism blog posted the FWBO document on how to bring the FWBO files down the Google ratings, an extensive and highly disingenuous plan to hide their past, the Order simply removed all the linked to pages from their own server. ( Thank goodness for screen grab! ) http://britishbuddhism.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/triratna-buddhist-community-friends.html
        You will note that the link to Anandas revelations has also been removed by their closure of the page
        In summary, the FWBO Triratna are using online censorship in deliberate effort to hide their history and the truth about their teacher.” Open and honest”? I don’t think so.
        
        236
        
        tenpel on March 2, 2017 at 2:26 am
        
        Thank you mettaman.
        
        I have to read these accounts now again (or I read some of them for the first time because I couldn’t read all of them due to a lack of time). The order leadership seems to try to get control and to whitewash their actions.
        
        Munisha posted on the Buddhism UK Facebook group:
        
        The Adhisthana Kula is a new group made up of some of the most experienced members of the Triratna Buddhist Order, meeting together to help our community find lasting reconciliation in the face of renewed interest in historical controversies and some of the issues arising from them.
        
        Follow the work of the Adhisthana Kula online:
        https://thebuddhistcentre.com/adhisthana-kula #Triratna #Buddhism”
        
        Below is a video they released on Adhisthana Kula.
        
        https://vimeo.com/205963429/4851f0981b
        
        This statement is for me deceptive because she is insinuating that today controversy is a matter of past or history and it implies the subtext “old stories” denying that there are also recent stories – including that of Björn as summed here: https://buddhism-controversy-blog.com/2016/09/27/fwbo-triratna-sangharakshita-cases-of-sexual-abuse/#comment-398033
        
        Vishvapani also tries to set a TBO narrative in motion https://thebuddhistcentre.com/mitra-support/sangharakshita-and-shadow-past-vishvapani – though at least he acknowledges that there are also recent cases – he as well as the statements of the Adhisthana Kula team seem to be more concerned with either “giving background” to understand Sangharakshita’s “experiments” as a matter of the times (80s/90s) (which is a quite strange argument not even the church has used as far as I know) or by praising or stressing how much Triratna or Sangharakshita helped them. Less time or words are given to the pain of those who have been harmed compared with the long elaborations which (more or less) rationalise the abuse or which aim to make the abuse of power or sexual abuse more understandable. It doesn’t feel like enlightenment. And how can those who are part of a rotten culture where the abuse of power has been rationalised as “beneficial” for those been harmed (or where people who have been harmed were slandered or treated badly) really step a step back and put their ideology aside while really putting their mind into the shoes of those who have been harmed? I cannot see that this will work. TBO needs professionals outside experts. The tendency to justify and rationalise in the guise of enlightenment (sprinkled with some words of compassion) appears to me far too obvious.
        
        237
        
        tenpel on March 2, 2017 at 2:39 am
        
        BTW, also interesting (and not convincing for me) how Vishvapani uses the light term “unskilful” for the abuse of power, sexual abuse or sexual misconduct and how he claims (or continues to spin) a narrative of an extreme openness of TBO/FWBO to face and acknowledge what happened. This might be true for him or some but was surely not the case at certain local TBO / FBWO centers or behind the scene where victims’ testimonies have been denigrated or in public where bad things about victims has been spread. For example (as quoted here on the blog already):
        
        Bodhipaksa writes, april 2009:
        
        “I don’t think Sangharakshita has written anything in response to the critical information about him and the FWBO, although there is a video in which he discusses his sexual activities. I don’t think he’d dignify his fiercest critics with a response. There are three principle actors. There’s Mark Dunlop, who was formerly an Order member and who had a sexual relationship with Sangharakshita. Some time after the relationship ended he became increasingly bitter, and then he started his campaign. The second (the author of the FWBO Files) is Gary Beesley, who is a religious education teacher and Tibetan Buddhist. He’s never had any direct experience of the FWBO. His campaign isn’t just against the FWBO, but also against SGI and the NKT, and is a kind of personal crusade. The third is Jurgen Schnake, who runs fwbo-files.com. He also has no experience of the FWBO. Schnake has nakedly asked for money in return for ceasing his activities. I don’t think that was his initial motivation, which seems mainly to be mischievous. He’s quite happy to make stuff up, like claims that the FWBO is a branch of scientology. Unfortunately none of these people has any great regard for honesty or accuracy, and they’ll say anything if they think it helps damage the FWBO (Dunlop has accused the FWBO of murdering children, and I’ve mentioned Schanke’s alleged Scientology takeover). I’d be astonished if Sangharakshita was to address their often outlandish accusations. We’re dealing with “fake moon landing” psychology here.”
        
        Two critics and one person being harmed have bad sinister motivations and we have to do with a “‘fake moon landing’ psychology here”. Well, very open, honest and compassionate …
        
        Vishvapani speaks a lot about his feelings and love to TBO and “Bhante” at the end and about shadows in his talk but his words which express his concern for those who have been harmed or who have been treated badly even after they whistle blowed what happened to them are remarkable few. For me it appears rather to be a speech to keep people in Triratna and not to put them off – this is what I feel when I hear his speech – even though he uses some words of compassion initially.
- 238
  
  Prajnacitta on June 14, 2019 at 12:49 pm
  Reply
  
  Mr Anon, as I read these comments, I do not find the writers here passing judgement on DL. What I do know is that it requires an awful lot of talking LOUDLY to get past the blather and propaganda that the FWBO put out and see behind the smoke screens.
  
  These following facts are set out on the TBO website and are undisputed:
  – DL is the main/only/founding teacher for FWBO
  – his spiritual authority comes from his only ordination, as a Theravadin bikkhu (from which he gets his Buddhist name) therefore making him subject to the full Vinaya
  – TBO concede that DL had a minimum of 25 homosexual relationships over about a twenty year period (official story is 1967 to about ‘mid 1980’s)
  – those 25 sexual relationships were primarily with members of the FWBO, ie students
  – at least one of those homosexual relationships was with a legal minor and so was a defacto crime, for which he should have gone to prison
  
  That he had so many sexual relationships with students is spiritual and sexual abuse. That there were that many different sexual partners over a relatively short space of time is serial sexual abuse. This is not insignificant or trivial !
  
  With these facts so clearly outlined and admitted to, it is striking how this behaviour is ignored and minimised, glossed over and/or excused. So it falls on others to state what is not being said clearly and to say that loud and clear is not to get things out of proportion but to put everything else DL has done into proper perspective.
  
  The main reason, it seems to me, as to why FWBO members fail to consider the effects of these sexual encounters on the other person is that they do not wish to become aware of the full effects of the sexual actions of DL. If they did consider the effects on people victimised by DL they would have to chose a different way of dealing with this whole situation.
  
  One thing that is fundamental to Buddhist teachings is the law of karma. It is a fundamental recognition that effects are always commensurate with their causes. So when you take the time to look at the effects these sexual relationships have had on the students and clearly see the depth and extent of the trauma that has come about, there can be no doubt about the depth and effect of the unbeneficial samskaras that caused it.
  
  There can be no healing and resolution in this situation for the students and no clarity for the TBO and how it should go forward until it is clearly seen and understood that a sexual relationship between a teacher and a student is extremely unbeneficial and that the damaging effects of such can be life-long. Why ?
  
  Because in a dynamic where there the possibility of giving consent has been removed, then this sexual interaction is necessarily non-consensual.
  And non-consensual sex is called rape.
  
  Therefore any teacher who has sexual encounters with a student is a rapist.
  To have a long term relationship, eg 3-4yrs as some of DL’s relationships were, is to engage in repeated rape. If to be raped is traumatic, to be raped repeatedly over a time period of some years is devastatingly traumatic.
  
  But in the case of DL, it actually gets worse than this:
  
  A teacher who has repeated sexual encounters with students is a serial rapist.
  
  And, by law, to have sex with someone under the legal age for sex is called paedophilia.
  
  And to continue that activity over a period of decades is a monstrous predation in the same sort of league as Jimmy Savile, preying on spiritually impressionable and naive young men for almost the whole time that the FWBO has existed in the UK.
  
  Mr Anon, your dilemmas and uncertainties about the FWBO will evaporate fully when you see quite clearly and distinctly that:
  
  Dennis Lingwood is a serial rapist, a homosexual paedophile and a sexual predator.
  
  The only question you have to ask is: do I really want to be involved in an organisation that was setup by someone like that ?
239

NO NAME on October 17, 2016 at 11:55 am
Reply

You’re rambling to the point of irrelevance
There are questions to be answered and debts to be settled. Intellectual theorising doesn’t do either.
- 240
  
  NO NAME on October 17, 2016 at 4:40 pm
  Reply
  
  And the Ginsberg reference it’s an excuse
  Ginsberg was an abusive child molester.in India but no doubt you think being a poet excuses that
  There are many cult characteristics in Triratna and they stem from Lingwood and his willingness to manipulate You try to blame it on those who project but without him in the equation, the whole trip collapses So don’t try blaming others, except the early concubines, who replicated and normalised Lingwoods behaviour Kulananda et al
  Self appointed leader, answerable to no one, secret inner circle practices, feelings of elitism, damned if you leave, all these are part of the trip and they are all the macroeconomic manifestation of Lingwoods microcosmic ( though megalithic) ego. You have been duped and lied to Gy a selfish narcissistic abuser of innocents and have invested too much in it to let go
  - 241
    
    Mettaman on October 22, 2016 at 7:37 pm
    Reply
    
    Alan Ginsberg crops up with Sangharakshita towards the end of ‘The Priceless Jewel’ apparently seeking tantric sex possibilities with a boy … and in easy to locate footage on line supporting NAMBLA, North American Man Boy Love Association, a pederasty Greek Love pressure group …. and in several other shared spaces with Sangharakshita … WHat else did they share apart from their craving of young men and Greek Love?
    - 242
      
      NO NAME on October 22, 2016 at 10:44 pm
      Reply
      
      Ginsberg and Lingwood visited yogi Chen in Kalimpong to ask him if it was possible to practice tantra with young boys.Anon may never have heard of this just as she claims never to have heard about supposed gay tantric doctrines in Buddhist monasteries But claiming not to have heard something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Stupid though it sounds, this is the kind of excuse Anon offers
    - 243
      
      NO NAME on October 23, 2016 at 7:33 am
      Reply
      
      ” Chen’s hermitage was situated at the farther, lower end of the Kalimpong bazaar. When we reached it half an hour later, and were sitting in the tiny reception room with its numerous pictures of Tantric divinities locked in (hetero- )sexual embrace, Allen lost no time in putting his question. Could you do it with a boy? Rather to my surprise, Mr Chen showed every sign of extreme embarrassment. No, you certainly could not do it with a boy, he replied shortly, and at once changed the subject. Allen’s visit was not a success. When I saw Mr Chen a few days later he referred to the strange American I had brought to see him, and to his outrageous question, in terms of horror and disgust. How could anyone even think of ‘doing it with a boy’! So far as the Chinese Buddhist yogi was concerned the sexual practices of the Buddhist Tantra were, it seemed, essentially and unalterably heterosexual, which I could not help thinking was rather a limitation.”
      Sangharakshita Priceless Jewell 172
      Now we see where rumours of the doctrine were formulated for Lingwoods own devices. The wording of the last sentence is very interesting, considering Lingwood was later to claim gay sex was a way to ” overcome ones limitations”
244

jigmeyeshe on October 18, 2016 at 12:56 am
Reply

Persons here might find this description of how ‘sexuality’ is dealt with by monks in the NKT interesting in this context. The NKT has created its own ‘monastic’ rules – they do not study the Vinaya.

facebook.com/NewKadampaSurvivorTestimonies/photos/a.820235608033105.1073741828.818114228245243/1011302455593085/?type=3&theater
WHEN IT IS NO MORE THAN ABUSE

By Peter Graham Dryburgh

“The hurt and harm of spiritual abuse is rarely inflicted upon people with the intention to wound anyone”. Major Scott Nicloy

When we think of abuse in the year 2016, we think of horrific, intentional acts that are set out by a perpetrator, whose simple intention is to violate, humiliate and control another person by whatever means possible – for they need this, they thrive on this to succeed in their role, it is a must, it is the core, the life essence of the perpetrator.

Sadly in this day and age, there is an unspoken danger, an abuse never mentioned, nor addressed by law no society in general, but we have passed new laws around psychological abuse in the UK (December 2015) to protect the oppressed, but it is still not recognised that within the realms of ‘spirituality’ that there is abuse, there is manipulation, there is control forced upon those who feel ‘devoted’ and (simply in my opinion), that this must change.

A number of years ago, I was diagnosed by a psychiatrist as living with a condition called “Developmental Post traumatic Stress Disorder”, which is a culmination of many traumas in life to effect the mind, or the brain, and one of these contributors was most definitely ‘spiritual abuse’ at the hands of and the control of the ‘New Kadampa Tradition’, which cost me my home, my job and around £10,000 in debt, but most importantly, for a long time, it cost me my confidence and self esteem, my dignity and my heart.

When you give nothing but trust, you sometimes leave yourself vulnerable; however, when you are manipulated into this trust, and manipulated into believing that you are doing the right thing, it can leave you quite damaged.

I remember my first ever meeting with the NKT, it was nothing more than a simple meditation class in my locality, it was an interest I had. At that initial meeting I raised the question around their relationship with His Holiness The Dalai Lama, and I was greeted at the next class by the ‘resident teacher’, not the course teacher, to eliminate my fears and concerns regarding their ‘tradition’ – which I now realise was their first lie, their first mis-truth, and sadly the road into ‘spiritual abuse’.

Everything seemed to happen so quickly for me, I was encouraged to leave an unhealthy relationship that I had been in for a number of years, give up my property, leave friends and family behind – all in the name of ‘seeking perfection’ and Dharma – I had had an interest in Buddhism for a number of years, but I grew up in fishing villages and islands on the Scottish coast, so accessing this spiritual path was jarred with obstacles, until I moved for employment reasons to Birmingham, and I had been presented with such an easy access. One might say that I should have been more cautious, one would think I may have spotted the signs, but I challenge this, because, with every form of abuse, the perpetrator ‘sugar coats’ the truth, it is given with false love and the offer of true friendship and a spiritual ‘brethren’, a family almost.

So I started attending classes, moved into the centre, started paying for as much as I could in order to ‘gain merit’ on my road to enlightenment, which became the most important ‘mantra’ in those years, almost more important than spiritual prayers themselves, ‘gain merit, gain merit, gain merit’ is something that was taught so hard lined it became something I ate, slept and breathed for a long period of time.

When the NKT offered me the opportunity to become ‘ordained’, I was so overwhelmed with gratitude that I was never able to refuse – it had almost become a situation where my dreams had come true – and this is where the real abuse started, it was customary to give ‘interest free loans’, pay for building renovation, cars, statues and even the resident teacher to attend ‘festivals and empowerments’ in foreign countries (I recall paying so that someone could go to Germany for ‘Highest Yoga Tantra Empowerment’ and also being told that I may not achieve enlightenment for ‘eons’ as doing so left me unable to afford to go myself). Sadly the more I gave, the more it seemed never to be enough, there was always a need for something – I was never allowed to give up my job (which was not an issue as I loved helping others, and worked full time in an alcohol and drug treatment service) as I was the only person who brought money into the ‘Centre’ that was not based on fraudulent benefit claims by the other ordained staff there.

As time went on, my responsibilities matched my financial contribution; on times where I could afford to take out loans from my own bank, my responsibilities were great, and the respect I appeared to be shown matched this; on months where I had to pay back more to the bank than I could to the ‘centre’, I was almost shunned and kept to the side – but I did so ‘willingly’ as it meant I was balancing the negative karma from both this life and past lives, and who would not wish for this, especially in the road to enlightenment – which after the HYT empowerment, would only take 3 years, 3 months, 3 weeks and 3 days – yet I never gained this empowerment, as I always paid for others to do so, generating the karma to allow myself to do so one day. I began to despair, for only one reason – that I might never find enlightenment – that I might never be free from samsara and able to actually help other people? I think this is when my doubts begun to set in.

I began to realise that even working from 9 a.m. – 5 p.m. Monday to Friday outside of the centre, I would often be up til 2 a.m. working on the building, and up again at 5 a.m. to ‘get the shrine room (gompa) ready for the day, my weekends had become full of ‘cherishing the centre’ and I lost any friends (and was encouraged to do so as they were negative to the path) who were not connected to the NKT; it became my entire life, my world, my every waking and sleeping moment.

Meeting Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (GKG) was a special and rare occurrence, and when I did, he would simply laugh and tell me that any worries were due to negative karma, and to simply see these issues as purifying negative karma, to see them as wonderful opportunities on the road to enlightenment, so as I had become so engrossed in seeing GKG as my living Guru, and a living embodiment of the Buddha himself, then of course I would thank him and feel that I had done wrong by even questioning the ‘challenges and worries’ that I faced in daily centre life.

I used to welcome an NKT festival in Ulverston as it was almost a break, a holiday from responsibility. I was often challenged by ‘senior’ monks and nuns as I always missed the first session in the temple, morning meditation, as I used this for catching up with sleep – and frankly it was a delight to be able to shower and dress in peace away from the sometimes thousands of people who were there – it became my welcome break – and I think the beginning of realising that things were not right.

I started to worry when there were death threats made against GKG and security precautions were taken – such as bullet proof vests were being worn by monks under their robes – and we were asked if we would take a bullet for ‘Geshe-la’. This is when it became real to me, realising that it actually can’t be a safe place, a genuine place to be, so I hatched a plan to leave, which was filled with obstacles. It was almost similar to the film ‘The Running Man’ – and with every sexual based scandal the NKT was facing with all the corruption and money laundering that was evident, with benefit fraud, and exploitation of innocent people, you think it would be easy to walk away when you are faced with these dilemmas – but it isn’t, there is the huge guilt of ‘breaking away from the Guru’, there is the being ostracised by your community, friends and even teachers.

I made a decision to deliberately break my ‘ordination vows’ so that there was no way I could or would stay, and even that process wasn’t without challenges – I did nothing sinister, I simply masturbated to break my celibacy vow – thinking they would simply discard me for this – however, I was wrong, I was told to do the Sojong Practice and that was told it was a standard process, almost a ‘secret club’ that most monks would do this once a year, then renew their own vows at the ordination of others – I was even partnered with another monk who would talk to me about how ‘okay this was’ and told (and I quote) “we all do it”. The only thing that I had to change, was that I would have to do a month’s retreat and write a letter to GKG to apologise for doing this “without permission”.

So there is no celibacy in the NKT ordained community – and this is when my mind became so entrenched in absolute terror – but terror of remaining there – as I was assigned another monk to ‘help me’ in my celibacy – and this turned out to be that if I did not masturbate myself – it was okay, the expectation was to ‘help each other’ – not a comfortable concept – he now (K Cho) runs and manages a prominent centre in Rome, so my mind was made up!

I actually waited for the centre to ‘close’ for two weeks, and everyone went away to where they went to. I remained, and spoke with a student at the centre, and asked for her help. I lived in her cupboard for a number of week as I had nowhere else to go, I was not allowed to speak to anyone, and as I could not get transport I left my belongings there – of which I managed to fish some clothes and basics from a skip a few days later.

If I was to be asked what my biggest mistake was to date, it was picking up a copy of ‘Transform Your Life’ in a bookshop all those years ago – it did transform my life, but not in a good way, not by any means…

The author gives permission for this article to be posted elsewhere.
All testimonies on this Facebook Page are protected by Creative Commons
CC BY-NC-ND https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
- 245
  
  frenzy on October 18, 2016 at 7:27 am
  Reply
  
  Re jigmeyeshe:
  Interesting. It is good to aknowledgde, that these all sorts of power abuse and boundary crossings are not intented to create such damage, but that it nevertheless does and that the result (esp. without aknowledgment and consequences) is known to be multiple trauma/PTSS/DPSD etc.
  I agree the lack of awareness is broader than spiritual communities.
  - 246
    
    tenpel on October 18, 2016 at 1:12 pm
    Reply
    
    May I add, this NKT approach has nothing to do with the Dharma and the Vinaya or ordained life. It might come across as this would be the norm. IT IS NOT! I wondered if I should say something when Mr Anon wrote about it making the exception the norm already:
    
    I also think he rationalised this philosophically by referring back to “Greek love”, the normality of student-teacher, older-younger man relationships in the classical world (and from what I have heard in Buddhist monasteries down the ages).
    
    THIS IS NOT THE NORM!
    
    But there are – as in any institutional body – problems and as far as I can see there are rather rare exceptions from the norm. I’ve never witnessed or heard of the exceptions in any monastery directly. I heard or read stories here and there but the behaviour was never accepted as the norm but as being wrong – except, sexual predators or confused people see such behaviour as acceptable. What I know for sure is that there is clarity what the rules are and what is acceptable and what not. There IS NO “model” of “older-younger man relationships” “in Buddhist monasteries down the ages”.
    
    Only from Buddhist ordained or lay teachers (Thich Thien Son, Sangharakshita, Sogyal…) who like to have sex with their students (be it male or female), or who don’t educate their monastics leaving them in the dark about the rules (NKT) I witness an abuse of the teachings – a distortion – to either justify their own sexual desires and inclinations or not doing their duty which is to teach the Vinaya properly to the ordained and to do proper Sojong/Uposadha.
    - 247
      
      NO NAME on October 18, 2016 at 5:24 pm
      Reply
      
      Ms/mr Anon
      “I also think he rationalised this philosophically by referring back to “Greek love”, the normality of student-teacher, older-younger man relationships in the classical world (and from what I have heard in Buddhist monasteries down the ages).”
      The difference being in Greece it was an accepted norm
      In Buddhist monasteries it’s called sexual misconduct
      And in Triratna it’s called ” the secret tantric practice engaged in by gay men in Buddhist monasteries
      Dominic Kennedy ( who left the FWBO) told me that in 96 when he was an order member
      - 248
        
        tenpel on October 18, 2016 at 9:32 pm
        Reply
        
        “the secret tantric practice engaged in by gay men in Buddhist monasteries” – well. This is more or less what Thich Thien Son, the abbot of the Frankfurt Pagode, did: he told the young monks that it is part of the monks training to have sex with each other and he claimed Thich Nhat Hanh and the Dalai Lama do it also that way. There is no “secret tantric practice engaged in by gay men in Buddhist monasteries” whatsoever. Self-serving fiction to justify and meet the own desires. Ugly!
        
        249
        
        NO NAME on October 19, 2016 at 7:50 am
        Reply
        
        And this is a false doctrine that Maitreyabandhu, ‘poet’, senior OM and openly gay man continues to propagate to his inner circle of friends, procured from new recruits to Triratnas flagship London Buddhist Center. Maitreyabandhu has always promoted the idea that gay sexual relationships are superior and allow one all the freedoms one could wish for without becoming entrapped in the complexities of heterosexual ones ( clearly, gay people don’t have difficulties in their relationships with other, like minded folk [ perhaps he needs to get out more?])
        He has taught these ideas ( borrowed from Lingwood.to feed his own libido) for years and there have been more.than their fair share of ‘ problems’ at LBC as a result. And yet, knowing the games he plays, the people who hold the power at Triratnas big London Center, that has a massive turnover ( sorry) of visitors/ potential Buddhist followers, allow him to remain in a senior position at the Center. The perverse ideas of Sangharakshita are therefore still perpetuated, with the full knowledge of the college of preceptors- talk about not learning from mistakes of the past- even now, while Lingwood is falling under police scrutiny, his perverse distortions of the Buddha’s teaching continue to be disseminated.
        
        250
        
        Mr Anon on October 22, 2016 at 11:39 am
        
        To be fair I’ve never heard anyone mention anything about “the secret tantric practice engaged in by gay men in Buddhist monasteries”. This is the first I’ve heard of it. As for ideas that being gay is more conducive to spiritual practice than being straight – there probably are pros and cons. I think one of the cons about being gay, judging by some of my friends, is that sex is available on tap, probably even more so now with apps like Grindr. So that must be a big distraction. However, an advantage is that they don’t generally end up with family responsibilities and so in theory at least, are free to devote more of their time and energy to the Dharma. The connection between gay men and spiritual communities is an old one.
        
        251
        
        NO NAME on October 22, 2016 at 4:53 pm
        
        And therein lies the difference betwixt Buddhism and Lingwoods perverse teaching . To escape the difficulties of family life, Buddhists monks and nuns practice celibacy and work to abandon craving. TBO teaching is the way to escape those same difficulties is to practice gay sex and continue feeding ones craving.. That’s NOT Buddhism Its called having your cake and eating it. Simply put, if it is not an antidote to delusion it is not dharma. TBO therefore preach false dharma and auger its destruction
252

NO NAME on October 19, 2016 at 10:53 am
Reply

In his lifetime, millions knew Jimmy savile as an eccentric TV personality.
One of Britain’sbiggest stars, he was a larger-than-life character who was known for tea-time TV favourites such as Top of the Pops and Jim’ll Fix It as well as stints on BBC Radio 1.
He was also, to some, Saint Jimmy, a diligent fundraiser who raised £40m for charity. But, a year after his death in 2011, allegations of abuse surfaced.
It transpired that he was, in fact, one of the UK’s most prolific sexual predators. He had been exploiting his status to prey on hundreds of people – girls and boys, men and women, but mostly vulnerable young females.

A lot of history to erase-and Lingwood will have many more skeletons, believe me
- 253
  
  tenpel on October 20, 2016 at 11:52 am
  Reply
  
  This prominent case of Jimmy Savile shows the layers of blindness, self-deception, manipulations, projections, ignorance etc. which are the basis for these types of abuses. There is also a reason why often those things come to surface after the death of the abuser – his effective system of manipulation and deceptions collapses due to his death. It is interesting to note what level of self-deception even the old aunt BBC developed in that context. Therefore, I think, members of TBO should be cautiously reflect their role in that system that enable(d)(s) these types of power and sexual abuses. Sadly, those being harmed, there are only a few who speak up. Those are rarely supported but come under attack (see Mike Dunlop in this case) while the abuser has a large network of people who protect him, speak up for him, defend him, believe him, continue to support him. I think people should also ask themselves who needs to be protected the abuser or those being harmed and the possible future victims.
  
  Its good to hear a clear voice such as the one from the clinical psychologist, Elie Godsi, an expert witness on a number of high-profile abuse cases:
  
  This is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group.
  
  However, such voices are rare. There are usually more people who are either silent, or defend the abuser, or distrust and even attack the whistleblowers of sexual abuse … These are patterns you can observe in all those cases of sexual and power abuse. However, one has to read articles and books, reflect deeply, or talk with people who have been abused and manipulated to understand these topics better. Its always easier to defend the status quo than to question it because from the status quo many is served from questioning the status quo a big loss might manifest which most people are going to fear.
  
  Again, at least people should watch well made films about these topics such as »Spotlight« which summarise these dynamics very well.
254

frenzy on October 20, 2016 at 8:06 pm
Reply

Hi Tenpel,
As this site comes up very hight when you search for Triratna and abuse i would like to use the opportunaty to put some general information here about how to deal with abuse.

Some general notes/quotes, taking it out of triratna context:

”Ordinarily, when you tell about your experience with abuse you are rarely told something to the effect of: “I’m so sorry this has happened to you. You didn’t deserve it. It’s not your fault. You’re amazing for getting through what you have. I want to exact revenge on the person (or people) who did this to you. My respect and admiration for you go beyond what I can express. I want to help in any way that makes you know that I am with you and you are safe with me. Here are my ideas. Would that help you?”
It would be very comforting to be told told these things. But instead of comfort, we get/are challenged to see the pain of the offender(s), to be grateful that it wasn’t worse, to forgive as I have been forgiven, and so on. Rather than feeling supported, we often are left with the message that we are insignificant and wrong for talking about it.
We are told we’re all sinners. That we should let it go. Forgive and forget. That we are responsabe on some level.
All too often, friends and family of a sexual assault victim either don’t accept that the perpetrator committed the crime, or they believe the person’s actions were misinterpreted, or they make excuses for the crimes committed.
In their view, the perpetrator should be forgiven and seen for his positive qualities (or seen as someone in need of rehabilitation). This is an open betrayal of the person who was violated.
Such challenges ultimately protect the violator and patronize the victim.
Forgiveness is a topic that only the survivor should be able to mention. And it’s important to add that most survivors are not struggling with forgiveness. Rather, they’re struggling with stigmatizing shame and being asked to keep secret someone else’s violation of their rights.”

Here some hopefully helpfull tips:

Recognise that you are not the problem.
Your love, endurance, patience and service wil not change the situation.
Get information about the dynamics and powerfields that are of influences. (like gaslighting)
Dont live in denial.
Set boundaries.
Assess your situation/relationship(s) and the consequences of the decisions you will make to address the abusive relationship(s).
Seek profesesional help and support.
If your concerns indeed relate to Triratna i would advice to look for feedback, guidance and support not just inside the sangha.
Make new positive and healthy connections; healthy relationships are your birthright and you can achieve them.
Dont judge yourself for your anger and confusion, it is a signt that you are starting to understand what has been going on.
Be resourcefull tapping into self compassion.
Know that you are not going to be forever damaged by this.
Forgiveness of the abuser is a personal choice, not a necessity. You may have gone through so much trauma that it feels impossible to forgive, and that’s okay.
Forgiveness towards yourself ís necessary to move forward.
- 255
  
  jigmeyeshe on October 20, 2016 at 11:01 pm
  Reply
  
  Very good, frenzy.
  
  Can I post your words onto a support group for ex NKT please.
  
  Thank you.
  - 256
    
    frenzy on October 21, 2016 at 7:15 am
    Reply
    
    Hello Jigmeyeshe, thank you and yes do please.
257

tenpel on October 21, 2016 at 12:41 pm
Reply

Interesting documentary by The Atlantic about Andrew Cohen and his cult – they also interviewed Andrew Cohen:

http://www.theatlantic.com/video/index/501413/life-and-death-of-a-cult/
258

Mettaman on October 24, 2016 at 7:13 pm
Reply

Thank you, Tenpel, for the link above. It is interesting how the word ‘cult’ is reworded to avoid the word ‘cult’. The words of the last former member are indeed spot on for Triratna devotees of Sangharakshita … ‘We were intelligent – why didn’t we question?’
259

Mettaman on October 24, 2016 at 8:07 pm
Reply

http://www.padmaloka.org.uk/videos/padmavajra-young-mens-weekend
Some very concerning use of language, misogyny and anti-heterosexuality sections on here … particularly 38.00 onwards
All for a young men’s weekend ….
It appears that someone or some at Padmaloka is or are still ‘encouraging’ men to leave their family if they are ‘serious about their spiritual development ‘ …. Padmavajras use of language is clearly anti women, anti mothers and anti family ….
At least one German public preceptor or private preceptor is keen to ‘interview’ partners of prospective ordinands. This is tantamount to vetting them for compliance.
Padmaloka is still at the heart of the men’s ordination process and was the focus of the BBC programme. Three men say that Sangharakshita enticed them spiritually into sex there.
Whereas Kulananda, Cintamani and Vishvapani maintained in their Response to FWBO Files and / or Guardian article that cultic activity including ‘sexual misconduct’ was limited to Croydon and Padmaraja, the BBC programme clearly shows that cultic / sexual abuses involved Padmaloka and the group leader, Sangharakshita in three cases of alleged sexual abuse, at least one with someone under the age of consent. Whereas they maintain that Sangharakshita eventually stepped in to halt the cultic situation at Croydon, the BBC programme clearly indicates that at least three people were exposed to kalyana mitrata through sex with Sangharakshita.
THe Triratna Story repeats their narrative.
Sangharakshita was also involved in oral sex with a mitra 50 years his junior in 2002 / 2003 in Birmingham despite claiming to be celibate and despite wearing a golden kesa . Sangharakshita, via his senior order members, is still insisting he did not have sex, but that he does remember having a friendship with the young man in question.
Sangharakshita never ‘remembered’ having sex with the young man, who wrote his Shabda article in 2003, either. It may be that it was disconcerting to have an order member 40plus years his junior writing about sexual abuses in 2003 at the same time as he was busy covering up a sexual relationship with a mitra 50 plus years his junior in Birmingham at the same time?
The order is busy dealing with i.e Discussing in house about the BBC programme. THe young mitra has taken things into his own hands and has used his own Facebook page to tell the story of how he got involved with FWBO and its leader and the painful consequences of being told that what he experienced did not happen. JUst like the young man who wrote the Shabda article. IS this a coincidence?
260

frenzy on October 24, 2016 at 11:11 pm
Reply

I feel the talk also gives insight in the power of the transformative experiences one can have on retreat, indeed related to getting in touch with ones deep aloneness, ones shadowsides, powerfull as well as vulnarabe qualities, and in a longing of being seen in ones individual uniqueness and desire for freedom (in a non escapistic way).
It makes it v clear IMO how intens retreats can be, also how powerfull and charged the relationship between a teacher and spiritual aspirant and how one is needing a positive identification with the spiritual group.
How serieus the all sorts of ethical boundary crossing and abuse of power/position therefor in such a spiritual community really is.
261

NO NAME on October 25, 2016 at 11:47 am
Reply

In preaching distortions like this, Padmavajra. violates the second of the four root downfalls of the bodhisattva according to the system of Asanga.
Breaking root bodhisattva vows is thousands of times heavier than a monk breaking his root vows.
So it looks like Padmavajra will meet his teacher again in his next life, in surroundings somewhat more unpleasant than their current environs
- 262
  
  tenpel on October 25, 2016 at 12:13 pm
  Reply
  
  Did you watch it? I checked it from minute 38. The combination of different factors make it strange. It’s ok on the one hand to inspire to renounce life and to dedicate totally to spiritual practice. The stories he is quoting are ok. BUT the setup and context as well as additional information given by Padmavajra make it somewhat distorted. 1) „young men retreat“ in the context of a male homophile 0rganisation gives the taste of a recruiting camp – the Buddha was beyond that in all ways!!! Good is that Padmavajra stresses that the Buddha focused always on the spiritual potential of any being – though Padmavajra shares only male examples of this quality. 2) inspiring people to renounce life but not to become monks but order members with self created rules and students of „guru Sangharakshita“ (PV is creating this image of Sangharakshita as the guru) is highly suspicious to me. There is a monastic order properly taught by the buddha those seeking to renounce samsara can join. 3) the stressing of „passionate friendship“ is an invention and sounds like justifying the emotions stemming from an unhealthy setup or deluded followers/teachers or after abuse – instead of countering those passions or unhealthy structures. VP stresses too much for my taste passionate emotions and the community in a way that it seems to justify an unhealthy group setup that triggers kleshas / strong negative emotions as something good. But the Buddha was explicit in his advice to avoid spiritual friends who are deluded. Also, neither the Buddha nor his followers were passionate! Nor has passion played a wholesome role in the Sangha. 4) Sangharakshita as the preceptor: becoming an ordained is a matter of the community and not of a single person. The preceptor is only part of that. Sangharakshita as the guru and preceptor without anybody higher or equal to him; cut off from persons of the same level who correct you … is that the situation in TBO? If yes, I think it’s highly unhealthy. All abusive teachers I got to know cut off themselves from peers or higher authorities who could correct them. Higher authorities might have been accepted but only in a 100% supporting role.
  - 263
    
    NO NAME on October 25, 2016 at 3:51 pm
    Reply
    
    Emotion equals klesas The tantras utilise rather than renounce the klesas. Now you begin to see how Lingwood manufactured his doctrine of the tantric muse, not to mention how this idea is still current in TBO
  - 264
    
    tenpel on October 25, 2016 at 4:53 pm
    Reply
    
    From the dhammapada, 20th chapter, The Path, „of all things, passionessless is the best“ – this is what the Buddha said. But, this man in the video, Padmavajra, teaches the opposite when he calls for „passionate friendships.“ The Buddha didn’t teach passionate friendship. In the same chapter, he is quoted by saying “be passionless, O monks!”
    - 265
      
      frenzy on October 26, 2016 at 2:52 pm
      Reply
      
      It depends on your definition of passion doesn’t it? On your experience of whether it is feeling or desire based.
      What about egoless passion?
      What about the passion in compassion?
      The kleshas are graving, aversion and ignorance, if not: blind attachment to those.
      All feelings needs to be lovingly aknowledged. To see how they come up, and how experience then changes again. Desire has a felt experience also. It being helpfull to reflect on the nature of the experience, wheter it is restictive or spacious/free, when you are experiencing. As supposed to filosofying about it.
266

NO NAME on October 25, 2016 at 5:19 pm
Reply

The Buddha’s Warnings Against Demonic False Teachers
by Dharma Protector, The Buddhist Channel, Jan 2, 2013
— In the Surangama Sutra, where the Buddha warned of fifty demonic states that unmindful spiritual practitioners might fall prey to, he spoke of the possibility of how… ‘that good man [or woman]… greedily seeks skilful means [to further spirituality]. Then, Mara [the chief heavenly demon], having awaited to take this convenience, [sends a] flying spirit [demonic ghost] to possess this [or another] person. With one’s mouth preaching the Dharma of the Sutras, this person is not aware, that he [or she] is possessed by a demon, self-proclaiming to have attained unsurpassable Nirvana.
[He or she] comes to others who seek skilful means, where the good man [or woman] is, arranging a seat to preach. His [or her] form changes momentarily, perhaps as a Bhiksu [Buddhist monk], for others to see… perhaps as a woman [or man], perhaps as a Bhiksuni [Buddhist nun]… This person [disciple and/or teacher] is deluded and confused, misled that he [or she] is a Bodhisattva. Believing in such [wrong] teachings, the mind is swayed to break the Buddha’s disciplinary rules, to secretly practise [acts of] craving.

[His or her] mouth is fond of speaking about variations of [omens concerning] disasters and auspiciousness… Perhaps speaking of fires [at the end] of kalpas [world cycles], perhaps speaking of wars and fighting, terrorising [frightening] people, causing their families’ wealth [and properties] to be dissipated without reason. This is named a ‘bewildering ghost’, whom when old in years, becomes a demon, who troubles and confuses people. When the thought of being tired and satisfied arises, he [or she leaves to] possess another person’s body. The disciple[s] and teacher, [thereafter] all fall into troubles [difficulties] with the law. You should first be aware [of this, so as] to not [re-]enter rebirth, become confused [deluded] and unaware, [thereafter] falling into the Uninterrupted [Avici] Hell.’

Due to the great weight of the Surangama Sutra’s moral authority, it is also known as a demon-reflecting mirror, as inner and outer demonic influences are clearly reflected in its final chapter on ‘Fifty Demonic States Of The Aggregates’, where the above teaching is listed – out of great compassion and wisdom by the Buddha, to prevent truth seekers from straying from the path to enlightenment.
Those who truly strayed away due to demonic influences are those who have not learnt about the teachings in this chapter in time, or who wilfully refuse to see themselves reflected in it, as it reveals their true colours. Being so powerful for recognising demons, this Sutra will be the first that Mara seeks to destroy in this Dharma Ending Age, to urge forgetfulness of, so as to pave the way for his minions to take greater siege of this world. As such, this is a crucial time to recall and study this teaching. The above passage on doomsday sayers has been selected as it is representative of a common phenomenon in our times. Below is commentary on it.

Demons can influence both teachers and students with the weaknesses of strong greed and delusion, which are not always obvious to the unmindful. We ought to note that just because someone appears to preach the Dharma correctly or even excellently to some extent does not mean that person will always do so. No individual teaching by anyone should be received without continual wise discernment.

It is horrifying but possible that “demonic tendencies” can take place over a long period of time, especially in this Dharma Ending Age, when Mara’s workings are capable of being more elaborately tactical. For instance, a teacher who appears to build up much confidence in the masses through his or her proper teachings of the Dhama over some time might turn out to be possessed all along, or later, when he or she cunningly confuses followers by subtly advocating poisonous ideas that run counter to the Dharma presented earlier.

As a glaring sign of having great egos and greed to gather attention and followers, false teachers might claim to be ‘supreme’ masters or ‘true’ Buddhas, or even manifestations of Arhats and Bodhisattvas. This is clearly against the orthodox Buddhist practice of not attracting followers with arbitrarily community or self-appointed status; but only with the pure Dharma (and exemplary moral conduct).

Some false teachers might not explicitly claim to be enlightened, while continually dropping hints that they have some special attainments or abilities, or that they are ready to be born in Pure Land (or came from Pure Land), before possibly brushing away suggestions of being highly accomplished or enlightened out of false modesty later. Some false teachers know their disciples are openly claiming that they, their teachers, are ‘enlightened’, but never admonish or refrain them from continually doing so – because this is exactly what they want them to do – to advertise their ‘status’ to attract more followers.

False teachers’ so-called supernormal powers (and special experiences) are hearsay, cannot be objectively proven, or can be analysed and disclosed to be sleight-of-hand tricks or psychological mind games. If they often manifest ‘true’ powers, all the more should they be stayed away from, as again, the Buddha taught that only the Dharma should be used to attract followers. Refusal to abide by enlightened advice means they cannot be enlightened. Faith in teachers only due to their ‘supernormal’ powers or fame is simply blind faith; not rooted safely in the Dharma.

Demonic influences can occur at many levels – from the workings of inner personal demons (greed, hatred and delusion) to actual outer demons, from demonic mental suggestion to actual physical possession. Just as demonic influences can come from ‘trusted’ teachers, they can come from ‘close’ disciples too, who feed their teachers seriously erroneous information for propagation to the masses.

As false teachers can even appear to be monastics, this is why we should rely on the Dharma and not any personality or the person’s fame and projected status. We must remember that as there are many evil cults with huge followings in history, mere popularity does not equate to truthfulness. It was a religiously held belief, for example, by many, that the earth is stationary, which is totally untrue. Amazing as it is, some still believe the earth to be unmoving (and flat).

Long-time followers of teachers with now questionable teachings have to resist the natural urge to defend new unsound teachings out of blind loyalty, for true loyalty, as expected by the Buddha, is towards the Dharma; not any misguided person. (They should correct them instead, though real demons are unlikely to easily regret their ways.) Whether the Buddha is around in person or not, he should always be seen as our fundamental teacher.

As deluded followers tend to rationalise unwholesome speech and actions of their beloved teachers, these teachers thus become more audacious in flouting the Buddha’s important moral guidelines, and gradually urge their followers to do the same, openly or secretly, thus sabotaging their spiritual progress. Acts of craving done might include public or indirect amassing of fame and wealth, and/or having sexual misconduct secretly in the name of ‘spirituality’.

The Dharma is most easily destroyed by those who appear to propagate and defend it ‘well’ – by causing subtle but definite growing rifts in the Buddhist community. In fact, the Buddha taught that the Buddhadharma in our world can be destroyed only by those who seem to be ‘Buddhists’. This includes creation of schism in the Sangha, which is one of the direct paths to rebirth in the deepest hell for the longest time.

With deluded followers uncertain of how to dis/continue following their once beloved but later wayward yet unrepentant teachers, while lacking ability to sift truth from deceit, their spiritual lives become confused, especially if they do not know any orthodox teacher to address these issues objecTively. There is, after all, nothing more treacherous than building a whole well with pure water, representing the true Dharma, only to add in a little yet lethal poison later – for drinkers who already have great faith in quality of all the well’s water.

As it takes sharp analytical minds to filter fact from fiction, to sort the precious baby representing the Dharma from the bathwater representing defiled teachings, to see how spiritually and physically dangerous misinformation can be, especially when it involves the Dharma, it is best to altogether avoid teachers suspected to be false, by using the Buddha’s true guidelines for reference. Only teachers who abide by the Buddha’s teachings should be learnt from, especially in this age, when they will be increasingly rare and precious.
- 267
  
  tenpel on October 25, 2016 at 11:21 pm
  Reply
  
  Someone wrote on Reddit: “And if they are so happy, I invite you read the resignation letter from 88 Indian orderr members- were they happy with S parading around in monks robes while screwing little boys? Don’t think so” – Does anybody know anything about this resignation letter? Is there a copy, source or so?
  - 268
    
    Mettaman on October 26, 2016 at 7:14 am
    Reply
    
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/fwboIndia.htm
    The resignation letter of 88 Indian order members of Mumbai region is included.
    - 269
      
      tenpel on October 26, 2016 at 6:01 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you. Someone sent me now also the link. I quote it here to raise awareness about this letter. Interesting also how the finish the letter!
      I can now see more clearly that Dennis mainly wanted to be a central part of something, an object of devotion. “the guru”. The whole story resembles the process of the foundation of the NKT and its the motives + distortions of its founder Kelsang Gyatso.
      
      Resignation letter from 88 Indian FWBO members
      
      December 25th 1999
      
      Dear Sangharakshita,
      
      We, the undersigned, very much regret to state that we no longer consider you to be our teacher and guide in the Dhamma. By telling us lies and making false claims you have rendered yourself unworthy of being a teacher and guide in the Dhamma. By misleading us, the Indian Buddhists and staunch followers of Bodhisattva Babasaheb Ambedkar, you have committed a gross breach of the basic precepts of Buddhism. Please note that henceforth you have no place in the lives of Buddhists in India in general and the Ambedkarites in particular. As a mark of protest, on this 25th day of December, the 72nd anniversary of the burning of the “Manusmirti”, we are burning your photograph publicly.
      
      Incidentally, we feel it our duty to state the following for your information and guidance.
      
      Firstly, when you came to India, you told us that you wanted to help Dr. Ambedkar’s work grow, that you had personally shared some of his ideas about the propagation of Buddhism in India, ideas that you wanted to share with us and help the Ambedkarite movement to grow in a distinctive manner and style. You never made it clear that your real interest was to set foot amongst the Ambedkarites and secretly establish your own cult which claimed total allegiance to your person as “Guru” and founder of the so-called “international movement”, this at the cost of Ambedkar and his distinct vision of the revival of Buddhism in India. Neither you nor your disciples have any understanding of caste-ridden Indian society, the intricacies of socio-economic problems directly related with people’s religious status, nor of Dr Ambedkar’s way of dealing with this by way of Buddhism. Your claim that you are doing Dr. Ambedkar’s work is a blatant lie and by chanting his name you have betrayed both Dr. Ambedkar and his followers. What right do you have to do this, playing with our lives and interests?
      
      Secondly, while claiming to be a properly ordained Buddhist monk, a Bhikshu, you showed no respect for the devout feelings Buddhists associated with the robe by indulging in sexual misconduct, experimenting with drugs and teaching the “neutrality” of sexual activities. In our opinion, this final act of yours was nothing more than an attempt to cover up your misbehaviour as a monk while still holding onto the power and prestige which the yellow robe along with the epithets Bhikshu and Mahasthavir held in the eyes of the common people. Thus you have cheated us. Why didn’t you tell us right from the beginning that you weren’t a monk? Why didn’t you feel ashamed appearing before us in the yellow robe between 1979 and 1993? how can this falsehood be considered spiritual, nay, even common human behaviour? Yet you and your disciples talk of being a spiritual movement, a misnomer which amounts to a denigration of the truly spiritual.
      
      Thirdly, those funds raised by your disciples in the UK through Karuna Trust for supposedly carrying on some social activities for the benefit of poor and backward people are grossly misused by you for the propagation and preservation of your cult. Indians working full-time in these social projects are humiliated and forcefully repressed by threats of sacking and the withdrawal of funds. Poor as they are, for it is indeed hard to make a living in India, they are easy prey to this sort of pressure and are thus forced to nod to the dictates of your cult. In a free and sovereign land such as India, where Dr. Ambedkar worked to abolish the blatant enslavement and exploitation of the caste system, your disciples are freely enforcing yet another form of enslavement by humiliating and exploiting the poor, pressurising them into accepting both your cult and your “supremacy”. What authority do you and your disciples have to enforce this kind of enslavement upon us, and this at the cost of naive donors in the UK and other Buddhist countries?
      
      Finally, we wish to record our profound feelings of gratitude to Miss Bunting and the Guardian newspaper for unveiling to us the true nature of your cult and enlightening us as to the facts concerning your hidden interests. We pray that Miss Bunting may live long, serving humanity and benefiting Third World countries through her investigative journalism. May she be able to shed more light on the manoeuvrings of your cult in India. Despite all this, it is also our duty to thank you and your disciples for whatever good work you have done for us in India. All that remains now is for us to part peacefully. We pray that the Buddha may bless you and your disciples, bestowing truthfulness and reason upon you, that you might act humanely with Indian Buddhists.
      
      Yours in the Dhamma,
      
      Letter signed by 88 Indian FWBO (TBMSG) Dharmacharis (order members) and Mitras from the Mumbai (Bombay) area.
      - 270
        
        NO NAME on October 26, 2016 at 7:45 pm
        Reply
        
        Slightly heavier than the NKT in some ways, though nothing as bad as Shugden deaths
        When these Indian members started to speak out, death threats were issued and thugs ( goondas) turned up at their homes. People from the Uk had to be despatched to India to help calm the situation, while other white FWBO seniors had to be called back from India because it was believed their lives might be in danger. An effigy of Lingwood was burned in the streets.
        Karuna have done some good work but who knows at what cost and how much money gets through?
      - 271
        
        Stephen on October 30, 2016 at 7:07 pm
        Reply
        
        This is a long post from a Karuna Trust contact:
        Since September 26th and BBC programme, Karuna Trust has removed any evidence that it is linked to Trirtana UK or Triratna Bauddha Sangha. There is no evidence of Sangharakshita.
        Subhuti is Alex Kennedy,Sangharakshita’s right hand man.
        This document is evidence of ‘concerns’. It was sent – in house – in 2012.
        
        SAFEGUARDING THE ORDER IN INDIA A MESSAGE TO THE ORDER IN INDIA FROM THE INDIAN PUBLIC PRECEPTORS’ KULA: Amoghasiddhi, Amritdip, Chandrasil, Jnanasuri, Karunamaya, Subhuti, and Yashosagar. August 2012
        The Triratna Bauddha Sangha is, as we all know well, a spiritual community of men and women who Go for Refuge to the Three Jewels. We look to the Buddha Shakyamuni as our guide and inspiration and it is his teachings that we practise and try to spread to others. In India, most of us have come to the Sangha through the inspiration of Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar and our Sangha is devoted to carrying out his great vision of bringing Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity to India and the world by means of the Dhamma.
        The Buddha’s teaching is vast and timeless. Our own founder and teacher is Urgyen Sangharakshita and it is his particular presentation of the Buddha’s Dhamma that we follow. The Order is made up of his disciples and the disciples of his disciples. All Order members have been recognised as Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels effectively at the time of ordination, which means that they should be trying actively to let go of selfish clinging so that the Bodhicitta can be their guiding inspiration. When they join the Order, Order members leave behind the power mode and agree to live in harmony with each other on the basis of the love mode. As a way of ensuring this, they undertake to practise the ten precepts, which define what it is to live by the love mode.
        Order members are not, however, Stream Entrants necessarily. In most cases, their Going for Refuge is effective, not yet real. From time to time, we fall back in our efforts and cease to Go for Refuge effectively. If too many of us fail in this way too much of the time, the Order will cease to be a genuine spiritual community and will be just another group. There need to be ways of safeguarding the integrity of the Order, especially by guarding entry to and exit from it.
        This responsibility was originally carried by Bhante, who ordained all Order members for nearly twenty years and himself suspended and expelled a number of people. In August 2000 he handed on this responsibility fully to the College of Public Preceptors. Bhante gave to this international body authority for deciding who enters the Order and who is no longer a member. The College as a whole is made up of a number of kulas, consisting of at least five Public Preceptors – usually on a singlesex basis, although this is not yet possible in India. Each kula usually, although not necessarily, has responsibility within a particular region. Thus the Indian kula is at present responsible for ordinations of men and women in India.
        With the appointment of Amritdip and Yashosagar, there are now seven Public Preceptors active in India: Amoghasiddhi, Amritdip, Chandrasil, Jnanasuri,
        Karunamaya, Subhuti, and Yashosagar. Five of these are of Indian origin and this marks a very significant step forward for the Order and movement here. We are now able to tackle many long standing issues that have affected the integrity of the Order and movement for many years. We already made clear our strategy for renewing the Order in India in the paper of that name written by Subhuti on behalf of us all at the beginning of this year. We now intend to apply that strategy more vigorously and we want here to explain what more we will be doing and the basis on which we will be doing it.
        Under the working arrangements of the College, each separate kula is responsible for making final decisions about who joins the Order in their region and about who becomes a Private Preceptor. Although the Public Preceptors consult other Order members, they make the final decision as to whether or not someone is ordained. This gives them a duty to see that the training of mitras for ordination is adequate and for this they have formed Ordination Process teams of Private Preceptors and other senior Order members to help them.
        One of our great concerns in India is that, when mitras are ordained, they should go to situations where they will get a good experience of the Order. Otherwise new Order members will quickly lose their inspiration and their training will be undermined and even lost, as happens all too often at present. We are now looking closely at all Triratna situations in India and there are quite a number of them that we do not consider to be ready to receive new Order members. In the next year or so, we will be letting the Order members from those situations know what we expect them to do to create a proper setting for new Order members. Until they have brought that about and maintained it for some time, there will be no ordinations of mitras from those situations.
        The Public Preceptors’ College is not only responsible for introducing mitras into the Order, it is also responsible for ensuring that no one remains in the Order who is not acting in accordance with the ideals and precepts of the Order. From time to time the Public Preceptors will find it necessary to put various Order members on probation, suspend them, or even decide that they have effectively left the Order by their own actions. This responsibility is carried by each College kula, although the College’s working arrangements lay down that kulas must check with the Chairman of the College (at present Dhammachari Dhammarati) and the two Deputy-Chairs (at present Dhammacharini Padmasuri and Dhammachari Saddhaloka) before their decisions on these matters become final.
        Order members will be put on probation (given a warning with a trial period) when the Public Preceptors conclude that, though they have not broken any precept in a gross way, they are not engaging in their own spiritual lives at all effectively, are not participating much in the life of the Order, and/or are not making much effort to help spread the Dhamma. In other words, they are not Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels at all effectively. We will be making clear what we understand the duties and
        responsibilities of an Order member to be in the Indian context and we will then be letting various Order members know that we do not consider them to be fulfilling those duties and responsibilities sufficiently to remain in the Order. They will then be on probation and will need to demonstrate to us over a certain period of time that they are active and effective members of the Order, otherwise we may declare that they are no longer in the Order.
        We will also be suspending some Order members who commit gross acts of unskilfulness, bring the Order into discredit, or engage in other activities incompatible with membership of the Order. When an Order member is suspended, he or she will not be able to wear their kesa, attend Order events, including their chapter, or attend Triratna Dhamma Centres or teach. Suspension is not a punishment however. It creates a space within which the suspended person is encouraged to face up fully to what they have done and put it right, so that they can get themselves back into the Order. When someone is suspended, the Public Preceptors will try to form a clear plan with them, based on kalyana mitrata, that will help the person to resolve the issues that have led to their suspension. That suspension will be lifted once the Public Preceptors are convinced that they have sincerely repented their actions, confessed it to their preceptors and kalyana mitras, genuinely apologised to all who have been affected, and put right whatever they possibly can. They will then be reaccepted as Order members in good standing. In a few very serious cases, we will be declaring that someone is no longer an Order member because their actions have excluded them from the Order.
        As we have already made clear, Bhante has given the Public Preceptors responsibility for guarding the gates of the Order, both as to who comes in and who leaves. Their decision is therefore final as regards ordination, probation, suspension, and expulsion. Of course, they need to consult other Order members and take seriously any advice they are given. However, any Order member who publicly refuses to accept such decisions made by the kula thereby automatically is themselves excluded from the Order.
        Over the next year or so, the Indian Public Preceptors’ kula will gradually be addressing a number of cases of what we believe is serious misconduct of various kinds or serious lack of effectiveness as an Order member and this may mean that a number of people will be put on probation, suspended, or excluded from the Order. We want to make it clear, once more, that we are doing this not in order to punish people – that has nothing to do with a spiritual community. We do it out of our concern for the integrity of the Order and indeed for the spiritual well-being of the people concerned. We ask all other Order members to approach these matters in a spirit of maitri. Bhante made it clear in a recent conversation that anyone who is suspended, for instance, needs more kalyana mitrata than ever and should not be cut off from communication. That itself would be an act of violence that breaks the spirit of the Order.
        When we discussed our strategy with Bhante earlier this year, he stressed once more that he wanted all Order members to look very closely at their own conduct and to make sure that they are acting fully in accordance with the Ten Precepts and in the spirit of the Order. This is what we will ourselves be trying to do and we urge all our brothers and sisters to do likewise.
        ETHICAL ISSUES WE WILL BE LOOKING AT
        The boundaries of the Order are defined by the Buddha’s teaching as presented by our teacher – or more fundamentally by the Three Refuges and the Ten Precepts. In a sense that is enough, and it should always be the ultimate basis on which the Public Preceptors make their decisions about who enters the Order and who should be recognised as having left it. Nonetheless, it is not always clear, in certain cases, how the Refuges and Precepts are to be applied in various situations. This is especially the case insofar as the Order functions in a number of different cultures, each with its own particular conditions.
        The Indian kula of the Public Preceptors’ College, with the help of the Private Preceptors, Chapter Convenors, Chairmen, and Mitra Convenors during the recent ‘Three Strands’ retreat at Bor Dharan, has begun looking at a number of ethical issues that have arisen in the Order in India. In what follows, we have set out, on the basis of our discussions with other senior Order members, the principles as we understand them to apply in India, which may be different from how they might work in other cultures – even though the basic principles are exactly the same. We also describe the actions that we will be taking, with the help of other Order members, to apply these principles to our Order now.
        Whilst we will be acting on this basis, we welcome discussion, advice, and suggestions from other Order members and will modify this document accordingly. We will also be adding to it as new issues require clarification. It will thus form a kind of Vinaya or code of conduct for the Order in India that the Public Preceptors will modify from time to time in accordance with changing circumstances. Naturally, it should not be understood in legal terms and it is the spirit, not the letter, that we will be trying to apply. We ask all Order members to read it in that light by referring back to the Three Refuges and the Ten Precepts.
        VIOLENCE AND HARSH SPEECH IN THE SANGHA Breaches of the first, fifth, and sixth precepts
        The Public Preceptors are aware that there a number of Order members who in the recent past have used violence against another Order member, whether by way of a physical attack, threats, legal action, or harsh and slanderous speech. This sort of behaviour is completely against the spirit of the Order and we are determined to deal with it as quickly as possible.
        As long ago as November 1987, Bhante himself wrote to Order members about this:
        I have made it clear on several occasions that entry into the Order means that ‘we go from being governed by the power principle to being governed by the principle of the Bodhicitta’ – and by power I mean ‘the capacity to exert force,
        capacity to coerce, whether directly or indirectly, whether physically or psychologically’. I have also made it clear that the use of power within the Order is the negation of the Order.:
        Within the Spiritual Community it is impossible to act in accordance with the power mode, for by its very nature as a voluntary association of free individuals sharing certain common goals the Spiritual Community is based on the love mode. This means that should an Order member so far forget himself as to relate to another Order member in terms of force or violence he to that extent places himself outside the Spiritual Community and ceases, in fact, to be an Order member. Acts of violence between Order members are, therefore, the most serious breaches of the unity and solidarity of the Order that can possibly be imagined, even as the best conceivable means of strengthening that unity and solidarity are thoughts, words, and deeds of love. The Ten Pillars of Buddhism, Windhorse.
        Bhante went on to say, ‘Whilst no-one can be expected to move from the power-mode to the love-mode all at once, nonetheless overt violence within the Order is totally unacceptable.’ He said that ‘Any Order member who commits an overt act of violence, whether by physical attack, by threats, or by such means as legal action, against another Order member, regardless of the provocation or the rights and wrongs of the case, thereby puts in question his or her membership of the Order’. He later declared that any Order member who acted in that way thereby automatically suspended themselves from the Order. If they did not put the matter right very quickly they would be excluded from the Order. The Public Preceptors will be acting in accordance with Bhante’s words.
        We have also been concerned at the tendency for some Order members to circulate letters to Order members and others making serious allegations against another Order member. This is especially serious when the allegations have little or no foundation. This kind of slanderous speech will be treated by the Public Preceptors as an act of violence and we will immediately suspend that person from the Order.
        There have also been a number of cases of the very serious verbal use of harsh speech and the spreading of false allegations about other Order members by word of mouth. These too merit suspension from the Order.
        The Public Preceptors will gradually be meeting up with everyone we believe has been involved in such acts of violence to discover the full facts. If violence has indeed taken place then we will not the matter go until we are sure that the perpetrator feels genuine regret for what they have done, has confessed it fully to their preceptors and Kalyana mitras, has apologised to all who have been directly affected, and put right whatever damage has been done, as far as is possible. In the most serious cases we may find it necessary to suspend or even exclude that person from the Order.
        In future, such acts of violence will merit immediate suspension.
        Whilst what we have set out here concerns violence within the Order, obviously we are also very concerned about violence that Order members may commit towards others. Of especial concern is domestic violence committed by Order members, usually, although not always, by men against their wives or children. We want it to be clear that such behaviour is completely unacceptable and any Order member guilty of it will be immediately suspended from the Order and may be excluded if they do not fully repent and take steps to make sure it is not repeated.
        Order members should not generally use legal means to coerce other Order members against their will. Any Order member taking legal action against another, without the explicit agreement of the Order Convenor or Preceptors’ College Kula, will be deemed to have committed an act of violence. It should be noted that where Order members decide to go to court by mutual agreement, for instance to file for divorce, no violence has taken place.
        However, when Order members work for an organisation whose Trustees are Order members a different case arises. The Trustees have a duty at law to make sure that the Trust fulfils its aims and objects and, if it is dependent on money received from donors, that the resources of the Trust are used for the purpose intended. Any Order member who is employed by the Trust must then be subject to the disciplinary procedures of the organisation and may be disciplined or their employment terminated if they fail to fulfil the duties assigned to them properly or act improperly in other ways. So long as action is taken in accordance with the law, with the constitution of the Trust, with the disciplinary code of the organisation, as well as with the principles of natural justice, the Trustees and management will not be held to have acted violently and thereby to have breached the principles of the Order.
        If an Order member considers that a movement Trust has acted unjustly against him or her or denied them their legal rights, they may seek redress by taking the matter to the courts. However, they should only do so after all other avenues have been exhausted and after consultation with their Kalyana Mitras, preceptors or the Order Convenor.
        Of course, if Order members do discipline others or do take movement Trusts to court, this will inevitably affect the harmony and integrity of the Order. Every effort should be made by all concerned to avoid such actions.
        SERIOUS FINANCIAL MISCONDUCT BY ORDER MEMBERS Breaches of the second precept
        There have recently been a number of cases of serious financial misconduct by Order
        members. This of course is in direct breach of the second precept and puts in question membership of the Order. We will be approaching all Order members we believe to have been involved in such activity to find out the full facts. Where it does emerge that there has been misconduct, we will give the person involved a chance to pay the sum back in full, with appropriate interest, and, so long as they genuinely recognise what they have done, feel remorse for it, confess it in full to their preceptors and kalyana mitras, apologise to all they have harmed, and put right whatever can be, they will be able to continue as Order members. If they do not, then we will suspend them and, if they do not quickly confess etc., we will declare that they are no longer members of the Order.
        In future, any acts of serious financial misconduct will merit automatic suspension from the Order and will lead to exclusion from the Order if they do not pay back whatever has been misappropriated, confess etc.
        We are especially concerned about four areas in which misconduct has occurred:
        1. Stealing from movement trusts etc.;
        2. Taking or giving bribes in any context. However, this is especially serious when it happens in connection with the movement’s work;
        3. Engaging in personal business activities at the centre or doing pyramid sales, land dealing, etc. among mitras and sahayaks. We should generally avoid doing business through our contacts at the centre and within the movement, because of the strong potential this has had to destroy people’s confidence in the Order when they are disappointed with what they have been sold;
        4. Failing to repay loans, taken from the movement’s organisations or from other Sangha members, whether Order members or others.
        Anyone engaging in these kinds of activities may incur suspension from the Order.
        SERIOUS SEXUAL MISCONDUCT IN THE ORDER Breaches of the third precept
        Over the past few years, there have been a number of cases of adultery within the Order in India, sometimes prolonged over several years. Anyone in the Indian context who has sexual relations with someone other than their own husband or wife or who has sexual relations with someone who is married to someone else breaks the third precept and usually brings great pain and hardship to their own family and/or someone else’s. In doing this they destroy the commitment to the Three Jewels that they made at ordination and the Ten Precepts that represent the application of that commitment. In addition they severely undermine the integrity of the Order and give
        a very bad example to mitras and others.
        Although public preceptors and others have tried to deal with several of these cases through friendship and kalyana mitrata, adultery by Order members still continues to occur, so we feel we must make it quite clear that we cannot regard anyone involved in adultery as an Order member in good standing. Anyone who commits adultery in future should realise that they are thereby automatically suspended from the Order. They will not be eligible to wear their kesa, attend any Order gatherings, including their chapter, or go to a centre, far less to teach the Dhamma. They will only be reaccepted into the Order when they confess their fault fully to their preceptors and kalyana mitras and apologise to those they have wronged in both families. The public preceptors will only re-accept them as Order members when they are quite confident that this has been done.
        In a number of cases, an Order member has been involved in sexual relations with the husband or wife of another Order member or of a mitra. If another Order member’s husband or wife is involved there is effectively an act of violence against a fellow Order member and that must be taken even more seriously and may well lead to exclusion from the Order. Similarly if a mitra or the husband or wife of a mitra is involved then there is a serious breach of the trust that mitras should be able to have in the Order and this too may well lead to exclusion from the Order.
        We are aware of a number of cases of adultery within the Order over the last few years, some of them, we believe, still continuing. The Preceptors will be approaching all we have reason to believe are engaged in adultery or to have been so engaged since ordination to discover what the position is now and to help bring about a resolution. We should point out that concealment and lying will only add to the offence. We will be concerned to make sure that they have fully stopped, confessed to their Preceptors and kalyana mitras, and have apologised for and cleared up whatever they have done as much as is possible. If this has not happened or does not happen immediately, then that Order member will be suspended until it is and may face exclusion from the Order if no active effort is made to resolve the matter as soon as possible.
        We are aware that if such cases become widely known about, great shame and humiliation is brought to quite innocent people, such as the husband or wife and other family members of the adulterer. We will therefore not be making these cases public, even within the Order, and will work to resolve matters as discretely as we can. However, we will not in any way excuse those who have acted unskilfully.
        Our purpose in these cases left over from the past is to help anyone in this position to get back onto the path of skilful action and to restore the harmony of their families. However, we want to make it clear that in future we will be acting much more rigorously and promptly and anyone committing adultery will automatically be suspended.
        ACTIVE PARTICIPATION IN CEREMONIES AND OTHER ACTIVITIES THAT ABANDON REFUGE IN THE THREE JEWELS
        In two recent cases, Dhammacharis got married according to Hindu rites. In one case, the Dhammachari has been suspended, as has his mother, and in the other the matter is being investigated more closely, it being more complex to come to a conclusion what to do since he lives in the UK.
        In Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels, we abandon all other refuges: N’atthi me saranam annam, Buddho/Dhammo/Sangho me saranam varam. If we do affirm another refuge then we cease to Go for Refuge to the Three Jewels and thereby cease to be an Order member.
        We are quite sure that in neither of these cases did those concerned intend to commit themselves to a different refuge, but that is what they effectively did. They allowed themselves to participate in a public ceremony in which Hindu rites were used and without a clear Buddhist component. They may not have thought that this was anything more than the price they had to pay to marry the person they had chosen, each of the cases involving marriage to someone from a Hindu family. The point is, however, that a ceremony has a very powerful effect, both on those who actively participate in it and on those who are present or who hear about it later. That is why we each went through an Ordination ceremony, thereby publicly committing ourselves to the Three Jewels.
        In India there is, in particular, great danger in Order members submitting to Hindu ceremonies without proper care. Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar became a Buddhist to escape the oppressions and superstitions that are completely bound up with the Hindu religion and to bring Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity to India. He initiated a cultural revolution based on the Dhamma, but he was very aware that this revolution could easily be destroyed by a counter-revolution, as happened to Indian Buddhism in the middle-ages. Buddhism is especially vulnerable to Hinduism. That is why Dr Ambedkar gave us the twenty two vows, to protect us from falling back. If we do not adhere very strictly to Buddhist custom, we will again see Buddhism disappear from the land of its birth and the opportunity may never come again to revive it.
        One of the worst aspects of these cases is the effect that the ceremonies had on local Buddhists, who were severely disillusioned at seeing Order members acting in this way. Inevitably, some will believe that it is all right for them to engage in Hindu customs and practices, because Order members are doing it.
        In these two particular cases, it must be recognised that the circumstances of the marriages were very difficult, insofar as they were to people who were not from
        Buddhist families: in one case, the marriage was inter-caste, with the parents-in-law being staunch Hindus and opposed to the marriage, and in the other with the Dhammachari’s own parents also being Hindus and from a state where there are not many Buddhists. We certainly do not want to make it difficult for people to marry outside the present Maharashtrian Buddhist community. Indeed, if that does not happen on a much larger scale, ‘Buddhist’ will just become a caste label, as has already begun to happen. There is no doubt that some concession will need to be made to the other party’s religious feelings. However, this should be done in active consultation with Kalyana Mitras and friends in the Order to find a solution to these problems that does not compromise Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels and the effectiveness of the Order in spreading the Dhamma. This did not happen to any great extent in either of these cases. With help, they could almost certainly have found a way of getting married that satisfied the other parties without compromising Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels.
        In future, everyone should be clear that active engagement in such ceremonies will automatically lead to suspension and eventually to exclusion from the Order. Anyone who finds themselves in a situation where some concession is needed to accommodate the feelings of people from a different religion, should not act before they have discussed the matter fully with their kalyana mitras and preceptors, who will help them to find the best compromise.
        Of course, merely being present at an occasion when there is a non-Buddhist ceremony does not of itself breach the refuges.
        While on the subject of marriage, it should be clear that it is completely unacceptable for an Order member to receive a dowry at the time of marriage. Dowry is illegal in Indian law and often involves considerable hardship for the family that has to pay it. Of course, since it is illegal, dowry is paid under the guise of a ‘gift’, but this is still morally wrong. Of course, gifts can be given that help the new couple set themselves up, but not what amounts to a payment. It should also be stressed that Order members should not have elaborate and expensive weddings that waste resources, nor should they accept them for their own children. Care should also be taken that all ceremonies and events connected with the marriage of an Order member or Order member’s children are in accordance with Buddhist ethical principles. For instance, alcohol or non-vegetarian food should not be served. COMPROMISING THE SANGHA BY ENGAGING IN POLITICS
        Over the years, a few Order members in India have considered standing for election on various party tickets. All have been discouraged by Kalyana Mitras and Preceptors from doing so. Recently, a new Order member was invited to stand for his local gram panchayat. His preceptors and kalyana mitras advised him strongly against it, as did Bhante when he was approached. Nonetheless, he did stand, although unsuccessfully.
        Another issue connected with politics has arisen recently. A poster was put up outside the Mahavihara, wishing everyone well on Buddha Purnima. The poster had the photographs of four Order members, an unconnected man, and a local corporator, who was credited as the sponsor. One of the four Order members quite definitely and knowingly made the arrangements. It further emerged that he had been seen endorsing that politician on public platforms, albeit connected with his micro-credit society – which is a clear political front.
        Naturally, we encourage Order members to engage in politics in the sense of using their vote to endorse the candidate of the highest moral standards who is most likely to be effective in bringing about a better society. Order members may also actively campaign to encourage positive change in relation to broad issues, such as to end atrocities or to advocate equal opportunities for women. It may also be necessary to take up particular local issues, for instance, to do with the removal of illegal industrial works or the like.
        However, electoral politics in India is usually very corrupt and many active politicians are more or less criminals (it seems that the one who sponsored the poster has since been charged with assault). It is very difficult to get elected, even at gram panchayat level, without bribery, giving out free wine, and making promises that cannot be kept. This is especially the case where political parties are concerned. Even if one is relatively moral oneself, one belongs to a party that is filled with, and often led by, people who are deeply unskilful and unscrupulous. Political parties are usually the epitome of the negative group, manipulating the basest emotions for the sake of power. Very few Order members are likely to have the mindfulness and understanding to remain uncorrupted in these circumstances, even at the lowest level of politics and without a party ticket.
        In addition, if several Order members engage in politics, they are likely to come into conflict with each other, insofar as their political interests will diverge. ‘Political’ Order members will then infect the Order itself with their own divisions and campaigning, thus breaking the harmony of the Order.
        It will also appear to the general public that the Order and movement are affiliated to a particular party or politician. This is why the putting up of the sponsored poster was so unskilkful: the Mahavihara will naturally now be identified with the sponsor and his activities, which may even have included criminal assault.
        Nonetheless, there may be very exceptional circumstances in which an Order member is able to stand for election, especially at local level, without risk of corruption or of creating divisions within the Order or of giving the impression that the Order and Movement have a particular political affiliation. They should only submit themselves for election after consulting widely with local Order members and getting the full agreement of their Preceptors and kalyana mitras, as well as of the National Coordinating Council.
        It should then be clear that any Order member who, in future, becomes openly and actively associated with politics in this sense will automatically be suspended from the Order and, if the matter is not satisfactorily cleared up, may eventually be excluded. In general, any Order member who stands for election at any level of government without the full agreement of their Kalyana Mitras and Preceptors and of the National Council will automatically be suspended and, if the matter is not satisfactorily cleared up, will eventually be excluded. We will be approaching those who have previously been so involved and making sure that they have completely stopped their activities, recognised what they have done, and apologised to those who might have been affected. If they do not do this very quickly, they will be suspended from the Order and eventually may be excluded.
        Some involvement with politicians is however almost unavoidable, especially in the course of organisational work, whether to do with our Dhamma centres or social work. At times, we need their support in various ways. This is of course a potentially dangerous relationship, leading to all the problems mentioned above. This seems to be partly what happened at the Mahavihara. The politician was approached to put up a pandal and welcome arch at the centre. However, he quite naturally expected something in return – that is politics. It should always be clear to any politician helping us that they can expect nothing back from us, that we are not endorsing them nor are we necessarily going to vote for them, and that we may also accept help from other parties and politicians opposed to them. In general such relationships with politicians should only be handled by very experienced Order members who should make sure that they keep the Chairmen’s meeting and the National Council informed. It is the responsibility of the Chairmen’s meeting and National Council to make sure that the movement remains quite clear in this respect.
        COMPROMISING ONE’S RELATIONSHIP WITH ONE’S PRECEPTORS AND TEACHERS AND THE INTEGRITY OF OUR TEACHING AND PRACTICE OF THE DHAMMA
        The Order consists of disciples of Urgyen Sangharakshita and disciples of his disciples. We practise and teach the Dhamma in accordance with his particular presentation of the Buddha’s teaching. Any Order member who rejects this understanding of the Order thereby ceases to be an Order member and will be declared to have left the Order.
        All our centres teach the same common core of Dhamma and anyone going from one centre to another anywhere else in the world should find the same practices and the same basic teachings being taught. In this way we can successfully follow the path shown by our teacher and remain united through our common understanding and practice.
        In what Bhante has taught us there is everything that we need to enter the stream of the Dhamma. As Order members, we should not normally take teachings and practices from outside his presentation or go to other teachers, otherwise we are likely to become confused and to find ourselves with a different perspective from that of our fellow Order members. Any Order member who does so, without proper consultation, thereby effectively leaves the Order and may be suspended.
        From time to time it may, however, be useful for a particular Order member to investigate teachings and practices coming from sources not taught by Bhante. In that way we may discover something that can be incorporated into what is taught in the movement because it adds something useful. However, this will require a very clear understanding of the basic principles of Bhante’s presentation of the Dhamma and an ability to think critically about what they are learning from outside the movement. Not everyone is qualified to do this. Order members should not take teachings from other teachers or go on their retreats and courses without the full agreement of their preceptors and kalyana mitras, who will make sure there is a procedure for evaluating and, if appropriate, absorbing what is learned. Anyone who does go without that agreement may be subject to suspension from the Order.
        It is very important that people who start to practise the Dhamma through Triratna Bauddha Mahasangha are taught the particular presentation that is the basis of our movement. Other teachers should therefore not be invited to teach at our centres. The Public Preceptors need to be confident that mitras who are approaching ordination are clear about Bhante’s teaching. They will not agree to the ordination of anyone coming from a centre where that is not the case. We hope that the Chairmen’s meeting and National Council will ensure that all centres are allowing only qualified Order members to teach in accordance with our common approach.
        We want to be clear, however, that keeping this kind of clarity about what is taught within the movement does not restrict us in another way. It is important that we should be developing positive relations with other Buddhists. We do not want our movement to be cut off from the wider Buddhist world, both in India and elsewhere, since we may need help and support from other Buddhists and should cooperate with them whenever possible to safeguard and spread the Dhamma. Contact with other Buddhists also gives us a chance to communicate to them the very special approach that we have developed, under Bhante’s guidance. Properly qualified Order members should be encouraged to attend Buddhist conferences and to develop friendly contact with other Buddhists of all kinds. Buddhist conferences on various themes have been hosted at Nagaloka and these can be very useful ways of promoting understanding and good contact. However, they should always be under the guidance of skilled leaders, such as Lokamitra, who are able to make sure that our position is quite clear.
        At times it may be appropriate to arrange a meeting of Order members to which we invite guest Buddhists to address us about their work, Buddhism in their countries, and the like – partly to educate us and partly to create a connection though which our work can be appreciated. This should always be done under the skilled chairmanship of someone who is able to handle diplomatically any problems that chanced to arise. Both before and after the session with the speaker, there should be time to discuss and to sort out any confusions. At present, probably only Lokamitra and one or two others are in a position to chair such a meeting.
        ORDER MEMBERS WHO HAVE CEASED TO GO FOR REFUGE EFFECTIVELY
        At the time of their ordination, all Order members were acknowledged by their preceptors to be Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels Effectively. However, effective Going for Refuge is not stream entry and we will fall back from time to time if we do not make a continuous effort to practise the Dhamma. Quite a number of Order members fall back so far and over such a long period that they have in fact ceased to be members of the Order: one could say that they have become ‘Mitras with kesas’.
        Until now we have not done anything about this situation, apart from encouraging people to make more effort and to re-engage themselves with the spiritual life and with the Order. However, when there are too many Order members in this position, it begins to undermine the integrity of the Order. Order members who are effectively Going for Refuge themselves begin to be disillusioned and the Order is not able to give the kind of inspiring example that people in the wider society need. This has already started to happen here in India and we, in the Indian Public Preceptors’ Kula, believe that, unless we act soon, it will be more and more difficult for the Sangha to be a genuine spiritual community.
        It is our duty to make sure that the Order consists only of those who are going for Refuge to the Three Jewels effectively. That is, of course, primarily not an external matter. Going for Refuge is a complete re-orientation of one’s life so that it is based upon the Three Jewels. It consists in an active and continuing effort to develop skilful karma, let go of self-clinging, and to allow the stream of the Dhamma to carry one onward towards Bodhi. However, Effective Going for Refuge within the context of our Sangha will have general characteristics that can be seen by others. We wish therefore to set out what we believe to be some of the principal external signs of an Order member in good standing who is Going for Refuge to the Three Jewels effectively. We appreciate that this can never be completely definitive, but nonetheless consider that the general outlines of what can be expected are reasonably clear. We will do this under the headings of the four verses of acceptance that we all recited at the end of our Public Ordination ceremony:
        For the sake of Enlightenment, we accept this ordination; With loyalty to our teachers, we accept this ordination; In harmony with friends and brethren, we accept this ordination;
        For the benefit of all beings, we accept this ordination.
        For the sake of Enlightenment, we accept this ordination
        An Order member who is Going for Refuge Effectively will be: Living skilfully in accordance with the ten precepts, especially not eating meat, drinking alcohol, smoking or chewing tobacco, or using drugs; Practising Right Livelihood; Accepting full karmic responsibility, confessing faults, apologising, and making amends; Maintaining an effective meditation practice on a daily basis, through which they will be working on the five aspects of Bhante’s system of practice, especially spiritual death and rebirth; Studying the Dhamma for at least two or three hours each week, especially in the light of Bhante’s particular presentation, and reflecting upon it; Attending at least two of the following kinds of retreats of at least one week each every year: on meditation for Order members, led by an experienced Order member; on Dhamma-study for Order members, led by an experienced Order member; solitary, with guidance from an experienced Order member. Practising mindfulness in all aspects, especially of mental habits and patterns, and trying to ‘die and be reborn spiritually’;
        
        With loyalty to our teachers, we accept this ordination; Maintaining the 22 vows given by Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Reading or listening to Bhante’s works every week; Practising and teaching in accordance with his presentation of the Dhamma; Not taking teachings from teachers outside the Order, without full discussion and agreement from Preceptors; Maintaining regular contact with kalyana mitras and Preceptors and consulting them on all major decisions in life;
        In harmony with friends and brethren, we accept this ordination; Attending festivals, celebrations, and other major events at the centre; Attending chapter meetings every week and engaging effectively with fellow chapter members in discussion and practice of the Dhamma; Regularly confessing faults and helping others to confess theirs; Attending Regional Order weekends and days at least three times a year; Attending all Order conventions in India; Not engaging in quarrels or factions; Working harmoniously with others in the Centre Councils etc.; Supporting, working with, and engaging in all the structures of the Order and movement: Centre chairman, Mitra convenors, chapter convenors, ordination teams, public preceptors, etc.;
        Keeping in daily, deep, and effective communication with friends in the Order;
        For the benefit of all beings, we accept this ordination. Giving dana for Dhamma work: trying to give 5% of income; Voluntarily helping clean, maintain, and organise the Centre; Supporting Dhamma classes and activities weekly; Learning to teach the Dhamma effectively; Making friends and developing kalyana mitrata with sahayaks and mitras on a daily and weekly basis; Helping mitras to prepare for ordination through deep friendship.
        If Order members are doing all this, then they will make good spiritual progress and the Order will be in good shape.
        The Public Preceptors have been surveying the whole Order, with the help of the Chapter Convenors, and have found that there are a number of Order members who appear not to be fulfilling these basic duties of an Order member, to a greater or lesser extent. Of course, there are Order members who would like to fulfil all these criteria, but who cannot do so because of illness, old age, long distance from other Order members, etc. Such people will continue to be considered to be Order members in good standing, so long as they have discussed their situations fully with their Preceptors, kalyana mitras, and the Order convenor. Such exceptions apart, there are three main categories to be considered:
        1. Order members who are so out of contact that no one has seen or heard of them for many years. We will be making their names known to Order members to see whether anyone has any definite information about them. If no one has, then we will simply declare that they have effectively left the Order. If later they try to return, they should be referred to the Order Convenor.
        2. Order members who are not participating in the Order at all but who are in social contact with other Order members. We will be approaching such people to ask them either to fully engage in the Order or to resign. If they do not, then we may declare them no longer to be Order members.
        3. Order members who are peripherally engaged in the movement, but have little or no spiritual practice or active involvement in the Order. This is the largest category and contains quite a few familiar faces, even people working in movement trusts. We will be approaching such people, pointing out what we expect of an Order member and how far short they fall, and putting them on probation for six months or a year. If they do begin to function fully and effectively as an Order member, as outlined above, they will be able to continue as an Order member in good standing. If they do not, then we may declare that they are no longer Order members.
        We hope all Order members will consider their own lives in the light of these criteria.
        Surely every one of us could be fulfilling our duties as an Order member much more effectively. We hope also that Order members in chapters will work with each other very sympathetically to help each and every chapter member to be a fully effective Order member. It is this spirit of kalyana mitrata that in the end is the true life blood of the Order.
        
        272
        
        NO NAME on October 31, 2016 at 10:01 am
        Reply
        
        ” Orderr members committing adultery” I wonder if this is sophistry? Are we talking about male OMs who are married, sleeping with other women or, surprise, surprise, are we talking about male OMs, married, then having sex with other OMs?
        I note to that, soon after the identification of MR Anon as Katherine Hopper/ Munisha, he she stopped posting. Why? Was it that she was revealing too much inadvertently, or was it that Hopper worked out who was posting and that person was instructed to stop.
        I am amazed at the extent to which the above post focuses on the individual as a component of an organization and instructs each on how best to behave for the good of that organization. Whatever happened to freedom of thought/ individuality? It’s all about organisational growth rather than personal growth.
        Can’t these poor people see what they have been sucked into?
        
        273
        
        Mettaman on October 31, 2016 at 12:51 pm
        
        The final section indicates that colonialism is not dead. Subhuti and co in U.K. are obviously more concerned about keeping the drip, drip, drip of the Dharma as presented by Sangharakshita / Bhante dripping into people’s lives, relationships and brains and the 5 % of income as Dana rolling in to promote the order. Big Brother, it seems, will be checking up on them in a very undharmic fashion. They are told to read or listen to Bhante at least once a week … but In another document we are told that Bhante / SR is not in any sort of leadership role? Do UK donors know who they are giving their money to when they are giving it to The Karuna Trust? Where can one see the accounts leading up to 2012? How conditional is funding? Do people in poverty have to show allegiance to the order to receive help? Do those they work with – and get money from – understand who Dennis Lingwood is?
        At least there is some consistency as UK order members are also being told to spread the Dharma according to Sangharakshita actively via chapters or face outing and expulsion as quote ‘dead wood’.
        On the other hand, there seems to be one set of rules and no sanctions for Serious Misdemeanors (and crime?) of U.K. OMS, especially leadership, and another set of rules and sanctions for Indian order members.
        By the way, I was told last week that Triratna rules do not apply to Sangharakahita / Lingwood as he is not technically (favourite word of Sangharaksharites) in the order; he was ordained into another order so only that order can supervise him … Indeed, their safeguarding policies cannot apparently include him either because he is not actually in the order …. which, in any case, he has stepped down from leading ….
        Has anyone else come across that excuse before?
        Can anyone give both names for any or some for The Karuna Team now listed on http://www.karuna.org
        Some have recently dropped their order names from the website and thus hidden the Trirtana-centric nature of their work.
        The CEO Padmadaka Ciaran also works for Breathworks (Triratna) by the looks of it, but he does not want Karuna Trust (Triratna) mentioned in his Breathworks information …. His Breathworks profile lists him as CEO to a large international NGO.
        I am sure that the CEOs of Oxfam, Amnesty and other reputable NGOs do not have identity problems or the need to hide who they are connected to. The current CEO of Karuna Trust used to be chairman of Padmaloka, the retreat centre at the centre of the BBC documentary … Anybody got dates for his chairmanship? There is absolutely no doubt that he knows of all the allegations made about kalyana mitrata via sex at Padmaloka with Sangharahita Banthe Lingwood and other senior OMs still in power …
        Double names, double standards, no standards, low standards, one name and not a name, hiding names and hiding connections, changing names …. None of these accord with safety, transparency or real safeguarding.
        Maybe Subhuti, from his kuti in Snowdonia, can shed some light on all this for us? After all, his name is listed in the ‘Safeguarding the order in India’ document.
        (Unlike some of the poor souls, who gave too much to Triratna, he seems to have inherited enough to buy a place with Srimala, a woman with whom he insists he is celibate, He did, however, invite unsuspecting locals in to witness the unveiling of a plaque to Sangharakshita …
        I wonder what they would make of this thread and the alternative truth about the order?
        
        On a different but connected note, does anyone know what became of Kovida John Hunter, who seems to have a series of worrying mentions from some ex-order members and some current ones, wrestling with resigning ….
        
        274
        
        tenpel on October 31, 2016 at 8:07 pm
        
        By the way, I was told last week that Triratna rules do not apply to Sangharakahita / Lingwood as he is not technically (favourite word of Sangharaksharites) in the order; he was ordained into another order so only that order can supervise him…
        
        How bizarre. In what order should Sangharakahita / Lingwood be? Does he consider himself to be a monk? Does he consider himself to be “a monk” while not seeing a contradiction in engaging in sexual activities and wearing lay clothes? Who should supervise him, if he lives on his own without being part of any monastic order or without being surrounded by monastic order members?
        
        This sounds quite like the story of ‘Geshe’ Kelsang Gyatso with respect to how to disconnect (or even being expelled) from a healthy monastic environment, how to set up your own Western Buddhist cult outside of established Buddhist communities, with people who have no clue about monastic life or Buddhism but who worship you as an authority (an “authority” who can tell the most stupid things without being challenged or corrected and with followers who will even defend the most obvious distortions as genuine Dharma), placing yourself at the top as the final, sole and lasting authority with nobody above or equal to you … and as a wonderful result of this setup, nobody dares or can correct you. What a wonderful world! (for a narcissist)
        
        275
        
        Mettaman on October 31, 2016 at 9:42 pm
        
        Sangharakshita is actively participating in the creation of his own memorial, a stupa and various pilgrimage accessories at Adhisthana …. He already call s himself Bhante and Urgyen and his worshippers intend him, as he does himself, to be raised to the archetypal status of Padmasambhava as soon as practicable ….
        
        It is good that you offer this site and your experience of cultic controls, Tenpel. It is really excellent that others can see your journey into and out of an unhealthy group. You flag up many similarities between the Kalsang Gyatsa and Sangharakshita Lingwood.
        
        How are you managing with the news of the Augsburg arrest of high profile Buddhist monk?
        
        276
        
        tenpel on November 1, 2016 at 1:35 pm
        
        The Augsburg arrest is a zen priest, married, having children… he’s not a monk.
        
        277
        
        NO NAME on November 2, 2016 at 4:21 pm
        
        “and his worshippers intend him, as he does himself, to be raised to the archetypal status of Padmasambhava as soon as practicable …”
        After “A season in hell”? [Thank you Rimbaud]
        
        278
        
        frenzy on November 1, 2016 at 10:53 am
        
        Besides it being a rather intimidating piece of writing i noticed, as no-name did, adultry being reviewed in a supprising manner. Speaking out v firmly as opposed to the: we are not a celibate order, going for refuge comes first lifestyle second- approach.
        Though adultry is punishable by law in India, that might have something to do with it. As is actually sex with persons of the same gender, as Sr might remember from when he fled India.
        I noticed also the discouragement of legal action against another ordermember, as seen as an action in the power mode as opposed to the love mode…
        
        279
        
        NO NAME on November 1, 2016 at 2:11 pm
        
        “Power mode v love mode”? And which scripture does that come from?
        
        280
        
        NO NAME on November 1, 2016 at 4:42 pm
        
        I note also the absence of any pro Triratna voice in general for quite some time now. I doubt very much this is because they have nothing to say. It seems far more likely that commenters have been told to stay quiet, on the basis of the idea that if one of two people involved in conflict stays quiet, the conflict goes away. It’s a kind of ‘ use conflict resolution to squash criticism’ philosophy
        Perhaps someone on the inside can confirm or deny this?
        Either way, it won’t work. As long as the problem goes unacknowledged, as long as victims go uncompensated, this problem isn’t going to go away. Dennis dying won’t solve it either . When he passes, questions about a cover up will certainly arise
        
        281
        
        frenzy on November 2, 2016 at 11:49 pm
        
        Re Non-name:
        It was interesting nevertheless to read the comments here of a committed OM.
        The lack of further OM’s commencing could mean Mr Anon’s are reflecting in essence a common stand, general viewpoints and assumptions and, sorry Mr Anon, commonly accepted rethorics and blind spots.
        
        282
        
        frenzy on November 1, 2016 at 1:35 pm
        
        There seems to be (in the least..) some issues in regard to the perception of ”right view” as well as (subsequently / prev mentioned by Mettaman in regard to Mark and Bjorns accounts) ‘bearing (true or) false witness’…
        
        To Dh Subhuti and all those in position of power: shów us the love mode; set an example ethically…
        
        283
        
        NO NAME on November 1, 2016 at 8:37 pm
        
        There has long been collaboration between the two groups, kelsangs NKT and the FWBO . It was the FWBO who negotiated the NKT NBO membership and the FWBO PR dept that advised the NKT on rebuilding their public image after the Guardian article and earliest HHDL demos. They both worked together on fund raising from the uk gov Faith Communities Capacity Building fund). And who published Sangharakshitas massively plagiarised Eternal Legacy? The NKTs Tharpa publications Vishvapani also wrote some pro NKT stuff and they were sometimes featured in the FWBO magazineDharma Life- which, printed on shiny paper, didn’t even work as toilet paper. Dharma Life also featured stuff critical of HHDL, referencing the Nazi myth
        How strong the relationship is after the NKT threatened the NBO with legal action I’m not sure but there is certainly a lengthy history of association. The legal threats to the NBO were IMO extremely damaging to the relationship. The NKT threatened to take the shirts of the backs of the NBO exec for their suggesting that they stop demos against HHDL in what was clearly an attempt at preserving reputation
        
        284
        
        NO NAME on November 2, 2016 at 2:57 pm
        
        Re Kovida- John hunter-take a look at Jnanaviras letter on ex-cult.org. Seems that, after using his senior position in the Order to procure a string of young men for sex, he eventually left the order in disgrace after it was discovered he had used £18,000 for personal purchases
        As ever, ‘ for the good of the dharma’, this criminal act went unreported and the issue was dealt with in house. Nothing whatsoever to do with preserving reputation … Honest
  - 285
    
    Mark on October 26, 2016 at 3:12 pm
    Reply
    
    Resignation letter from 88 Indian FWBO members:
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/MumbaiResign.htm
    
    See also:
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/fwboIndia.htm
    This contains 3 links, including the above letter, and also a letter from Bakul protesting about his expulsion. Bakul is an Advocate (= Barrister) in India, and his letter also contains a contact address, though I don’t know if this is still current.
    - 286
      
      tenpel on October 26, 2016 at 6:12 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you. Strange that FWBO’s The Karuna Trust – besides all of the controversies – was able to win such celebrities as Dame Judi Dench and Sir Ben Kingsley … This seems to be a huge running network …
      - 287
        
        NO NAME on October 26, 2016 at 7:35 pm
        Reply
        
        Founded on lies, by a liar.
        You can fool some of the people some of the time………but not all of the people all of the time. The truth is out
288

Mettaman on October 26, 2016 at 7:54 am
Reply

It isn’t interesting that The Karuna Trust, a Triratna project, suddenly has no visible links to Trirtana and its FWBO / Triratna links on its website .. nothing … Maybe others could have a look and see where they have been put… There are a few order-like names shown as workers, but an innocent reader will not be able to see .. unless I am wrong … who is running the charity by looking at The Karuna Trust website.
Celebrity patrons such as Dame Judi Dench are mentioned, but not who is behind the charity.
They have also removed mention of encouraging freedom to practice Buddhist religion …

Why do Triratna suddenly not want to be recognised or indeed noticed in their flagship charity? The changes have happened since the BBC programme was broadcast.
289

NO NAME on October 27, 2016 at 6:22 pm
Reply

https://dalitnation.wordpress.com/2009/01/02/friends-of-the-western-buddhists-as-enemies-of-dalits/
Dalit Nation – The Only Authentic Voice of Dalits
Friends of the Western Buddhist cults are Enemies of Dalits
January 2, 2009 at 8:48 am · Filed under Uncategorized ·Tagged babasaheb ambedkar, Dalits, fwbo, sangharakshita, tbmsg

Ever since we published our article on the Brahminical conspiracy to dilute Buddism through Vipassana (Refer – Beware of Meditation – Dalit Nation Dec 2007) there has been a huge turmoil in the Dalit Intelligentsia. We stirred a hornet’s nest more than a year ago by debunking this Vipassana myth. Many psuedo Dalit intellectuals who are sold out to Goenkawadis (who are manuwadis with a Buddhist mask) are pestering us to retract our statements on Vipassana meditation. We at Dalit Nation want to reiterate again that Vipassana meditation has no place in Buddhist Dharma. Buddhist Dharma is revolutionary and runs counter to the useless leisure class activity of Vipassana meditation. Vipassana is a creation of our Brahmin oppressors to quiet down the Dalit Movement.

The Brahmins being a micro minority are ever vigilant to any threat to their hegemony. When Babasaheb converted to Buddhism in October 1956 the Brahminical forces started working against Buddhism through multiple channels. We at Dalit Nation would like to expose four of these movements. The first was the Mahayana of the Tibetian tyrant Dalai Lama (Refer Dalit Nation – Brahmin Deception through Dalai Lama). The second was through Goenka’s Vipassana meditation cult of Brahminical Burmese Buddhism. The third through the Sokka Gokkai cult of Nicheren Buddhism. The main practice of the Sokka Gokkai cult is Brahminical mantra chanting except that the mantra is that of the Buddha. The fourth, which not many are aware of in Dalit circles is the FWBO or the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order created by the misogynist, narcisstic and perverted British Buddhist monk Sangharakshita aka Dennis Lingwood.

It is very sad that some of our bright and intelligent Dalit youths are caught up in this FWBO which is another Buddhist cult to smother the Dalit Apprising. The Editor of Dalit Nation had met Sangharakshita in London many decades ago. We wanted to talk about his association with Babasaheb and Dalit movement. We also wanted to know more about the dangers of Vipassana meditation. Sangharakshita had stopped the vipassana practice in his centres in UK as it lead to nervous breakdown and created lunacy. But instead of talking to us about these things the senile old Sangharakshita was so full of himself and his so called liberating teachings. It did not take much time for us to realize that this man was another subtle front for Brahminism in the name of Buddhism.

It is not surprising for us that he learnt Buddhism through Brahmins like Bhikku Jagdish Kashyap. Sangharakshita also spent a huge amount of time in India chasing Hindu holymen and sadhus like Ramana Maharishi, Anandamayi Ma, Ramdas and many others. How can we expect that such a person is the friend of Dalits. Can this man be trusted for working on the Dalit cause. A Brahimincal hippy in Buddhist mould is what we at Dalitnation term such people.

At the time we met Sangharakshita many Dalits were involved in FWBO. They were fooled into believing that Sangharakshita was a friend of Babasaheb Ambedkar. When we did more research on this man we discovered that not only was he not a friend of Babasaheb he was actually working against the revolutionary ideas of Babasaheb. This friend of Dalits had written an article in Mahabodi Journal (1959) that Ambedkar never understood Buddhism and his revolutionary book ‘Buddha and His Dharma’ should be renamed as ‘Ambedkar and his dharma’. Sangharakshita accused Ambedkar of using Buddhism to further his political ambitions. Babasaheb whose every life breath was dedicated to the Dalit upliftment was being told that he is using buddhism for his own self aggrandizement. Atrocious.

Due to our expose of Sangharakshita in 1998 most dalits dissociated from this cult. This same Sangharakshita is back again in the garb of Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayak Gana (TBMSG). He and his foillowers have created trusts and scholarships to gather funds and propogate the personality cult. Bright Dalit youths are lured into such cults. The fund managers of trusts like Trailokya Bauddha Mahasangha Sahayaka Gana which is the indian wing of FWBO control the mind of the bright Dalit youths. The Dalits who are part of these movements have expressed to us that their minds have been enslaved by these trusts and they have no time for the revolutionary activities envisaged by Babasaheb.

We at Dalit Nation will spare no efforts to expose these criminials like Sangharakshita and vicious organizations like FWBO and TBMSG. Our Dalit youths should be one pointed towards the goal laid out by Babasaheb and we should avoid these cults like filth. These cults are no different from the Brahminical Cow Dung cults.
- 290
  
  frenzy on October 28, 2016 at 9:42 am
  Reply
  
  I am learning that the Dalits feel/ felt(?) opressed by mediation, though that it was seemingly the being left rendered powerless and treated unjust in certain acpects that was the issue.
  https://dalitnation.wordpress.com/2007/12/14/beware-of-meditation/
  Interesting how socialdynamic background and envirement is of such major influence in ones perceptions, needs etc.
  I can see the the contxtv but still not quite dont understand the alltogether rejection of the satipatthanisauth… whith is supposed to be a essential sutra/part of the Pali canon no?
291

tenpel on October 27, 2016 at 7:23 pm
Reply

To those who have experienced harm by TBO/FWBO
If you want to protect others from similar experiences or if you want that the public is better informed about TBO and what can happen there, I would highly recommend to write testimonies and to send them to INFORM, a research group on New Religious Movement who give accurate and unbiased information when the UK government or journalists are having questions or inquiries about a group. You find here some more details and a link to their website: Reporting Personal Experience On Religious Movements
They might have only information from the past and if you want to change things it would be good to update them!

With respect to my own former “cult”-group the Berlin Senate for NRM’s/cults (Sektenleitstelle) judged them as unproblematic when journalists contacted them because the information they had was 15 years old and no new information was coming in, so finally the documents were somewhat forgotten and there was no awareness about the problems anymore …
- 292
  
  Stephen on November 1, 2016 at 7:45 pm
  Reply
  
  Thanks for the link to Inform. Very useful if everyone with concerns updates Inform. They have old information about FWBO and some needs updating as Triratna Buddhist Community, which is still a cult of personality with some harmful teachings that are easy to access and which are still being spread by some people, who think of Sangharakshita as the Buddha in our midst. I contacted them. It looks like others have since BBC documentary went out in September.
293

tenpel on November 4, 2016 at 2:13 am
Reply

BTW, sexual abuse manifests usually always in the same old ways of denial, brushing under the carpet, downplaying. See for instance the Jerry Sandusky case. The Penn State University management tried to solve it “internally”, played it down, silenced it, didn’t warn their students … now they were charged with a fine of 2.4 million dollar for this misbehaviour. They had to pay already a fine of 60 million dollars in the past. People in charge – chief coach Paternos & the president of the Penn State University Graham Spanier lost their jobs, the football team was banned from play off games for four years and all titles made from 1998 onwards were declared invalid … http://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/jerry-sandusky

Compare these events with where Triratna is now …
- 294
  
  Stephen on November 4, 2016 at 3:11 am
  Reply
  
  With so much information from different sources and from UK wide Triratna centre connections being presented here, it must surely be obvious to others from Triratna reading this that sexual assaults, coercion, deceit and denials took place together with whole group denials, brushing under the carpet and downplaying, including in the most recent media statement to BBC. Sangharakshita led on all of this. There is far too much evidence of sexual assault for anyone to ignore. There is too much evidence that young men were groomed from a young age into Sangharakshita’s particular presentation of kalyana mitrata and that some of his cohorts of order memebers went on to emulate kalayana mitrata through sex, widening the web of damage and complicity. It is only when you get free of the group that you can see the traps here … love and devotion to Bhante are primary, his sexual assaults on others are secondary. There must be order members and mitra trapped in this web still, desperately trying to reconcile actions and ideas that cannot be reconciled. No amount of soul searching and internal discussions, always accompanied by reaffirmations of love and gratitude to Bhante, can make up for the harm caused by the abuses and after-abuses or gIve them back their wasted years, lost opportunities, trust, girlfriends, children and family time or their faith as was.
  If individual order members have realised that there is just too much evidence that sexual abuses and cover ups have taken place, are they Buddhist enough to do the right thing and make sure that external agencies investigate and follow through accordingly? Or will their devotion to Bhante and their roles and status in Triratna stop them? A full and public apology is needed at the very least. Public and formal. Triratna will be prolonging its own suffering until a public and formal apology is made. It is time to see Dharma put into practice instead of power mode cover ups and power mode legal advice to keep schtum out of fear of more media attention or valid compensation claims.
  - 295
    
    Prajnacitta on June 15, 2019 at 3:13 am
    Reply
    
    Stephen – well said. Fully agree with you.
- 296
  
  frenzy on November 4, 2016 at 11:35 am
  Reply
  
  Indeed the dynamics seem to be v predictable… though not less shocking.
  I do not think they are buddhist enough to do he right thing. I think also it is a too complex and disfunctional situation… It is a v closed system. I feel most people in Triratna are indeed on some level trapped, they need to look away, downplay and worse and as Stephen says are in the grip of ‘trýing to reconcile actions and ideas that cannot be reconciled’… Even the most critical people are somehow to close to the fire to see and have their investment in the group etc.
  Once you see it you cannot nót see it anymore… That they are indeed hardly buddhists. With their structure where anybody who is ‘going for refuge’ is allowed to teach the dharma… v much watering down the clarity and depth. People getting v attached to their ‘orderstatus’. Senior teachers still using the sangha as a dating site, the watered down ethical standard of it all.
  Indeed time to see Dharma put into practice…
  - 297
    
    tenpel on November 4, 2016 at 6:33 pm
    Reply
    
    Christopher Hamacher, a lawyer, Zen practitioner and panelist at ICSA where he presented his paper ““Zen Has No Morals!” – The Latent Potential for Corruption and Abuse in Zen Buddhism, as Exemplified by Two Recent Cases” made the following suggestion: „…ultimately, the way a group reacts to allegations of misconduct may be a better indicator of its underlying dysfunction than the content of the allegations themselves.“ – I totally agree with that. I will put that quote in the post as the opening quote!
298

NO NAME on November 4, 2016 at 3:23 pm
Reply

And herein lies the rub
The Order is divided between two groups: those younger, idealistic OMs, poor unfortunates who have been hooked in before they could explore the Buddhist world in all its variety and who can now see Sangharakshita et als actions for what they are, abusive and dishonest, and then a smaller, group of older OMs, who have invested most of their lives in blinding themselves to the reality of their founders actions and who, as a result, have been promoted by him to positions of power and respect which they are terrified of losing. So much to lose if they dare speak the truth, so much to cling to in a world that recognises clinging as the cause of suffering
And thus, the Order is dividing along lines of truth and falsity, with the younger OMs being truth and the older, supposedly wiser ones clinging to their illusions and representing falsity. Truly, the FWBO/ Triratna is the world turned upside down.
- 299
  
  NO NAME on November 4, 2016 at 9:18 pm
  Reply
  
  “ultimately, the way a group reacts to allegations of misconduct may be a better indicator of its underlying dysfunction than the content of the allegations themselves.”
  This is great though in the FWBO Triratna case, I think “ultimately, the way a group reacts to allegations of misconduct may be as clear an indicator of its underlying dysfunction as the content of the allegations themselves.” would be closer to the truth- only slightly different but I fear the former statement devalues the suffering of victims somewhat
- 300
  
  Prajnacitta on June 15, 2019 at 12:33 am
  Reply
  
  No Name, that is such an accurate depiction of the current state of affairs in TBO…
- 301
  
  Prajnacitta on June 15, 2019 at 3:34 am
  Reply
  
  “older OMs, who have invested most of their lives in blinding themselves to the reality of their founders actions and who, as a result, have been promoted by him to positions of power and respect which they are terrified of losing.”
  
  Possibly also that they believe that they are on a true Buddhist path and that’s what adheres them to the position of ‘overlooking’ DL’s pathology. Unfortunately they don’t see that he path of Buddhism they are on is not Buddhist, just DL’s interpretation and re-presentation of Buddhism; in other words, they don’t see that the teachings they are following are just as fake as DL himself.
  
  Even if they don’t have so much invested in Sangharakshita himself (as someone like Mr Anon seems to be), they are attached to the teachings and their years of their ‘spiritual endeavour’ and donlt want ot see that that has been a waste of time – which, ironically, if they wake up to the fact that they have been deceived for so long will mean, actually, it won’t have been a waste of time at all !!
  
  I was at a TBO centre recently at a talk being given by Lokeshvara (one of the senior OM’s residing at Adhisthana) in which he was discussing ‘How do we know what to believe?’ … I thought he was using that title as a didactic device, esp when he started referencing the Kalamas…. but no, he really intentionally gave a presentation on how one should know who to believe ! Not even any understanding that belief has no place in Buddhism over and above the efficacy of karma-vipaka. He squarely stated that he ‘believed’ in Sangharakshita and ‘believed’ in the teachings of the TBO; I had the feeling I was in a Church of England seminary rather than a Buddhist meditation centre. I asked the woman next to me, a young woman new to Buddhism and on her 3rd or 4th visit to the centre, what she thought and she said “He sounds like he’s full of fear”.
  
  Their fear may be based on a deep but unacknowledged recognition if they see clearly what DL has done, they will lose the true/proper/western dharma and fall into some kind of hell realm of eternal suffering. The truth is that they are already in that hell-realm.
302

tenpel on November 5, 2016 at 12:46 am
Reply

Today I received this message via email:

“I was sent this today: Could you post it on your page about Sangharakshita please. The following just seems to confirm to me how Sangharakshita did whatever he liked with very little care as to context or function in what he did, relating to Dharma as a whole in the Tibetan Buddhist context. And he completely lost sight of the need for an ethical foundation. And his sexist ideas – it’s atrocious how he managed to have so much influence….”

The person attached the following quote of what was sent:

I haven’t been round for a while bit just happened to pop by the other day and noticed this post and thought I might comment. I started a comment yesterday but it was all a bit messy and confused so didn’t post it.

The subject is confused. I honestly don’t think Sangharakshita’s knowledge or understanding of Tibetan Buddhism and culture is really good enough to make an informed decision on dogyal and the NKT.

Here are a few things I noticed whilst attending FWBO classes and listening to Sangharakshita’s teachings related to dogyal.

Dhardo Rinpoche was an important teacher for Sangharakshita. Indeed, dogyal lamas seem to have been very keen to teach western students quite early on and many early western students of Tibetan Buddhism had connections to dogyal lamas. Nebesky Wojkowitz was a student of Domo Geshe Rinpoche, as was his friend, Prince Peter of Greece and Lama Anagarika Govinda. Lama Yeshe who later founded the FPMT was very keen to spread the Dharma west, and Kelsang gyatso seems to have shared this desire to teach westerners, agreeing some kind of teaching thing with Thomas Merton.
The latter was also a student of actively anti-dogyal lama Chatrul Sangye Dorje, as was Sangharakshita. In one teaching I heard a recording of “Bhante”, who made a great deal out of his links to rime lamas, was talking about protectors and said, with a laugh, that sometimes a lama’s protector can disagree with another lama’s protector. He recounted an anecdote I can’t fully remember but it went something like; one of his Nyingma lamas came to him one day after having a bad dream and explaining that he can’t see another lama because their protectors don’t get on. Sangharakshita thought this was funny but seemed to lack the curiosity to find out what was behind this. My guess is it was a Nyingma lama avoiding a dogyal lama. In another teaching about his teachers he recounts an incident when one of Dhardo Rinpoche’s students was being magically attacked by someone. Stones were falling onto his roof. He tells Dhardo Rinpoche and later the stones stop falling. Sangharakshita tells Dhardo, who says he “did a little puja” with a wry smile. I guess this was a dogyal puja but again Sangharakshita misses the point and claims Dhardo was doing Buddhist white magic against Nepali black magic.

Sangharakshita also seems to miss the history of sectarian division that the dogyal cult stirred up. He says that Dhardo Rinpoche wasn’t against Nyingma and used as evidence the fact that many of his previous incarnations were Nyingma lamas. This is the case for many tulku lineages and monasteries in Eastern Tibet, which were forcefully converted by Pabongkha and his followers from Kagyu or Nyingma to Gelug. Sangharakshita simply didn’t know about these things and, like many early western students of Tibetan Buddhism, just took what he could from where he could without understanding any of the complexities or differences.

However, it seems to me that Dhardo Rinpoche must have been aware of the issue and sought to influence Sangharakshita to follow him more than the Nyingmas he was hanging around with. A couple of things come to mind. In one anecdote Sangharakshita recounts how Dhardo Rinpoche had a word with some drunk Nyingma monks. They were drinking and said it was alright because Guru Rinpoche drank. Dhardo criticised them and said it might be alright for Guru Rinpoche but was not alright for them as they were young monks with no realisation.

In another anecdote, Sangharakshita explains how he bought a cheap Tibetan text a poor man was selling in the market. It turned out to be a Nyingma ngondro text. He takes it to Dhardo Rinpoche who helps him translate it. This struck me because the text would have undoubtedly contained the Vajra Guru mantra and the FWBO, as I knew them, always mispronounced the Vajra Guru mantra Om Ah Hum JETSUN Guru Padma Siddhi Hum. Was this through Dhardo’s deliberate misdirection? Dhardo himself was a student of Pabongkha and gave Sangharakshita Pabongkha’s Chittamani Tara practice. Pabongkha was very much against the recitation of the vajra guru mantra and, according to one anecdote I heard from a lama, used to have people that recited it thrown out of his teachings.
I think it was Dhardo rinpoche who gave Sangharakshita a tangkha of Naro Kacho Vajrayogini with dogyal as one of the two protectors prominently displayed at the bottom. This picture was reproduced in Vessantara McMahon’s book Meeting the Buddhas. I really liked the book when it was first published. I bought the first edition but noticed that in subsequent editions the publisher (Windhorse – in-house FWBO) had cut the bottom off the picture with dogyal now missing, presumably that was to reflect the growing controversy around the subject rather than to hide Bhante’s dogyal affiliations?
Sorry this is a bit of a ramble. I suppose my conclusion is that Sangharakshita never really knew enough to even know that dogyal was an issue, let alone deliberately take a controversial position. But that also, Gelug lamas did all they could to influence the newly interested western students into adopting their approach (the way they influenced western academia into viewing Madhyamaka their way was a big problem for ages) and this was driven by enthusiastic dogyal lamas. The NKT are the logical expression of this.

As far as Sangharakshita promoting kelsang goes, I think the name dropping and comments he makes about others are largely designed to promote himself or lend himself authority rather than the other way round. Saying nice things about kelsang might be an attempt to attract the same kind of people that are attracted to the NKT.

The feeling is in no way reciprocated, if kelsang lodro’s response to the FWBO is anything to go by, As I heard from him: when the Bodhisattva Centre first opened in Brighton the FWBO Brighton Buddhist Centre offered a gift of offering bowls to the new NKT centre as a gesture of Buddhist unity. Lodro said they never used them as the bowls weren’t right and the FWBO is corrupt and have no lineage.
- 303
  
  tenpel on November 5, 2016 at 1:14 am
  Reply
  
  it’s atrocious how he managed to have so much influence
  
  I think he managed it in the same way like Kelsang Gyatso: exploiting the naivety and faith of ill-informed but open-hearted Western seekers. And these open-hearted Western seekers became at one point their close minded, self-manipulating followers who’ve totally missed to question their teachers, to question what they taught & to question their behaviour … – instead, they tend to defend them by all means.
- 304
  
  NO NAME on November 5, 2016 at 11:09 am
  Reply
  
  These anecdotes demonstrate how little S understood Tibetan language at the time ( there were very few translators in Kalimpong during this period) and, by extension, how he could therefore have not understood any of the higher teachings. The story of the rocks falling on the roof is actually taken from the life of the Fifth Dalai Lama ( something Dhardo would certainly have known since he was an avid.devotee of Dolgyal whose actions are recounted in the same series of stories.)
  His total mistranslation of Guru Rinpoches mantra, even though he supposedly received assistance from Dhardo ( which is again doubtful since, as a Dolgyal devotee, Dhardo would have seen as heretical) speaks reems. How cold he ever understand the texts if, even with assistance, he makes such basic errors.
  His emphasis on being ‘ given’ Chittamani Tsra, rather than using the word ‘ received’ is an example of S self serving use of language Another, pfrequent trick of his. He often uses the old NLP trick of humming affirmatively when he makes an assertion, a technique used to convince the listener of his correctness and their agreement.
  His claim to have been student of the eminent masters he lists have never been confirmed by the majority of the. Masters he lists; Jamyang Khyentses translator had never heard of him and Chatral Sangye Dorje even issued a letter.disassociating himself from such claimants.
  To sum up, Sangharakshita is a master of nothing except self aggrandisement and deception. His accounts of his time in India are peppered with exaggerations, half truths and untruths, as the above account and indeed the FWBO Files proved
  - 305
    
    NO NAME on November 5, 2016 at 2:05 pm
    Reply
    
    Chatral Sangye Dorjes letter denouncing charlatans claiming to have been his students
    http://www.shabkar.org/teachers/tibetanbuddhism/chatral_rinpoche.htm
306

learninglive2 on November 6, 2016 at 12:33 pm
Reply

Considering the pain of current devotees: This may be useful for all of us.

Click to access intrafamilialabuse.pdf

It may be helpful to those in Triratna, who are trying to come to terms – for the first time or yet again – with the most recent revelations of Sangharakshita’s spiritual manipulations involving sex and / or sex and secrecy. It is also useful for those of us not / no longer in Triratna to understand how shock, rage, confusion, disbelief and denial play out for the ‘family’ members not directly involved. In FWBO / Trirtana family, several ‘brothers’ with corroborating claims and stories have shown the long-term damage and despair created directly for adolescents by Sangharakshita’s spiritual-sexual abuses. Brothers and sisters have told us how the ideological and instituational conditions for such spiritual-sexual abuse were created and practised over decades. The abuses continues via denial and cover up. This linked article (albeit relating to children / adolescent situations) indicates very clearly how other family members are damaged, too.
The most needy in Triratna will need to reaffirm their devotion to Sangharakshita as to do otherwise will throw them into a vortex of pain and despair. When the father abuses his power and trust to manipulate his juniors, it is a tragedy for all. In this case the father is a religious figure / leader and ALL his devotees are caught in the tragic web as direct or indirect victims of abuses of trust and power that started a long time ago. It would be interesting to hear from others in Triratna or formerly in FWBO / Triratna, who are experiencing or who have experienced the fall out from father figure abuses of his order adolescents / their Dharma siblings.
It is important for all of us to understand the deeply tragic situation that ALL devotees past and present find themselves in. It would be useful for Triratna people to access external counselling to discuss their shock, pain, confusion and / or grief. Turning to ‘spiritual friends’ may compound the ‘pro-Sangharakshita truth’ presented as The Truth for longer. Mitra turning to order members for answers may get the current party line. There are rumours that one person in the order has openly expressed more sympathy for their damaged Dharma sibling(s) than in the past? Can someone tell us more about this?
It would also be good to hear from someone once / still connected to Triratna, who recognises the indirect fall out detailed in the article.

Click to access intrafamilialabuse.pdf
- 307
  
  jigmeyeshe on November 6, 2016 at 6:29 pm
  Reply
  
  Ironically, many of the ‘kalyanamitras’ in Triratna are counsellors themselves. Who are well aware of the issue of the ‘shadow’ aspect of the self.
  - 308
    
    NO NAME on November 7, 2016 at 12:13 pm
    Reply
    
    And their willingness to deny thee truth, even to themselves is the shadow aspect. of the FWBO Triratna
- 309
  
  frenzy on November 10, 2016 at 12:27 am
  Reply
  
  Re learninglive2:
  I apriciate your text, equally for content and tone…
  Thank you.
310

Jo White on November 8, 2016 at 6:10 pm
Reply

Anti-family still and always: In August 2016, three weeks before the BBC programme was broadcast, the Triratna media team gave Sangharakshita / Lingwood yet another platform to teach his anti-family rhetoric. In this session, hosted openly on web via soundcloud, he teaches that spirituality will be impaired by taking on a family and tells us that order members are not individuals but bound to be be dutiful to his order. He tells us that as order members we should not be making individual decisions but need to consult our spiritual friends i.e. those immersed in Sangharakshitas teachings. Anyone considering making up their own mind is thus displaying, according to SR / Lingwood ‘individuality in the negative sense’ i.e. you are not as available to spread the Dharma as presented by him. Couched in language that suggests he has your best spiritual interests at heart, this piece reinforces his anti-family teaching and his desire to control order members to serve his interests.

(Btw, Two men have reported that they have been told very recently by certain order member(s) at Padmaloka (focus of BBC programme) that family will impinge on their spiritual life in the order. One has been told he needs to leave his family if he is serious about making spiritual progress. Padmavajra’s name is being mentioned as someone with ‘hardline’ Sangharakshita views on family. A resident or visiting senior order member from Germany is definitely proposing ‘meeting’ possible female partners i.e. with the intention of ensuring compliance with the order.)

Soundcloud post from August 2016:
Interviewer (Vidyadevi or Kalyanaprabha?) What are your thoughts now about family within a spiritual life? Is there anything you can say about that?

Sangharakshita: Well, I suppose there is quite a lot I could say and some of it would perhaps be a bit controversial but it’s not just a question of spiritual life in general. Within Triratna there is also a question of your relationship to family if you’re an order member – and if you are an order member, you are taking your spiritual life and you’re taking your practice and indeed your living of the Dharma very very seriously. So you have to consider whether or to what extent a family of one kind or another impinges upon that life or not so that’s a very serious thing and obviously one shouldn’t commit oneself to the three jewels as an order member without a lot of very serious thought and if you add to your personal responsibilities, whether as an order member or not, by taking on a family, well, you need again to think very seriously and to consult your spiritual friends because it will make a difference. So, I don’t think we should rush into any important change in our lives without due consideration and without consulting our spiritual freinds.
It’s a not a question of ‘Well that’s my life. Hmmm? It doesn’t concern other people.’ If you are an order member in a sense your life is not your own. You’ve committed yourself to the buddha, the dharma and the sangha, so you’re not leading any longer if you did lead originally a purely self-centred life and you don’t think simply in terms of what YOU as an individual would like to do. You take into account the fact that you are an order member of an order as when you become an order member, you it#s goodbye to individuality in the negative modern sense.

Interviewer: Has that quality of individual negativity become stronger, do you think, in the order or in society in general?

SR: I think it has become stronger in society partly because there is a greater emphasis on one’s rights and decreasing emphasis on duty. Well, I wrote this more than half a century ago and I think what I wrote then still holds good.

Warning: While teachings such as this are still propagated, a new recruit to Triratna could find themselves spiritually befriended by people who still hold to the rhetoric displayed in this interview and in many, many more public places let alone private spaces.
311

tenpel on November 9, 2016 at 1:15 am
Reply

Sounds like the continuation of denial – sexual abuse has been prevented for the last thirty years – an TBO representative claims…
https://boeddhistischdagblad.nl/achtergronden/76604-76604/

“Google translate”:
Ujukarin, representing Triratna in BUN says, “I am and always a wholehearted follower of Sangharakshita, although he -mogelijk- his human side may have made mistakes in valuing the situation with students annex lovers thirty years ago. And that kind of risk of error ‘Triratna learned like many other programs which have Sangha. As thirty years we have rules to prevent this in the future and to my knowledge have prevented the last thirty years.
So yeah, I do not see what I’m here to show more sympathy than did in the previous debate. I have sympathy for them apparently now feel the pain of something they did thirty years ago, knowingly and adults among themselves, whether or not under “pressure” of the teacher and Sangha because there are differences, the fact views, and we this could have prevented all together if the rules had been when the views of NOW stricter.
But anyhow, now might still be situations where it could have gone wrong than we have now before the counselor alongside the hotline. My Sangha and I have nothing to hide … “
- 312
  
  frenzy on November 9, 2016 at 3:20 pm
  Reply
  
  Re Tenpel:
  Translation by dutch contact:
  
  ”Ujukarin, representative of Triratna for the Dutch Buddhist Union says:
  I am and will stay wholeheartedly follower of sangharakshita, dispite him – possibly- on his human side could have made mistakes in estimating the situation with students annex lovers 30 years ago. And from that sort of ‘chance for mistakes’ Triratna has learned as many others have. Allready around 30 years we have rules that must prevent this for the future en as far i know also háve for the last 30 years.’
  So well, i dont see how i can show more sympathy then what we have in the previous discussion. I have symphathy that they aparently now feel the pain of something they did 30 years ago, with full knowledge as adults among adults. wether or not under ‘pressure’ of the teacher and the sangha, as the representation of facts vary. and that we with all of us together could have prevented ths if the rules then would, with the knowledge we have NOW, been more strict.
  But anyhow, would there be situations where something could have gone wrong, we now have for that the national independent counselor and hotline. My sangha and i have nothing to hide…”
  
  Compared here with statement from the chair (till v recent) of Ujukarins local buddhist centre at request (oktober 2016):
  ”There are not yet any local ethical quidelines, polocies and safeguardingstructures. except for those by the Budhdha formulated in the 5 and respectively 10 precepts (trainingprinciples).”
  
  Ujukarin says about this (here/Tenpels) thread: ”No i do not find it informative, rather disinformative. The background of the critique is deeply negative, has all sorts of non-buddhistic elements as a clinging to Victorian Familyvalues. family values the Buddhia would have been appalled by etc.”
  - 313
    
    tenpel on November 9, 2016 at 8:02 pm
    Reply
    
    Thank you Frenzy.
    
    Very interesting to get to know more about the discriminating and judging faculties of Ujukarin – representative of Triratna for the Dutch Buddhist Union:
    
    No i do not find it informative, rather disinformative. The background of the critique is deeply negative, has all sorts of non-buddhistic elements as a clinging to Victorian Familyvalues. family values the Buddhia would have been appalled by etc.
    
    I didn’t know that I am (or we are) “deeply negative” and that we are “all sorts of non-buddhistic elements as a clinging to Victorian Family values.”
    I am not deeply negative, I am not a non-buddhistic element. I don’t cling to Victorian family values. – Just to make that clear. I wonder how Ujukarin can prove or substantiate his claims? Or is it just an ad hominem attack by Ujukarin, if you have no argument slander your opponent?
    
    Ujukarin, please give good arguments, don’t slander your opponents.
    
    To make one point once and for all clear, I have no problem with homosexuality in any way and my website contains a well thought out article with a lot of further links about the subject of Buddhism and homosexuality. Also here I made very clear that the Buddha himself never ever said anything about homosexuality, however, he for sure taught the abandoning of desire. He taught that non-desire is highest bliss and that desire is a main cause of samsara. What FWBO presents with regard to sexuality is sprung from the desires and fantasies of Dennis Lingwood (promoted as “Bhante Urgyen Sangharakshita” by TBO). The presentation of Dennis and his students about sexuality and the superiority of homosexuality over heterosexuality or male spirituality over female spirituality are non-buddhistic not my (or our) refusal of these distortions! While for their assertions there is no Sutra or teaching by the Buddha for my claims there is. The Buddha indeed taught again and again that non-desire is highest bliss and that desire is a main cause of samsara. Therefore, according to Ujukarin’s own phrase combined with good reasoning it follows, the TBO leadership are “non-buddhistic elements” who are clinging to sexual desires and sell that as Dharma.
    - 314
      
      frenzy on November 9, 2016 at 9:03 pm
      Reply
      
      What struck me was the dissonance between the (Triratna) statements: ”Triratna has learned as many others have. Allready around 30 years we have rules that must prevent this for the future” and/but ”There are not yet any local ethical quidelines, polocies and safeguardingstructures. except for those by the Budhdha formulated in the 5 and respectively 10 precepts (trainingprinciples).”
      What ‘rules’ are we talking about here?
      Combined with his view that ”they aparently now feel the pain of something they did 30 years ago, with full knowledge as adults among adults. wether or not under ‘pressure’ of the teacher and the sangha, as the representation of facts vary.”
      Whát have they learned..?
      - 315
        
        NO NAME on November 10, 2016 at 8:55 am
        Reply
        
        Indeed, dissonance is the word for, whereas he claims there are no specific guidelines in Triratna centres other than the five precepts and Triratnas invented 10, Munisha and the BBC state that guidelines exist/ are in place ( as we know, they are not yet in place)
        In the Dutch Buddhist newspaper article, he refers to traditional Buddhist values as Victorian, presumably in elation to concerns expressed about sexual activity between his teacher and students. This is an appeal to ignorance and contemporary liberal values, whereas the Buddhist condemnation of such abusive activity is long established and not shaped by social mores- changing religion tto fit social mores is to pollute the wisdom of the Buddha whose teaching, according to Sangharakshita, transforms society to fit religion. More dissonance
        Most disturbing is his reference to polygamous relationships in Nepal. Setting aside the fact that Nepal is overwhelmingly Hind, one wonders what he is trying to justify here; is this not an attempt at justifying relationships with multiple partners? Does he not understand that even in polygamous Buddhist relationships in Nepalese society, the partners are committed to one another? Polygamy is certainly not considered a justification for sex with no strings, with multiple partners, beyond the perameters of the committed family relationship
        Most disturbing is the fact that this man is Triratnas representative in the Netherlands. The pseudo dharma he reaches throughout his responses, combined with the disdain and total lack of concern for his teachers victims, are both poisonous and venomous. If this person is representative of what decades of practicing Lingwoodism results in, Lord Buddha help him AND the people of the Netherlands
        
        316
        
        Jo White on November 10, 2016 at 1:46 pm
        Reply
        
        It would be useful to know where the man now is, who locked schoolboy Y into a room to initiate him into kalyana mitrata Sangharakshita style. There is no doubt in my mind that this was not a one-off incident. Where is that man? It is far more than likely that this behaviour has happened again inside and outside the order as he was not able to control his sexual urges. The same is clearly true of Sangharakshita, too, judging by the number of men who have already come forward in some way. Ananda’s description above is hideous. What is he doing to himself to allow such coercion of him to gratify a Man claiming to be a Buddhist Teacher to pass? He was not teaching you non-attachment to your girlfriend, Ananda. He wanted you and your beautiful young male body for sex, however nice he has been since. You know that, Ananda.
        Using sex to apparently spiritually unblock young men is behaviour that was encouraged and endorsed by Sangharakshita. The bottom line is that it was sex to gratify the older man be it Sangharakshita or others encouraged to do so. Indeed, many of his teachings groomed young men into this situation and could still be used in places where safeguarding has not yet penetrated. It does not matter whether one is heterosexual or homosexual if this is what happened to you in a retreat centre, a single sex house or a place of refuge. It seems that people inside the organisation are wanting to talk but can’t talk unfettered to those outside. It’s all in the family. A short name beginning with K keeps returning. He was a private preceptor and lived at Madhyamaloka until a few years ago. What sexual power did he still hold over his mitra? More importantly … who is he and where is he now? I am in no doubt that he will have repeated some of his disturbing behaviours inside and outside the order.
        There will be other young men who were ‘had’ by this man and SR LIngwood at Padmaloka and elsewhere. If you are one of them, please seek external counselling help if you now recognise what happened to you under the guise of spirituality. Do not rely on partisan spiritual friends or counsellors in TRirtana as he / she may try to keep it all in house still. They are trapped by family loyalties i. e to father figure SR. It will be too painful for them to detach and see things as they really are. Hopefully, some will move towards the truth more and more.
        
        317
        
        NO NAME on November 11, 2016 at 5:28 pm
        
        I think this is schoolboy Ys letter you refer to http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/Yashomitra.htm
        The rapist was K who left the Order after embezzling 18000UKP As for his current location, watch this space- should be some time soon. The plot is thickening very rapidly
        
        318
        
        NO NAME on November 12, 2016 at 2:03 pm
        
        The theft by K is mentioned at the foot of the following page, under the heading Sangharakshitas Procurer Embezzles Charity Funds
        http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/Jnanavira.htm
        Soon after this shenanigans, K started to be referred to as an’ex OM’ though I can find no resignation letter or letter of expulsion. Clearly, the issue was hushed up. However,his doesn’t appear to be the end of the saga of K
        More soon
        
        319
        
        Joc on November 24, 2016 at 8:38 am
        
        He is no longer in the order. He is known to and being ‘monitored’ by ‘appropriate authorities’.
        
        320
        
        frenzy on November 10, 2016 at 5:55 pm
        Reply
        
        Contact says that it has been stated by Ujukarin also that apparently it is considered v normal, as we speak, that a senior ordermember does not aknowldege himself being in a teacher position (thus dynamic) with the attendees of his retreats, who come esp. from abroad for their specific teaching. And to suggest there was such a teacher/student relationships and thus mixture of romantic/teacher-spiritual aspirant relationship is interpreted as, quotes: ‘’throwing with mud’’ and ‘’trying to blacken…’’ and ‘’not taking responsability’’.
- 321
  
  Prajnacitta on June 15, 2019 at 3:53 am
  Reply
  
  The dissection of a person into ‘human side’ and (presumably) ‘spiritual side’ as expressed here is, indeed, the very psychological mechanism of creating or perpetuating the psychological fracturing or schism that pervades cults. If you see the leader in that way, then you also see yourself in that way, so rather than the practices (meditation, dharma etc) creating greater integration, wholeness and psychological unity, the milieu engenders the development of a schizoid state where a person is divided against himself.
  
  In every video i have seen of DL – and even when I met him in person – I always felt that he was an emotionally shut-off person, dualised and schizoid. He will, therefore attract students around him who are already inclined that way, possibly looking to heal that rift and division they experience within themselves. Unfortunately, the group they are in – by virtue of the nature of their founder, by virtue of the teachings they expound and by virtue of the dualising environment they find themselves within, will only make their condition worse. Of course, they will believe that they are on a wholesome path and things will all get resolved ‘one day’, when they have done enough pujas and prostrations… So their adherence to the TBO path is also an expression of their hope for healing.
  
  But such a schizoid disposition inevitably means you become increasingly un-self-aware, and its this lack of self-awareness (smrti, mindfulness) that means you ‘overlook’ the faults of DL and DL himself is unable to see the damaging effects of what he has done in his ‘creative phase of sexual experimentation’….
  
  So rather than becoming less fearful, less insecure and less filled with worry, being in the TBO will do the opposite. Dualised teachings perpetuated by a schizoid teacher will only end up fracturing the consciousness of those that follow it.
322

NO NAME on November 9, 2016 at 9:11 am
Reply

Liars, deniers and hypocrites-the new face of western Buddhism
Shame on these people
- 323
  
  tenpel on November 9, 2016 at 10:11 am
  Reply
  
  It’s now also the official face of America.
324

frenzy on November 13, 2016 at 10:37 am
Reply

It is sad so many people don’t recognise and get stuck in pathological dynamics. Esp. those with influence and power over others. Good to know that in the light of interconnectness we ALL have influence.
325

NO NAME on November 13, 2016 at 1:30 pm
Reply

Truth eventually prevails and justice will be done- the law of karma ensures that
The irony is that Lingwood et al, who dare to call themselves ‘buddhist’ try to ignore and resist its inevitability and reap the fruits of his evil acts in this life
- 326
  
  NO NAME on November 16, 2016 at 8:34 am
  Reply
  
  Some very disturbing facts beginning to emerge about one of Sangharakshitas chief procurers of young men, ex OM Kovida ( as he is cautiously referred to by the Order) The extent of his activities and their duration, as well as the consequences are almost to shocking to comment on. However, once the facts have been corroborated, this blog will report all the facts
327

Joc on November 15, 2016 at 7:19 pm
Reply

I agree with frenzy’s comments about lack of safe safeguarding and the crossing of teacher-student boundaries in FWBO / Triratna groups. I can also confirm that some order members resort to ad hominem attacks if anyone questions the order and / or its leader Sangharakshita.
There were no safeguarding policies in place in Norwich Buddhist Centre at the start of 2016.
We (two female school / college teachers) have a close family member / friend connected to Triratna. We have both promoted this group in our schools in the past, but did not know of the damaging teachings of its leader until quite recently.
We met the chair of Norwich Buddhist centre and the women’s order convenor at her house earlier this year.
The chairman was very polite to us but clearly very, very uncomfortable talking about safeguarding.
He said that Triratna did not need safeguarding because they have the precepts.
I drew their attention to the ‘Safeguarding Children and Vulnerable Adults’ guidelines which went up on The Buddhist Centre, Triratna’s website, last November and the definitions of abuse included in this Triratna document. I also drew their attention to the disclosure of abuse written in 2003 by a former order member, who was 17 and a schoolboy when he was groomed for sex via kalyana mitrata by senior order members including Sangharakshita at Padmaloka. He was under the age of consent.
From Triratna’s document concerning vulnerable adults. Their children’s guidelines covers under 18s.
What is ‘abuse’? Abuse is the harming of a person usually by someone who is in a position of power, trust or authority over them, or who may be perceived by that person to be in a position of power, trust or authority over them; for example by a Friend, Mitra or Order member who is helping to run [name of Triratna Buddhist Centre/enterprise] activities those newer to such activities. The harm may be physical, psychological or emotional, or it may exploit the vulnerability of the victim in more subtle ways.
Types of abuse
Physical
• Bodily assaults resulting in injuries e.g. hitting, slapping, pushing, kicking, misuse of medication, restraint or inappropriate sanctions. • Bodily impairment e.g. malnutrition, dehydration, failure to thrive • Medical/healthcare maltreatment
Sexual
• Rape, incest, acts of indecency, sexual assault • Sexual harassment or sexual acts to which the vulnerable adult has not consented, or could not consent or was pressured into consenting. • Sexual abuse might also include exposure to pornographic materials, being made to witness sexual acts; also sexual harassment, with or without physical contact.
Psychological/emotional
• Threats of harm, controlling, intimidation, coercion, harassment, verbal abuse, enforced isolation or withdrawal from services or supportive networks. • Humiliation • Bullying, shouting or swearing
Abuse through neglect

• Ignoring medical or physical care needs, failure to provide access to appropriate health, social care or educational services the withholding of the necessities of life, such as medication, adequate nutrition and heating
Financial or material
• Theft, fraud • Exploitation, pressure in connection with wills, property or inheritance or financial transactions; the misuse or misappropriation of property, possessions or benefits
Discriminatory
• Language which is racist, sexist, or based on a person’s disability, gender or sexual orientation, etc

The chairman of Norwich Buddhist Centre remained polite. He told us that all that this had happened in the past and was no longer relevant. He said that the order had discussed this for a long time and that the issues had been resolved. He said that in his opinion safeguarding and gone too far. He maintained that Triratna’s policies only refer to the present and the future and cannot be used to look at the past. He said all the relationships with Sangharakshita had been consensual .
I reminded him that the school boy was under the age of consent, and in a vulnerable situation as an aspirant order member placing trust in Sangharakshita and other senior men.
The women’s order convenor made ad hominem attacks to discredit the writer and other former order members who had made similar claims. She described them as ‘trouble makers’ and ‘jilted gay ex lovers’. She accused me of wanting to kill an old man.
We explained that if either of us were shown a disclosure of abuse dated 2003 suggesting that the headteac her and / or senior staff had encouraged a 17 year old student to engage in sexual acts to make educational progress, we would be obliged to follow safeguarding procedures and hand over the disclosure to safeguarding experts and external authorities.
The Norwich chairman and the women’s order convenor did not want to know.
Since I flagged up safeguarding concerns, I have been the subject and object of ad hominem attacks in an email sent to my close family member. This was from another order member who was not present at that meeting. I have seen the email and am shocked at the levels of manipulation, nastiness and intrusion into family life.
- 328
  
  tenpel on November 16, 2016 at 8:40 am
  Reply
  
  Dear Joc. I am very sorry to hear about your experiences.
  I thank you from my heart for having written this very clear, frank comment. It is especially painful to see how Triratna reaches to the vulnerable in schools. Highly likely the best is to inform school authorities. If you like you could also share your observations and experiences with INFORM http://www.inform.ac
  Very best wishes, t
329

Joc on November 16, 2016 at 11:16 am
Reply

It appears that Triratna is organising some safeguarding training now with a church organisation, but that the person who has taken Safeguarding on is also the person responsible for the PR of the group. This is a fundamental flaw in her and Triratna’s understanding of safeguarding.

It seems that past allegations of long term harm to former order members in FWBO / Triratna will not be taken into account as the group’s leader cannot be criticised even lightly without assuring others of one’s gratitude and devotion to him. No one can be objective about someone they bow down to on a shrine.
The email I have seen about me, from a long standing order member, says that the recipient must cease any relationship with me if he wishes to remain in the order and describes me as ‘an impediment’ to his involvement with Triratna. It also delivers ad hominem attacks on a former ‘companion’ of Sangharakshita.
Seeing the email makes me understand how very difficult it is for anybody to speak up as one becomes a trouble maker for doing so. The recipient of the email is told that he is putting himself outside the order by maintaining his friendship to me and also for his part in questioning Sangharakshita’s behaviour. Those reliant on in house friendship groups or housing only must find themselves very lost and isolated for speaking up. Triratna friendships revolve around devotion to Sangharakshita and those who try to speak up from inside must be very brave souls indeed. There is definitely a Public face of Triratna, which is pleasant. There is definitely a private face which is very unpleasant. I have now seen that first hand.
Since the BBC programme was shown I have been told that the local MASH, multi agency safeguarding hub have started work to get safeguarding in place and made schools local to certain Buddhist Centres aware of issues.
Thank you for the information on Inform.
- 330
  
  tenpel on November 16, 2016 at 11:45 am
  Reply
  
  Thank you for sharing your experiences and knowledge.
331

Joc on November 17, 2016 at 11:46 am
Reply

It is also important to say that two other current order members have been very kind to me and asked me to explain what safeguarding involves, not just in documents, but in fully accountable practice. This is encouraging. Since February, two order members have shown that they are very concerned for the well-being of former order members, who have openly written or spoken about their long-term pain and suffering, consequences of trusting in the spiritual guidance of Sangharakshita and his – and others’ – promotion of kalyana mitrata via sex with them. They are concerned that anyone who openly speaks up then gets vilified, excluded and/ or shut down by senior order members and College of Preceptors. They cannot speak openly because they fear the consequences. They cannot speak as they find, but they are definitely brave and caring people who desperately want the order to change for the better and open up.
A former order member, P, told me last week that there was a meeting in 2003 at Wymondham College and everyone was collectively invited by senior order members to share their experiences of sex with Bhante-Sangharakshita. This is shocking. Imagine asking a room full of people to speak up surrounded by devotees of the leader, some still promoting the embedded ideology of ‘being saved from neurotic heterosexual relationships’ or ‘being unblocked spiritually via sex’. It is shocking. He told me that while on retreat Sangharakshita wanted to have sex while others went to early morning meditation and puja at Padmaloka, I do not know if this man gave in or not to Sangharakshita’s sexual needs. He said that some men had a vasectomy – another spiritually beneficial undertaking according to FWBO teachings. This is shocking not in itself, but if taught as spiritual progress.
Apparently, this event is described in a book?

A safe organisation is more than happy for a safeguarding team, with no biases for or against the organisation and / or its leader, to hear the grievances in a completely neutral space. An organisation, whose priority it is to protect itself, its institutions, its media image and its leader at the expense of its members and openess/ honesty is not a safe organisation. An organisation with no external point of safeguarding reference is not a safe organisation, however many paper policies it has written. An organisation that shuts down its whistle blowers is not a safe organisation. There have been so many whistle blowers in the past. Most seem to have resigned as noone can speak up inside for long or detach themselves from Sangharakshita-Bhante without censur.
It is also important to say that I feel for the many decent order members caught up in all this. It must be so hard to have a beloved father figure criticised. He was their teacher-mentor, but who was his? It seems as though he could turn his sexual needs into spiritual practice for others.
It is also important to remember that the young men – and young women – who got involved did so because they enjoyed and benefited from meditation, mindfulness and friendship and / or sought spiritual guidance. They were not the troublemakers and villains of this mess.
332

roxazosin on November 17, 2016 at 2:41 pm
Reply

I have been following this topic for some time now. I just want to thank all of you for the discussion and the information you provide. I have been involved with a Triratna center for several years. I knew about the FWBO files from the beginning, but I nonetheless decided to give this center a try. My personal experience has been mostly positive and I met a lot of wonderful people there, which is the main reason why I am still affiliated with Triratna. However, I dislike the silence around the sexual misconduct of Sangharakshita. If it comes up, then the standard excuses à la “Yeah, we made mistakes in the past/ we experimented a lot in the past / it was all consensual” are provided. I never heard an OM question Sangharakshita’s behaviour or be critical of him. On the contrary, he seems to be unanimously admired and his photograph has a prominent place on the shrine. The one OM who I directly confronted with the FWBO files said that the people who run the FWBO files site are “full of hatred” (which may be true or not, but it doesn’t make the content automatically untruthful) and “hate Buddhism”. There is no whistleblowing culture.

I am really ambivalent about my future involvement with Triratna. It seems that this kind of abusive behaviour has infiltrated almost every Buddhist group, so I don’t really know where to go instead. I recently checked out my local Shambhala group and it turns out (oh, suprise) that they have had similiar issues. At least they seem to work on a plan how to handle it better: http://shambhalatimes.org/2016/11/14/sexually-enlightened-society/

I also found this article which I can really recommend: http://www.lionsroar.com/proactive/
Unfortunately, Triratna is still far away from being proactive.
- 333
  
  tenpel on November 17, 2016 at 3:22 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you very much for your feedback and for sharing your knowledge and experiences!
  Thank you also for the links.
- 334
  
  NO NAME on November 17, 2016 at 5:04 pm
  Reply
  
  With regard to the motives and nature of the FWBO files author, I have had the good fortune of meeting the author, Gary Beesley, on several occasions
  When I asked why he had written the Files he told me he did it to rectify the wrongs and false doctrines Sangharakshita was preaching and to seek justice for the victims of his sexual abuse. He praised the sincerity of genuine lower level OMs but said the senior levels of the Order were fatally. corrupted As for whether he hates Buddhism, he has been a Buddhist for 40 years so that’s nonsense
  He has always struck. me.as being genuinely concerned for people and for the future of buddhism
- 335
  
  NO NAME on November 17, 2016 at 9:25 pm
  Reply
  
  “Abusive behaviour has infiltrated almost every Buddhist group” No, though you can be forgiven for thinking that especially given your terrible experience so far
  Why not try just being a Buddhist, applying your understanding to your experience instead of falling victim to this common disease among westerners; the misconception that one has to belong to a particular group before one can call oneself Buddhist
  Lord Buddha is your example- he wasn’t a member of anything!
- 336
  
  tenpel on November 17, 2016 at 11:34 pm
  Reply
  
  BTW; I missed to give attention to this sentence “It seems that this kind of abusive behaviour has infiltrated almost every Buddhist group, so I don’t really know where to go instead.”. There are good and non abusive groups and as far as I can see they are still the majority. And in a way to practice Buddhism is not a matter of being part of any group or local “Sangha” but rather listening, studying and practicing the Dharma. If there are good teachers (and there are many) you could just go there, receive teachings and practice them. No need to get involved with any Dharma center and their policies if you don’t like …
  - 337
    
    roxazosin on November 19, 2016 at 9:57 pm
    Reply
    
    @No Name and tenpel: You’re right when you say that one does not have to belong to a group in order to be a Buddhist. However, I found that being a lone wolf is very difficult. Years before I got involved with Triratna, I visited a Buddhist group for the first time. I didn’t feel very comfortable with them, so I left and tried to practice on my own. Unfortunately, it didn’t work out and I made no progress at all. I have read some books, but I didn’t manage to establish a regular practice. This only started to work when I joined Triratna. The second reason why I feel that practicing on my own is not a good idea is because I had some pretty horrible and scary meditation experiences, probably some old trauma resurfacing. I found it really helpful to have somebody to talk to, even if what they said wasn’t always particularly helpful. But there are people at Triratna whom I trust and who I can turn to when things get tough.
    - 338
      
      NO NAME on November 19, 2016 at 10:28 pm
      Reply
      
      This is just the blind leading the blind. Nobody is genuinely qualified to comment on ones internal experience unless they have genuine long term experience under the guidance of a genuine master. Anyone who claims they are is just a fantasist
      If you have developed a practice you can now move on. If you need guidance, seek a genuine teacher , not the misguided egotists appointed by a lying sexual misconduct expert
      - 339
        
        tenpel on November 19, 2016 at 11:03 pm
        Reply
        
        … or confused Westerners who praise manipulative, psychological & spiritual forced sexual misconduct with young men below the age of consent as »the way of the greeks that has served the greek society so well« …
    - 340
      
      tenpel on November 19, 2016 at 10:59 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you Roxazosin.
      In fact, I think it is very good, to have a well functioning, supportive group or spiritual friends / environment. Good spiritual friends are crucial. The problem in the West seems to be, that there is rarely a Buddhist group that can fulfil a healthy and spiritual nourishing function. Rather these groups are filled with people who have heavy loads of cultural and psychological backpacks, and their lack of healthiness which they want to heal in those groups meets with people who also have heavy loads of cultural and psychological backpacks. This can’t work as long as there is no majority of healthy, mature spiritual friends in such communities or a real beacon of light / extremely advanced Bodhisattva in such a group that can help all to transform.
      
      At the moment, I think, a group with a majority of mature and healthy spiritual friends is quite likely really rare and hard to find. The illusion seems to be that it is easy to find any such support. My and others’ experiences rather show the contrary.
      
      Since Triratna stresses spiritual friendship and has some unique, caring qualities to a certain degree, wich most find useful, it is natural, that people who are looking to find support in a group are drawn to Triratna (or similar groups). However, this group seems to be sick from the top and this sickness is not obvious at the beginning … so, sooner or later problems will occur.
      
      My own experience and observation is, those groups who feel well in the beginning, who show or manifest or pretend of having a caring or inspiring group culture (closeness, togetherness, caring) are most often the most controversial, exploitative, manipulative groups with aspects of (or even fully fledged) abuses of power. My observation is, less caring or affectionate groups don’t have these exploitative, manipulative or abuses of power issues, they let you live more or less as you are but they care less, and you feel more alone …
      
      It seems to be a vicious circle. Many of those who left the NKT and loved the group togetherness and support (though deceptive in the long run) tried to find that outside of the NKT and all of them with whom I spoke failed and were finally frustrated. Since many years my suggestion is therefore, don’t look for groups, look for good teachers and good dharma because at least this won’t let you down unlike if you place your hopes and energy in rather dysfunctional groups with members who come from a dysfunctional culture, dysfunctional families etc …
      
      Sounds a bit like painting things so black, but so far I don’t have good counter examples of healthy groups. And even where people praised groups (like Thích Nhất Hạnh) there were other problems (e.g. Thích Nhất Hạnh is accused of running a type of a »happiness cult« and according to stories I heard and people who have more insight into this group, this might be the case. However, this does not deny the qualities he and his groups obviously have.)
      
      I think, best is to let go to cling to find a healthy nourishing group because it is unlikely to meet one. It might be more timely and recommendable to cling to good teachers and teachings, to practice what is really helpful and to do wishing and dedication prayers to find good, healthy, mature, sustaining spiritual friends (in a community or without a community) in the future.
      
      Even better, if possible, it might be wiser to heal oneself first and then to become part of a healthier group. As Gandhi said: »Be the change you want to see in the world.« Problem is, if you need a group for growth so much and there is none, what can you do? At the end, only to give your best in the given circumstances and to practice as good as possible and putting energy in dedication and wishing prayers might be the better option than going through the hopes and fears and resulting frustrations of encountering different but rather dysfunctional Western Buddhist groups …
      
      BTW, the joyous effort a Bodhisattva/Bodhisattvi needs to cultivate includes the »power of steadfastness«. This power depends on cultivating the »pride about action«. Tsongkhapa in his Lam Rim Chen Mo describes that mental attitude as follows:
      
      Pride about action means that no matter who else may be your companion as you practice the path, you do not count on them but accomplish it yourself alone. Engaging in the Bodhisattva Deeds states:
      
      »I alone shall do it.«
      This is pride about action.
      
      Also Nagarjuna’s Friendly Letter (Suhrl-lekha) says:
      
      »Liberation depends on oneself;
      It never occurs through the help of others!
      
      The thought, »I alone shall achieve this without having any expectation of others,« is similar to pride, so it is given the name »pride about action.«
      
      Quite of an empowerment & encouragement, I always felt…
      
      Now, when you need advice (as I do too!) you can find it when you take care of creating and keeping good relationships to healthy and supportive spiritual friends. These healthy and supportive spiritual friends can come from different groups and backgrounds. I think there is no need to be part of a group to get good advice, isn’t it? In my case I have different teachers and spiritual friends whom I ask according to their expert level and availability and according to where I stand now on my spiritual path and according to my life situations. In that way I create my own mandala of supportive spiritual friends without having to become part of any group. (I am extremely happy when I live in a monastic environment. I love it. But I think in this time I have also a duty to work in Dharma centres to give something back …, and one of my teachers asked me to work in his Western center …, so I have to compromise what’s good for me and what needs there are.)
      
      If there are people at Triratna whom you trust and whom you can turn to when things get tough, great! If they are good spiritual friends, I guess, they will be good spiritual friends also when you leave Triratna or if you leave them and go a different direction. Again, I think, this is no reason to make oneself dependent on a group.
      - 341
        
        roxazosin on November 21, 2016 at 6:22 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you, tenpel. I’m curious, what do you mean by “happiness cult” in Thich Nhat Hahn groups? Is everybody obliged to “don’t worry, be happy”?
- 342
  
  frenzy on November 20, 2016 at 7:51 pm
  Reply
  
  Roxasozin,
  Thank you for the to the article on proactice polocies, v interesting.
  The vipassna community Spirit Rock has allready developed a combination of ethical guidelines and polocies incl a grievance and reconsiliation procedure, which seems to be totally missing from Triratna’s new ‘model ethical guidelines’, which was posted by Munisha on the website of the buddhist centre just before the bbc item aired. Besides it actually not having been implemented yet it just says:
  
  3
  I undertake to abstain from sexual misconduct. With stillness, simplicity and contentment I purify my body.
  Triratna is a community of people practising the Buddha’s teachings together. As such it is natural that close relationships should develop between us, and that some of these may be sexual relationships.
  We encourage all members of our community to conduct their sexual relationships ethically, with awareness and kindness.
  People in teaching roles or similar have a particular responsibility in this area, particularly to those new to Triratna. We propose that they do not start a relationship while they are the other person’s main connection with Buddhism and Triratna, even when there is clear mutual attraction and wish to enter into a relationship. Rather, we would ask them to wait until the less experienced person has established other effective friendships within our community.
  We suggest that any proposed relationship between someone in a teaching role and a less experienced person is discussed openly in an Order context. Usually this will mean their chapter and/or their preceptor and kalyana mitras.
  
  For comparison see here the Spirit Rock polocies:
  http://www.spiritrock.org/teacher-code-of-ethics-2016
  http://www.spiritrock.org/teacher-ethics-and-reconciliation
  
  Especially with a history of (and still not proparly aknowledged) abuse and with all the concern and information about safeguarding about there is IMO no good reason why any buddhist organisation this day and age still hasn’t found effective safequarding means and ways. The powerfields that keep them from doing so must be very strong. Suggestions of háving safeguarding polocies when not so, having learned from the past when apparently still oblivious of the damage done, suggesting having (no or) resolved issues etc are mostly simply underbuilding these powerfields are still strong.
  
  Thank you Tenpel and No-name for your inspiring and empowering input on group and individual practice, spiritual friendship etc.
  - 343
    
    frenzy on November 21, 2016 at 9:43 pm
    Reply
    
    Also Shambala’s ‘Preventing and Responding to Sexual Misconduct and Harm: Draft Polocy’ is interesting. (at request given in first link of Roxasozin) It seems they have giving it some good thought in regard to for exampe communication and centralising and aknowledging the experience and needs of the person who feels harm(ed).
    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RJfi-7IywUL742emHKZosfbpsBW2j547Cu754xopLt8/edit
    
    Here also Triratna’s Draft (status – not available yet for general public) ‘Protocol for dealing with serious breaches of the law and/or 10 precepts’ – The Triratna Buddhist Order 2016.
    It seems to focus on structures and quidelines for the adressing of ”allegations” and the question of wether someone is ”guilty” or not.
    
    ”For our own internal clarity and for legal reasons, we need a clear procedure to be followed when a member of the Triratna Buddhist Order has committed, or is believed to have committed, a serious breach of the precepts or law. This will apply to all Order members including those in particular positions of responsibility, such as Preceptors, Mitra convenors, Presidents and Chairs.
    
    Some obvious examples of breaches to which this protocol would apply are sexual activity which is illegal or which represents a clear misuse of authority or of the Dharma; alcohol or drug abuse and misappropriation of funds; or well-founded suspicion of such activities.
    
    1. Anyone becoming aware of a serious ethical and/or legal breach should, in the first instance, bring it promptly to the attention of the Chair of the relevant centre or enterprise. 2. Breaches involving the Chair should be raised with the President or Order convenors. 3. If the matter involves a person under 18 years old (or the local age of majority), it should also be brought to the attention of the centre/enterprise’s Safeguarding/Child protection officer, who should refer to their Safeguarding policies (if applicable). 4. Local Order members must not try to resolve the matter privately. They must ask for the help of the Order convenors, their President and the Public preceptors. 5. Experience has shown that it is extremely important to share information only with those who need to know; the person concerned is innocent until proven guilty; schism and much disquiet may result if information circulates before the facts are established. 6. Taking great care over confidentiality, the Chair should bring the matter to the attention of the President and Order convenors, who will collectively decide with whom to share the information further. 7. Taking great care over confidentiality, the Chair may wish to consult their Area council, where there is one, or the European Chairs’ Assembly Development Team, in case the same issue has been encountered elsewhere. 8. The President and Order convenors will set up a small working group of senior Order members. 9. Members of the working group will speak to the Order member(s) concerned, and any others involved, to ascertain the truth if possible. 10. If there are good grounds for believing the allegations to be true, the Order member will be asked to step down immediately from official and teaching responsibilities. 11. The working group will follow up the allegations in discussion with the Order member(s), the person making the allegations and any others involved, keeping in dialogue with the Chair, Order convenors, President and Chair and Deputies of the College. 12. If the allegations are criminal, formal legal advice will be sought and action taken accordingly. It may be necessary to report the matter to the police or other authorities.
    
    Saddhaloka, Chair of the College of Public Preceptors Parami and Lokeshvara, Order convenors Dhammarati, Convenor of the International Council.”
    - 344
      
      NO NAME on November 22, 2016 at 6:53 am
      Reply
      
      All in house, keeping things quiet. “If the allegations are criminal……it may be necessary to report.the issue to the police.” Bullshit. What considerations will be taken?.whether the repiutation oof the Order will be damaged? Elsewhere, if a criminal act is noted, it MUST be reported to the police. This is all just window dressing,with the primary aim of self preservation. And of course, it’s not in place, all just suggestions, not legally binding. More self serving lies AS ALWAYS
    - 345
      
      NO NAME on November 22, 2016 at 7:04 am
      Reply
      
      To knowingly conceal a criminal act is in itself a criminal act under uk law. This safeguarding policy is therefore bullshit. All it safeguards.is Triratnas reputation
      - 346
        
        Stephen on November 22, 2016 at 6:41 pm
        Reply
        
        Sangharakhita says in Conversations with Bhante from 2009: This whole terminiology of abuse has been very much overworked and I don’t think that any of my sexual activities in the past could have been described as remotely abusive.
        
        Mark Dunlop: I said I did not want to – followed by spiritual coercion. Lingwood pressurised him.
        Ananda: Did not want to – I do remember feeling let down, cheapened, almost physically dirty, and I’d have given anything for that not to have happened. Lingwood pressurised him.
        Yashomitra: patted on the bum by Lingwood after a serious sexual assault from K, uses Y for own sexual gratification later. Lies fully – says he never had a sexual relationship with Y. Lingwood and co groomed him.
        Prass: misused spiritually to provide sexual gratification; Lingwood wants him to believe he had given up heterosexuality for the sake of Dhamma; Lingwood grooms him. alienates Prass from mother of P’s child and his son.
        Mitra: Lingwood lies about being celibate since mid 80s. Oral and masturbation sex with mitra. Says he never had sex with mitra. Tells him to keep it secret. Mitra shunned when he speaks up.
        
        People around S collude in the whole thing.
        
        Haselmere – two guys
        BBC 1992 – one guy at padmaloka – abusive teachings flagged up
        BBC 2016 – three guys at padmaloka
        1997 Guardian – Three guys Croydon / elsewhere -abusive teachings flagged up again
        2016 Mitra – one guy – Birmingham
        Shabda: Lots of guys ‘teaching’ KMsex – culture of copying Lingwood and accepting it as normal.
        
        What is triratnas definition of What is abuse?
        
        347
        
        tenpel on November 22, 2016 at 9:51 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you Stephen for this very clear and concise summary!
        
        348
        
        NO NAME on November 23, 2016 at 10:17 am
        Reply
        
        Dont forget Sachin Kumar Singh in India and Terry Delamare in the early days. Thats 9. Nor the meeting in 2003 where senior OMs were asked to talk about their experiences of sex with him-that takes it into double figures [while they claim this was not abuse because it was consensual, it breached fiduciary care responsibility, and thus Triratnas own safeguarding policy which, very conveniently, ‘cannot be applied retrospectively’) In a conversation between 2 OMs, they estimated ‘hundreds”.
        This ‘guru’ is in fact a prolific, serial sex abuser-all bow down before him
        
        349
        
        tenpel on November 23, 2016 at 12:17 pm
        
        Weren’t people similar blind with Sai Baba?
        
        350
        
        NO NAME on November 23, 2016 at 2:53 pm
        
        Can’t comment- haven’t studied the case
351

Triratnavisitor on November 18, 2016 at 12:31 pm
Reply

To add to the discussion on the status and treatment of Sangharakshita within the Order, not only is he referred to as Bhante and Urgyen, he was described (in the last year) at a public talk at the London Buddhist Centre that I attended, by Jnanavaca, the head of LBC, as a Bodhisattva. This produced a sort of excited hush, a frisson, within the room. There is zero chance of them appraising him honestly as they would destroy their Order in the process, given the level of veneration for him and the idiosyncrasy of his presentation of the dharma.

For OMs (such as Miss Anon) now to start saying he is just an ordinary, frail, flawed human being is disingenuous, as that is not the role he has played in the development of the Order, and, in a different way, it is not consistent with his behaviour. His deceitfulness and manipulative behaviour, together with the egotism displayed in Conversations with Bhante and some of his writings and video presentations, indicate a strongly narcissistic personality.

In spite of this (and it is a paradox not unusual in religion) the centres do a lot of good work and there are very many very serious and committed practitioners of the dharma within the Order. They will have to continue their practice, but they will struggle to do that within an environment of Sangharakshita-veneration. They cannot simply up sticks and join another Buddhist movement (the Order has distinctive features that they won’t find elsewhere and that are too important to them, and many are dependent on it for money and housing). It is inevitable that it will split into two. The structure of the Order (each centre being legally distinct from the other (assuming that to be true)) will facilitate a split.
- 352
  
  tenpel on November 18, 2016 at 1:53 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you for your comment!
353

Stephen on November 19, 2016 at 9:23 am
Reply

Mark Dunlop is a very brave and courageous man, who against all the odds, had had the strength and mettle to keep writing, talking and telling the truth. Often in isolation, he has faced derision, contempt and personal attacks from Sangharakshita’s devotees as here:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan/w85Zck-OXAc%5B76-100%5D
The personal attacks and denials continue to this day.
The order’s continued denials, cover ups and reframing of people’s experiences is unravelling. In the recent Inside Out programme two younger men told the BBC similar stories of being lured into sex with Sangharakshita under the guise of spiritual progress and kalyana mitrata. There are more stories on the Dialogue Ireland website and even more that the order know of.
Without Mark’s endurance the truth would have been buried.
Mark is due a public apology from the order and a debt of gratitude for taking on the burden of truth for so long.

I have never met Gary Beesley, who worked so incredibly hard to write ‘The FWBO Files’.
Several pages of the order’s Response to ‘The FWBO Files’ have been deleted since The BBC Inside Out programme was broadcast.
The writer of ‘The FWBO Files’ has also been personally attacked and vilified by the order.
Gary is also due an apology from the order and a debt of gratitude for taking on the burden of truth for so long. He showed there was an embedded culture of abuse. He was right.

The tireless work these men have done to tell the truth over decades will have saved some from the dangers of intimate involvement with FWBO Triratna.

Independently of Mark Dunlop or ‘The FWBO Files’, a German ex-mitra has told his story of sex, denial and secrecy from 2003. Sangharakshita has lied about being celebate since the mid 1980s. The order are complicit in the cover up and lies.

In the space of weeks, the order have been publicly confronted with three more stories of spiritual-sexual abuses, implicating its founder and leader Sangharakshita at Padmaloka and Birmingham. How long will the order maintain that the abusive culture was limited to Croydon and that Sangharakshita was not involved?
354

NO NAME on November 20, 2016 at 10:40 am
Reply

In fact, going to Triratna followers for advice when in need may not be an instance of the blind leading the blind; perhaps it is more akin to the blind leading the partially sighted. For me, having the guts to look in and try and.come to terms with ones inner demons shows deeper spiritual awareness than blindly following the false and abusive doctrines of a self proclaimed ‘master’ who can’t even keep his penis in his trousers, without having the wisdom to investigate his pseudo Buddhist teachings and compare them to the teachings of the traditions. Who is the wise one here? Those who blindly follow or those who question?
As for the support one receives from the sangha, I would suggest it is very easy to be taken in by love bombing and tactical targeting of potential converts- the NKT, SGI, the Moonies and Triratna FWBO all have well developed policies on how to draw people in- this advice is sometimes even visible on the web, in documents designed for centre coordinators and so forth.
But the real test of a genuine sangha is how they relate to former members. If you think Triratnas sangha are a worthy object of refuge, why not ask Mark Dunlop, who gave up his inheritance and his chance of a family life to support Sangharakshita. How has he been treated by these ‘loving’ people?
What about Yashomitras experience? For his devotion he was rewarded with rape and being branded a liar. There is a long and growing list of former members who can attest to how helpful Triratnas old boys club is for those who have dared to question. Regarding Triratna then, with friends like that, who needs enemies?
Just look at how. they dealt with Gary Beesley, who revealed the truth about the Order, thus giving them the o opportunity to come clean and revitalise the Order. From the very beginning.he was branded a liar and a hate filled anti Buddhist and his vilification has continued right down to the pressing. The Order even manipulated the UK Network of Buddhist Organizations into defaming him and publicly stating that none of his allegations had been proven, thus blackening his name throughout the British Buddhist world for decades. And yet the reality is that all of his allegations have gradually revealed themselves to be true.
Are these people really genuinely spiritual. Or are they politically motivated power seeking narcissists, who have aided and abetted a serial sex abuser in carrying out a lengthy program of sexual abuse of young men, young men who have then been left broken by their experiences, spat out and left at the side of the road to fend for themselves Are these people really the ideal spiritual friends?
355

Joc on November 23, 2016 at 5:11 pm
Reply

Two Buddhists (not order members) have set up a page on FB to discuss ways to move the Triratna ‘mess’ on. There are some caring Order members -rank and file – and some non-order members. Some want to shape and apology or more, but they are not the ones ‘in power’ in the hierarchy. This is where I am at.

Dear All,
I went to bed mulling over Dh U’s kind suggestion to offer what I might want to have included in a document for potential discussion with a group of preceptors and felt pleased that there was some drive to change things. I thank you all again.
But I wake up in the middle of the night and am back in the nightmare moment of finding Yashomitra’s letter a year ago – cold – with the same horrendous mix and rush of anger and fear pulsing through me as then. I see a schoolboy, hardly 17, the same age as some I teach, being taken into a room in a ‘religious centre’ after prayers and being seriously sexually assaulted by an older priest. Who the hell is doing it to him in the room? Who is this guy? Where is he? This is not a one off offence – this guy is used to doing this. He’s done this before. And since. I can see and ‘feel’ the boy reeling in shock from what he has experienced. He feels cheap and dirty and confused and wants to accept it’s the ‘Buddhism’ he has been ‘taught’ already -the kalyana mitrata sex and leaving mother entering manhood stuff. I know instinctively that he has been groomed. He doesn’t. I can feel his disorientation and his shock. He needs help so turns to others but gets more of the same. The leader, who he is already in awe of, does not notice the boy for real; he sees a pretty bum to pat and endorses his experience as sex with a friend, a spiritual friend. The leader later has him in his room. He is kind and encouraging. Grooming has worked. The leader is happy. He has a huge pool of young men around him. He is loved and adored. He can take his pick. He is saving them from neurotic attachment to women. He calls it spiritual friendship. He has created a world where this is normal and no one challenges him. He is used to getting what he wants; spiritual practice for others meets a lot of his needs. He can always justify it. People think he is a spiritual giant. His most devoted disciples copy him and adopt his way of thinking. They surround him now. They can always justify anything, too. Almost. There are cracks now.
I am writing this with the same intensity for compassion that I had then. The same intensity of compassion which has forced me to be involved. The same intensity of compassion that led me to search for J and D and Mark D and others – and there are others; we all know that – and tell them that I believe them. I searched for some of you, too. I searched for Gary Beesley. He wrote the FWBO Files. He is a Buddhist. I searched for Bj (mitra) and found him. We never told him about the others. Bj (mitra) worked out his journey for himself.
I have spent hours talking to and with these men and others and filling in the gaps. They – and some of you – have helped me do that and also helped me to understand the inner world of Triratna that ‘outsiders’ do not normally see. I had only ever been shown the lovely outer world. Sometimes I felt very sick, hearing what went on under the guise of spirituality. I feel sick because I can see how those around the leader cover things up and tidy them away. One minimising sentence on the September BBC documentary – over 90 years of these guys’ (not Bj’s) joint suffering popped into a neat little sentence on The Buddhist Centre online. I wished that I could ‘unknow’ what I had been told. That is not an option. It may be for others.
Last night I was mulling over how to speak as I find in a nice ‘Triratna speak’ way, so that I might stand a chance of those around the leader possibly agreeing to listen to me / us. ‘Feeling’ Yashomitra’s experience again so clearly last night has purged me of that. I have no desire to protect Sangharakshita or his order. Or to speak to them at all at the moment. I am working – as are others of you – outside the prescribed hierarchical routes. You are welcome to join me / us.
Someone posting on the Buddhism Controversy blogspot last night offered this as food for thought:

Stephen says:
November 22, 2016 at 6:41 pm
Sangharakhita says in Conversations with Bhante from 2009 – This whole terminiology of abuse has been very much overworked and I don’t think that any of my sexual activities in the past could have been described as remotely abusive.

Mark Dunlop: I said I did not want to – followed by spiritual coercion. Lingwood pressurised him.
Ananda: Did not want to – I do remember feeling let down, cheapened, almost physically dirty, and I’d have given anything for that not to have happened. Lingwood pressurised him.
Yashomitra: patted on the bum by Lingwood after a serious sexual assault from K, uses Y for own sexual gratification later. Lies fully – says he never had a sexual relationship with Y. Lingwood and co groomed him.
Prass: misused spiritually to provide sexual gratification; Lingwood wants him to believe he had given up heterosexuality for the sake of Dhamma; Lingwood grooms him. alienates Prass from mother of P’s child and his son.
Mitra: Lingwood lies about being celibate since mid 80s. Oral and masturbation sex with mitra. Says he never had sex with mitra. Tells him to keep it secret. Mitra shunned when he speaks up.
People around S collude in the whole thing.
Haselmere – two guys
BBC 1992 – one guy at padmaloka – abusive teachings flagged up
BBC 2016 – three guys at padmaloka
1997 Guardian – Three guys Croydon / elsewhere -abusive teachings flagged up again
2016 Mitra – one guy – Birmingham
Shabda: Lots of guys ‘teaching’ KMsex – culture of copying Lingwood and accepting it as normal.
What is triratnas definition of What is abuse?

Is this really Buddhism?
Thanks for the messages. Don’t be frightened to speak up. Don’t be frightened to do something.
Joc x
356

Joc on November 24, 2016 at 8:07 am
Reply

The Triratna order leadership is currently asking its order members to write into a group space (order controlled and order only) and write openly about anything involving ‘stuff from the past’ .This is a travesty of safeguarding. A safe organisation has an external and neutral route to follow. A safe organisation does not expect its members to make disclosures / talk about such sensitive issues en masse or in the space controlled by its power base. A safe organisation does not create a space where disclosures can be ‘tried’ and judged. Order member A. is right to press for an external safeguarding team and route. Ironically, Maitribala, who has shown most interest in educating the order about safeguarding, is locked out of his order account. The space for anyone to ‘share sensitive stuff’ is not in the space he is locked out of. It is in a safe and neutral space, which respects the confidentiality of the participants. Neutrality and confidentiality are the hallmarks of robust safeguarding. Order member A: I am still happy to talk to you about safeguardng! (And other things) with metta
- 357
  
  tenpel on November 24, 2016 at 2:08 pm
  Reply
  
  Part of cult characteristics is the control of information. This sounds exactly like that characteristic. By reporting your feelings and experiences to the order in a closed group Triratna leadership is able to control and guide the whole process according to their own ambitions or ends. Moreover, it could be used to blackmail or manipulate those who don’t share the leadership pov on the events. Moreover, they could use the information to prepare for a media battle and threaten people to reveal secrets they shared in the group if they speak to the press.
  
  I totally agree with you:
  
  A safe organisation has an external and neutral route to follow. A safe organisation does not expect its members to make disclosures / talk about such sensitive issues en masse or in the space controlled by its power base. A safe organisation does not create a space where disclosures can be ‘tried’ and judged. Order member A. is right to press for an external safeguarding team and route.
  
  I would recommend anybody from Triratna who has to say/share something to do it with a professional neutral and save organisation such as INFORM. At least, this will protect their privacy as well as it can be a means to soberly inform the public and thereby to prevent future harm to open spiritual seekers.
  - 358
    
    karma dondrub tsering on November 25, 2016 at 11:39 pm
    Reply
    
    “Part of cult characteristics is the control of information. ”
    this is also true of a good number of human organisations, companies, governements, NGOs, you name it …
    unfortunately, this a long time time now since ” leadership is able to control and guide the whole process according to their own ambitions or ends” be it in this so called Triratna, or wherever you want, the problem is when it destroys “common decency” – not to mention Dharma
359

Joc on November 25, 2016 at 6:36 am
Reply

Dear Tenpel – may I share your comment on another discussion? I will also invite them to join us here.

Maitribala / Simon (Who spoke out on the BBC documentary) has told me that one argument he has heard this week to defend Sr being a sexually active teacher is that some lecturers at, for example, a uni went / go to bed with their students.
Both ‘settings’ offer teaching and learning, there is an age gap, an experience of subject disparity and there is also an imbalance of knowledge and understanding of the subject matter. The fatal difference is that Sr’s teachings promote the actual act of sex between Teacher and student (male male / single sex) as part of his Dharma course. He has presented it as if it were part of the Dharma. It is his own invented curriculum. And he was the sole teacher and appraiser. He is still the sole Teacher with a capital T. That is why it was (potentially still is) so alarming. The Clear Vision/ Triratna video shown in the September 2016 BBC documentary show him at the front of a ‘lecture room’ of his student-disciples taking questions. He is defered to and refered to as Bhante and he is given a platform to extol the virtues of teacher-student sex as ‘creative’ and ‘inspiring’ and good for the FWBO. He cleverly plants the idea that it is modern attitudes that have impaired such creative and inspiring possibilities. This was filmed in house and placed on an FWBO / Triratna educational website used in schools. Munisha, whose dual role as both safeguarding officer and PR person is unethical, makes the excuse in the media response that it was in the adult section of the website and not the schools section of the website. That in itself is alarming. But it also indicates that she believes it is appropriate for adults to receive Bhante’s defence of and promotion of sex between teachers and students. That is damning in itself but it was on a website shared with under 18s. It would be laughable were it not so serious. And it is serious.
Whereas responsible institutions e.g. Royal School of Music put checks and balances in place to minimise damage to students’ learning, Triratna are seen promoting Bhante’s ideas on sex between teachers and students still. Maybe it is still ‘invisible teaching’ to some. The BBC did not include his final line: “I have no regrets”.
- 360
  
  tenpel on November 25, 2016 at 1:15 pm
  Reply
  
  Dear Joc, yes, you can share my comments or parts of it where it is useful. Yes, and pls invite them to join us here.
  
  Oh Buddha, it makes me speechless what you write. Thank you for sharing this.
- 361
  
  NO NAME on November 25, 2016 at 1:36 pm
  Reply
  
  Are Triratna really that disconnected from reality? If a university lecturer sleeps with a student he or she is subject to disciplinary action in any university. What planet do these people live on? They’re completely lost.
  - 362
    
    tenpel on November 25, 2016 at 1:50 pm
    Reply
    
    I can’t remember that sex between student and university lecturer was a model at all while I studied… This idea was just not there. We even didn’t have any discussion (nor interest) in it. Don’t know how it is legally.
    
    For sure, again Lingwood clearly aims to make his sexual desires or his preferences the norm for society and his followers – he successfully aims to fit the world into his very own cosmos of sexual desires and Triratna is his propaganda tool to achieve this. His blinded followers turn a blind eye on it or lack the courage or clarity and compassion to refuse these deluded non-dharmic attempts. – At least, this is the impression I get here following the discussion.
    
    Lingwood twists Buddhism to meet his desires. But what he says regarding this, has nothing to do with Buddhism. The Buddha taught the end of desire is highest bliss. The Buddha didn’t teach to fulfil one’s desires is highest bliss, instead the Buddha compared desire with “honey on a razor blade”.
    - 363
      
      NO NAME on November 25, 2016 at 2:43 pm
      Reply
      
      In the uk, legally, sex between a teacher and student can happen once the he student is 21
      However, the law is override not by all unis safeguarding policies which recognise such as breach of fiduciary care. Invariably this would result in disciplinary proceedings and in most cases loss of post
      - 364
        
        tenpel on November 25, 2016 at 3:30 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you.
    - 365
      
      Triratnavisitor on November 26, 2016 at 11:34 am
      Reply
      
      Tempel: “The Buddha taught the end of desire is highest bliss. The Buddha didn’t teach to fulfil one’s desires is highest bliss, instead the Buddha compared desire with “honey on a razor blade”.
      
      Except that that is where you end up if you say that the Four Noble Truths are not really about the path to the cessation of suffering , they are about (“when adapted to the conditions of the West”) the path to self-realisation. That is the core philosophy of Triratna.
      - 366
        
        tenpel on November 26, 2016 at 1:02 pm
        Reply
        
        It looks like that you don’t like the clarity of the statement,
        
        The Buddha taught the end of desire is highest bliss. The Buddha didn’t teach to fulfil one’s desires is highest bliss, instead the Buddha compared desire with “honey on a razor blade”.
        
        Its just that. Why do you have to put a twist on that?
        Nobody said – and so far there is nobody on the horizon who is going to say – “the Four Noble Truths are not really about the path to the cessation of suffering”. … “When adapted to the conditions of the West”? It’s still the same, the abandoning of desire is highest bliss, following desire is like licking honey on a razor blade. Whatever you call “the core philosophy of Triratna” or “the path to self-realisation” when it teaches desire and increases desire it is not Buddha’s teaching. Buddha’s teaching is a about the pacification and the end of desire. If you can’t see that, I think you missed the very core of what the Buddha was teaching …
        
        ADVICE FROM A KADAMPA MASTER
        “What is the difference between Dharma and non-Dharma?” the teacher Drom[tönpa] was asked by Potowa.
        
        “If something is in opposition to fettering passions, it is Dharma. If it is not, it is not Dharma. If it does not accord with worldly people, it is Dharma. If it does accord, it is not Dharma. If it accords with the teachings of Buddha, it is Dharma. If it does not accord, it is not Dharma. If good follows, it is Dharma. If bad follows, it is not Dharma.” –Tsunba Jegom, Precepts Collected from Here and There (Kadam Thorbu)
        
        367
        
        frenzy on November 27, 2016 at 7:09 pm
        Reply
        
        Indeed ”It’s not just about philosophy, it’s about human suffering.” My experience is that the absolute can also be ‘imposed’ on the relative experience in a dismissive way. For example when one is reminded of desire being the root of craving and of the buddha’s emphasis on celibacy as respond to (suffering resulting from) breaches of ethics (when) thus misplacing responsability.
        
        368
        
        Triratnavisitor on November 28, 2016 at 12:53 pm
        Reply
        
        You misunderstand me. I agree with everything you say and admire you’re clarity. I am contrasting what you say (which is correct) with what Triratna says or seems to say, and deprecating the latter.
        
        369
        
        tenpel on November 28, 2016 at 3:49 pm
        
        Thank you for the clarification. Mark got you right. I got you wrong. Sorry!
      - 370
        
        frenzy on November 26, 2016 at 2:21 pm
        Reply
        
        Hi Triratnavisitor, i read you like this:
        
        ”Except that that is where (with the honey on the razor blade, no highest bliss, meanng : in dual persective..?) you end up (as you feel one in Triratna does..?) if you say that the Four Noble Truths are not really about the path to the cessation of suffering (as you feel how Triratna does/acts in reality?) they are about (“when adapted to the conditions of the West”) the path to self-realisation. That is the core philosophy of Triratna.
        
        What do you in this context mean by self-realisation? Can you say some more about that?
        That one ends up feeling better about one-selve but is still clinging…? D’you have the experience many OM’s seem to have a sense of self-deception..? 😉
        I feel there is a strong tendency towads essentialisme, conceptualisme, literalisme. If there is not they are not so advanced in ethics etc… and actually do cause harm.
        
        To tenpel: Buddhist ethics does not say desire is ‘wrong’ does it… It’s the clinging. Or aversion/to pretent not to cling, the selfcentredness… I can see there is a apparent connection with fundamental undstanding of the Dharma and breaches of ethics/integrity and other unwholesome dynamics though.
        
        371
        
        karma dondrub tsering on November 26, 2016 at 9:25 pm
        Reply
        
        Dear Sir,
        
        actually, Buddha-dharma seems to be about non-self, so where does self-realisation stand? this makes effectively “self-realisation” going somewhere into vaishnava-land (but many contemporary Buddhists make a disatrous use of “conscious(ness)” and “mind”
        but, as far as as “desire” is involved, I have to inform you that, unfortunately, “desire” is one of the three poisons,”desire” is not ‘wrong’, it is the root of all evils, craving …
        
        372
        
        frenzy on November 27, 2016 at 12:07 pm
        
        In re to thread selfrealisation/desire.
        I understand developing a positive sense of self is part of shammatha.
        And that integration of shadow- / unconscious parts is part of the whole process of ‘awakening’. I dont know if you can call that ‘self’ realisation, i suppose one could no?
        It seems v important to understand or stress words have the tendency to seperate and to fixate and constrict reality …
        I like the tibetan notion that Nirvana is Samsara, they cannot be seperated… To see through the attachment to clinging/desire one has recognise it and stay with Vedana and practice common decency indeed… I tend to agree with the disastrous use people/contemporary buddhist make of ‘consciouness” and ‘mind’ and this is saddening.
        
        373
        
        NO NAME on November 27, 2016 at 4:48 pm
        
        “I understand developing a positive sense of self is part of shammatha.
        And that integration of shadow- / unconscious parts is part of the whole process of ‘awakening’. I dont know if you can call that ‘self’ realisation, i suppose one could no?”
        This is pseudo Buddhism. If you are going to make such claims, justify them on the basis of the Buddha’s word. Or cite commentaries by recognised Indian masters. AFAIAA there are no such concepts in genuine Buddhism It sounds very much like Lingwoodism,most of which is his ego fantasy
        
        374
        
        frenzy on November 27, 2016 at 6:23 pm
        
        The buddha is quote to have said “Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.”
        🙂
      - 375
        
        NO NAME on November 26, 2016 at 6:24 pm
        Reply
        
        If Triratna Buddhism is not about the path to the end of suffering then it is not Buddhism
        As the 4 noble truths are the core teaching of the Buddha and the practice of Buddhism is about achieving the end of suffering any path which does not do this is not the Buddha’s word
        As for ‘ the science of self realisation’ it sounds like you’ve been reading the works of AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabuphada, the founder of ISKCON, rather than any Buddhist teaching. What Buddhist scripture preaches ‘self realisation’ At best it’s a Hindu idea, and at worst just hippy claptrap. Following the Buddhist path requires wisdom and an enquiring mind. Wake up and do some research!
        
        376
        
        NO NAME on November 27, 2016 at 11:32 am
        Reply
        
        What’s clear from this post is the poster ( and the whole of Triratna ?) are clueless about the nuances of tenets and the nature of the goal. This is not surprising considering tthe leader has focused on distorting the path rather than its outcome- the latter is completely outside his field of interest
        However, since due to embarrassment, it is highly unlikely that the poster will respond, let’s not get bogged down in the orders pathetic understanding of what constitutes enlightenment . Rather, we should focus on the distortions Lingwood has introduced into the Buddhist path and the horrific consequences that have transpired.
        It’s not just about philosophy, it’s about.human suffering
        
        377
        
        Mark on November 27, 2016 at 1:07 pm
        
        When Triratnavisitor writes:
        ‘Except that that [teaching that to fulfil one’s desires is highest bliss?] is where you end up if you say that the Four Noble Truths are not really about the path to the cessation of suffering , they are about (“when adapted to the conditions of the West”) the path to self-realisation. That is the core philosophy of Triratna.’
        
        it could be that they are reporting (and criticising) Triratna teaching as they have experienced it, rather than endorsing it. Saying something like, self-realisation ends up as self-indulgence in Triratna.
        
        That is one possible interpretation of their post anyway, though it is not very clear exactly what they meant.
        
        378
        
        NO NAME on November 27, 2016 at 6:37 pm
        
        One thing is for sure. In a group that emphasises mindfulness of breathing and metta bhavana while rejecting vipassana ( Lingwoods theory is that vipassana causes mental illness !!) there cannot possibly be liberation or nirvana. The metta bhavana and breathing meditation can, at most lead to the attainment of the brahma viharas, the samsaric absorptions of worldly gods. Still, Lingwood was never interested in liberating beings from suffering , just gathering followers and abusing the pretty ones. His ‘buddhism’ is just a means to an end.
        
        379
        
        frenzy on November 27, 2016 at 7:34 pm
        
        It must be said they have somewhat changed there attitude towards vipassana/insight practice.
        
        Wikipedia says:
        ”The founder, Sangharakshita, described meditation as having four phases.
        The first two according to his system (‘integration’ and ‘positive emotion’), can be correlated to the traditional category of “calming” “samatha” practices, and the last two (spiritual death and spiritual rebirth) can be correlated to “insight” or “vipassana” practices.
        For those not ordained into the Triratna Buddhist Order, the practices associated with the first two are emphasised, though the spirit of the last two is also taught.
        
        These phases are:
        1.Integration. The main practice at this stage is the mindfulness of breathing, which is intended to have the effect of “integrating the psyche” – improving mindfulness and concentration, and reducing psychological conflict.
        2.Positive emotion. The second aspect of samatha is developing positivity – an other-regarding, life-affirming attitude. The Brahmavihara meditations, especially the ‘metta bhavana’ or cultivation of loving kindness meditations, are the key practices intended to foster the development of positive emotion.
        3.Spiritual death. The next stage is to develop insight into what is seen to be the emptiness of the self and reality. Meditations at this stage include considering the elements of which self and world are thought to be composed; contemplating impermance (particularly of the body); contemplating suffering; and contemplating sunyata.
        4.Spiritual rebirth. The WBO teaches that, with the development of insight and the death of the limited ego-self, a person is spiritually reborn. Practices which involve the visualization of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are among the main practices in this phase. At ordination, each dharmachari(ni) is given an advanced visualisation meditation on a particular figure.”
        
        But still: the way a group reacts to allegations of misconduct may be a good indicator of its underlying dysfunction…
        
        380
        
        NO NAME on November 28, 2016 at 9:08 am
        
        The description of ‘spiritual rebirth’ ,is a term unheard of in traditional Buddhist teachings from which the order claim their teachings are derived. In fact, the whole concept of the ‘death of the limited ego- self’ and of a person being ‘spiritually reborn’ are fraught with contradiction and raise numerous questions about Triratnas understanding of what constitutes liberation and enlightenment. It sounds more like a kind of Buddhism lite, an extremely confused and conflagrated mish mash of post Buddhist, jungian and hippy, pseudo Buddhism rather than any genuine doctrine. I wonder for instance, whether there is any understanding of Theravada and Mahayana tenets, or whether practitioners consider the rangtong/ shentong dichotomy, or the similarities and distinctions between Dolpopas and Kongtruls interpretations of the goal? Somehow, considering the simplistic description of their path, I doubt it..
        However, this is not a debate over philosophy. We are here to expose the inhumane abusive behaviour of the orders founder and his close supporters. I hope this will be the last post concerning doctrines, excluding those false ones widely used to facilitate abuse We can philosophise until the cows come home. But time is running, Lingwood is not getting any younger. We need to get more people to speak out, more people to report their abuse to the authorities so that the case is strengthened, the man is held to account and the order are forced to compensate the victims who were abused, while their ‘men of wisdom’ stood by and turned a blind eye
        
        381
        
        frenzy on November 28, 2016 at 9:49 pm
        
        Re Stephen:
        They seem to feel powerfull and selfrightious. They have a habbit of closing ranks in the face of ‘criticism’. The dissidents must be pushed out when no longer possible to manipulate the situation. However unconscious this might be. They might be aware this man stands for a growing group of people.
        
        382
        
        Triratnavisitor on November 28, 2016 at 1:05 pm
        
        I am not a member or a supporter of this order, i have sometimes visited their centres to find out what they are about. Hence “Triratnavisitor”. In my post above I was trying to contrast Buddhism properly understood on the one hand with what I believe to be their core philosophy on the other. The Triratna philosophy seems to be about self-realisation, which is not what Buddhism is about, and which can degenerate into a philosophy of narcissism.
        
        383
        
        tenpel on November 28, 2016 at 3:53 pm
        
        Thank you for posting again and for your clarification. I agree with you. I apologise for having misunderstood you so thoroughly. I misinterpreted you are a Triratna follower who wants to convince us about how correct it is to preach sex with students…
        
        384
        
        tenpel on November 28, 2016 at 3:48 pm
        
        Interesting. Thank you Mark. Just approved 2 further comments by Triratnavisitor. Let’s see…
- 385
  
  NO NAME on November 25, 2016 at 1:44 pm
  Reply
  
  Please note Munisha is also head honcho at Clear Vision, the educational wing of the group.Therefore, that video was uploaded with her knowledge.This is why she dare not speak out. She’s in it up to her neck. When this story breaks, she’s for the chopping block, as one of the principle facilitators of Lingwoods sick master plan
  - 386
    
    frenzy on November 25, 2016 at 8:36 pm
    Reply
    
    If there is an investigation by MASH into the current effectiveness of claimed safeguarding polocies in Triratna: I have extented mailcommunication in my possession around a recent concern and permission to hand it over.
    - 387
      
      Joc on November 26, 2016 at 7:13 am
      Reply
      
      Yes, the various MASH teams across the country (soon wider) can link up quite effectively. The police and social services are interlinked with MASH in various ways and yes, there are wheels within wheels now enabling the authorities to monitor particular places and particular ‘problem areas’.
      A very significant post has been made on a closed but friendly group and it contains admissions and an apology. The writer is apologising for his part. One can tell he was an impressionable teenager at the time, too. More on this later. Let’s hope that others now follow his lead. A friend has obviously enabled him to share his apology.
      - 388
        
        frenzy on November 26, 2016 at 1:19 pm
        Reply
        
        When can we expect apologies for todays harm done…in 30 more years..?
        
        389
        
        tenpel on November 26, 2016 at 1:34 pm
        Reply
        
        According to the official Triratna narrative sex with Sangharakshita or Triratna teachers is/was “beneficial” and such sex (even if psychologically pressured or manipulated with pseudo-spiritual explanations) enabled “spiritual growth”.
        Students being harmed who don’t subscribe to this narrative (or critics who don’t buy into it) but question it are attacked and defamed by leading Triratna order members. What is the learning process here? There is none, isn’t it?
        As long as this misconception of “sex with your spiritual teacher is good for spiritual growth” is not challenged or questioned by the Triratna leadership and leading order members as well as devoted followers, I think nothing will change.
        
        390
        
        frenzy on November 26, 2016 at 2:47 pm
        
        Tenpel: thank you for your respond. Part of the enheritance is that breaches of fiductary care/ethics are consided v normal, wether or not considered beneficial.
391

NO NAME on November 25, 2016 at 2:45 pm
Reply

Override not should b ‘overriden’
392

Stephen on November 28, 2016 at 6:38 pm
Reply

Just heard that the guy who spoke up on the BBC has been asked to resign by some other order member for his own integrity. Apparently the main reason is that he is not reverencing Sangharakshita. Personality cult or what?
- 393
  
  NO NAME on November 28, 2016 at 10:45 pm
  Reply
  
  What ah utter disgrace! What is he supposed to be referencing: Lingwoods ability to avoid prosecution despite years of abuse of innocents?
  Actually, it’s a blessing for the chap concerned- perhaps he can now practice Buddhism instead.
  Pin sure the people at the BBC will be interested to hear this. It might also encourage the abused to prosecute, after his sacrifice.
  The Buddha will embrace him while the denizens of hell await Lingwoods immanent demise. Both are worthy of our compassion. One man is liberated while another ventures deeper into darkness
394

Joc on November 29, 2016 at 4:19 pm
Reply

Dear Stephen and site readers, yes I can confirm that ‘Maitribala’ has received an email and that he has been ‘requested’ to resign by a local chair person possibly acting on his own or possibly being asked to effect this. Either could be the case. (Ironically, it’s the same chairman that was very polite but overwhelmed when I and a local head teacher suggested to him and a female order convenor that Norwich / Norfolk has disclosures of historic abuse that have never been dealt with despite being very common knowledge. We reminded them that their safeguarding policies should be activated as the Anglican Safeguarding Team did in the case of Bishop Peter Ball (aspiring priests in late teens and early twenties in the 80s) The chairman stated very clearly that he believes that safeguarding has ‘gone too far’ and that Triratna policies do not cover anything from the past. This seems to be the position Munisha Catherine Hopper (Safeguarding and PR) is also taking. I hope that she will correct me here if I am wrong.

However, I do need to restate, as I said above, that there are several order members, who do not agree with such a request to resign and do not want M to resign. I can also confirm that some order members are working – as best they can – to bring about some form of resolution to a situation that has dragged on for decades, dragging them along with it. I can vouch for the emotional pain being felt by the order members and mitra I have been able to communicate with recently. It is very close to the painful family dynamics described in a previous post.

Unfortunately, ‘outsiders’ only see ‘the official face’ of the order as presented for example in ‘The Triratna Story’ and The Buddhist Centre online. They only hear ‘the official voice’ of the order so it is, of course, no wonder that many outsiders are angry and frustrated at the lack of compassion for a whole array of ‘harmed people’ who got / get caught up in Sr’s ideology of kmsex, ‘abstaining from the world of women’ and being ‘taught’ to leave their families. This ‘we do care’ voice and face is not seen or heard beyond Triratna circles. I do feel privileged to have ‘spoken’ recently with a few order members who do care that this situation is resolved. It might be possible to engage with them here, but I think it is a scary space for them. It is not safe to be seen representing a view that questions the offical lines.
Given that we have acknowledged the painful place those ‘family members’ might be in, would we on this thread be able to listen to someone from that pained group? It might be necessary for someone to hide their identity as these people do seem to be ‘putting themselves on the line’ to engage with me and others hoping to effect a deep and sincere apology for harmed cause and its long term denial. What do we think? Can we welcome them? (They may not accept, but I want to create a safe space in case one or more does).

‘Maitribala’ is absolutely fine. He feels released and liberated from reverencing Sangharakshita. He has also been locked out of two order only on line spaces, including The Buddhist Centre online. Thankfully, his moral integrity is greater than that of those who seek to control the narrative and run a space where people’s character and actions e.g. Bjorn’s, MD’s can be trashed without any right to reply. Bjorn did not know at all what they wrote about him. No wonder they need to lock Maitribala out of the website. He might call out other misuses of power.
In fact, it was me and another two order members that located the Shabda articles about Bjorn. ‘Maitribala’ had never seen any information about Sr’s involvement with oral and masturbatory sex with a mitra 50 years plus his junior in 2003 / 2004. It had been ‘swept under the carpet’. (In Conversations with Bhante Sr claims he has been celibate since mid 1980s, so that is probably the reason they need to twist the narrative.) The other two order members also helped Maitribala see how Bjorn’s experience had been ‘managed’ and ‘massaged away’ by Mahamati and Subhuti. I have the documents as a pdf from them. If the reverencing of S IS the corner stone for the group, then it is a cult of personality. I know there are some order members who are members but not reverencing Sr now. How easy it is for one not to bow down to his image, sing his anthem or show gratitude to him on a refuge tree? It is hard to not conform as Maitribala has found out. Thankfully, he had good links to other friends in and outside the order.

It is surprising that the order are so hesitant to take action when they have disclosure of ‘sexual inappropriateness’ laid publicly on their table. Yet someone has the power to quickly shut down communication access to someone who has shown immense moral integrity by flagging up misuse of power via sex, silence and denial. The writer of the email does do exactly what several of us on here predicted: Turns the courageous act of whistleblowing into an apparent abuse of the trust of others. You can have someone teach kmsex for years and get bowed down to, but if someone flags up a breach of morality, they are locked out of order spaces. This is cultic. The second reason given is that M does not show reverence to Sangharakshita. This is also cultic.

I have a copy of the email sent.

Anyway, what I do want to say is that there is a some grass roots movement for change that I can see since the BBC and Bj’s story came to light. I can also confirm that at least one order member tried to get Sr or the order to accept that kmsex was in appropriate at the very least. Sr did not want to accept it, so his order – and all in it – is still in a mess and viewed with suspicion and / or alarm by many outside. It is not possible yet to hear and see the dissenting voices, those who do want change.
We need to nurture those who might be able to put the victims’ needs for acknowledgement and an apology on the table. Could you let me know that we are willing to create a safe space here for them?
- 395
  
  tenpel on December 1, 2016 at 1:33 am
  Reply
  
  Thank you very much Joc for updating us about these matters and developments. This is very kind of you!
  And the information is very interesting though I cannot follow everything. Who is Bjorn? What happened to him?
  
  —–
  
  Everybody is free here to post in the comment section. Comments are save in so far, that everybody can post anonymously and the ip or email been used for commenting are never shared. Sometimes I check the IP if I assume a socket puppetry and then I remind to stick to one pseudonym and not posting as one person under different pseudonyms.
  
  I am also very much interested that nobody is attacked or put down. If anything like this happened and I missed it, people made me aware of it in the past and then I deleted such comments or removed content from such comments while leaving a note that a passage from a comment or a whole comment was deleted. However, for this I need the support of those who do care about this too.
  
  In general I and most commentators take side and encourage those who have been harmed. The reason is that they need encouragement and support and the abusive organisations or abusive Buddhist leaders have already enough support and power and don’t need our support. However, I try to avoid at all costs to invoke images of an enemy towards those who are abusive or those groups who turn a blind eye on abuse. I try to follow the key principles of compassion and to avoid the manifestation of the three main kleshas, ignorance, hate and greed.
  
  A key problem of mine has become a lack of time. So rarely I can comment or act quickly.
  HTH
  
  —–
  
  BTW, if you think this comment section is not save, that is fine. But maybe you can post from time to time updates about the developments of those within Triratna who want to something about it? Thank you for your and others’ engagement. Thank you for not being silent, taking responsibility and also sharing these background developments with us. I wish you and everybody involved to change things to the better, strength, courage, clarity and compassion.
  
  Looking back to my experiences (East Germany, cults), it seems, bodies or organisations which are deeply rotten or which have a strong fixed ideological mental setup, can’t change really to the better – especially when the leadership itself is corrupt or rotten. So, though I wish you and the others good luck, please keep in mind also the option that you might run against walls and that you might waste your energy when you put it into change. However, it will be always useful to support, ease and listen to those being harmed.
  - 396
    
    frenzy on December 1, 2016 at 7:09 pm
    Reply
    
    Bjorn is the Germans ex-mitra’s name who came forward with his story of abuse publically.
    In respond to your last words above: considering there is no sign of party reformation, on the contrary, it seems important to keep trying to keep the dissident spirit up.
    - 397
      
      tenpel on December 1, 2016 at 8:19 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you. Did Bjorn speak with BBC or where is his story?
398

Joc on November 29, 2016 at 4:35 pm
Reply

I have, of course, suggested that they are free to work outside the power structures than limit them if they so choose. There is nothing stopping a group of people putting up a public apology themselves. for example, independent of those that seem to control the institution that apparently does not exist.
399

NO NAME on November 29, 2016 at 4:54 pm
Reply

This is a free listening space where anyone can post their experience
If the persons concerned are frightened, use pseudonyms
I am sure that everyone here wants to help them heal
- 400
  
  tenpel on December 1, 2016 at 1:40 am
  Reply
  
  Well said, thank you no name.
401

Stephen on November 30, 2016 at 7:21 am
Reply

Is there any reason not to share the Shabda extracts and letter on this forum? Might enlighten us all.
- 402
  
  tenpel on November 30, 2016 at 11:27 am
  Reply
  
  I had no time to follow the discussions but in general whatever you post should enlighten the reader to understand things better.
403

NO NAME on November 30, 2016 at 9:17 am
Reply

Potential posters here and those who comment must be aware of the incredible dichotomy their experiences have left them in. On the one hand, victims feel weakened spiritually, physically and mentally by their experience and will therefore find it very difficult to speak about the abuse and pain they have endured (Something Triratna seniors will see as their trump card and will feel happy about)
On the other hand, these people who have been abused hold incredible power in their grasp, capable as they are of shattering the Orders top heavy perverted infrastructure with a single tap of a ‘send’ button, or a single phone call to the police
Recently, within the last few days in fact, a somewhat uneducated British sporting figure claimed victims of abuse were emotionally weak. In response, the football player who revealed the abuse in soccer that currently dominates the press, said that in fact, those who speak out about abuse are the real men and that their actions were acts of the highest bravery.” It’s about saving lives” he said, “and there is no greater task than this”
Ex FWBO who post here, either because they have been abused or simply because they are totally sickened by the arrogance and hypocrisy of the megalomaniac hierarchs and their current cover up campaign, should be treated with the highest respect: there is no greater task than protecting others from suffering and saving lives
- 404
  
  tenpel on December 1, 2016 at 1:43 am
  Reply
  
  Thank you, no name, I agree. Those who speak up are the strong once! And yes, “there is no greater task than protecting others from suffering and saving lives”.
- 405
  
  Prajnacitta on June 15, 2019 at 6:38 am
  Reply
  
  “On the other hand, these people who have been abused hold incredible power in their grasp, capable as they are of shattering the Orders top heavy perverted infrastructure with a single tap of a ‘send’ button”
  
  Once again No Name, very well said. This is absolutely true and the taking of that opportunity is also a way of liberating yourself from the binds of that particular suffering.
  
  I myself was totally vilified by my ex-teacher when I exposed his sexual assaults on female members of the BSBA in 1999. Indeed, many other former members of that Buddhist cult, who had left the organisation before I did but still held the teacher in considerable reverence, were extremely critical of the actions of myself and others to bring the details of all the lies and manipulations to light. Despite their views that I was being nasty, vindictive, revengeful and ungrateful, actually my motivation was simply to ensure that what had been going on since at least 1972 came to a complete end and that no more young men and women would be drawn into the narcisscistic hate-filled world of that particular schizoid ‘Buddhist’ leader.
406

tenpel on December 1, 2016 at 1:50 am
Reply

Just for your information. Since this brief post was posted the post is the most read or visited post on the whole blog. Attached the stats from last week:
407

Joc on December 1, 2016 at 3:56 pm
Reply

This was the third most read article across England on day of broadcast and is still attracting a large number of hits. Sit tight – other journalists are picking up on the story, Some order members know that this is on the cards; others seem to be putting their heads in the sand or still denying there is a problem. Some just do not want to know and won’t discuss with those who do. It is ‘off limits’ for some to even talk about it. Those with a sense of decency could get a joint statement together and publicly apologise for what has gone on in the name of the order they belong to. Four of the guys who have been incredibly damaged by kalyana mitrata with sex with Sanghrakshita and other aspects of his ideology that are self-created are showing concern for the mental health of order members and mitra hearing and reading things for the first time for real i.e. not via damage limitation. They know that stepping back from reverencing Sangharakshita has consequences – stepping back from cultic belief and dependence on a figure is hard. Very hard.. An order member in London has sent a contact a screen grab of someone confirming that a culture of km with sex was promoted and endorsed by Sangharakshita. This man was also 18 when he was ‘inducted’ into km sex practices at Padmaloka. Also under the age of consent. I have read this as a second hand comment on a different thread.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-37432719
408

frenzy on December 1, 2016 at 8:26 pm
Reply

Re Tenpel: I will ask if he is okey with a link to his story here.
- 409
  
  tenpel on December 1, 2016 at 8:42 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you. For me as an outsider its hard to follow the details and stories. It was easier with the NKT because this was my cosmos of experiences and I could relate to all the details …
  - 410
    
    frenzy on December 2, 2016 at 10:06 am
    Reply
    
    https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByPI1gZWqGl7M2ZobXV0b2FLYWs/edit?filetype=msword
    Summary, by Björn:
    ”Dennis Lingwood is the perceived head of the organization ‘Triratna’ (formerly the ‘FWBO’). Seemingly out of gratitude for the transmission of Buddhadharma to the West, it looks as if his disciples were ready to fulfill him every wish. However, he did not leave the tradition as it is (which is impossible to grasp for one person, anyway), but he changed it to suit his own needs in terms of lifestyle and sexuality. His opinion was that women are occupied with reproduction and family, whereas men find it easier to transcend themselves. Thus, he encouraged heterosexual men to let go of their attachment to femininity, by having sex with men. It seems like there was a sex-rota for him at ‘Padmaloka’, the main center for ‘men who have asked for ordination’, in the seventies and early eighties – a rota to have sex with him. He also made up his own refuge tree, that people prostrated to (including myself); he changed traditional mantras, such as a mantra for protection during pregnancy, into his own longevity mantra, that many people recite, even now. When I was his assistant, employed at ‘FWBO Central’, he was quite free to build a relationship of trust with me. It seemed like he was ill, and in need of help. Officially, he was supposed to be celibate, as a so-called ‘anagarika’. However, as I was so in awe of him, I also tried to fulfill him wishes. He was intimate with me; not in terms of physical coercion; I was vulnerable to the projections I had on him; he got sexually aroused by that. When I told a colleague in this institution, Dennis immediately withdrew his ‘friendship’. Afterwards, I left my job, and a number of consequences ensued, gradually leading to illnesses (brain tumor), loss of employment opportunities, and loss of the family home. I tried to still protect Dennis’ reputation for quite a while, but when I heard that Dennis had done this with quite a number of young men, I went to the police; usually cases of sexual abuse are handled by the criminal police.
    The reason why I call it abuse is because this individual created a separation between a public world, where he can appear in public as an ‘anagarika’ (celibate/homeless wanderer), and privately as a lover who breaks young men’s attachment to reproduction and feminity.”
    - 411
      
      Joc on December 2, 2016 at 3:25 pm
      Reply
      
      Bjorn has given permission for this email exchange with the author of the fwbo files to be shared with the audience of this site:
      Dialogues with the author of the FWBO files
      On Fri, 18 Nov 2016 at 20:09, Bjoern ………. @gmail.com> wrote:
      Dear G
      I hope you are well.
      I would love to connect with you; I am particularly interested in the tibetan Buddhist connections behind the ‘FWBO files’. I tried to still work with ‘order’ members, in clearing things up in the past; not fully understanding the sexual abuse that I was subject to. When I heard Mark D’s account of his sexual encounters with Dennis, I was shocked that it went on for such a long time; him and other people setting up the conditions for sex with young men. I’m horrified I got into such a thing; I broke off all contacts with ‘order’ members, and do not accept the ‘order’ at all any more.
      This is why I am also keen to discover the roots of the FWBO files, and the teacher that encouraged you to write them. We may connect over Skype, if you want to talk more personally.
      Since leaving Triratna/FWBO in 2004, I have practiced with Shambhala; the lineage going back to Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche.
      All the best
      Björn
      Hi Bjorn
      Nice to meet you.
      FYI The abuse didn’t start with Mark. S was abusing during his time in India ( remember, he was forced to leave by legal threats from a politician whose nephew, Sachin Kumar Singh, was abused by him.Pandit Nehru, who was a keen Anglophile was desperate to protect the reputation of the British and Buddhism and colluded with Christmas Humphreys to get him out of India without attracting too much attention. Humphreys convinced my friend Maurice Walshe to give him a job as sangha representative at Hampstead Buddhist Vihara. Maurice was Chair at HBH and told me that S soon started turning.up with young rent boys so they threw him out.This was not before he’d managed to trick Terry Delamare into having sex with him, which ultimately resulted in Terry’s suicide.( dr Elizabeth Tylden told me she attributed 3 suicides to men’s encounters with S.
      From my investigations, I was able to ascertain that S was having abusive sexual encounters from the beginning of his supposed founding of the Order: in conversation, two OMs concluded the number of people abused ran into hundreds. S has a prolific sexual appetite which he.was unable to control, a problem which persisted even into old age.
      While various Tibetan masters I studied with were concerned about S behaviour ( I have studied with around twenty masters from all four sects since 78) thel person who most encouraged me to write the Files was Maurice Walshe. Maurice Wass broken hearted about introducing S to the British Buddhst scene and felt personally responsible for the damage he was doing. Maurice begged me to right his wrong ( though he was not to blame)
      Glad to hear you still. practice, Trungpa was a great yogi but rather enigmatic.I have some reservations about Shambala but if it works for you then that’s cool. Personally, I find the Western need to belong to a specific group a little odd. After being a member of a few communities, nowadays I am just a Buddhist, trying to follow the tradition of the Big Lebowski!
      Hang loose
      G: Morning Bjorn
      Hope you’re ok? Sorry if my direct response to you shocked ( it IS shocking!) and hope I didn’t cause too much internal turmoil. I’m here if you need me.I will try to be more gentle/ diplomatic/ respectful
      Lots of love and respect
      Hello G,
      No, it’s fine; I just need time to respond, and I’m in touch with quite a few other people…
      Sometimes I’m having Skype conversations with people about this. Are you into that?
      Best wishes
      Björn
      G: I’m getting there; like you, it takes me time. But I want to help. We will talk soon.
      Stay in touch
      B: Hello G,
      Great! I guess there is no hurry…
      I hope your health improves.
      Best wishes
      Björn
      G: Well, there isn’t a very big chance of my healthp improving- I have a chronic degenerative neurological condition (Parkinsons ) so the best I can hope for is more good days than bad days! I’ve struggled to come to terms with it since I was diagnosed five years back and am JUST coming out of a very long period of deep depression as a result.
      What I’ve learned is that trying to fight internal psychological battles is pointless. If we want to go beyond depression and misery, we must first accept that these are both normal reactions to the suffering nature of the human condition. If one accepts them as normal, sane responses to the difficulties of life, one can gradually work through them.
      This goes for practice too; fightingt internal wars with the emotions just increases the mistaken belief in the reality of our hallucinated misery.Accepting the presence of suffering, samsaric thoughts and seeing them as normal, in perspective , against the backdrop of spacious awareness, allows us to gradually come to terms with and accept our experience
      Practice should NEVER be done to get rid of thoughts: it should be simply carried out, like cleaning the teeth or going to the toilet. It needs to be done no matter what one is going through, good or bad times, but not as an opponent to the emotions. Fighting emotions just gives them more power. Seeing them for what they are: flimsy, transitory, transparent and dream like, without rejecting them or trying to escape them gradually comes to fruition, as long as we don’t solidify them by fighting with them
      Please forgive me, I’m just thinking out loud, trying to help myself understand my own internal processes
      G
      B: That’s great, G. I’m in similar process, and it helps me that people accompany me!
      Reckognizing the dream as a dream…. I’m getting more and more hints that point in that direction, too.
      Sending love
      Björn
      G: Thanks Bjorn.
      It IS a dream. Dreams in sleep are the activity of consciousness. Likewise, the way we perceive space like experience in daily life, filled up with dualistic projections of self and other, is again, no more than the activity of consciousness
      I think we agree!
      G: And Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche stated very clearly that Lingwood ” had not received any higher tantric initiations, unless by false pretences”. I was told this by the person he said it to
      PS
      According to Khyentse Rinpoches translator in Kalimpong, who I communicated with in 96, Khyentse Rinpoche did not have any dealings with Lingwood. Therefore, he couldn’t have given him permission to teach. He may have sat in on an initiation or two, as many people do nowadays, without understanding what was going on!
      I’m sure the Buddha didn’t regard himself as a Buddhist. If one simply applies Buddhist principles to ones experience, does that make one a ‘ buddhist’? Or is it the case that ‘ buddhist’ is just another label we need to let go of?
      Keep it simple! Remember the three universal truths/ the three marks of conditioned existence: impermanence, selflessness and suffering. If we don’t recognise everything changes all the time, we cling to the image of a permanent self and therefore we suffer. The same goes for the label ‘budddhist”!
      Re the mantra, he also taught the Vajraguru mantra incorrectly
      Being a Kagyu, Sakya and Nyingma practitioner,(I did ngondro in all three) I have received the same White Tara initiation.
      Just hang loose brother. It’s a great idea to cs top calling yourself a ‘Buddhist’ and there’s no need to be part of any group. But learning to just let go of the dream and feeling love and compassion for all those beings trapped in the dream will always be good for you
      Do you want your letter to Shambala publicised?
      G
      B: Great!
      I wrote these things for a group of friends, connected to Shambhala; many of them fellow practitioners. If you are ready to, I could forward what you said to them, without mentioning your name. Maybe I could say (once again), that it comes from the person who has written the FWBO files… But that’s up to you. It might help clarify things for quite a few people…
      G: I don’t mind sharing my name with you but. I have to be careful with people who I don’t have knowledge of.
      You could say you contacted the FWBO Files author and he gave the following answers to your questions.
      B: That’s great, G, and I’ll keep to that
      G: My thoughts and good wishes are with you brother
      
      Clear Vision website hosts numerous intimate portraits and photos of the student mentioned above as Sachin.
      Sr wrote adoringly of his beautiful student.
      
      Sr claims he was celibate in India,but he also claims he has not broken his vow of celibacy whilst in bed with BJorn, so …… maybe he does not understand what sex and celibacy actually mean? There are so many stories connecting Sr to allegations of sexual activity with beautiful student boys in India, and in his own creation FWBO? Can Sr’s version of events always be the truth given that there are a growing number of first-hand accounts that counter the history as told by Sr and the narrative as derived from Sr. What patterns of behaviour and activity do folk on this site see in the various stories about Sr and handsome young men in his classes?
      - 412
        
        tenpel on December 12, 2016 at 5:25 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you for sharing this. (I could only read it now…)
        
        dr Elizabeth Tylden told me she attributed 3 suicides to men’s encounters with S.
        
        Horrible! Terrible!
        
        What patterns of behaviour and activity do folk on this site see in the various stories about Sr and handsome young men in his classes?
        
        My thoughts are, he seems to be an untamed sexual predator who abused Buddhism to satisfy his sexual thirst at the costs of others. It looks FWBO/Triratna is just the means to fulfil his own ends. He justifies the own shortcomings as strengths and incorporated his short comings into Triratna as supposed virtues. The pattern and the FWBO/Triratna official responses remind me of other cases of long term sexual abuse and all the efforts of covering up, denial and attacking the victims. His followers seem to lack clarity, compassion, understanding of (Buddhist) ethics as well as lacking the courage to reject what he has done and to point it out as what it is: harming other sentient beings. Rather, his followers (at least those who have some sober information about it) seem to like to continue to live in this deceptive and twisted world S/Lingwood has created. Highly likely either due to (confused) ideological/psychological reasons or for rather mundane matters …
        
        —
        
        Great and admirable how G. treats with his neurological condition (Parkinsons)!
        Acceptance, acceptance! Great teaching!
413

Stephen on December 1, 2016 at 8:35 pm
Reply

Does Kulananda Mr Michael Chakolson want to update his letter to Guardian? Looks like Sangharakshita was the originator of all the mess-with-your-head-and-body-stuff. Padmaloka and other centres involved. The Guardian received a large number of letters following publication of this article, of which they published the following two:

Guardian Letters, Wed 29 Oct 1997

The true face of Buddhism.

Your feature on the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order (The dark side of enlightenment, October 27) makes much of difficult, indeed tragic, events at one of our centres nine years ago. However, Madeleine Bunting does not make it clear that such events have never happened at my other centre and she thereby unfairly implicates the FWBO as a whole.

The FWBO has learned many lessons and instituted safeguards to prevent a recurrence, but the article does not do justice to this. It is also not made clear that the activities of the centre’s chairman were based on distortions of the FWBO’s teachings, and that he left the order when his activities came to light.

The article misrepresents the FWBO’s teachings in suggesting that these underpin abusive relationships. This is a serious charge to make against any religious community, and one would expect to see it substantiated. Instead, we have criticisms from three British Buddhists – one of whom even refused to be named. There are many disagreements and misunderstandings within British Buddhism and none of these figures would claim to be an impartial adjudicator.

Ms Bunting ends up adjudicating on what is Buddhism. Rather than discussing the issues in a balanced manner, she quotes selective and inaccurately from FWBO literature, and her versions of Sangharakshita’s teachings on sex, gender and family life are gross misreadings of his deep concern with how the Buddhist path can best followed in modern society.

On ordination, all FWBO members undertake to follow a traditional list of 10 ethical precepts, including abstention from harming others and from sexual misconduct. As in any community, there have been lapses, but these are viewed as such, and observance is ensured through peer scrutiny.

Dharmachari Kulananda.
FWBO Communications Office,
St Mark’s Studios, Chillingworth Road, London N7 8SJ.

Guardian Letters, Thurs 30 Oct 1997

Dharmacari Kulananda’s reaction (Letters, October 29) to Madeleine Bunting’s article (The dark side of enlightenment, October 27) indicates that the leadership of the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order (FWBO) is still out of touch with what is occurring in some of its centres. Your report coincides directly with my own experience of this movement.

In 1994 I opened my home as a meditation house for people interested in the dharma and meditation. A young man arrived to join the sangha, having left his home and girlfriend to explore his spiritual path further. I watched him trying to correlate his deep and natural love for his partner with an insistence from members of the FWBO that spiritual enlightenment could only be gained by leading a single-sex existence and relinquishing his relationship.

On several occasions, the young man broke down, unable to relate his own commitment to the dharma with the treatment he was receiving. At no point did the people involved in instigating his distress examine themselves or accept any liability for it. As a result, he returned home and to his partner and turned his back on Buddhism – a great loss.

The FWBO seems like Western evangelism in a different garb. In a climate where enlightenment and self-exploration are becoming one of our main growth industries, it provides career opportunities and a possible support structure in a milieu of fluctuating cultural and social change. As such, it has a great responsibility.

If the FWBO reaction to this article is denial, anger or dismissal this would be unconstructive. They should regard it as a gift to inspire genuine investigation into their motives and behaviour and address the problems exposed in the Guardian.

Anne Liddell.
Bristol

Guhyavajra (Feb 98) Shabda
“I have been interested to follow discussions on the Guardian article…The media is a load of rubbish, most people know that. With regard to Ms. Bunting (I assume she is a Ms.),…it is well to remember that the aforementioned journalist is a spiritually stupid and ignorant person, a mud clam, an existential pygmy writing and commenting on a subject in which she is conspicuous for being brainless and clueless. An impertinent unspeakably arrogant self opinionated commentator without ethics or reason … In the final analysis Madeleine Bunting is spiritually so low she could crawl under a lice on stilts.”
- 414
  
  NO NAME on December 1, 2016 at 10:00 pm
  Reply
  
  Chaskelson doesn’t give a hoot.Hes had his good time, facilitated and engaged in abusive relationships, used his esteemed position in the Order to build himself an image then dropped the Kulananda label, hidden the FWBO links then set up his own cosy little business Sees it as a nice little earner , I’m sure. Cheap holidays in other people’s misery is what I call it. It’s amazing what a combination of arrogance, abuse and lies can do for a mans career http://www.michaelchaskalson.com/
  H
  - 415
    
    Prajnacitta on June 15, 2019 at 7:14 am
    Reply
    
    Wow…. what a legacy. Michael Chaskalson has founded a whole business charging money for a teaching given freely by the Buddha (mindfulnessworks)…..
    
    I see also he has written books with the titles ‘ Mindfulness and Money’ and ‘Buddhism in Twenty Minutes’. I guess thats the sum of what he learned through his involvement with the FWBO.
    
    Chogyam Trungpa, for all his faults, came up with a good name for such activities: spiritual materialism
416

Joc on December 2, 2016 at 2:47 am
Reply

I received this information this evening: Comment from former member “We were shown a video of why our FWBO work was so important. I saw a guy in India being able to buy a moped and another one building a house for him and his wife and child – all because of ‘development’ and business links. People in Windhorse were congratulating themselves but I was thinking I can’t even afford a pedal bike; I can’t afford new shoes and my family has not got what we need. Seeing Coddington Hall was the final straw for me. Have we been exploited? Yes. Lots of us struggling now because we gave too much to this. You were made to feel guilty for having a family. And they never stop asking for dana and more money for Sangharakshita. And all the sex stuff, too. I resigned.”

So, Kulananda does not seem to value his links to Sangharakshita anymore? It seems that the names ‘Sangharakshita’ and ‘Triratna’ have become an embarrassment? The Karuna Trust has also dropped all mention of Triratna. Sangharakshita gets one mention in the search.
417

NO NAME on December 2, 2016 at 9:11 am
Reply

“Neither lay nor ordained” So, in the hours of need that eventually befall us all, they get support from neither the family nor the sangha. This is why the more senior OMs who hold the positions of power are resistant to admittng to the abuse. You see, they’ve got their pension plan, their nests are feathered and their retirement home is bought. As for the unteemenschen of this world within worlds,the only way they’ll be secure is by keeping quiet and doing as their told. Which oppressive dictatorial political regime does this remind you of?
418

frenzy on December 2, 2016 at 2:56 pm
Reply

I think dependency and oppression are v relevant issue in the group dynamics. But maybe more around a variety of things, like: identity, social life, status, work/income, needing it for spiritual progress/input/ friendships/retreats etc. I don’t think ”their nests are feathered and their retirement home is bought” though if you dont mind me say so…
- 419
  
  NO NAME on December 2, 2016 at 8:06 pm
  Reply
  
  Their nests ARE feathered as long as they. don’t speak out about the abuse by their glorious leader and the retirement home is already bought: a multi million pound mansion in the English countryside called Adisthana
- 420
  
  Stephen on December 3, 2016 at 12:50 pm
  Reply
  
  There is nothing in place to support the people who gave so much http://triratna-centre-support.org/wp-content/uploads/pensions-article-by-lb-088.pdf
421

frenzy on December 3, 2016 at 10:48 am
Reply

Your outrage (if i may call it that) is refreshing.
I like the image of a sinking ship.
422

Joc on December 3, 2016 at 11:56 am
Reply

Whose ‘truth’ is presented in ‘The Triratna Story’? (freely available on the net because Triratna have enough resources to publish in house and, of course therefore to control the narrative ) Whose versions of Hampstead events has become the ‘accepted narrative’? See pages 4 and 5 for starters ….
This has been commissioned ‘by the Triratna Community itself’ i.e. devotees of Sr / those who have vowed to be loyal to Sr.
Viajragupta is a member of same devotee group. He has vowed to be loyal to Sr. This is therefore not impartial, It is propaganda. It tells the story the order need it to tell and minimises the harm done to people, whilst glorifying Sr. It is used to ‘soften up’ newcomers and to massage away doubts and fears.
Compare how V writes about the early days in Hampstead and Sr’s relationship to Terry Delamare with the narrative of GB (files) from Maurice Walsh who was also there. The files / MWalsh narrative is that Sr’s sexual activities caused grave concerns to Hampstead Buddhist Vihara. (You can see Maurice Walsh discussing his fears of Sr’s manipulation of young men on Dialogue Ireland BBC / FWBO embedded BBC video from 1992. In that Maurice Walsh quotes directly from FWBO writing. He assesses the writings as a form of manipulation. So does Rev Daishin Morgan. It is also available here https://vajratool.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/1992-bbc-documentary-concerning-the-fwbo-triratna-buddhist-community/…
This has been commissioned ‘by the Triratna Community itself’ i.e. devotees of Sr / those who have vowed to be loyal to Sr.

Is it possible that a ‘dodgy priest’ was moved on by the Catholic Church? Yes – Sr. in the same 1992 video talks about abuse in Catholic Church and in families, both of which he expressed ‘extreme and violent negativity’ towards. (See ‘Spotlight’ film to show how an institution protects itself – over decades – at the expense of people ‘used’ by clergy for sex and manipulation) Is it possible that Sr was himself ‘moved on’ to avoid scandal a) In India and b) in Hampstead Buddhost Vihara? This is what Maurice Walsh told GB, the writer of The Files. See BBC documentary from 1992 and locate Maurice Walsh.
- 423
  
  Joc on December 3, 2016 at 5:37 pm
  Reply
  
  https://vajratool.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/1992-bbc-documentary-concerning-the-fwbo-triratna-buddhist-community/
424

frenzy on December 4, 2016 at 8:30 pm
Reply

https://www.freebuddhistaudio.com/texts/read?num=FBA104&at=text&q=&p=7

Growing Pains by Vishvapani
An Inside View of Change in the FWBO by Vishvapani

”In January 2003 I heard that a long-standing Order member called Yashomitra had
submitted an article to Shabda, the Orderâ€™s confidential journal, detailing his sexual
contact with Sangharakshita and making some trenchant criticisms. A debate ensued at
Madhyamaloka: Should Yashomitraâ€™s piece be published? Should it be withheld? Who
should decide? Should we ask Sangharakshita, anticipating that he might well say no?
Was it fair on him to publish it â€“ or even to ask him, given his current ill health? What if
it killed him? But then, was it fair on Yashomitra not to publish? On one side was loyalty
to Sangharakshita, a desire to protect him â€“ especially now he was ill â€“ and exasperation
at the seemingly endless stream of criticism. On the other side, for Kulananda and
myself, was frustration at the constraints on talking publicly about Sangharakshitaâ€™s
sexual past. We had had the task of responding to the 1997-9 campaign against
Sangharakshita and the FWBO that used the press and the internet; and in August 1998
we had co-authored with Cittapala The FWBO Files: a Response. This document had
offered only minimal comment on the accusations about sex: one reason was the request
from Lokamitra and a a team of senior Order members in India that he had convened to
say as little as possible to confirm that Sangharakshita had been homosexually active.
They told us they were afraid of the response in their community, even fearing that there
would be violence against members of the movement. The other reason was that
Sangharakshita himself had said that he wanted to write his own account in his next
volume of memoirs. But when he came to write that volume he covered only a period in
which he was still celibate. By 2003 we could wait no longer.”

”2004: Who Are We Now?
The turbulence that had rocked the Order in 2003 died down in 2004, but the movement
was still profoundly affected by it. Looking back I see 2004 as one of the most difficult
years the FWBO has been through, although the difficulties were diffused and for the
most part not consciously articulated. I want to suggest some causes and some symptoms.

Sangharakshita’s Position

It would be wrong to suggest that Order members in general rejected Sangharakshita and
his teachings in the wave of questioning of that was prompted by Yashomitra’s article.
Many remained loyal disciples, felt deep respect and gratitude to him and continued to
appreciate the Order and movement he had founded. But many also became aware of
what they considered his faults and were reeling from the discovery. His books and ideas
were usually not repudiated, but they were increasingly left unread as attention was
attracted elsewhere, perhaps to the works of teachers whose appeal seemed less tarnished.

There is no need to repeat the content of those criticisms but it is worth trying to describe
their effect. For Order members a sense of distance from Sangharakshita was perhaps the
most serious problem they could face. He was the Order’s founder and his role as
preceptor had no authority behind it other than his confidence in himself and the
willingness of others to accept ordination from him. Later, ordinations had been
conducted by those who had been authorised by him. So for an Order member to reject
Sangharakshita was, by extension, to reject the validity of their own ordination. Order
members had trained by practicing and studying the Dharma as elucidated by his
teachings, and to reject these would, in effect, be to reject the validity of the FWBO.”

So they were hush hush about the behaviour of Sr that same year… Who apparently seemed completely oblivious of what was going in the Order after Yashomitra’s article they indeed decided to publish.(Ordermembers only). But he decided to put it online as well.
425

NO NAME on December 4, 2016 at 9:51 pm
Reply

“So for an Order member to reject
Sangharakshita was, by extension, to reject the validity of their own ordination. Order
members had trained by practicing and studying the Dharma as elucidated by his
teachings, and to reject these would, in effect, be to reject the validity of the FWBO.”
The myth of sangharakshita was his invention. The orders ordination has no basis in Buddhist tradition and was also his invention-he made it up! And as for the validity of the FWBO, parts of it ARE valid. These being the Buddha’s teachings The teachings of Sangharakshita are his fabrications, mainly to facilitate abuse, and are not valid- obviously! The real problem is OMs don’t have the guts to say this because it would display their own gullibility. It is their. characteristic arrogance, inherited from Lingwood that prevents this.
The answer to the Orders problem is to practice humility and admit they were lied to, duped and deceived by a conman. Then perhaps they could start practicing Dharmas truth
426

NO NAME on December 5, 2016 at 9:14 am
Reply

“So they were hush hush about the behaviour of Sr that same year… Who apparently seemed completely oblivious of what was going in the Order after Yashomitra’s article they indeed decided to publish.(Ordermembers only). But he decided to put it online as well.”
NB ‘He’ was Yashomitra, the former Order member who was raped by Kovida and Sangharakshita while under the legal age of consent for consensual sex. So don’t be confused by Vishvapani’s apologist article or see it as a sign of the Order being willing to publicly acknowledge their shortcomings. This article is no ‘ olive branch’ indicating a change of policy or an openness to criticism.or. change; it is a ‘damage limitation’ exercise that one of the senior OMs wrote ( Vishvapani joined the Order at 14- draw your own conclusions about where he stands and why)
It was written AFTER Yashomitras letter to Shabda ( a magazine intended ONLY for OMs, a secret place for discussion of issues and incidents considered too sensitive for public consumption ) and was placed online by Yashomitra himself.
This article then is no Indication of a change, a new openness to public scrutiny of the orders lengthy history of sexual abuse. It is actually a very devious piece of propaganda designed to create that impressio but which actually hides much of the dubious conduct going on behind the scenes
In some ways, I am reminded of the current situation, where a Facebook page has been set up by an Order member where former members can air their grievances and talk about the abuse that they experienced, with the long term hope of bringing about change in the Order. The page is a closed page and is moderated by an Order member. While I am sure the intention in this case is genuine, the end result is the same. The abuse lies beyond public view and the Orders reputation is protected.
The aim is clearly to assess the grievances and establish a new framework of ethical behaviour for a new, post Sangharakshita Order. Noble indeed. However, the reality is, unless one is considered ‘safe’,BY AN OM one cannot view the pages content. So all revelations of abuse are kept out of the public domain and the Order continues on its merry way, with senior OMs such as Munisha no doubt rubbing their hands together gleefully, in the knowledge that genuine moderates in the Order are unwittingly doing their dirty work for them. Once again, we see that the road to hell is paved with good intentions
IMHO the place for the revelation of widespread sexual abuse is to GENUINE safeguarding officers, the police and/ or ( in accord with HHDLs advice on dealing with Buddhist teachers reluctant to admit to or abandon their abusive behaviour) to the press. It is certainly not appropriate for such revelations to be dealt with ‘ in house’ behind closed doors, by members who bear allegiance to the very Order responsible for perpetrating the abuse in the first place, no matter how well intentioned they might be.
I must apologise to these well intentioned people for saying this. But this is the end result of their well intentioned efforts and it is important that they are aware of this outcome.
- 427
  
  frenzy on December 5, 2016 at 12:48 pm
  Reply
  
  Yes it sems a realistic ‘concern’ that dealing with the ‘difficulties’ will at best be used in a ‘damage limitation’ exercise again.
  The recent request put to Maitribala to resign from the order is in this light a v worrysome development. It has apparently been posted with the closed Order Facebook group in a section where normally high priorty information is placed. It would be good to know how this groups respond is to the request for Maitribala to resign.
  The ‘Truth and Reconsiliation’ group mentioned by Joc represents both om’s and non om’s attempting open dialogue and is initiated by non-om’s. Though dealing with different views and conflict, ‘safety’ issues etc ‘critics’ are welcomed here and receiving support. The group is also working on an attempt to adress issues as propar aknowledgement and safeguarding and trying to come to the creation of a document to be presented to ‘Triratna office’.
  - 428
    
    NO NAME on December 5, 2016 at 3:07 pm
    Reply
    
    It seems these “non OMs” are largely composed of former devotees. The document to be presented to the Triratna office will not be seen in the outside world unless it is simultaneously published outside the Order. The moderator of the site is an OM. While their intentions are clearly honourable, it cannot be denied that this will likely colour any outcome. The promise for future reform in return for no publicity for instance, is far likely to be accepted by an ‘ insider’ than by a neutral. What we need is outside, public scrutiny rather than any private process which allows the Order to get off scot free AGAIN, a situation which will allow the lies about history to continue
    - 429
      
      Joc on December 5, 2016 at 5:01 pm
      Reply
      
      There is a mixture of people in the Truth and Reconciliation group. There is criticism of SR and his ideology as well as defence of him and his teachings. The people who set it up are not OMs. Both are female. The group is working towards sifting through problem areas and looking for acknowledgement and solutions and – unless I have misunderstood – the vocal part of the group sees the need for any list of concerns to be lodged and discussed with an external safeguarding agency. In my opinion, no-one at Triratna central will ‘take responsibility’ for receiving or acting on this group’s concerns as no-one is apparently in control, so enlisting for example a MASH team will be crucial if the group is to have any effect. Hopefully, this group will move even more in support of those harmed as is starting to happen in some cases. Some were already there. For some, the BBC programme was news indeed and some are finding out things that they did not know before, such as the name of the schoolboy in India and information on Dr. Elizabeth Tylden. I hope that some of them will come and join the discussion here with a wide range of other Buddhists and thinkers. They will be most welcome.
430

frenzy on December 5, 2016 at 5:19 pm
Reply

Thank you for your feedback No-name. Your first two statements i think might be correct. The third isn’t though as far as i know.
I think the ‘outcome’ lies in the quality of the dialoque rather then aims involving a ‘promise for future reform in return for no publicity”. We can conclude from Jock comments there is attempt to create an as safe as possible space for people to speak out.
I agree with ”what we need is outside, public scrutiny rather than any private process which allows the Order to get off scot free AGAIN, a situation which will allow the lies about history to continue.”
I would be interesed to hear if you have more advice from which you think this specific group would benefit either related to the formulation of their aims or their dialogue.
- 431
  
  NO NAME on December 5, 2016 at 9:40 pm
  Reply
  
  Well, first and foremost I would suggest that all substantial evidence of sexual abuse or other forms of criminal activity are passed to any relevant, external MASH ( multi agency safeguarding team) for assessment and to provide an evidential basis for criminal proceedings.
  I would also use this current blog to post testimonies ( with permission and names removed) of former and current OMs who have endured abuse ( I believe there are at least half a dozen so far) The sooner groups of abuse victims can come together through a mutual understanding of shared plight, the sooner they will have the strength to speak publicly about what they’ve endured, legal action can proceed and compensation can be sought. It is also important insofar as, as well as including police , MASH teams include educational professionals Through the sharing of information across national MASH teams, Clear Visions ability to draw in vulnerable youngsters can be nullified, especially since Lingwoods sexual procurement doctrines are still being propounded at men’s ordination retreats in Norwich for example.
  If the Order remains unwilling to admit to past mistakes, apologise and compensate victims or to renounce Lingwoods false doctrines, I am afraid that there is no other alternative but for us to do it for them.
  As a matter of public record, I also think it only right that any document produced by the folk at truth and reconciliation should also be made public, as should the date of its issue and to whom it was sent
  I’d like to hear more about the Maitribala(?) case It seems that on the one hand the order claim they are open. Tto criticism while at the same time eliminating those who make valid criticism. Who made this decision and on the basis of what reasoning?
  More to follow
432

Joc on December 7, 2016 at 2:47 pm
Reply

Apparently a new safeguarding officer has been appointed to replace(?) Munisha Caroline Hopper in Triratna.
It is good that Munisha’s dual role is coming to an end. Presumably she will stay on as PR? Question 1: When is the handover?
Question 2: Who has interviewed and chosen this new safeguarding offcier?
Question 3: Who are this person’s line managers?
Question 4: Who is the external point of contact for the new safeguarding officer?
Question 5: Where is the transparent and open document detailing a) Job Specification and b) Person specification?

Can any OM, who has vowed to be loyal to his / her Teacher and reverence Sr do the ethical work needed with the disclosures of abuse concerning Sr? There is a conflict of interests. S/he would need to hand everything over to an external agency for there to be any sense of impartiality. In the case of Bishop Peter Ball an Anglican safeguarding team went to look at historic files. Where are the historic files concerning Sr? The Anglican safeguarding team did not know or have any allegiance to Bishop Peter Ball. If one has a vested interest in a person, one must hand over to someone who does not have a vested interest in that person. As an OM, one has a vested interest in Sr. It is a paradox to have a safeguarding officer in Trirtana as his / her hands are tied by the vows made at ordination to the person who is at the centre of the safeguarding nightmare. The only ethical and moral course of action is to have an external safeguarding team in to scrutinise impartially.
433

Mettaman on December 7, 2016 at 5:56 pm
Reply

The BBC programme caused a stir in Triratna but it is still not possible to see any sincerity of movement towards the apology needed to alleviate the suffering of those groomed under the cloak of spirituality by Sangharakshita (or his clones). According to a source close to Adhisthana dealing with the complainants concerns as raised by BBC and three former order members is low down on any agenda in official meetings at Adhisthana.
A few order members have shown concern and a desire for change but there is otherwise casual and systemic inertia. In themselves order members are not bad people but they are working in a profoundly dysfunctional structure.
434

NO NAME on December 7, 2016 at 10:13 pm
Reply

“If all else fails, name names in newspapers!”
HH Dalai Lama on abusive teachers
- 435
  
  NO NAME on December 10, 2016 at 10:33 am
  Reply
  
  If the issue of Sangarakshitas abuse.of students is ” no longer relevant” because it all took place ” a long time ago” according to Munisha et al, why on earth are people at Triratna following the Buddha’s teachings? After all, it was all formulated ” a long time ago ”
  I note that the football abuse scandal in the Uk is reviewing cases. Stretching back from the present to the 1970s.Funnily enough, that is very much the same period within which the FWBO Triratna abuse took place. So it looks like, while the perpetrators are using the argument above to hide from prosecution, genuine safeguard ears and legal officials consider the same time period entirely relevant.
436

tenpel on December 17, 2016 at 11:02 pm
Reply

I bought the book, »Buddhism for Today« by Alex Kennedy (FWBO’s / Triratna’s »Dharmachari Subhuti«). The chapter about Spiritual Friendship seems to be strange on the first glance and I hope to read it in detail soon and to analyse it in more detail. However, what I read already seems to be driven by the desire to form very intimate relationships with others, in a way that I find intrusive, not respecting other’s boundaries and manipulative. The writing appears to be obsessed by the idea to come closer to others by applying rather bizarre and questionable means, creating an emotional rapport that is not really healthy from a spiritual point of view or from the pov of spiritual development. (Let me know what you think about it!)

On the way glancing through the book I found the following sentence by Subhuti on page 167:

Some might decide to keep clear of unhealthy attachment by happily enjoying a number of different sexual relationships.

Wow, more sex with more people as an antidote to attachment!

But there are even more distortions from Subhuti in other context which might explain how confusion formed the basis for the manifold sexual abuse of faithful students which has unfolded over the last decades. Subhuti’s paper to »The Conference on the Ordination Process for Men«, published in the Order magazine Shabda in September 1986, states:

Sexual interest on the part of a male Order member for a male mitra [novice] can create a connection which may allow kalyana mitrata [spiritual friendship] to develop.

Wow, using sexual desire / attachment to create a spiritual friendship that should enable spiritual growth? Hello?
This is totally absurd and also manipulative for me. Dharma practice means you try to avoid at all costs to let your mind be led by the three mind poisons, ignorance, attachment and hatred. Instead of following them you work to abandon them, you don’t fuel them. Nor do you follow them and “use” them to form spiritual relationships. If your spiritual relationship has this connotation or is driven by these mind poisons, it is already poisoned. The advice would be, you do everything to stop that or you even avoid the person in order to save yourself from increasing your attachment. The Buddhist texts are very clear about this. No Buddhist text or tradition has ever recommended such a delusional approach. (Though my former cult leader used the sexual desire of others in her or her monks or nuns to bind those people to the group… but this is not the Dharma and clearly manipulative.)

It gets even crazier:

Perhaps the strongest factor which might bind an order member to a mitra is sex. It does seem that many of the most successful Kalyana Mitras have an erotic interest in their mitras. It might be fruitful to look further at this point.

Read more details here: http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/SubQuote.htm

I agree with the comment given at the end from the BBC documentary Going for Refuge:

To me this is totally contrary to the Buddhist precepts, its totally contrary to the Buddhist scriptures, and its absolutely contrary to any sort of good practice. It to me is a form of manipulation.
437

NO NAME on December 18, 2016 at 9:36 am
Reply

The usual fwbo Triratna response here is”That was said a long time ago and is no longer relevant” Setting aside questions as to why, therefore are they studying Buddhism (2,500 years old so no longer relevant?) it should be noted that these very same ideas were recently preached with gusto at a men’s ordination/’dressing up’ retreat at Padmaloka Norwich, the centre focused on in the recent BBC report ‘Apology sought over abuse at Buddhist centre’
- 438
  
  tenpel on December 18, 2016 at 1:39 pm
  Reply
  
  This response might delude the lazy. These ideas and concepts formed the culture and is the mental framework of the Triratna religious network setup. Even if this mental framework is not communicated nowadays it can still form and frame how Triratna functions. It can still frame and form it’s culture.
  
  You can see this in the NKT, the culture of the Teacher Training Manual as set up, lived and explained by Neil Elliott still exists even if not explicitly communicated or even denied.
  - 439
    
    NO NAME on December 18, 2016 at 3:55 pm
    Reply
    
    As a set of standards by which people judge others? Sounds like that would fit both models. It’s a common sidetrack for all we buddhists: using the mirror to examine the features on somebody else’s face.
440

NO NAME on December 18, 2016 at 4:04 pm
Reply

i guess the only difference between the Eliot model and the Sangharakshita one is the former is more based in dharma so eventually it might prove useful on the path. Lingwoods doctrine is so subjective to him and those who emulate him that its pursuit can only lead to confusion and misery when followed through to the end. And it’s certainly still in place, though better concealed than previously
- 441
  
  tenpel on December 18, 2016 at 4:29 pm
  Reply
  
  Elliott’s model is based on proselytising and sectarianism when I remember and judge this correctly. Therefore, I don’t think it’s based on the dharma…
  - 442
    
    NO NAME on December 18, 2016 at 10:02 pm
    Reply
    
    “An undisguised commitment to recruitment and expansion” was how one commentator aptly ddescribed both groups. As for sectarianism, Lingwood is a master of proclaiming the inferiority of “ethnic ” Buddhism.
    These shared characteristics of course feature on lists of cult characteristics.Alarm bells should be ringing.
443

Stephen on December 18, 2016 at 7:29 pm
Reply

The documentary section with three men making similar allegations was placed on Dialogue Ireland website a few days ago with the names FWBO TRIRATNA and inappropriate sexual activity in it title.
444

Mettaman on December 28, 2016 at 7:01 pm
Reply

Two order members from London have been expressing concern that order discussions of the Padmaloka issues connected to September 2016 BBC Inside Out programme and mitra Bs description of his sexual relationship with Sangharakshita in 2003 /4 have already been filed in an archive on The Buddhist Centre online despite them being topical. They say that the highly respected female order member who wrote a very useful piece reflecting on the various kalyana mitrata via sex with Sagharakshita stories is also concerned that her piece has been archived and that it is very difficult to trace the discussion.
- 445
  
  tenpel on December 28, 2016 at 7:45 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you Mettaman for sharing this.
  
  There is an non-order controlled face book page in which order members discuss how to deal with this and how to reform Triratna. But I fear internal discussions won’t help. I think only public pressure and public exposing might help.
  
  What you write here rather approves such concerns. It’s been discussed, archived and buried without public notice – very comfortable for the Triratna leadership and Lingwood/Sangharakhita or “damage control”.
  
  Those people who are concerned are invited to share here on the blog (or at other places online) for the public what they have to share. Also guest authors (also anonymously) are invited to post here their pieces. (We can post such pieces, like that of the “respected female order member”, as an extra post so that it also allows discussion related to its content.)
  
  Secrecy plays in the hands of the persons who abuse power. I think there is no other way than publicity.
  - 446
    
    NO NAME on December 29, 2016 at 9:20 am
    Reply
    
    The setting up of the internal ‘truth and reconciliation ‘ page by various contributors was exactly what the FWBO Triratna hierarchs have always ordered. Closed discussion, while it gives survivors the place to open up ( I believe several have now come forwards to say they were used and discarded like a sperm drenched rag by Lingwood) is also a perfect way of keeping the truth hidden.
    While contributors are to be congratulated on their intentions, the product does all the Orders dirty work for it. Hiding the truth has always been the order of the day when it comes to FWBO history, abuse and misuse of the teachings and individuals. The new Facebook page will never achieve the open exposure necessary to force the change necessary in the Order as long as it continues in that manner
    Visible change in response to visible concerns- sounds so much better and more effective than keeping things quiet and trying to influence direction from the inside
    I believe Munisha asked to join the group but was rejected. Why no fuss about democracy then? I’ ll tell you. Because she knows the page is private and can therefore never lead to her fears ( the truth!) being realised
447

tenpel on December 30, 2016 at 12:57 am
Reply

BTW, here is a moving & powerful documentary why it is important to stand with the victims of sexual assault (or the abuse of power).

Because the words of our enemies aren’t as awful as the silence of our friends. – Daisy Coleman

Audrie & Daisy review: Netflix documentary exposes epidemic of sexual assault culture among teenagers
»The documentary tells the stories of two girls who were raped in the same year. Both tried to end their lives. Only one survived. The other is playing a crucial role in educating today’s youth about the dangers of social media, sexual assault and not speaking out on behalf of your friends«

You might think and argue, these were teenagers and it was rape, while here we have a case of adults … Though this is true from a mere factual perspective, it would ignore the brainwashing and power dynamics that enable sexual intimidation or sexual attacks and make a potential victim mute / unable to protect himself …

Especially in this case of Dennis Lingwood we have people who committed suicide after the sexual manipulations, and exploitations by Lingwood, “Bhante”.

Its really worth to watch the documentary and to feel and think with the people being harmed by the sexual thirst and sexual violence of men.

https://www.netflix.com/title/80097321
448

tenpel on January 2, 2017 at 3:37 pm
Reply

IMPRORTANT NOTICE

I want the readers let know that there are uncommon activities on the blog with respect to the Triratna / Sangharakhsita post.

Since 3 days the blog is accessed thrice up to 5 times as much as usually (see screenshots to get an idea). Accessed are rather irrelevant posts which have been viewed 3-4 times a day in the past but have now statistics of up to 500 – 600 and more views per day. I guess behind these are tactics to distort the statistics and to manipulate the google ranking. Since these manipulations started, the two posts which were read the most over the last weeks (Triratna/Sangharakshita & Mimi interview about Sogyal Lakar) have been removed from the list of the “TOP POSTS & PAGES” due to these manipulations.

The question is, who has the benefit from distorting the statistics and subsequently (highly likely) the google ranking? Since the new “TOP POSTS & PAGES” list lists at least three Rigpa posts after the manipulations have been started, it is clear that it is Triratna / Sangharakhsita who have the benefit from these manipulations because the post regarding them, which was the number 1 or number 2 post in the list is now out of the list.

So, I have to strongly assume, that Triranta is trying to manipulate this blog and subsequently the Google ranking and to get this post – which was so far well listed on Google and one of the most read post over the last weeks here on the blog – out of the google top search results.

It rather fits in that context that “Dharmacari Upekshaka” – the photographer of the Sangharakshita image in the post – claimed yesterday via email copyright infringements and required “to remove it from your blogsite”. However, there is no copyright infringement whatsoever.

I heard, similar trials to manipulate google have been made in the past also regarding the FWBO files. Maybe no name can give details?

PS: My response to these manipulations is a change of the landing page where I stick this post now to the very top.
- 449
  
  Mark on January 3, 2017 at 1:06 am
  Reply
  
  Halfway down this page:
  
  http://britishbuddhism.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/triratna-buddhist-community-friends.html
  
  there are some screen grabs of an article from an FWBO site of around 2009 or 2010, explaining how to get the FWBO’s own sites higher up on Google rankings on a search for “FWBO” or similar, and thus get sites critical of the FWBO pushed further down. Looks like they are trying similar tricks again.
  
  It refers specifically to the http://www.fwbo-files.com site which was set up by a German guy who I believe used to attend the FWBO Minden centre. This site no longer exists – it was costing him too much to have a .com site – but much of the material on that site is still available at http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo and other sites.
  - 450
    
    tenpel on January 3, 2017 at 1:52 am
    Reply
    
    Thank you Mark. I linked that post now also in the post above.
    On the 2nd January these manipulations reached almost 3.000 hits, 6 times as much as usually.
- 451
  
  tenpel on January 3, 2017 at 10:59 pm
  Reply
  
  Just to let you know and to be transparent about these strange stat matters. The high access to the blog (6 times as much as usual) continues. The last day the FWBO post was pushed to the top while other rather not so relevant posts were pushed too. Either this is a means to deceive or another group (like the Tsem people) is behind these activities. However, its guess work. Here the current stats. If things normalise I’ll let you know.
  - 452
    
    tenpel on January 4, 2017 at 1:02 am
    Reply
    
    The increase in views comes from Malaysia …
    - 453
      
      tenpel on January 8, 2017 at 7:38 pm
      Reply
      
      FYI. Its not so clear but these manipulations of my statistics seem nothing have to do with Triratna but rather with the Tsem people. The manipulations have started on 31st December 16 and continue. They distort the “Most Read Posts & Pages” and “Most clicked”-external link statistics. I suspended now both statistics from the landing page.
      
      Stupid as this is, it might be that these manipulations at the end rather promote the blog because the views are now up to six times as much as usually. The WordPress team said I can’t block IPs from Malaysia to stop this.
454

tenpel on January 3, 2017 at 1:25 pm
Reply

There is a statement by Dennis Lingwood (Sangharakshita) on http://www.sangharakhsita.org. It reads,

A personal statement from Urgyen Sangharakshita

Next year we shall be celebrating the 50th anniversary of FWBO/Triratna. It will be an occasion of rejoicing, thankfulness for the Three Jewels and re-dedication to the ideals for which Triratna stands.

For me as the founder of Triratna the occasion will be an especially poignant one. I have more than once said that I was not the best person to found a new Buddhist movement, but the only one that was available, and friends have sometimes assured themselves and others that my words were not to be taken literally but were only a sign of my humility. But this is not the case. At the time I meant them to be taken literally and I still mean them to be taken literally.

I being its founder, Triratna sometimes bears the mark not of the Dharma but of my own particular personality. That personality is a complex one and in certain respects I did not act in accordance with what my position in the movement demanded or even as a true Buddhist. I am thinking in particular of the times when I have hurt, harmed or upset fellow Buddhists, whether within Triratna or out of it.

These thoughts have borne all the more upon me in the course of the last week, when I was in hospital with pneumonia. As I was well aware pneumonia can be fatal to a man of my age and I knew that I could die, even though I did not feel that I was dying, despite being very ill.

I would therefore like to express my deep regret for all the occasions on which I have hurt, harmed or upset fellow Buddhists, and ask for their forgiveness.

Urgyen Sangharakshita
Adhisthana
December 30th 2016

http://www.sangharakshita.org/personal-statement.html
- 455
  
  tenpel on February 9, 2017 at 11:29 pm
  Reply
  
  The personal statement by Dennis Lingwood/Sangharakhsita got an update:
  
  Update, 8th February 2017: Sangharakshita has confirmed that his apology extends to anyone he has harmed in any way at all, including those who were Buddhists at the time if not now, and their non-Buddhist family and friends. He further wishes to make it clear that his statement was a confession. As the acknowledgment of having breached the Buddhist ethical precepts, Buddhist confession can most fully be made to other Buddhists. His statement was therefore addressed to Buddhists, whether within or without Triratna, for the reason that the confession of evil is part of the spiritual context which he shares with other Buddhists.
456

NO NAME on January 3, 2017 at 4:33 pm
Reply

this “personality is a complex one and in certain respects I did not act in accordance with what my position in the movement demanded or even as a true Buddhist. I am thinking in particular of the times when I have hurt, harmed or upset fellow Buddhists, whether within Triratna or out of it.”

This not an apology for his actions. This is an apology if his actions “hurt, harmed or upset” others. There is a subtle but massive and significant distinction between the two. ” I am sorry if my abusing the idea of kalyana mitrata to facilitate sex with you upset you. I’m not sorry I did it; I’m just sorry if it upset you ( after all, that’s your problem, your hang up….)”
- 457
  
  tenpel on January 3, 2017 at 4:44 pm
  Reply
  
  Then it seems this statement could be rather a continuation of a spin which I found yesterday on the German Wikipedia site which claims “Because of his controversial appearance, he is revered by his followers but suspected of traditionalists of heresy.” So, does he have a too complex personality (or “appearance”) – which hurts, harmed or upset fellow Buddhists or with which ordinary people cannot deal with – or did he act wrongly by manipulating and pressurising underaged and not underaged men into sexual relationship with himself – three of them having committed suicide – and by distorting the Dharma?
458

frenzy on January 3, 2017 at 7:09 pm
Reply

He seemes to be leaving it to others to take responsability for figuring out what ‘parts’ of the movement are bearing the non dharmic mark of his personality and to what is the unspecified harm and damage done through (this and) his unspecified non dharmic, non Buddhist acts, as he says, and sadly leaves the ‘movement’, the ‘Order’ and ‘Community’, bearing the burden and the effects of some deep rooted inveterated undharmic aspects possibly harmfull and damaging dynamics around possibly truthfullness, psychological splitting, imposing hierarchy, scapegoating whistleblowers, bending reality, dismissing and disempowering dissidents and critics, and unspecified none dharmic thus misleading influence on again unspecified ‘aspects’ of the ‘movement’.
459

No name on January 6, 2017 at 12:58 pm
Reply

Questions
Is this an apology for Sangharakshitas behaviour or is it an apology IF his behaviour ‘hurt, harmed or upset’ others?
If there was no one else available to start a new Buddhist movement, and as S says, he was unqualified
1) what was wrong with the many other Buddhists, western and Asian, emerging at this formative juncture in UK Buddhism? Says who?
2) why did he decide to act as if qualified if he knew he wasnt?
3) what elements of Triratna teaching are dharma and which are Sangharakshitas accretions?
4)’ Hurt, harmed or upset’ seem rather vague.. What exactly is he apologising for? Why is he asking for ‘forgiveness’; what exactly does he acknowledge he needs ‘forgiveness’ for?
5) Triratna Ltd recently lied to the BBC claiming S was ‘ blind’ and therefore couldn’t be interviewed. In fact, he is merely partially sighted. In light of this, what faith can we have in S revelation that in a recent stay in hospital he had an epiphany,nrealising he had to apologise? Is this genûine or is it more of the Triratna onions and violin routine?
Two things are clear
More questions have been raised by the letter
Sangharakshita is getting older and closer to death. In order to smooth over the transition and present a post morten split,, he / Triratna ltd decided the above letter should be drafted( group effort?- badly written and repetitive) and publicised , albeit hidden away on sangharakshita.org. Between them, it is time to come clean, admit to abuse ( the current letter is a narcissistic retelling of history and avoids specific language only for the Order and its founders self preservation), to compensate victims and draw a line under the issue, once and for all.
460

Stephen on January 6, 2017 at 3:26 pm
Reply

Order members have a window of opportunity to ask questions of their leader, to question and to help create the change needed and do so in a public forum. Where are those with the insight to do this? The silence from order members is still deafening.
461

No name on January 6, 2017 at 5:00 pm
Reply

Demonstrating his professed characteristic of humility, the Mahasthavira Urgyen Sangharakshita decided he was the only fit candidate to found a new Buddhist movement with him at its head ( even though he realised he was completely unqualified to do so)
- 462
  
  tenpel on January 6, 2017 at 8:01 pm
  Reply
  
  No name, there are some contradictions, but at least, there is still some honesty here which I truly miss in the New Kadampa Tradition or other controversial groups. From that perspective, I appreciate this attempt to honesty though it is somewhat fuzzy. Of course, you could argue its part of writing a certain narrative, but there is also some quality here which I respect and appreciate. At least there is something like an excuse and some acknowledgement of harm being done to others.
  
  However, I agree, Order members should urge to clarify the details as long as he lives.
463

frenzy on January 6, 2017 at 10:37 pm
Reply

Sr is presented as a dying old man whith regrets over harm and damage done. It has allready been stated he has stepped back several years ago. More question should be put to Sr to clarify himself. It is nevertheless up to the Order also, and its different organs, to take accountability for their dysfunctionality, false safeguarding claims, their subsequent whitewashing attempts over the years.
I sure am suprised about the confessing to Triratna sometimes bearing the mark not of the Dharma but his complex personality…
464

joc on January 7, 2017 at 10:46 am
Reply

Some more order members are beginning to speak out or speak out more boldly, but only in house or on Truth and Reconciliation site at the moment. There are some who have recognised denial for what it is an also how group think denial has played its part in long term harm. There is some recognition of how Dennis Lingwood’s aka Sangharakshita’s sexual desires and cravings have harmed others A handful only is visible at the moment, but there is at least some movement. I have suggested that order members join us on this site. I have also suggested that order members use the websites of their individual centres to show where they stand rather than expecting Executive / college to take the lead. If centres are actually separate and autonomous, as they claim, this should not be a problem.
- 465
  
  tenpel on January 7, 2017 at 12:04 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you, Joc. Good to know!
- 466
  
  tenpel on January 7, 2017 at 1:41 pm
  Reply
  
  Some one shared on Reddit these quotes:
  
  If the spiritual master is following a wrong path, which is contrary to mainline teachings, the student should be able to take a stand and not blindly follow that path. – The Dalai Lama
  
  If students sincerely point out the faults of the guru and explain any contradictory behavior, this will, in fact, help the guru to correct that behavior and adjust any wrong actions. – The Dalai Lama
  
  However, faith in one’s guru does not mean blind faith. It does not mean believing “My guru is perfect,” even though your guru is not perfect. It is not pretending that your guru’s defects are qualities. It is not rationalizing every foible of the guru into a superhuman virtue. After all, most gurus will have defects. You need to recognize them for what they are. – Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche
  
  For the sources follow the link on the side widgets here: http://www.info-buddhism.com/Ethics-in-the-Teacher-Student-Relationship.html (I Just added these quotes there.)
- 467
  
  frenzy on January 7, 2017 at 3:29 pm
  Reply
  
  I understand it seems the ‘Triratna experience” is very dependent on your local centre/ordermembers and they might without you knowing, though some clearly, still indulge in the continuation of denial.(as the dutch https://boeddhistischdagblad.nl/achtergronden/76604-76604/ and the one connected to Bodhipaksa http://www.wildmind.org/blogs/book-reviews/the-essential-sangharakshita)
  I would expect if they take it serieus they (the preceptors college? more individual Om’s, centres etc?) would finally speak out, also publically, aknowledgeing serieus sexual misconduct of their founder, and aknowledgeing structural denial and damage done including through the existance of a still ethical dysfunctional situation. (apart from possible other unspecified non dharmic aspects)
- 468
  
  frenzy on January 7, 2017 at 3:42 pm
  Reply
  
  Joc: sounds like at least some people are willing to take the lead and the heat, for what its worth in the bigger scale of things, hope they don’t end up like Maitribala being asked to resign and so on.
469

No name on January 7, 2017 at 4:54 pm
Reply

OM s would have to post here anonymously- the guy that spoke up about Norwich has been summarily excommunicated
But if enough OMs speak out, what can they do: sack everybody?
In the NKT, when the trustees of one centre disagreed, they split from HQ and carried on running independently- one of the other benefits of centre autonomy.
470

Mr Anon on January 7, 2017 at 9:40 pm
Reply

Hi… It’s been some time. I have been rather busy. Just as a point of clarification, Maitribala, as far as I am aware was asked to resign by a local Order Member, not by any official body. As far as I can see, and I haven’t commissioned a poll, this is not something supported or in any way desired by most OMs. Crucially it hasn’t been suggested or demanded by the Preceptors College, which is the body currently responsible for ordination.
- 471
  
  No name on January 8, 2017 at 8:35 am
  Reply
  
  So the Center coordinator who excluded Maitribala was acting entirely independently? This seems both draconian and unlikely.
  Somebody, somewhere approved his expulsion. Perhaps the reason for blurring exactly who.is so that no one be held responsible for a despicable act. Nothing new there then.
  I’d be very interested to know who takes responsibility for such an act. That a single individual could do so raises many questions. Moreover WHY was he expelled? For telling the truth?
  - 472
    
    Mr Anon on January 8, 2017 at 5:21 pm
    Reply
    
    Each centre is a legally autonomous charity, so yes it was simply the local centre chairman, who as far as I can see may be a very sincere nice chap if you meet him one-to-one, but from his words in this case is clearly on the cultic wing of the TBO. As far as I am aware the Preceptors College, which at present is the nearest thing we have to a leadership, has not said or encouraged anything like that. I may I have missed something but I certainly haven’t heard that. Please bring me up to date though if you have more information. What exactly has he been expelled from?
473

Stephen on January 8, 2017 at 4:04 am
Reply

Who are the official bodies and what powers do they have? Could you post your whistle blower policies here. That would be useful. It was Chair of Norwich Buddhist Centre who asked Maitribala to resign. So that is not an official body? It also seems he has been blocked from online order discussion groups by order convenors. Metta.
- 474
  
  Mr Anon on January 8, 2017 at 5:29 pm
  Reply
  
  Hi Stephen. The chair of the Norwich Buddhist Centre was acting entirely on his own initiative, as far as I know and was way out of order. He simply doesn’t have the authority to ask another OM to resign and his suggestion was crass in the extreme. Now of course someone should ask Sangharakshita to resign for admitting (however generally) to having hurt people and even more seriously that the Order’s ideology is in part informed by his “complex personality” rather than the Dharma. Maybe the same genius of a chairman could write him a letter, accusing him of being just as bad as Maitribala! 🙂
  
  I don’t have access to any whistleblower policies, probably because the Order doesn’t have them! If Maitribala has been blocked from online order discussion groups by the order convenors then they too have acted badly. However, I should add that the liveliest online discussion groups are on Facebook and he certainly cannot have been banned from any of them. No one would stand for it.
  - 475
    
    Mr Anon on January 8, 2017 at 7:21 pm
    Reply
    
    ps. I should just add that my last reply has bugged me ever since I wrote it. I don’t want to be harsh about the Norwich chairman. I think I allowed myself to get carried away on a bit of righteous indignation! He clearly shouldn’t have suggested MB walk the plank, but I don’t know him personally and from what I’ve heard he’s a nice enough chap. He probably felt he was being loyal to his teacher or something like that. I actually think criticism, where due, is a greater mark of loyalty but let’s leave it there.
476

joc on January 8, 2017 at 8:22 pm
Reply

Dear Mr. Anon, that is very interesting. I have just asked Maitribala again about the Facebook discussion group. He says again that an order convenor (whose name I do know) asked him to remove himself from one of the Facebook groups. He is still part of another one, where any discussion of ‘the issues’ is not allowed. Only Bhante praise and devotion is allowed on that one.
I have also asked him again who exactly removed him or had him removed from The Buddhist Centre online order member only section, which also gives an order member access to Shabda (where he posted his Safeguarding article in May 2016) and he says it was Parami and Lokeshvara, who are inter/national order convenors. They told him so in a letter.
The Norwich Chairman is indeed a polite man, but cited Maitribala’s lack of loyalty to Sangharakshita as a reason to ask him to resign. As the Norwich Chairman is so locked up in guruism concerning Sangharakshita, I expect he will be experiencing a lot of pain and confusion due to the fallout of the past and its impact on the present. His pain, is I feel also linked to the past sexual misuses of others and the way the past was whitewashed for so long. Maitribala was in a chapter with him and Saccakka, also a guru devotee and I know that none of them in chapter could accept Maitribala simply wanting to find out the truth. I witnessed a lot of pain and confusion because loyalty and devotion to Sangharakshita was / is the deal breaker. Questioning him, as Saccakka also wrote was / is putting himself outside the order.
Interestingly, most of the people harmed by and vilified due to their close encounters with Sanghrakshita and its aftermath have expressed concern for those hearing / realising unpalatable truths about Sr and those who copied him and having to face the reality of what went on. They know how painful it is for them because they have been there themselves. Plus much worse. Three have expressed the hope that some sort of external counselling be made available by Triratna funding to help those having to face up to the facts either sooner or later.
Some of the people I have listened to have had help from Survivors UK and / or a cult exit counsellor. Personally, I hope that the Norwich Chairman gets to talk with some of the order members who are sharing dissenting views on a wider stage at the moment, albeit not a public one just yet. This space here is a solid space for Buddhists in Triratna to ‘come out’ fully with their important realisations and excellent suggestions on how to move on from denial. Some are speaking out and it is good to see that.
Mr. Anon, Have you asked Sangharakshita to resign completely? Actually, asking him to apologise now – fully – would be an excellent step again. Are you able to do that?
477

Mr Anon on January 9, 2017 at 8:27 am
Reply

Dear Joc. Thanks for all that.

I am very surprised that anybody has asked Maitribala to resign from a Facebook group. If it’s the group I am thinking of, discussion is very free ranging and open. As for the other group, its remit is very specifically about personal “sharing”. There is a place for that too.

As for Parami and Lokeshvara removing him from the Buddhist Centre online – again it’s way out of order and should be challenged.

As you probably know there has been a range of opinion in the Order from Sangharakshita/Padmaloka/Adhistana loyalists to the “lets throw it all up in the air and see where it lands” freethinkers. Now following Bhante’s statement the tectonic plates are shifting but we don’t yet know quite how far and where they are heading. The College will doubtless endeavour to lead whatever happens while reining it in within “acceptable” bounds. Perhaps I should also clarify that I didn’t actually mean that Sangharakshita should be asked to resign from the Order. What I meant was that his statement, however general, gave credence to Maitribala’s concerns expressed in the BBC film. So if loyalists to a particular cultic view of Sangharakshita think Maitribala should resign, then given his recent statement Sangharakshita the man as opposed to Bhante the fantasy figure is at variance with that view then he too should go. It seems that Sanghakshita has shown disloyalty to Bhante. So, in brief it was a joke…albeit one with a serious point behind it.

A further point is that not all chapters are the same. My chapter has been very tolerant of my “dissident” views for some years. No one has asked me to leave, or resign from the Order, and no one has attacked me. We just discuss things. That’s not to say people don’t have their own emotional responses – we all do – but the friendship and appreciation are enough to bridge the gaps in world view.

As for the therapy, I am sure some of us will need it!

Finally, I don’t currently intend to write to Sangharakshita myself about any of this. I know that other people have done so.
- 478
  
  tenpel on January 9, 2017 at 8:57 am
  Reply
  
  Mr. Anon & Joc, thank you for your comments.
  I have one specific question, why Mr Anon are you referring to Sangharakshita with the address Bhante? Bhante means venerable and it is an address the Buddha used only for monks and nuns who live in celibacy and abide by the Vinaya. Also in Theravada countries today the address Bhante is only used for Buddhist monks and not for lay persons.
  
  Sangharakshita is neither a Buddhist monk nor does he abide by the Vinaya. He might not even keep the lay precepts of not committing sexual misconduct. So what makes him a Venerable? It is very strange for outsiders of the Triratna cosmos to see the abuse of such an address reserved for ordained abiding in the Vinaya being used for a lay person with a long history of sexual abuse and manipulation. I think to continue to refer to Dennis Lingwood with the address Bhante perpetuates a history of deception or self-deception.
  
  Its also a bit interesting as an outsider to read these comments, they sound quite from another world …
  - 479
    
    No name on January 9, 2017 at 10:21 am
    Reply
    
    Ditto the epithets ‘Mahasthavira’ (20 years pure monastic conduct qualifies the use of such a label) and ‘Urgyen’ ( after Tibets second Buddha Padmasambhava: the implication being that S is an enlightened being- in light of publicly acknowledged long term breakage of basic precepts, a HUGE insult to Tibetans and Tibetan Buddhist practitioners btw)
    Triratna in its present form is reminiscent of the Hindu primordial man, or Purusha, who is composed of the universe and it’s inhabitants In this case, the. Purusha is in denial of his own misdemeanours but still insists on being perceived as all powerful and spiritually advanced. The trouble is, for years Purusha has been behaving in a decidedly unspiritual manner: abusing disciples arrogantly defying any wrongdoing and generally doing whatever he feels like without regard to consequences (nb Indian religions call this karma, a law which governs our experience and which Buddhists try to observe at all costs)
    The Triratna Purusha has lied to himself ( the Orders collective denial) about his actions for so long that he has become blocked spiritually, and is unable to grow spiritually or morally because he has missed the first rules of basic Buddhism ( don’t lie, don’t sexually abuse others, don’t harm others).
    
    In Buddhist circles, the solution here is to confess faults as faults by recognizing them as such and vowing not to repeat them. Often such practices involve some sort of virtuous act in recompense.
    
    Sadly in Mr Purushas world, these are alien practices , even despite the murmurings of of his conscience ( open minded, genuine seekers within Triratna ) and, other than infrequent sophism and inadequate acknowledgement of wrong doing ( “I apologise IF YOU WERE HURT OR UPSET by my behaviour- if you weren’t hurt or upset, then my frequent sexual experimentation did not constitute misconduct”) basically remains in denial. Mr Purusha has had phases like this before and even though his conscience, the innate ability to distinguish between right and wrong, keeps coming back to haunt him, he feels everything is ok.No significant change is necessary; just keep quiet, pretend to be perfect and it will all go away ( at least, that’s what happened last time……. And the time before.)
    
    In a state of total denial like this, there is no room for the growth of wisdom or compassion. Indeed, it would be difficult to make ANY progress spiritually, since Mr Purushas practice seems to be based on the deeply nihilistic idea that karma is either irrelevant or does not exist. Basically Mr Purusha doesn’t seem to understand what is required to make any spiritual growth possible because he rejects the connection between cause and effect ( whenever that’s the most comfortable option.
    
    If Mr Purusha wants to become a sincere spiritual practitioner or, perhaps more importantly from his perspective, TO BE SEEN as genuine, his best course of action in today’s world would perhaps be to combine Buddhist practices with contemporary arbitration and reconciliation measures to heal his continuing internal, though now bleeding on the outside, wounds, combining traditional remedies ( reassertion of refuge and compassionate motive, regret, compensatory act and vow not to repeat- ‘the 4 opponent powers) with modern ones such as therapy, arbitration etc
    
    But Mr Purusha doesn’t want this. His heart does ( those within the Order who realise what went wrong and want to make it better) but his head ( the ‘college of preceptors’, for it is they) is filled with the old attitudes of ignore it and it will go away, it was all a very long time ago, they were consenting adults, it’s not abuse now so it wasn’t then, archaic laws etc etc.
    Sadly, Mr Purushas heart is ruled by his head and so, as often happens in these cases, he remains in denial and probably won’t be seeking any psychological or medical help. Again, as often happens, it is likely that the condition will be left to worsen and, malignant as it clearly is, will probably lead to the demise of Triratnas along with the rest of Buddhisms reputation as ax whole.
    
    Finally, a few words about the letter. It is not enough. It hides from the truth of the damage done and the depths of the suffering caused. It is not even an apology for behaviour. It is an apology IF that behaviour led to ‘suffering’
    We need to remember, this is about prolonged abuse of duty of fiduciary care, MANY people have been abused and hurt, families have suffered, people have died, tears have been shed, whistleblowers maligned and insulted, Buddhisms reputation severely damaged. The list is endless and shameful.
    
    Do Deniis and the co authors of his narcissists charter masquerading as an apology really think this is enough? “Dear Mrs Evans, we would like to apologise if your sons suicide, a result of our immersion in FWBO Triratna doctrines, hurt, harmed or upset in any way.” On the other hand, if you weren’t upset, that’s fine and we can all forget about the whole thing and all live happily ever after.
    ;
  - 480
    
    Mr Anon on January 9, 2017 at 12:46 pm
    Reply
    
    Hi Tenpel. They are from another world – the Triratna world! I call him Bhante because that’s the usual form of address, whatever the niceties about whether he now technically merits the title.
- 481
  
  Mr Anon on January 9, 2017 at 12:52 pm
  Reply
  
  I should just add that discussion broke out on this topic on Facebook this morning and it appears that Maitribala was not banned from any groups because of his appearance on the BBC TV documentary. He was removed by the Order convenors from the buddhistcentre.com Order forums because he had leaked information from the site and did not undertake not to carry on doing so. Similarly with Facebook, he resigned from the main discussion group when challenged about leaks. Again he was unprepared to commit to keeping the site private. Now, while I do think there are cases in which for legal and/or moral reasons the commitment to confidentiality must be broken, I don’t think as a general rule a private group can accept someone as a member if they don’t commit to abide by its rules under all reasonable circumstances. So, probably all this is fair enough.
  - 482
    
    No name on January 9, 2017 at 5:32 pm
    Reply
    
    “Fair enough”? So if I’m on a Triratna website and someone reveals they are being or have been sexuallyabused by an order senior i should not report it to any external agency? Is that in the safeguarding guidelines?
  - 483
    
    frenzy on January 10, 2017 at 5:42 pm
    Reply
    
    Mr Anon: is it possible someone is asked to resign localy without being reprimanded or corrected by the preceptors college?
    It seems you feel a need to defend the order against what you feel are ungrounded accusations of unetical behaviour. Is that correct? But please remember there is also the context of a statement now about harm and damage done, undharmic aspects, a history of maltreatment of dissidents, absence of safeguarding (despite claims made) etc. What are your real concerns here? To point out that two wrongs dont make a right?
484

joc on January 9, 2017 at 2:04 pm
Reply

What is your order name, Mr Anon? Where is your centre? Hopefully, you are experiencing a climate here in which being open is seen as move forward.
- 485
  
  Mr Anon on January 9, 2017 at 6:19 pm
  Reply
  
  For the time being I prefer to remain anonymous on here. I am not even quite sure why, but I do.
486

frenzy on January 9, 2017 at 9:35 pm
Reply

It has made me LOL you calling yourself a dissident Mr Anon. I am very glad for you you can discuss things in your chapter and that the friendship and appreciation are enough to bridge the gaps in world view in your chapter. And that they have been tolerant of your “dissident” views. This aparenty, as you are aware of, has not been the fortunate circumstances that were met by others when they expresed their ”dissident” view.
- 487
  
  Mr Anon on January 15, 2017 at 9:24 pm
  Reply
  
  I am glad to make you laugh, however inadvertently. We need more of that in this world! 🙂 Anyhow, in my experience we are generally a fairly tolerant bunch for a religious group with some worryingly cultish tendencies.
  - 488
    
    frenzy on January 15, 2017 at 9:57 pm
    Reply
    
    Mr Anon, you áre funny… I am being in a favorable mood because of Aparimana’s and Tejananda’s so i will just say i am glad you managed to squeeze in the ”worryingly cultish tendensies” there.:-)
  - 489
    
    No name on January 15, 2017 at 11:20 pm
    Reply
    
    Or is that “cult that tolerates the intolerable”? Thank goodness there are voices like those of Tejananda and Aparimana
    I am very much aware that individuals such as Maitreyabandhu and some at Padmaloka ( to name but one location where men’s ordination retreats take place ) are still teaching non Buddhist values such as the superiority of homosexuality for those who wish to practice the path and anti family values. Only if the Order listens to these voices of reason will these pernicious doctrines ever be exorcised
    Open up to change or stay closed and leave these cancerous ideas to destroy the Order and Buddhism.
490

Joc on January 9, 2017 at 10:16 pm
Reply

An order member on The Truth and Reconciliation (Triratna) Facebook page has said he does not want his very useful contribution displayed here. However, he has suggested that people here join the Truth and Reconciliation (Triratna) facebook page and contribute to the discussions using their own names. (He is using his order name and his real name. I am not sure about all the others and cannot tell if some people are order members or not). The site is moderated by Nina D, who appears on the BBC programme with two others connected to Triratna.
- 491
  
  No name on January 10, 2017 at 7:00 am
  Reply
  
  There you have it. An Om asking for this discussion to be conducted privately, while he or she gets to see real names- no double standards there then”
  - 492
    
    No name on January 10, 2017 at 9:30 am
    Reply
    
    This suggestion of course, perfectly mirrors the concept of collective concealment that manifests in dysfunctional families where abuse has taken place. It’s quite ironic that Dennis should’ve rambled on for so long how families are ” breeding grounds for sexual abuse” while simultaneously setting up his own same sex family where, surprise, surprise, abuse has been perpetrated. Now,protective ‘family members’ appear to be manifesting ( as previously) this wish for closed door communications.
    Imagine if a member of your family was abused by someone whose relatives refused to discuss the abuse publicly while still expecting the abused to reveal their identities to them. These people are away with the fairies.
- 493
  
  tenpel on January 10, 2017 at 2:07 pm
  Reply
  
  Dear Joc. As you wished I deleted your last comment. I hope I got the right one. Thank you for your contributions! T
494

joc on January 10, 2017 at 2:48 pm
Reply

Dear Mr. Anon, you seem to have had some difficulty in reading the FB posts this morning and you are clearly on the T&R site (as yourself?) so I have copied and pasted it below. Some people in the order seem to be under the impression that Maitribala is responsible for all the ‘leaks’ that are now taking place in more than one way and in more than one place. (As they have done for decades, in fact, as caring people wanted the truth out. See plethora of websites and shabda comments made in late 90s, for example) Thanks to all those who have presented material that supports what Mark Dunlop and Gary Beesley have been saying for decades and for doing so in a way that builds up the picture of what really has been going on, how widespread it was and how it was linked the the Dharma as presented by Sangharakshita / DL. It seems that several members are more open to looking at the reality of collusion and denial now – not yet out in the open. I will paraphrase some excellent contributions later today. Also, I am also reliably told that the order member I address this to has been campaigning for many years to bring about change in the FWBO / Triratna and I have seen some of his positive suggestions on the T&R site, so I will not include his name here and hope that he continues to work positively, buoyed by the help offered by many here, other external groups and increasingly from the inside working outwards towards the light. If he truly want change, he has allies here, if he could but see.

What I object to is anyone from Triratna thinking s/he can interfere in how my partner Simon (Maitribala) communicates with me. I have offered several times to meet up with this particular order member, but he has not yet found time or inclination to do so. I look forward to meeting him as, as stated above, there is evidence that he wishes for change. It may be that he is busy. I also recognise that my experiences of Norwich order members have been very disturbing with cultic email from Saccacca and local office holders showing that they consider absolute loyalty to Sangharakshita is a must, whatever the context and the evidence. Obviously, Sangharakshita has ‘written’ now that not everything he taught was necessarily the Dharma, so maybe there will be some changes in attitude based on this. Let’s see. Opening up the thatch is vital and some light and air does now seem to be filtering in.

I also recognise that anyone from Triratna trying to tell my partner that he should not be communicating with me about Triratna business is a red rag in terms of the ideology that caused so many problems for so many men, women and families (still having a tragic impact on many). For decades, men were ‘taught’ and were expected to demonstrate that their commitment to their so-called ‘spiritual friends’ was primary and that they should keep heterosexual relationships ‘at the edge of their mandala’ as they were like ‘licking honey from the razor’s edge’. As one order member has expressed it, his heterosexual relationships was ‘the love that could not be spoken’. Men who had girlfriends were sneered at and looked down on. And even very recently Padmavajra has ‘lectured’ on the benefits of not having a family to lay people with heterosexual partners and families. While Sr was busy teaching km sex to lots of young men (ie being very sexually active / promiscuous and bending many men’s natural desires for healthy and happy relationships and stable families, families were splitting up and parents being made to feel guilty for wanting real loving relationships and loving families. Some were brainwashed or reconditioned according to Sr conditioning. There are so many damaged by this cultic horror. Still. Mothers without daughters; families with little positive shared history due to commitment to ideology of FWBO; poverty or lack of choice due to lack of money due to FWBO ideology; ruined relationships and fear that love and relationships would mean falling off the spiral spiritual path into an abyss …..(as one man put it to me). Maybe I have overreacted to news that my partner is being advised not to talk to me?

In the below, I am trying to find out why this OM has written to my partner, suggesting a friendly chat with himself and Lokeshvara, who is a national and / or international order convenor. (I still do not know what these titles actually mean. The OM I am writing to had started an explanation.) I do not know if this was not to be shared with me or not, so am asking for claification.

(He also seems to have got muddled up with a meeting that he had with my partner Simon / Maitribala at my house and a telephone call later to our shared cottage).

Dear OM Person can you explain why you and Lokeshvara wish to have a ‘friendly chat’ with Maitribala? If Maitribala has broken some order confidentiality rule pertaining to talking to a wife / partner about this, perhaps you can explain that at the same time? Why should he not tell me about the meeting that you have suggested if it is a ‘friendly chat’? As Maitribala pointed out to you, you talk to your wife / partner (?) Presumably. I know for sure that in a telephone call – quite a long one – you asked him not to talk to me about ‘the issues’. Perhaps you can explain why you (and others in Norwich group) have tried to have meetings with him ‘without your order hats on’ and how one can tell whether you have your hats on or not?

Maitribala / Simon has not ‘leaked’ any website information. As I keep saying, I was the one who was sent the series of Shabda posts about Björn H. Not by Dharmaghosha, not by Maitribala. In fact, Maitribala had never seen them and had not clocked the first attempts that Bjorn had made to tell his story to the order because it got buried. Dharmaghosha got shut down as the series of posts from him, Mahamati and Subhuti clearly indicate. The posts are all about Bjorn and tell a warped version of the events, which were taking place in Birmingham as Yash’s letter was written. The order and mitra were / are being told that Sr has been celibate since the mid 1980s. No wonder Sr kept silent when Yash’s Ietter came out. So, I was the one to contact Bjoern not Maitribala / Simon- this was quite easy as he lived in my university home town and has an unusual family name.

Later he and Maitribala talked, but we were very careful not to reveal other stories connecting Sr with breaches of trust / sex with disciples. We wanted Bjorn to work out his responses for himself, not coloured by others’ awful experiences. Yes, Maitribala did then send the documents about Bjorn to Björn H. Do you have a problem with that? if so, please explain why. Was this ‘confidential order only information’ or was it about Björn H? Bjorn went public with his response to the ‘stories’ about him via Facebook before he realised that other men had been enmeshed in Sr’s need for sexual contact with devoted disciples.

As for the ‘leaking’ of Sangharakshita’s memoir of P, it was Saccacca who sent that to Maitribala for me to read as he thought it proved how normal and healthy the relationship was between Sr and Pras. I read it because Saccacca sent it through in an email for me to read. (Actually, it is a sickening homage to Greek Love and power and control over a student disciple with some nasty vocabulary about women in it) It is in Files above for those who wish to read it. I was sent copies by other order members. Some women order members are obviously more concerned about these issues than some of the others and some men. Mind you, there are some very positive posts coming through on here from some male order members. And finally, I am still not sure which post you say is about you? I have posted the one about someone who told Maitribala that Sr’s behaviour was in the realm of lecturer-student behaviour and I posted up a detailed response to this before you revealed this was you. Is there another post on Buddhism blogspot that you are mentioned in as I do not know. If you point it out – in a private message if you wish – I will have a look. As before, my invitation to meet up stands as does my invitation for me to mediate to enable you – and others – to meet Mark – if he is willing.

End

Question to order members reading this: Did you Mr. Anon and any other order members read the first attempts that Bjorn made to get his story told? It was sent to 45 (?) order members in 2012 / 2013 but never published in Shabda (?) and some tried to act on it before the story was buried in Shabda. Did any of you a) try to find Bjorn b) support him? At least Dharmaghosha had a good try and told the truth. Hats off to him. If you tried and were shut down, could you share that with us? Bjorn revealing his story in public has helped create the external drive to get change and has probably contributed to Sangharakshita making a step in the right direction along the path of truth and apology. I hope that all order members realise soon the beneficial impact of public and external help and support. Gary Beesley cares. Still. Despite being vilified by the order in very many ways. Speaking up and out in public – as Sangharakshita now has done – is what creates change, not lots of closed house endless discussions. The game changes when the thatch is opened.
- 495
  
  Mr Anon on January 15, 2017 at 9:21 pm
  Reply
  
  Hi Joc. No, I made no attempt to contact Bjorn. The affair was something I remember reading about on an early order web forum.
496

Gunasara on January 10, 2017 at 7:46 pm
Reply

I feel quite saddened when I read the contents of this blog. I still feel very grateful for the enormously positive impact joining the Triratna Buddhist Community has had for me. I understand that not everyone finds the community to their taste and some claim to be harmed by their contact with it. It puzzles me that our experience can be so different. I guess a ‘community’ is made up of the experiences you encounter when you meet it and that will differ greatly for each individual. I understand that Sangharakshita is a controversial figure and I can’t say that I’ve always agreed with his views and presentation but by and large I still feel inspired by his vision of a close community of meditators who broadly teach Mindfulness of Breathing and the Development of Loving Kindness and practise vegetarianism and the ten Buddhist precepts. I am also grateful that he was sexually active as I would never have chosen to follow a monk and to practise as a monk would probably have been disastrous for my psyche. Just as he was probably not the best person to found an Order, most of us are not the best people to be his followers. We’re a messy bunch in some ways and yet I have not met a warmer bunch of humans yet. I don’t think I need exit counselling. Many of the comments on this site seem to be caught in their own logic so that everything in Triratna is seen as dark and manipulative and we are some tightly ordered drones who are sent by the chosen few who are Sangharakshita’s henchmen. It doesn’t really work like that I’m afraid. I am happy to be here under my own name and if there is anything I can say that will help then I will do that.
- 497
  
  tenpel on January 10, 2017 at 10:22 pm
  Reply
  
  Hi Gunasara. Thank you for your comment.
  
  if there is anything I can say that will help then I will do that.
  
  Before you can say something helpful it might be needed to understand the topic. The topic is about the abuse of power, manipulation, pressuring others by distorted Dharma into sex with Sangharakshita, group think of denial and manipulation of information, silencing critics, defaming victims and critics, and foremost the pain and harm experienced by those who were harmed by Sangharakshita /Dennis Lingwood and the order by their behaviour and culture of communication.
  
  If you could at least open up to the pain and suffering of those being harmed (three having committed suicide according to no name, one of these suicides have been reported by The Guardian), I think you would first be sadden by the pain these people experienced (and not so much on what is written here on the blog and which is in conflict of how you see and experience things); and subsequently you could make up your mind what could be done to alliviate these sufferings and what can prevent that this continues and repeats. Having a view based on compassion and insight into the dynamics makes you perfectly qualified to say “anything … that will help”, isn’t it?
  
  However, at the moment you seem to be in another process. The conflict seems rather to be to bring in line the devastating experiences of those who have been abused or harmed by Sr or the order with your good experiences. However, this is something that can be reconciled because, good experiences don’t invalidate bad experiences and bad experiences don’t invalidate good experiences. Both can coexist and have their respective causes and conditions which can be understood.
  
  It is not about “Sangharakshita is a controversial figure” – this is just spinning a whitewashed narrative. Its about controversial actions of him that hurt and harmed faithful seekers of Buddha’s teachings greatly, that have distorted the Dharma and created an organisation whose doctrine is mixed with the negative sides of his personality.
  
  You can be sexually active without harming others through sex. Its not a matter of being celibate or not what we are discussing here. So if you wish to contribute “anything that will help” please open up yourself to understand and allow yourself that compassion for the suffering of others arises in your mind. So far you seem to think the suffering of others is a matter of “taste” and “claims”. Its not.
  - 498
    
    Gunasara on January 10, 2017 at 11:37 pm
    Reply
    
    Hi Tenpel,
    Thanks for your response and your request that I open up. I don’t want to contribute here in a defensive way so if you see that in my posts please feel free to request I open up again as I find that helpful.
    I first got involved in the dharma through being wrecked by a friends suicide and it was only a few years after the event when I met members of what was then the FWBO that I found people who were able to help me open up and helped me bear the pain I carried. Shortly after my ordination in the Western Buddhist Order I worked as a Samaritan for two years precisely with the wish to ‘alleviate these sufferings’ and to prevent them from continuing and repeating. After listening to many distressed phone calls I left with a strong sense that any simplistic ideas I had about the causes of suicide had gone. When I read that you attribute the suicides of three people to their contact with the FWBO/Triratna I am firstly surprised by your certainty and then saddened that you believe the same ‘people’ who helped me find respite from emotional anguish were to blame for their deaths. My purpose in continuing to contribute to Triratna activities is to create a culture which alleviates this kind of extreme suffering by teaching simple and appropriate skills to find some peace and reach emotional maturity. I understand that your purpose too is to bring an end to the suffering that you see others in. What I am involved in is increasing suffering in the world from your perspective. What you are involved in is increasing suffering in the world from my perspective. How do we move forward?
    - 499
      
      tenpel on January 11, 2017 at 12:56 am
      Reply
      
      Hi Gunasara,
      thank you.
      
      I second the question by Stephen, “did you see the BBC programme? What are your thoughts?” I want to add, did you read Madeleine Bunting – whom I strongly admire for her precicion in what and how she wrote about the NKT – in The Guardian? What are your thoughts?
      
      Secondly, I am not a person who puts the blame on anyone – not even myself. I focus on dependent arising, complex causes and effect relationships as good as I can. Therefore, it is misleading when you claim I would “blame [FWBO/Triratna] for their deaths.”
      
      It appears to me that you seem to skilfully distorted what I said.
      I spoke about the actions of the abuse of power, abuse of authority by Sr which led to sexual manipulations and exploitation to meet his own sexual desires and a doctrine and organisation that backs these misbehaviours up. As long as you can’t see or acknowledge that there is no need to consider if my “belief” that there is a connection between the abuse of power and sexual abuse and three suicides is correct or incorrect. As long as you cannot see and accept the suffering of others there is also no basis to check if your “belief” in that there is no connection between the abuse and the suicides because “the same ‘people’ who helped [you]” behaved in ways that harmed others very much lead you to the thought that others must be wrong because your experience is so good and so right!
      
      What ever you do for Triratna, I don’t mind, however, I mind if you downplay the suffering which was even now acknowledged officially by Sr himself.
      
      I understand that your purpose too is to bring an end to the suffering that you see others in.
      
      This is not necessarily my purpose. My motivations and aims are complex as it is with anybody. They change also and are dependent on the context, my knowledge and internal states of mind etc.
      
      In general the purpose of the blog is explained here.
      My motivation can also encompass topics like justice.
      
      What I am involved in is increasing suffering in the world from your perspective.
      
      Who says that? I didn’t say that nor did I thing that in any way. You are in charge of what you do. I am in charge of what I do.
      You have to check your actions and motivations, I have to check my actions and motivations.
      
      However, if you engage on my blog I will engage with you if needed. And since we discuss here dysfunctional settings and harm been done to others, distortions of the Dharma (the latter two acknowledged by Sr recently in his open letter), I will oppose if people try to tell that the suffering is just a “claimed” suffering or a matter of “taste” or has anything to do with the appearance of Sr or so.
      
      The thing which victims of abuse don’t need are people who tell them that the suffering is not there, or is their fault, their projection, their error, their mental negativity, that they must be wrong because others experienced the perpetrator or his organisation as a good guy or helpful or even healing etc. As I said, two and more realities and experiences can validly coexist with the same person. This is something people have really to learn, to see and to accept. Clinging to the own experiences as the only valid ones can truly misguide one. Osama Bin Laden had many qualities. He was kind and fond to his son. The New York Times portrayed him once (at that time he was the ally of the US) like a holy being, a saint, a new hope. It might be helpful in that context to read books about Shoko Asahara like Lifton’s “Destroying the World to Save It”. The case of Shoko Asahara is a great teaching about gurus who can benefit their followers and harm them at the same time – and, how many difficlies followers of such gurus have to reconcile these different accounts about the good and the bad things they or others experienced or witnessed. The usual (misleading) struggle is to think only one side is right and then cling to that.
      
      I wouldn’t have a problem if people tell me convincingly that Sr healed 10 persons from severe cancer and being convinced that he abused his powers to meet his sexual ends by manipulating young boys into sex with himself. Both views are not necessarily wrong or contradictory. However, its not a matter of mere claims that Sr abused his power and manipulated young boys into having sex with him. BBC mentions also an underaged.
      - 500
        
        Gunasara on January 11, 2017 at 3:15 am
        Reply
        
        ‘As I said, two and more realities and experiences can validly coexist with the same person. This is something people have really to learn, to see and to accept.’
        
        Thank you for this. I can see that I have some difficulty seeing this and will reflect further.
        
        I have seen the BBC programme and yes I have read Madeleine Bunting’s article. I found these things painful and troubling. I have been involved in Triratna for 20 years and throughout that time I have felt proud to be part of a vibrant and warm group of meditators who benefit the community by teaching wholesome practices at a very low cost. I have witnessed spats and difficult communication between people from time to time which is only to be expected. I have witnessed nothing that warrants the term abuse of power.
        
        501
        
        No name on January 11, 2017 at 11:25 am
        Reply
        
        So if you haven’t seen it, it doesn’t exist? Such reasoning is at best infantile. Abuse usually takes place behind closed doors. When large numbers of people report they have been abused behind such doors, your response is, ” I didn’t see it so I don’t believe it.” I guess if you’ve never been to Australia, it doesn’t exist, despite all the rumours
        Again, you did not witness WW2 or the holocaust- perhaps they never happened
        If your response is that you have seen evidence of the latter, what about the growing number of former members reporting abuse. What about the consultant psychologist diagnoses? All lying?
        
        502
        
        Gunasara on January 11, 2017 at 5:54 pm
        
        Hi No-Name,
        You’ve made a number of posts since last night (when I slept fitfully) and I’m not quite sure I’ve got the sequence right but I’d like to start here and work through what you have said. I don’t write here with any authority and I am certainly not Sangharakshita’s defence lawyer in a trial by internet. Nevertheless I would like to share my thinking on the points you make as I ‘believe’ I have a reasonably considered position (although I am quite sure lack of depth will show up) and I am sure that any weaknesses in my thinking will come to light. This is not an intellectual exercise for me. I have felt pained throughout the night and all day today. Palpitations, sweating hands and solid tension in my shoulders are quite typical signs of stress for me. To connect with those who feel pain through their contact with the movement challenges me quite deeply I suppose. I don’t really know why I jumped on here but I shall continue for as long as I can.
        
        OK, so addressing the first point you make. I haven’t said that because I didn’t see anything, therefore it didn’t happen. When Tenpel first replied to me he pointed out that two peoples meeting with the same group can give them two completely different experiences. I am willing to open up and listen to others experience which suggests abuse and manipulation. What I was saying was that I am coming from a very different position. It’s not that I haven’t had challenges, disappointments and disagreements. I have had plenty. However, broadly speaking the movement and my contact with Sangharakshita’s teachings has been almost entirely helpful, healthy and foundational to my maturity. Whilst I have seen some weirdness, I haven’t witnessed abuse of power as far as I am aware.
        
        I don’t know about large numbers of cases of people reporting that they have been abused. I know of four clear key cases of complaint and I’m dimly aware that perhaps a few people have said ‘me too’ . I haven’t been keeping count, clearly.
        
        The fact that Sangharakshita has made an apology (although a bit unspecific) suggests that he acknowledges that something unskilful has gone on.
        
        503
        
        NO NAME on January 11, 2017 at 9:40 pm
        
        “I don’t know about large numbers of cases of people reporting that they have been abused. I know of four clear key cases of complaint and I’m dimly aware that perhaps a few people have said ‘me too’ . I haven’t been keeping count, clearly.”
        
        Perhaps if you count the increasing number of revelations appearing on the BBC and the Truth and Reconciliation page, combined with the confirmations from psychiatric healthcare professionals of deaths related to abusive behavior facilitated by S doctrines might be useful places to start a headcount. Remember also, these allegations, which S has now basically admitted to, went on from approx 1963/85 to 2003 (see Bjorns posts) Thats 40 years, during which time we know S was sexually active and implementing his will Order wide via his own fabricated non-buddhist doctrines (by his admission)
        
        However, for me, headcounts are not most important. If I learned my teacher had used Dharma to have sex with his student, even just one, Id be out of there. If I couldnt trust a person with my kids, I wouldnt entrust them with my whole spiritual wellbeing-the terrible potential consequences have already revealed themselves as death and madness [to name but a few]
        
        “I don’t know what you mean about deceptive safeguarding claims.”
        Munisha claimed here that safeguarding policies had been implemented across the Order to prevent recurrences. It subsequently emerged that these were guidelines, that they were discretionary in nature and that every centre was free to adopt them or not
        
        “The various choices of lifestyle each have their pitfalls and I guess I hope that the more senior an order member gets the more able he/she should be to navigate relationships relatively skilfully.”
        So what about the seniormost OM, the guru? If he were genuinely a being worthy of utmost respect and of being seen as a guide, what happened to his moral compass?
        
        “Context is important to this issue. This was a time when legislation was profoundly on the move (as I understand it). As late as 1966 a gay man could be imprisoned for having sex with another man.”
        Since Buddhism was founded 2500 years back, sex between student and teacher, especially if justified by false doctrines, has been considered inappropriate. Buddhists and disgruntled former OM s arent complaining because they were abused while under the age of consent; they are complaining because they were abused.
        
        Finally, I would suggest that the pain you feel when you read the above posts ISNT necessarily empathy. Perhaps more likely, it is your own wisdom beating the hell out of you for having allowed yourself to be misled for so long. Only you will know the answer to that in the years ahead. Facing the truth takes time, as Sangharakshitas 50 years of lying proves. Whilst I do not think his apology is worth much, at least now that he nears the exit, he has had the wisdom to begin to admit to his lies and manipulation. This will perhaps reduce the horrors that await him for what he has done
        
        504
        
        frenzy on January 11, 2017 at 11:52 am
        Reply
        
        Hi Gunasara, i apriciate you posting. Your first mail made me feel sad and a liitle despondend. i therefor apriciated the responds by tenpels and no-name. I also apricite the not so antagonist tone of the last few mails.
        A friend of mine (though having had no issues around sexual relationship in the sangha) said to me recently she had never felt more at home as in Triratna and never felt more betrayed. Another one spoke out about the issues she had around a sexual relationship with a senior Om and what she experienced as underming dynamics incl deceptive safeguardingclaims and retreated from Triratna feelings quite traumatised as a result. I am one of those people who feel desillusioned also and want to aknowledge the pain and suffering caused by the disfuntionality of Triratna.
        I apriciate you mentioning you find certain information painfull and troubling. I think the way forward is to move towards the pain and the shadow. I dont know what that will look like, but it needs to be integrated to reach emotional maturity as a organisation and individually.
        I can also understand the experience you have is that what ‘we are involved in’ is increasing suffering in ‘your’ world. There are a lot of innocent people involved. It is the looking away inside Triratna though that has caused suffering. Meta.
        
        505
        
        Gunasara on January 11, 2017 at 7:11 pm
        
        Hi Frenzy,
        
        Thanks for your reply. I agree that a lack of antagonism is to be appreciated.
        The suffering I see that I attribute partly to this site and others like it, is simply in terms of putting people off of Triratna dharma, which for many will be the most available and accessible package. That is not dismissing any other dharma practitioners. The more of us the merrier. I think Triratna does the basics very well for Westerners. All of the more controversial stuff is only an issue if you dive right in. Mindfulness of breathing and Metta Bhavana absolutely rock and I love that their effects are rippling through our culture.
        What I should say to balance out is that if it wasn’t for sites like this then perhaps Triratna would not be developing the safeguarding policies and ethical guidelines for teachers in such a comprehensive way. We had the ten Buddhist precepts and I think a lot of people thought that was enough but the relentless criticism has had the effect of sharpening our awareness of areas which were not getting looked at. So, for me, I, slightly grudgingly, feel grateful for the roasting. And whilst reading one of the latest posts I realised that we really do need a ‘Whistleblower’ policy in place too. Not that that is my call in any way other than locally to me.
        
        I don’t know what you mean about deceptive safeguarding claims. My sense is that whilst a bit new and creaky for us, the intent behind them is to look out for people and understand better the status differentials in our community and the effects of those.
        
        Saying that though, won’t there always be fallouts where sex is included? The various choices of lifestyle each have their pitfalls and I guess I hope that the more senior an order member gets the more able he/she should be to navigate relationships relatively skilfully. I appreciate that has not always been the case so far but don’t know what to do about that.
        
        506
        
        frenzy on January 11, 2017 at 11:24 pm
        
        Re Gunasara:
        We share some several physical sensations/hurt. I don’t want to further get into my personal hurt here though.
        
        It is very good to hear that you feel that if it wasn’t for sites like this then perhaps Triratna would not be developing the safeguarding policies and ethical guidelines for teachers in such a comprehensive way. That actually means more to me that you could possibly imagine. So thank you for sharing that you though ”slightly grudgingly, feel grateful for the roasting.” And whilst reading one of the latest posts you ” realised that we really do need a ‘Whistleblower’ policy in place too.”
        We have not seen any concreet results of this comprehensive way in safeguarding developments yet, which is closely followed by some of ”us” as that indeed seems vital.
        
        You wrote ”I guess I hope that the more senior an order member gets the more able he/she should be to navigate relationships relatively skilfully. I appreciate that has not always been the case so far but don’t know what to do about that.”
        Can you maybe say more about what motivates you to write that you dont know what to do about that?
        
        Sure there will always be fallouts where sex is included, even when not.
        That could also be read though as dismissive if related to specific (ethical breeches related) situations.
        So again i would like to ask the question what motivates you to say that in this context?
        I anyhow agree with you one would want to be able to trust the more senior an ordermember gets the more able he/she should be to navigate relationships. Dennis Lingwood was not a very good example though in the way he handled his desire, the lack of insight in the effects and responsabilities of being in teacherposition, the way some non dharmic ways etc. And that counts for the culture around it involving denial and dismissal, that also involved other people, too.
        I do hope you find my post is trying to stay out of antagonising as far as i can help it.
        
        507
        
        Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 1:22 pm
        
        Hi Frenzy,
        
        You wrote ”I guess I hope that the more senior an order member gets the more able he/she should be to navigate relationships relatively skilfully. I appreciate that has not always been the case so far but don’t know what to do about that.”
        Can you maybe say more about what motivates you to write that you dont know what to do about that?
        
        I think we are a community in the process of really getting somewhere. Perhaps Bhante only had insight to a particular level. There are suggestions that he needed to work more on Desire & Ill Will (this is a particular meme in the Order at the mo). What he did do though was to set up a practise community which will hopefully be able to go far beyond his personal limitations. This is what I hope I am beginning to see in our Order recently.
        
        Sure there will always be fallouts where sex is included, even when not.
        That could also be read though as dismissive if related to specific (ethical breeches related) situations.
        So again i would like to ask the question what motivates you to say that in this context?
        
        There is ambivalence in me. On the one hand I can see that if the path Triratna had offered me was one of celibacy, then as a youngish man when I got involved I would have left fairly swiftly. That was not what I wanted. And yet with older eyes I can see just how regularly relationship angst really really bites and hurts. And then there is this whole saga of was it abuse?/was it not abuse?, what happened?, who did what to whom?. It is exhausting and I want it to end. This is work in progress for me.
        
        As for the culture of denial and dismissal. When I first got involved every one of my friends at the time and my family all had a difficult time accepting that I was choosing to get involved in Buddhism. Back then it was far less well known. I got very used to ignoring criticism and pushing past resistances in order to engage with the spiritual life. Nowadays I find it much easier to listen without dropping my momentum, but then I couldn’t. I would imagine the community as a whole has some of these tendencies ingrained from the pioneering days which we could now helpfully let go off.
        
        508
        
        tenpel on January 11, 2017 at 12:16 pm
        Reply
        
        Not having witnessed abuse of power is no proof that abuse of power doesn’t exist. Because I didn’t see that my step brother killed a bird doesn’t imply he did not kill a bird.
      - 509
        
        tenpel on January 11, 2017 at 12:26 pm
        Reply
        
        BTW, with respect to having sex with an underage boy. It’s not the only case but this one is mentioned by the BBC.
        
        So, Sr had sex with boys who were under the age of consent for homosexual consent at the time. (It was 18 for homosexual sex in UK at the time)
        (Since then it has reduced to 16, safeguarding legislation has been put in place to prevent teachers from getting sexual relationships with those they teach.
        It also covers grooming. And most recently, there is ‘undue influence’ legislation)
        
        Vishvapani (Triratna Communications Officer) said in public posting of his letter to Norman Fisher that some of the young men were under the age of consent and did not feel they could say no. The fact that they felt they could not say no shows that Sangharakshita had control over them.
        
        510
        
        Gunasara on January 11, 2017 at 7:38 pm
        Reply
        
        Hi Tenpel,
        I feel pain all through my ribcage as I look at the page. I would so love to live in the alternative universe where Sangharakshita only had relationships with men at least in their thirties. But this is not so.
        
        Context is important to this issue. This was a time when legislation was profoundly on the move (as I understand it). As late as 1966 a gay man could be imprisoned for having sex with another man. Sangharakshita grew up in a culture in which his sexual preference was regarded as a perversion. The Triratna Order was founded the following year. Gay sex was legal but there was still a differential in terms of age of consent. I cannot imagine the contortions that gay people experienced in their attempts to be authentic to themselves before this time. When I came along to the movement in the early 90s there was still a kind of celebratory atmosphere amongst many of my gay men friends. Not only was their desire legal but here was a teacher who was gay himself and who had no truck with homophobia (rife in many religious settings) and the men’s retreats and gatherings were warm and respectful. I am so glad I was a part of that part of our culture. It seems unthinkable today but back then there was nowhere else like it. That I knew of anyway. I am not remotely surprised that the age of consent differential was not respected.
        
        Undue influence and safeguarding issues were not something I was at all conscious of until the last ten perhaps fifteen years. Back then as far as I know the age of consent was regarded as the age of consent. This area has become much more nuanced more recently and with rear-view perspective it seems shocking that those young men were not treated with more care. Again I am stepping into areas where I have no direct knowledge and I can only grapple with different stories that I have heard which don’t always agree.
        
        btw I think using the term young boys is perhaps pushing it a bit.
        
        511
        
        Triratnavisitor on January 11, 2017 at 10:04 pm
        
        Gunasara, not only do you have no knowledge, you have no right thought.
        
        Let us be absolutely clear about this. There has never been a time in which it has been acceptable, morally or culturally, for a religious leader to have sex with his disciple. Not in the 1960s, not in the 1970s, not in the 1980s, not in the 1990s, not in the 2000s, not now.
        
        There has never been a time in which it has been acceptable, morally or culturally, for a teacher to have sex with his student Not in the 1960s, not in the 1970s, not in the 1980s, not in the 1990s, not in the 2000s, not now.
        
        There has never been a time in which law-breaking has been acceptable within Buddhism, except in the most exceptional of circumstances. Not in the 1960s, not in the 1970s, not in the 1980s, not in the 1990s, not in the 2000s, not now.
        
        There has never been a time in which such a thing has been practised within a religious movement, except by a tiny minority of people, who, on their activities being discovered, have eventually been condemned by their fellows, often disowned or excommunicated, and, where appropriate, made subject to the sanction of the law.
        
        512
        
        Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 5:48 am
        
        Where do Church of England vicars find their wives and husbands. Surely they are free to engage with members of their church community. Also what about teachers in adult education? I don’t know if there are such strict rules in place in that situation. Those situations are more like what the Triratna movement feels like to me. There are no strict teacher/disciple relationships. It is much more like a community of seekers with some taking a lead one day and someone else another.
        
        513
        
        Stephen on January 12, 2017 at 11:42 am
        
        Do you teach, Gunasara? If so what and where?
        
        514
        
        Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 1:23 pm
        
        Could you say why you ask Stephen?
        
        515
        
        No name on January 12, 2017 at 12:02 pm
        
        C of E vicars do not procure partners for casual sex by telling newcomers to their congregation they will go to heaven if they have sex with them; this is basically what Bishop P Ball did. For that he went to prison Read it up- it’s very similar to Sangharakshitas behaviour
        
        516
        
        No name on January 12, 2017 at 1:44 pm
        
        NATFHE Guidelines for FE state
        Staff have a professional duty to develop their students’ abilities and a responsibility to safeguard students’ welfare. Given the imbalance of power between staff and students, any abuse by staff of this relationship will be viewed with concern.
        
        Staff are strongly advised not to enter into a sexual/romantic relationship with any student they are responsible for teaching, supervising or assessing. Such relationships could compromise the professional relationship between staff and students, and damage the teaching and learning environment for other students and staff.
        
        517
        
        Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 4:11 pm
        
        POLICY ON CONSENSUAL SEXUAL RELATIONS BETWEEN
        ACADEMIC STAFF AND STUDENTS
        
        London South Bank University is committed to ensuring that a professional relationship is maintained between staff and students. Such professionalism is a vital part of students’ educational development and the trust and confidence engendered by it is the cornerstone of the learning experience. Academic staff have a professional duty to develop the abilities of their students and to nurture their welfare.
        
        This professional relationship is seriously jeopardised if staff enter into sexual/romantic relationships with any student for which they have teaching, supervisory or assessment responsibilities. Given the imbalance of power between staff and students, any such relationships whether consensual or not could be construed as an abuse of power by staff, and have serious implications, albeit unintended, for the individual student and the cohort group. London South Bank University thus discourages such relationships and regards them as a breach of professionalism.
        
        With regard to non-consensual relations, the University will view the matter as harassment.
        
        With regard to genuine consensual relations, whilst they are to be discouraged, should they nonetheless persist, the University will require the following procedure to be adopted:-
        
        The member of staff must declare the existence of the relationship to the Head of Department.
        
        Arrangements will be made to ensure that the member of staff is not responsible for supervising or assessing the student in question.
        
        Where possible the teaching of the student in question, for seminars especially, will be transferred to another member of staff.
        
        Human Resources Department
        Updated May 2007
        
        www1.lsbu.ac.uk/hr/docs/consensual-sexual-relations.doc]accessed 12/1/17
        
        518
        
        tenpel on January 12, 2017 at 8:05 pm
        
        Gunasara, I didn’t follow the discussion and saw you commented a lot. Based on my initial impressions and glancing briefly a reply by no name and this comment by you here, it appears to me that you seem to suggest that sex between teacher and student is ok.
        
        It is in general not ok – not at all. I recommended in the post above Rutter’s »Sex in the Forbidden Zone« about sex between therapist and clients, priest and church followers etc. This book, based on field research, interviews, observations, the own experiences and introspection of the writer demonstrates impressively the long term devastating effects for both sides when there is a power differential and they engage in a sexual relationship.
        
        Because of that harm in Germany it is legally forbidden for state certified therapists to have sex with their clients. If this happens and it is announced to the police you have to face a court trial and punishment as a therapist. This law is based on acknowledging the damage such sexual activities (exploitations, projections and manipulations based on a power differential) cause.
        
        Now, a spiritual teacher student relationship is similar to a therapist-client relationship, and its even deeper, far reaching because it effects the spiritual life which in general goes beyond the scope of this life. Harm on the spiritual level can deeply effect also future lives. It can block the spiritual path and close the doors for your spirituality for a very very very very long time! This is really something very serious! That’s why Urgyen (the real one!) Padmasambhava and the Tibetan saint Patrul Rinpoche warned:
        
        The Great Master of Oddiyana [Padmasambhava] warns:
        “No to examine the teacher Is like drinking poison; Not to examine the disciple Is like leaping from a precipice.”
        
        You place your trust in your spiritual teacher for all your future lives. It is he who will teach you what to do and what not to do. If you encounter a false spiritual friend without examining him properly, you will be throwing away the possibility a person with faith has to accumulate merits for a whole lifetime, and the freedoms and advantages of the human existence, you have now obtained will be wasted. It is like being killed by a venomous serpent coiled beneath a tree that you approached, thinking what you saw was just the tree’s cool shadow.
        
        By not examining a teacher with great care The faithful waste their gathered merit. Like taking for the shadow of a tree a vicious snake, Beguiled, they lose the freedom they at last had found.
        
        The door for spirituality is rarely open, once it is open and the faith of a faithful seeker or disciple is exploited and his or her trust has been abused or exploited, they might be so much harmed that they abandon religion/spirituality for the rest of their live (I know people who did that) or that they cannot place faith anymore even in genuine spiritual teachers and that their path is seriously blocked!
        
        People who enter Dharma centres are looking for help for their life or they search for genuine spirituality, they might have genuine spiritual motivations. Maybe they have also just some mundane motivations like overcoming some problems, loneliness etc. Carefully guided they can be led to cultivate the highest motivations for one of the three types of Nirvana. However, NONE of those people enter Dharma Centres to have sex with old men who long for young bodies (be these female or male). Think about this. So how can they end in the bed of the guru when there was no wish initially? (There might be few exceptions of those who want to be in the bed with the guru but these are not the cases we discuss here and this seems to be rare and must be investigated and thought about separately.)
        
        A person doesn’t come to a Buddhist community to grow through a sexual relationship with a teacher. They come to a Buddhist community to study Buddhism. So in a teacher-student sexual relationship, the primary purpose of that relationship has been subverted. – Grace Schireson in Tricyle “Sex in the Sangha … Again”
        
        I deeply think, that you are on a very wrong and ignorant route if you try to justify the abuse of power, the manipulation into sexual relationships of faithful students of the Dharma with the guru. If you think this is ok (that gurus manipulate the students, distort the teachings to get young students into their bed), I think you are here definitely at the wrong place. If you want to learn more about the harm this in general brings, you are at the right place. If you are here to convince us of what we would see as a very ignorant and non-compassionate view – that sex between spiritual teacher and students (Plural!) – is very ok, you are also at the wrong place, because we don’t buy into this (deluded) view.
        
        The Buddha didn’t have sex with his students nor did he encourage teachers of the Dharma (including lay) to have sex with their students. He taught what sexual misconduct is:
        
        Impurity by body … He engages in sexual misconduct. He has sexual relations with women who are protected by their mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, or relatives; who are protected by their Dhamma [who have taken a vow of celibacy]; who have a husband; whose violation entails a penalty; or even with one already engaged.
        
        Purity by body … Having abandoned sexual misconduct, he abstains from sexual misconduct. He does not have sexual relations with women who are protected by their mother, father, mother and father, brother, sister, or relatives; who are protected by their Dhamma; who have a husband; whose violation entails a penalty; or even with one already engaged.
        – AN 10:178, NDB 1526
        
        Sr who claims to possess the vow of celibacy and to have lived in it for the last twenty years – as far as I understood it – misguided EACH student with whom he had sex after manipulating them to have sex with him because Sr had the vow of celibacy – at least according to his own and Triratna’s claims. If he had the vow of celibacy he himself committed sexual misconduct by engaging in sex and he led faithful students to also commit sexual misconduct by having sex with someone who abided on the vow of celibacy (the vow of celibacy can be taken by lay followers too). In that way he also misguided students to engage in non-virtuous activities, sexual misconduct, and truly harmed them from a karmic perspective. The same is true if these young men had a relationship themselves with a girl or boy. If he didn’t have he vow of celibacy, he and Triratna must have either lied about his own ethics or he and Triratna are seriously confused/insane because they cannot separate simple truths from untruths.
        
        Having sex with underaged boys or girls when it is legally forbidden is also against this basic ethics for lay persons. The basic ethic in Buddhism is non-violence, not to harm others. This includes spiritual relationships. To manipulate with distorted Dharma teachings others to have sex with oneself if unworthy of a spiritual teacher and its against the spirit of the Dharma. It’s unethical.
        
        The Buddha didn’t have sex with his students nor did he encourage teachers of the Dharma (including lay) to have sex with their students. The Buddha set the example for spiritual growth and guidance. Who doesn’t follow that route is on a wrong track. (Don’t come with Tantras at that point. I studied the Tantras and know some of the details. What we are discussing here has nothing to do with the tantras.)
        
        519
        
        tenpel on January 12, 2017 at 8:36 pm
        
        I added a small correction to the comment. I won’t be much able to read or reply in the next days but will confirm via mobile phone comments. If there are problems or the discussion becomes senseless pls write me an email.
        
        520
        
        frenzy on January 12, 2017 at 10:07 pm
        
        Re Tenpel: You wrote:
        ”So how can they end in the bed of the guru when there was no wish initially? (There might be few exceptions of those who want to be in the bed with the guru but these are not the cases we discuss here and this seems to be rare and must be investigated and thought about separately.) ”
        
        On a website about clergy abuse it said:
        ”Adults are often presumed to have colluded in, or even caused, their victimization …”
        Both Rutter as well as fiductiary care/clergy abuse laws mention that apparent consent is not automatically seen as adult consent. Here Peter Rutter’s experience with this. https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1992/01/sex-in-the-forbidden-zone
        
        Strangely enough this is Triratna’s definition of abuse from their Protocol safeguarding children and vulnerable adults.
        ”What is abuse?
        Abuse is the harming of a person usually by someone who is in a position of power, trust or authority over them, or who may be perceived by that person to be in a position of power, trust or authority over them; for example by a Friend, Mitra or Order member who is helping to run [name of Triratna Buddhist Centre/enterprise] activities those newer to such activities.
        The harm may be physical, psychological or emotional, or it may exploit the vulnerability of the victim in more subtle ways.”
        
        They apparently don’t see this vulnerability as applicable to attendees of there activities.
        This is something an expertise safeguarding team would have to help them with.
        
        521
        
        frenzy on January 12, 2017 at 10:47 pm
        
        https://thebuddhistcentre.com/search/node/vulnerable.
        From Triratna’s Vulnerable adults protection policy also:
        
        Who is a ‘vulnerable adult’?
        
        A vulnerable adult is a person aged 18 years or over who is or may be in need of community care services by reason of mental or other disability, age or illness; and who is, or may be, unable to take care of him/herself, or unable to protect him/herself against significant harm or exploitation.
        A vulnerable adult may be a person who:
        • Has a physical or sensory disability
        • Is physically frail or has a chronic illness
        • Has a mental illness or dementia
        • Has a learning disability
        • Is old and frail
        • Misuses drugs and/or alcohol
        • Has social or emotional problems
        • Exhibits challenging behaviour
        Whether or not a person is vulnerable in these cases will vary according to circumstances. Each case must be judged on its own merits.
        
        522
        
        Joc on January 11, 2017 at 10:31 pm
        
        Dear Gunasara, thank you for joining us. Thank you for using your order name if not your family name. I know these discussions can be very painful. I hope you stick with us.
        
        I am glad that safeguarding is taking root in Trirtana now. Training, robust recording and evidence systems and external points of contact are now vitally needed. (Some order members are asking me and others direct for advice on this now and I am able to refer them to organisations and best practice workshops).
        
        It is a great pity that Sangharakshita had free rein to replace one set of oppressions with another set. He replaced homophobia with some form of heterophobia, misogyny and anti-family rhetoric. Padmaloka was a RETREAT centre and yet all sorts of sexual ‘teachings’ were going on as many copied Sangharakshita and followed his ‘spiritual’ (sic) lead. This became a culture – yes culture – of embedded sexual misuse of young spiritual seekers. It became normalised.
        
        As I have listened directly to many people now, I am able to say that the consequences are still being felt. I have listened to men talking about the years of depression, isolation, illness and fear they have experienced. I have listened to family members describe their losses and grief. And all speak of broken family relationships or difficulty / inability to relate. Some men have cried as they talked to me. (I did not want to believe what I read on the internet. I wanted to meet and listen to people direct)
        
        Sr / Dennis Lingwood could have had any number of open and honest gay relationships with other gay men. Yet that did not satisfy him. His preference truly was for young heterosexual guys even if he bedded the homosexual ones as well. (As you will know if you have read Jnanvira’s recent apology) He created the ideology that ultimately gave him access to their bodies. He created the spiritual-sexual curriculum that he taught and others then taught as well. He continued to have sex with a man who said repeatedly that he hated it and who never showed any sign of response / arousal. What sort of Buddhist Teacher is that? He presented his needs as a failing on the part of the young man i.e. making him believe his lack of arousal was a spiritual block, using Buddhist scripture to maintain control over him. What sort of person uses Buddhism to get sex from his student disciples? He actively encouraged a young and devout man, who he wanted sex with, to keep away from his young girlfriend and baby. He encouraged the young man to believe he was his Ananda (Buddha and manservant for life?) and that they were both giving up heterosexuality for the sake of the Dharma and spiritual life. When he was tired of or bored with his manservant for life, Sr apparently chased after Paramartha, heading off on trips abroad. I know that Sr had many, many opportunities to tell the young man he was gay. He never did. The consequences for the whole family are still being felt today. There are many more stories. Order member Ananda apparently refered somewhere to not wanting to be one of ‘Bhante’s bum boys’ quite recently. Perhaps you have seen that? Men and women that I have spoken to say that this term was in common use. Have you heard it used before?
        
        It does not matter at all that Sr / Lingwood is gay. But, why was he not satisfied with having gay sex with gay men? Why did he have to bring his sexual cravings into the spiritual community, retreat centres and communities? Why did he crave sex with young heterosexual men? IS this the ultimate sexual kick? Was this the ultimate challenge? What does matter is that he used his spiritual status to get the sort of sex he craved. One order member has recently posted on sexual addiction and on how any sort of addiction affects the whole ‘family’.
        
        523
        
        Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 1:04 pm
        
        Hi Joc,
        
        ‘heterophobia, misogyny and anti-family rhetoric’
        Um… Buddhism is rife with that stuff particularly coming out of the monastic training where every one of them was probably longing for a warm bed and a cuddle more often than practising. The Buddha left his home and family.
        
        Bhante’s most incredible move was to set up men’s and women’s orders on an equal footing and then he got out of the women’s way. The women’s wing goes from strength to strength and barring disasters will become an incredible collective over time (well it is now!). Sangharakshita will be remembered for that far more than for his bedroom behaviour. That is not the mark of a misogynist.
        Our predominantly heterosexual culture deserves a bit of a kick after having repressed homosexual expression for centuries. Barbaric.
        
        Anti-family rhetoric has it’s place, particularly when the Tories were all promoting ‘family-values’ whilst dismantling the social infrastructure around us. Although Bhante probably wouldn’t agree with that.
        Which bit do you have a problem with?
        I would have replied earlier if I hadn’t had to do the school run, followed by a stint in the office to pay for some dental work for my step-son. I happen to love my life and my family but I wouldn’t argue with any of the points I’ve heard made over the years about the narrowed horizons and turgid routines sometimes.
        
        The stuff you say about Padmaloka I don’t know very much about. I have been there 76 times (they told me last time) over 22 years. I have never had sex on the premises or witnessed sex on the premises. Perhaps there was an unhealthy culture there for a while but it must have been largely over by the time I came along or have been an aspect I didn’t plug into. I went there for dharma teaching and received my wildest dreams.
        
        524
        
        joc on January 12, 2017 at 9:46 pm
        
        Dear Gunasara,
        
        There may well be abuses and prejudices occuring in Buddhist monastries as well as in ‘neither monk not lay’ orders. Where there is abuse and prejudice, it is right to challenge it. Have you done something about countering this? You say the Buddha left his wife and family in the same paragraph. Are these things connected?
        
        I agree totally with you that homosexuals have been oppressed for centuries (as have many women, many children, many men, the disabled, peoples of different colour and creed and many more). I find it so sad and alarming that you think heterosexuals ‘deserve a bit of a kick ‘ because homosexuals were (actually still are in many places) oppressed. I hope that you, like me, actively work against homophobia and other forms of oppression here and abroad. Why do you think heterosexuals deserve such violence? Can you explain your reasoning, please. If you are heterosexual, do you deserve ‘a bit of a kick ‘? Yes, the way homosexuals have been / are treated still in some ways / places was barbaric. Why suggest more barbaric behaviour to counter it? Please explain.
        
        Could you tell me more about what you feel are ‘narrowed horizons’ and ‘turgid’ routines’. In what way are these points made over the years. By whom and where?
        
        Why do you support some sort of anti-family rhetoric? It is no different from supporting an anti-gay rhetoric. Or an anti-semitic rhetoric. Or any other prejudice. It is sad that you seem so bitter about other people’s choices. (Or maybe you are bitter in some way about your own? Or you have been made to feel somehow spiritually ‘less’ than those not in families, which I have heard several people talk about. For some it has been a reason to leave the group and the prejudices behind.) Surely, people should be encouraged to work out how they would like to live for themselves without any religious group Christian, Buddhist or whatever setting hierarchical parameters to get people to conform to its prejudices.
        
        I see that NIna has joined you up to the Truth and Reconciliation site. Perhaps you could post your last post to me on there to get a cross section of responses from others, too.
        
        I see that you posted a HE policy as did no-name. So, you are agreeing now that teachers should not be engaging in sex / relationships with those they teach as specified by both policies? HAve you read the recently created Triratna policies?
        
        525
        
        tenpel on January 13, 2017 at 12:08 am
        
        Just some quick thoughts. It are totally wrong arguments 1) to justify or downplaying abuse by pointing out that abuse somewhere else also exists, 2) to bring in the discussion that homosexuals have been oppressed for centuries because 1) non-virtuous deeds are not justified because others do them too, it are still non-virtuous deeds, 2) what we discuss has nothing to do with the oppression of homosexuals. I find any arguments going into this direction manipulative. Comon tactics to whitewash harming and unethical behaviour … (I didn’t see where Gunasara brought in these arguments you relate here to Joc, but it is very correct to not accept them.)
        
        Besides other points you mention, also this is very good food for thought: “There may well be abuses and prejudices occuring in Buddhist monastries as well as in ‘neither monk not lay’ orders. Where there is abuse and prejudice, it is right to challenge it. Have you done something about countering this?”
        
        Gunasara, do you have a history about countering this? From what I got you seem rather to defend the sick status quo in Triratna. You might wonder how I can criticise that?
        When it came to our notice via a public Buddhist forum that the elected SEO of the German Buddhist Monastic Association, Thich Thien Son, a monk, an abbot, a well known person who built up a lot of things, abused his power to manipulated young monks into sexual relationships with him (two of them he promised to heal from child abuse by having sex with them!) we took these allegations very seriously. We investigated them for one year, we heard all sides and finally Thich Thien Son was removed not only as the head of the association but from the whole association and a public announcement about the expulsion and the reasons was made which is still online. The case of an underaged boy (12 year at the time) was given to the police two times.
        
        I can’t see any clarity like this in the Sr case.
        
        526
        
        frenzy on January 13, 2017 at 8:08 am
        
        I suspect, Gunasara, you have invested in the movement quite a lot for a positive identity and that it means much to you as a social community. You seem to have become a partyliner in the process and you might not be aware of that. That’s how it works.
        
        527
        
        Gunasara on January 13, 2017 at 11:35 pm
        
        Hi Joc,
        I was being a little flippant with ‘bit of a kick’ and was in no way suggesting violence. It is a metaphor. To be more clear I would say that I think the heteronormative narrative in our culture is so firmly established that it can stand up to a little criticism.
        I personally have chosen to live a family life and I am very happy with the choice. I have worked pretty hard over a number of years helping to organise camping retreats which give an opportunity for families to come together and practise in a way that is not available at retreat centres and more mainstream gatherings. I have pushed and pushed for the events I have been involved with to be not only family-friendly but in fact family-focused. I really wish Triratna was better at that sort of activity.
        I also really enjoy leaving my family behind once in a while and practising as a lone individual at a meditation centre. The range is available.
        I don’t understand what I said that made you think I seem bitter. I was not feeling that that I was aware of. I do find this forum emotionally challenging.
        As for ‘turgid routines’ I guess I was thinking of the countless re-runs of Peppa Pig I endured when my son was quite young. I love him deeply. ‘Narrowed horizons’ is the trip from here to swimming lessons I have done once or twice every week for 7 years. It’s not a biggie but I can understand some folk not wanting to do that.
        
        528
        
        frenzy on January 14, 2017 at 6:43 pm
        
        Gunasara, that you don’t meet the criteria for Sr’s view on nuclear families being breeding ground for neurotic relationships and child abuse might have actully less to do with his warning then with a whole range of other criteria. You are using cult reasoning/ fallacies. I would not want to deny you your reality but there are other realities too. Do you understand that you are dismissive? May i suggest you try to take in what Aparimana writes here?
        
        529
        
        Triratnavisitor on January 12, 2017 at 11:10 pm
        
        Blaming it on “the Tories” – this is getting a bit ridiculous now. Anyway, for the record, Lingwood’s anti-family theories seem to have been developed in the 70s or earlier. The FWBO Files quotes source material from 1978, tempus Jim Callaghan.
530

Stephen on January 10, 2017 at 10:54 pm
Reply

Hi Gunasara did you see the BBC programme? What are your thoughts?
- 531
  
  NO NAME on January 11, 2017 at 8:24 am
  Reply
  
  Gunasara
  You state “I understand that not everyone finds the community to their taste and some claim to be harmed by their contact with it.”
  
  The “claims of harm” came from senior psychiatric healthcare professionals, not former members or disgruntled Buddhists who do not follow the Tritatna path
  
  fOr instance, the late, eminent consultant psychiatrist Dr.Elizabeth.Tylden (MA MB B Ch(Camb) MRCPsych), who devoted decades to treating numerous cult victims stated in August 88:
  
  “I write to confirm that we discussed the case histories of four people who had experienced unfortunate results from having been recruited by the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order. On the basis of the symptomology which was extremely similar I suggested they were suffering from serious adjustment disorders.
  
  “As a result of their indoctrination, their states would in my opinion warrant the definition ‘ego dystonic sexual orientation` [F66.1, ICD 10] in that, being heterosexual, they were persuaded to participate in homosexual activities which they found distasteful, and as a result suffered identity crises; in two cases this sadly led to violent suicides.” [Letter available on request]
  
  ICD is the International Classification of Diseases, used by the World Health Organisation and UK health professionals. In layman’s terms, egodystonic sexual orientation means that the person’s sexual orientation is not compatible with where they think they “should” be to such an extent that it is causing “marked decline in social functioning,” or “dysfunctionality” as some might label it.
  
  Similarly, Dr Bill Jerrom, another eminent consultant psychologist who treated the late Matthew Evans, who committed suicide after joining the FWBO and being told to engage in same sex relations, attributed the psychiatric condition that led to his suicide as being “in large part due to his involvement with the FWBO” [Letter available on request]
  
  Again, In the recent BBC package, Elie Godsi, a clinical psychologist who has been an expert witness on a number of high-profile abuse cases, said: “This is all about the sexual gratification of a person in a position of authority or power within the group.” Godsis reference was to the doctrines of the FWBO Ttriratna with particular regard to Sangharakshitas teaching on spiritual friendship.
  
  This is the “hurt, harm or upset” S is talking about euphemistically in his recent ‘apology’. These are the doctrines of the FWBO that bear the trademark of his ego rather than being Buddhist that he referred to in his letter.
  - 532
    
    Gunasara on January 11, 2017 at 10:16 pm
    Reply
    
    Hi No-name,
    I don’t know the experts you quote.
    
    When I see your preamble to Dr Tylden I feel wary of the language of cults and recruiting. That sounds to me like someone who has made up their mind before looking. But as I say I don’t know them.
    
    When I saw Elie Godsi on the BBC programme I was quite surprised to see his declaration the “This is all about…” when he hadn’t even spoken to the other person involved in the relationship. But his job isn’t to be judge it is to be an expert witness for one side so I shouldn’t be surprised. But I dont think I take his pronouncement as the whole truth. It was what he saw in front of him. Nevertheless, it IS what he saw in front of him and I saw the distress too.
    
    I have no doubt that some people have had crises when they have engaged with the FWBO/Triratna. Not just through relationship trauma. The dharma encourages us to look at ethics, at death, at the fragility of our sense of self and other challenging practises. Sometimes people have a very very hard time indeed. My sense is that for those who manage to stay with the movement there is usually good care and holding when a crisis emerges. But some people leave then and I don’t know how they fare.
    
    I commented previously that it was a friends suicide that led me to the dharma. His death was one of three of my close school friends who all died before they reached 25 by their own hand. I spent years blaming the school I went to, blaming the catholic church and churches in general, blaming the heteronormative culture that did not allow my friend to be himself. I blamed feminists at times and I blamed tories at others. After a consistent period of counselling I was able to see my own part in their suffering, that which I had denied for so long, the petty barbs we slung at each other as teens, the spats and the unhealthy drink and drugs culture we had got involved in. However, it was only after a further spate of counselling that I was able to also see their part. Because they had died I had felt unable to look at their behaviour. It seems to me to be quite a difficult thing to take your own life. It is quite an act of violence. The person who kills themselves are the one who wields the knife, who steps onto the train tracks or swallows the pills. They bear a significant degree of responsibility too. And then there are even the impersonal factors. The dharma suggests that there is within us the potential to long for non-existence. I remember it well in my twenties. At it’s slightest it is the drive to hide beneath the duvet and at it’s sharpest it is a desperate longing for the world to stop and just shut up and just leave ‘me’ alone. It is human tragedy.
    
    I don’t doubt that FWBO contact has tipped some people towards an edge at times. We invest and we get hurt. It is possible something in the movement or from the movements past was more damaging than I am aware of. But the movement is made up of ordinary people grappling with the existential crap of being alive. Sometimes we probably contribute to each others suffering but also sometimes nothing would have stopped the suffering anyway. I shudder.
    
    I don’t think the Mindfulness of Breathing and Development of Loving Kindness meditations are harmful. Those are what we do most and do best.
    - 533
      
      NO NAME on January 12, 2017 at 7:55 am
      Reply
      
      Dear G
      I dont have the time or will to engage in debate over every point you raise. HOWEVER….
      
      “I don’t know the experts you quote”
      Does this invalidate their expertise?.
      “When I see your preamble to Dr Tylden I feel wary of the language of cults and recruiting. That sounds to me like someone who has made up their mind before looking.”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Tylden
      When I saw Elie Godsi on the BBC programme I was quite surprised to see his declaration the “This is all about…” when he hadn’t even spoken to the other person involved in the relationship. But his job isn’t to be judge it is to be an expert witness for one side”
      No, as an expert witness, who examined the evidence available he was expected to express his expert opinion, WHOEVER IT FAVORED
      “I have no doubt that some people have had crises when they have engaged with the FWBO/Triratna. Not just through relationship trauma. The dharma encourages us to look at ethics, at death, at the fragility of our sense of self and other challenging practises. Sometimes people have a very very hard time indeed.”.
      The crises we refer to here were caused by false doctrines being used to facilitate abuse, not the d harma-theres a difference
      “I commented previously that it was a friends suicide that led me to the dharma…….. The person who kills themselves are the one who wields the knife, who steps onto the train tracks or swallows the pills. They bear a significant degree of responsibility too. And then there are even the impersonal factors. The dharma suggests that there is within us the potential to long for non-existence. I remember it well in my twenties. At it’s slightest it is the drive to hide beneath the duvet and at it’s sharpest it is a desperate longing for the world to stop and just shut up and just leave ‘me’ alone. It is human tragedy”
      This shocks me. It is tantamount to suggesting that abuse is the fault of the victim. It emonstrates ignorance of the well documented [in buddhist circles] difference between causes and conditions. I t is like suggesting that the bridge at Hiroshima was destroyed, not by the atom bomb, but because there is a river in Hiroshima and someone built a bridge over it. WATCH MY LIPS-The dropping of the bomb was what caused the destruction [the CAUSE], not the decision to build a bridge [a CONDITION]
      “I don’t doubt that FWBO contact has tipped some people towards an edge at times. We invest and we get hurt. It is possible something in the movement or from the movements past was more damaging than I am aware of. But the movement is made up of ordinary people grappling with the existential crap of being alive. Sometimes we probably contribute to each others suffering but also sometimes nothing would have stopped the suffering anyway. I shudder.”
      Yeah, it was the fault of life itself that people died, had breakdowns, split from families. Sorry, but thats just rubbish! Dharma causes existential problems to manifest. Subjugation to sexual abuse justified by false doctrines causes psychiatric illness and death. Note the difference. The outcome of the former is development, the latter, neuroses and self harm. There is a bi difference
      “I don’t think the Mindfulness of Breathing and Development of Loving Kindness meditations are harmful. Those are what we do most and do best.”
      What about telling people if they have sex with their teacher, on the basis of false doctrine? Do you think these are harmful? These are the doctrines practiced behind closed doors for years-these are what S did best
      - 534
        
        Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 12:38 pm
        Reply
        
        Hi No-name,
        
        I would love someone to do the research. I imagine from my experience that involvement in Triratna leads to a significant decrease in risk of suicide. Regular study, meditation, reporting-in to groups of friends, telling life stories, confessing what is troubling us and even finding lovers who share our values. These things for most people are profoundly healing and helpful. This does not mean that everyone encounters a situation which offers these things to them. This does not mean that some people don’t somehow get hurt and troubled by something or someone they come across.
        
        I don’t think that in my post I try to blame the victim. But in the case of the friends I mention, even though they were young, I think they were the authors of their actions as well as the other factors I mentioned.
        
        As to ‘subjugation to sexual abuse justified by false doctrines causes psychiatric illness and death’. The phrase seems quite loaded. Is that really what happened?
        
        535
        
        No name on January 12, 2017 at 2:45 pm
        Reply
        
        Yes
        Ps your description of environs sounds like group therapy, not Buddhism
        One doesn’t go to the centre to find lovers or ‘confess’ to the group. What is the scriptural basis for such
        If you don’t know what happened, read before posting any more
536

NO NAME on January 11, 2017 at 9:03 am
Reply

” I am also grateful that he was sexually active as I would never have chosen to follow a monk and to practise as a monk would probably have been disastrous for my psyche.”
Fine. But the point is he was sexually active while simultaneously dressing as a monk and claiming ordained, celibate status. If youre genuinely interested in preventing “disasters for your psyche” theres a real pitfall to avoid
And surely, the best way to inspire lay Buddhists to practice genuinely in a contemporary setting is to do so as a layman in a contemporary setting, not to flounce around 1960s London dressed as a monk, with long hair, while sexually manipulating others at the same time as claiming to be a monk.
In fact, with regard to his inspirational status, are you aware that throughout both phases during which S claimed to be practicing celibacy, he was not and that a former close aide states that he was actually sexually active until at least 2003, while simultaneously claiming to be celibate and after concluding that “all sexual activity is inherently unskilful”.
What sort of example is this? In both instances, the lies were perpetrated to create the illusion of S celibacy-this constitutes encouraging others to follow a celibate path, while all the time having sex with young men, some of whom were under the legal age of consent. Cant you see thats wrong, dishonest, manipulative, damaging…………..etc etc
You seem to have difficulty seeing the dark side of the FWBO, attributing all and any criticism to misunderstanding, ignorance and resentment. Personally I admire many of those who have committed to the FWBO Triratna [though I would suggest it would be much better if they had investigated further before doing so]. However, no matter how much good one does, this does not automatically negate the negative consequences of the harms one inflicts. Does Shoko Asahara’s benevolence to his students mean he was not responsible for the sarin gas attacks or the murder of an investigative journalist and his wife? I dont think so.
Every karma has its own consequence: if I teach your son to be benevolent while simultaneously sexually abusing your daughter, I experience the consequences of each; one does not automatically cancel out the other. It is these things that people outside the Order find impossible to reconcile. Why? Because they contradict the example of the Buddha himself and show a deep rooted misunderstanding/ disrespect for the fundamental teachings of the Buddha, in particular those on moral discipline, karma and compassion. In these respects, S teachings are woefully lacking in real time experience and the only way he managed to succeed seems to be through a highly calculated and systematic policy of deliberate deception
- 537
  
  Gunasara on January 12, 2017 at 4:58 pm
  Reply
  
  I post this section of Sangharakshita’s memoirs. The wearing of robes whilst allegedly sexually active is not a special Sangharakshita practise he suggests.
  
  Forty-Three Years Ago by Sangharakshita http://www.sangharakshita.org/_books/forty-three.pdf
  
  When I was twenty-five I received ordination as a bhikkhu or Theravadin Buddhist monk. The time was 24 November 1950, a full moon day, the place the Burmese temple at Sarnath, only a few score yards from the spot where, two thousand- five-hundred years earlier, the Buddha had taught his first five disciples. The ordination gave me immense satisfaction. As I wrote many years later: ‘Whilst the ceremony was in progress I experienced an extraordinary sense of peace, satisfaction, fulfilment, acceptance, and belonging. It was a feeling such as I had not experienced before, and in subsequent years I was never surprised when an elderly monk told me that receiving the monastic ordination had been the greatest experience of his whole life.’
  
  …
  
  In the autumn of 1956 I received a rude shock. I discovered that there had been a serious flaw in my ordination ceremony, that really I had not been ordained, and that technically speaking I was not a bhikkhu. According to the Theravadin Vinaya, in the Middle Country (i.e. north-east India) a bhikkhu has to be ordained by a chapter of at least ten bhikkhus (outside the Middle Country, at least five) and the ordination ceremony has to be conducted within a specially demarcated and dedicated area known as a sima (literally, ‘boundary’). The bhikkhus constituting the ordaining chapter, and present within the sima and taking part in the ordination, have moreover to be parisuddha or ‘completely pure’ in the sense of being guiltless of any major breach of the sikkhapadas or rules of training, such as would render them liable to expulsion or suspension from the Order.
  
  What I discovered that autumn was that one of the bhikkhus taking part in my ordination had rendered himself so liable, as at least some members of the ordaining chapter were aware. He had been guilty of a breach of the training-rule prohibiting intentional sexual intercourse, and in fact had a ‘wife’ and son living with him at his temple, the former being officially his cook.
  
  The discovery left me in a quandary. If the supposed bhikkhu was not really a bhikkhu then I was not really a bhikkhu either, his presence within the sima having invalidated the entire proceedings and rendered my ordination ceremony null and void. What should I do? It was not really open to me to seek re-ordination, since I would have no means of knowing whether the members of the reordaining chapter were parisuddha or not and could hardly go round making enquiries. In any case, seeking reordination (or rather, again seeking to be ordained) would mean having to explain why I considered this to be necessary, and I already knew that questioning a bhikkhu’s ‘complete purity’ was something that was rather frowned on in Theravadin monastic circles. In the event I did nothing about my discovery. I continued to meditate and study, continued to work for the good of Buddhism, and observed the Vinaya or Monastic Code to the best of my ability, just as though I had been validly ordained and was technically a bhikkhu. My confidence in the Theravadin branch of the Monastic Order may have been undermined, but my faith in the Dharma and the spiritual life, and in the monastic lifestyle, remained unshaken.
  
  ….
  
  I do not regret being ‘ordained’ at Sarnath. Indeed I am glad there was a flaw in my ordination ceremony, glad that really I was not ordained, glad that technically I was never a bhikkhu, for in the long run this contributed more to my spiritual development, and more to my understanding of the Dharma, than any amount of correctness and technicality could have done. The bhikkhu who had a wife and son living with him at his temple may have been a bad monk, but he was a good Buddhist. He was kind to me, and took the trouble to help me, and I knew he had for many years striven, under difficult circumstances, to disseminate a knowledge of the Dharma. Later on, in the course of the eight years between my ‘discovery’ and my return to England in 1964, I came to know that most of the bhikkhus who had taken part in my supposed ordination were in much the same position as he was. They were either guilty, like him, of a breach of the training- rule prohibiting sexual intercourse, or guilty of a breach of one or more of the training-rules prohibiting actions of a sensual nature other than intercourse, and thus were permanently or temporarily self-excluded from the Order.
  
  Yet though most of the bhikkhus who had taken part in my ordination were, like the bhikkhu with a wife and son, bad monks, they were, like him, good Buddhists. They looked after pilgrims, edited Buddhist magazines, published books on Buddhism, ran schools and dispensaries, organized Buddhist festivals, gave lectures, and received new converts into the Sangha or Buddhist Spiritual Community, besides observing the basic ethical precepts and practising a little meditation. In the case of some of them, at least, these activities were the expression of a deep and genuine devotion to the Dharma, for whose sake they had, despite their sexual peccadilloes, made many sacrifices. I am therefore glad I was ordained by them, and in the case of two or three of them cherish fond memories of our subsequent association.
  - 538
    
    frenzy on January 13, 2017 at 8:32 am
    Reply
    
    Re Gunasara:
    
    This is altogether a very convenient anecdote for Dennis Lingwood to bring into the word! I wonder what year he wrote this?
    
    You conclude ”The wearing of robes whilst allegedly sexually active is not a special Sangharakshita practise he suggests.”
    
    Please do correct me Gunasara if i seem to have misunderstood but you seemed to me to be saying that as the ”The wearing of robes whilst allegedly sexually active is not a special Sangharakshita practise he suggests.” he must not have been sexually active as he was wearing robes?
    He was not ALLEDGEDLY sexually active. It reflects either your total lack of research or exposes another dismissive rethoric. He did wear robes to India as well as in the UK at the time when he was sexual active (in a serieusly unethical manner).
    - 539
      
      Gunasara on January 13, 2017 at 11:43 pm
      Reply
      
      I think you are probably right here. I think he was sexually active and wearing robes and I shouldn’t have said ‘allegedly’ there. Most of the time he was wearing robes, long hair and dirty jumpers I believe. I think wearing robes in India was probably quite a big mistake.
      The main point of the putting that piece of writing in though was to give Sangharakshita’s opinion that actually many of those who wear a robe are not practising the kind of pristine purity that some people imagine and that doesn’t make them bad buddhists. That also seems quite likely to me and I appreciate his honesty and willingness to speak to that subject.
      - 540
        
        frenzy on January 14, 2017 at 1:06 pm
        Reply
        
        Gunasara i do, like no-name, not have the time nor the will to invest in further responding to you.
  - 541
    
    NO NAME on January 13, 2017 at 9:34 am
    Reply
    
    I thought of writing to Tenzin off page to ask him to block Gunasara, who seems to be here simply to deny, justify and extol the doctrines and practices of Triratna-ie a troll. However, his posts are actually very useful in identifying the nature and consequences of FWBO/Tri indoctrination
    
    First, look at Gunasaras history, which is clearly deeply institutionalised after 22 yrs involvement. He is probably not married, having spent most of his adult life ‘married’ to Triratna. While his sexuality is entirely his business, it would probably be fair to assume from his willingness to voice anti family, anti hetero values, that he shares the same sex preferences as his founder. [Here, it is the contemptuous values he expounds rather than his sexuality that are of note]G in short embodies many of the values that he has been inculcated with over the last 2 decades.
    
    What we find in his posts is truly horrifying, not least because he believes his experience to concur with Buddhist teaching.What we read is that he holds anti hetero, anti family values. He tells us that he lives in an environs where wearing robes and simultaneously having sex is acceptable, where the boundaries between teacher and student are blurred, where sex between teacher and student is considered acceptable [despite supposed safeguarding guidelines] and where the suggestion that allegations that individuals who claim to have been damaged or abused by their experience of FWBO/T are as culpable as the perpetrators of that abuse ; abuse, like beauty, is here in the eyes of the beholder
    
    We learn that the [same sex?] environs in which he has spent most, if not all his adult life, engages in practices not found in scripture or traditions [problem sharing? Story telling? ‘Confession’ of troubles to peers? Student-teacher sex? “finding lovers (plural) who share their values”?-(is this a Buddhist version of a dating site?)] and shows a profound misunderstanding of basic social mores such as the inappropriateness of student teacher sex in education, along with a significant degree of pride in the superiority of his chosen group [i hesitate to use the word ‘tradition’ here]
    What G is, is a living piece of evidence that the claims and fears expressed in the FWBO FILES were and are valid. The values he expresses were all clearly outlined therein and, after 20 years of immersion in the Order, it is clear that Sagharakshita’s poisonous, non buddhist values are being instilled at FWBO/Tri centers across the globe
    Keep it coming G-the shovel is in the post. In the meantime, why not visit http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/ and read the Files [which you clearly have not]. Therein you will find all the allegations and false doctrines that Sangharakshita is referring to when he apologizes for the “hurt, harm or upset” he has caused, as well as the false doctrines he refers to when he admits that his teachings were manifestations of his own proclivities rather than the Buddhas teaching. Therein, you will find listed many [though just a few] of the horrific misdemeanors he has perpetrated in the name of the Dharma and for which he now, in light of his impending demise, begs for forgiveness
    - 542
      
      frenzy on January 13, 2017 at 1:24 pm
      Reply
      
      Gunasara i wanted to firstly empathize you must have a hard time getting roasted personally… I wanted to note that i find your sexual preference and wether you have raised or are raising a family irrelevant.
      I am curious what your view is on the need, in regard to Sangharakshita’s/Dennis Lingwood’s statement, for accountability and if this would not have to involve him being more specific.(in regard to his ”sexual peccadilloes”? as he apparently calls the behaviour of the bikkhus in his memoirs) Though i understand his statement is experienced as a positive step i feel (un) ethical specifics would be important. It seems the process of reviewing what happened should anyhow not been entirely left to him or the Order and should involve neutral independent safeguarding experts. I understand writing a statement was suggested to him by the Order (though, so far, unofficial). What does the Order make of his statement? And also i wondered if you feel your views reflect those of your enviroment. Meta.
      - 543
        
        Gunasara on January 13, 2017 at 10:04 pm
        Reply
        
        No one really represents the Order, we each feel quite entitled to hold our own set of views… I don’t agree with Aparimana’s analysis below but I love that we are part of a spiritual community that can handle quite different views… My take on Bhante’s statement is that even if he doesn’t give any further details, it will encourage others to talk about any harmful aspects of the movement they have experienced… That will be great… I am also a bit worried that we will trash what is a really helpful context for the vast majority of the people involved for the vast majority of the time…
    - 544
      
      Gunasara on January 13, 2017 at 9:43 pm
      Reply
      
      Hi No-Name
      I don’t know how accurate your stories are about the history of the movement but as far as your stories about me go you have not got me very accurately… I am heterosexual and married to a woman with two children and a job in an office…
      
      I think you use exaggeration quite a lot…
      - 545
        
        No name on January 14, 2017 at 2:06 pm
        Reply
        
        Dear G
        If you read my post you’ll see I said your sexuality was irrelevant
        “You exaggerate quite a lot” is itself an exaggeration
      - 546
        
        frenzy on January 14, 2017 at 3:09 pm
        Reply
        
        That was a pretty predictable respond Gunasara. I dont think but see for a fact you dismiss quite a lot here.
547

Stephen on January 13, 2017 at 1:36 pm
Reply

Gunasara, there are descriptions of Sangharakhita sexually harassing his followers until he gets sexual contact. He seems to have used a whole pallet of strategies to get what he wanted from his followers. It seems that Sangharakshita tried this with Ananda, presenting sexual contact as if his life depended on him getting sexual contact with the object of his sexual desire. Mark Dunlop also describes Sangharakshita clutching at his heart as if his life depended on sexual contact with the object of his sexual desire . It sees that he commenced the ‘spiritual justifications’ for sex with him after the encounter with Ananda. It seems that he was able to work out what spiritual justification would most likely trigger a response from a follower. Do you approve of a man in a position of power, trust and authority using such techniques to get young men into bed with him? Yes or no?
- 548
  
  Gunasara on January 13, 2017 at 9:37 pm
  Reply
  
  I simply do not know if any of those descriptions are true… They just seem so wildly at variance with the wise and mature culture I find myself immersed in generally in Triratna
  - 549
    
    Stephen on January 14, 2017 at 6:24 pm
    Reply
    
    ‘I simply do not know if those descriptions are true’. So ….. no need to do anything? Complainants must be making all this up? This is why your movement is neither wise not mature. Your statement is indicative of the sort of wisdom and maturity that protected Jimmy Saville, Catholic priests and Bishop Ball for decades, too. And many more at the expense of those harmed. It is shameful. Deeply shameful. It is not connected to Dhamma. It is not Buddhist.
    
    This is one such description. Do you doubt this order member’s description that he has apparently added to and confirmed more recently? This seems to pre-date the reakisation that Sabgharakshita could get sexual contact more easily with more directly ‘spiritual’ inducements. This is not Dharma.
    
    Re: Sangham saranam gacchamiFriday, 29 January, 2010 12:07
    From: “zenandthecity” Add sender to Contacts
    To: fwbo@yahoogroups.com
    In the light of Sangharakshitas recent attempt to elucidate on his sexual activity with younger O/M’s, which surely reflects some of his meaning about Sangha, eg. as the founder and head off the order, how can you separate his behaviour from his ideology…. which is reflected in the mitra course, its important to remember what these young men went through. What you have is a contrast between the emotional immaturity of the founder and the ideology he thrust upon the Order.
    How can you trust the ideology?
    
    Here is Ananda’s (a respected senior O/M) account of his relationship with Sangharakshita
    
    Ananda writes: ‘But then something very strange and disturbing began to happen. I wasn’t being given any special powers: instead my teacher began to show signs of serious un-guru-like behavior. He started getting upset when I didn’t want to visit him; he seemed to get very jealous of my inviting a certain girl round to stay with me, and he worked himself up into a lather when I refused to sleep in his bed on the few occasions when we went to Haslemere. I found this very upsetting, mainly because he was showing signs of being dangerously human, having emotional and physical needs, being angry, crying, showing irritation, being distinctly bitchy on occasion, and so forth. But also because he was teaching me non- attachment, and yet here he was showing all the signs of attachment to me. Things came to a head on our last visit to the cottage, when he asked me to sleep with him and I decided I’d be buggered if I was going to be Bhante’s bum-boy, to use the immortal phrase, no matter what pressure he put on me, subtle or otherwise.. That night I underwent every conceivable kind of guilt trip, even wondering if I was going to be responsible for Bhante’s imminent death, as he was working himself up into such a state, crying, whining, moaning, sobbing, imploring – everything except threatening. (I could never imagine him doing that in a thousand years). I don’t remember too clearly, but I don’t think either of us got any sleep that night. I do remember feeling let down, cheapened, almost physically dirty, and I’d have given anything for that not to have happened. But at no time did he exert any direct kind of pressure or suggestion that I should do it for the sake of my spiritual health: he simply had an overwhelming desire that he could not gainsay, and he saw no reason why he should.’
    
    What do you feel when you read this description, Gunasara?
    Metta
550

aparimana on January 13, 2017 at 8:55 pm
Reply

Someone asked whether any Order Members were aware when Bjorn made his allegations, and what they did about it.

I received an email containing Bjorn’s letter, I think this must have been not long after he wrote it. I believe it was distributed quite widely by email, I am not sure by whom, though it was followed by an Order Office email asking everyone to delete every copy they had of the document!

I did nothing more than write to Bjorn thanking him for writing the letter and expressing how important I believed it to be (this was some time later, when I found out how to contact him on Facebook).

I consider myself thoroughly free from any need to reverence Sangharakshita, but as an Order Member, it was not obvious what to do, beyond offering a little support to Bjorn.

This is because, in my experience the Order is divided between people who are primarily interested in traditional Buddhism, and those who are primarily devoted to Sangharakshita and his teaching. This reflects, in my opinion, the fact that Sangharakshita has claimed to be communicating the Dharma, while his teachings do not actually faithfully communicate the Buddhist path. I do not just mean specific rationalisations justifying km sex, but a much broader problem with his overall conception of what the path is about.

I believe that this mixture of Dennis-plus-Dharma has created an Order largely divided between those who look to traditional Dharma, who find the personality cult to be an embarrassment, who consider Sangharakshita to be seriously flawed and his teachings rather limited; and those who are devoted to Sangharakshita and his teaching without even realising that it is not actually Buddhist.

What this in turn means is that there are many OMs who, like me, would read Bjorn’s letter and recognise it as yet more evidence of Sangharakshita’s feet of clay; while others would either refuse to read it or assume Bjorn to be dishonest.

This means that, in trying to raise profound reservations about Sangharakshita within the Order, I find most people either already agree, or are completely incapable of even beginning a conversation. There are also many who smile and say “I don’t do Order politics”, having managed to find a comfort zone without considering the issues at all. So there is, in this sense, very little to discuss!

Some have valiantly tried to keep the issue of Sangharakshita’s sexual misconduct on the agenda, for example Jayanatha (now resigned) who repeatedly wrote in to Shabda about these issues, but this is a difficult and thankless task. Many of those on the “devoted to Bhante” side of the divide find any criticism of “Bhante” very painful – some say that they cannot even be in the same room as a critic – and believe that anyone making such criticisms has “put themselves outside the order” and should resign. (Jayanatha was asked by his preceptor to resign, which he declined to do at the time, though he did resign a year or two later.) While even those who agree that there was a problem tend to get bored eventually, because the issues are huge and discussions never seem to go anywhere. In effect, the critic is just offering a constant reminder that bad things happened in the past that have never been resolved, and are still not being resolved. This gets tiring for everyone.

I am therefore profoundly glad that the BBC documentary got made, that this blog thread exists, and that these issues are again topical. There is no future for the Order unless these things can be faced and worked through, and there are signs now that the decades long deadlock may be shifting.

However, I would say that the issues are actually even more profound than the sexual misconduct, in that the entire doctrinal structure of the Order is not actually Dharmic, and supports a cultish set of social norms. The doctrines support the personality cult. If there is any future for the Order (and I am not convinced that there is), addressing the historical abuse is just the start. If you remove the personality cult from the Order, is there anything left? I think so, but it is a big job….
- 551
  
  tenpel on January 13, 2017 at 9:37 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you!!!
  This comment is very helpful for me to understand these things better. _()_
- 552
  
  Patrick Baigent on January 16, 2017 at 12:01 am
  Reply
  
  I think Aparimana may have been in a slightly darker mood than his normal jovial self? Personally I think we would get on fine without the personality cult. And Aparimana might even find he gets more recognition for his wise utterances 😉
  - 553
    
    Stephen on January 16, 2017 at 5:56 am
    Reply
    
    It is heartening to read your comments recognising that there is a cult of personality and that Triratna would do well to free itself from that. Thank you, Patrick Baigent. It is, in fact, critical, that the cult of personality aspects are clearly identified and then eradicated. They support the non-Dharmic and non-Buddhist harms that have to be eradicated for the good of followers and their loved ones. Metta
554

frenzy on January 14, 2017 at 1:01 pm
Reply

Aparimana, very significant and hearthening! I presume and hope that this will give further direction to developments on this thread also.
555

NO NAME on January 14, 2017 at 7:06 pm
Reply

Aparimana
Thank you for your honesty and openness-it is truly refreshing to see such sentiments expressed from someone within the Order. I have said before that, while I have no respect or faith in Triratna hierarchs, I deeply respect the sincerity of some OMs; you are one of those people. With people like you speaking out like this, it calms my fear that Triratna may be responsible for destroying the dharma in the years ahead via their faith in Sr doctrines. Your presence heartens me sincerely.
Gunasara
Dont you read Shabda? I do and therein I find frequent reference to the very problems you claim do not exist, from people who were actually there at the time. Since you claim repeatedly these occurrences are not your experiences, I wonder if you think all the contributors who refer to them are lying?
556

Tejananda on January 15, 2017 at 10:55 am
Reply

Joc asked me whether I’d post my article / letter ‘Opening up the Thatch’ here. I was initially reluctant as I didn’t want to get involved with yet another forum. However, scanning through, there seems much more sense of an urge to get at the truth than expressions of animosity. I’m not sure that I want to become a regular contributor, having rather fruitlessly engaged in the usergroups that sprung up at the time of the Guardian article (1997) and the subsequent publication of the FWBO Files. However, the discussion here seems, mainly, on a different level.

I wrote the article mainly to try to precipitate a discussion within the Order and wider Triratna community. It’s directed to the College of public preceptors insofar as I recognise that without their being on board, realistically the suggestions are not going to get widespread serious discussion. As it is, as well as to the chair of the College, I’ve posted it in ‘The Art of Truth and Reconciliation (Triratna)’ on Facebook, which is open to anyone who is concerned with the issues, another group for Order members on Facebook, and an area that has been set up for Order members on the Triratna website to ‘tell their stories’ and personal experiences of what happened in terms the issues that concern this group and are brought out in my article. The vast majority of responses on these various forums have been positive and constructive and I’m fairly hopeful that a real shift may be happening – in the light of Sangharakshita’s ‘Personal Statement’, outright ignoring of the issues is no longer possible.

So, here is the article:

Opening up the Thatch

“As therapists, we cannot undo what has been done. But we can allow the unspeakable to become speakable and to call what has been done by its true name. Sadly, there has been too often a repetition of the failed witness in Buddhist communities where abuse has taken place. Whether in the name of preserving the Sangha or the Dharma, or simply protecting the teacher, the truth remains unspoken, the pain never acknowledged, real action never taken. Too often, the wider community of Buddhist teachers has also remained silent, again, failing in its broader responsibility to bear witness.”

– Barry Magid, ‘Nothing is Hidden’

It has been heartening to see Sangharakshita’s “Personal Statement” from 30 December 2016 and the recent “Statement about sex between preceptors and those they ordain from the Preceptors’ College”. This current article / letter was mostly written just before the publication of these two documents, but the points herein still stand. The two statements just mentioned represent openings, initial steps, in addressing issues which have long been undermining the integrity of the Order and FWBO / Triratna – arguably from the start.

The recent short programme on BBC Inside Out East jump-started the latest round of debate and discussion around allegations of sexual abuse or misconduct in Triratna, particularly with regard to its founder. The ensuing debate has included contributions from two Order members with considerable professional expertise in the areas of sexual and emotional abuse which are useful and salutary. They brought out two aspects of the same issues. One focused on the suffering that can be experienced by people who have been at the receiving end of sexual (or other) abuse, which is redoubled if their experience is doubted or denied by others. The other focused on the suffering of those who are wrongly or maliciously accused of such abuse. If anything is clear, it is that great suffering can be experienced by those at the receiving end in either situation. Beyond this, it is clear that, if there is contention, establishing the ‘truth’ regarding any such situation is liable to be extremely complex.

It seems to me that to characterise such situations in terms of ‘abuse’, particularly in the case of clarifying sexual morality within the Order and with regard to its founder, is often unhelpful. It’s a very blunt instrument. As soon as the ‘a’ word comes in, the discussion invariably becomes polarised and fractious. This is particularly the case given that ‘abuse’ now has such strong and specific connotations in contemporary discourse. Calling someone an ‘abuser’ is tantamount, in popular usage, to evoking them as ‘a monster’ – no redeeming qualities, not fully human. Hence, discussions within Triratna – including discussions involving those with whom Sangharakshita had sexual relations and who have subsequently left Triratna – get irretrievably polarised and bogged down if some are trying to ‘prove’ that Sangharakshita was an ‘abuser’ and others are trying to ‘prove’ the opposite.

These terms of reference can get in the way of an open and compassionate discussion of the issues. I would suggest that, without denying the possibility that actual abuses may have taken place in our community, we frame our discussion primarily in terms of ethical conduct and misconduct, which naturally includes sexual conduct and misconduct.

Despite some degree of public acknowledgement of the problems for us, collectively, around Sangharakshita’s sexual activity, e.g. in ‘The Triratna Story’, it has continued to be an issue and refuses to go away. Since Madeline Bunting’s article in the Guardian 20 years ago this year, every time there is a new ‘revelation’ or public story, much the same happens: some people get to hear things they never heard before, there is an upsurge of discussion, some of which tends to get very polarised and then it gradually subsides into the background until the next time. And there is always ‘a next time’ because the issues have still not been fully addressed internally, within the Order and the Triratna Community generally. I feel that our collective failure to address the issues fully means that, for all of the beneficial aspects of our community – and there are many – there is what might be called a collective ethical dysfunctionality in our Order and community.

This is hardly a wonder given the nature of the dysfunctionality in all of us – avidya, ignorance, ignoring realities. Manifestation of ignorance is inevitable in any group of ordinary, unawakened humans, which is of course what we collectively are. There is, naturally, a huge amount of gratitude and appreciation in Triratna for Sangharakshita’s many beneficial activities and teachings – not least founding the Order and the FWBO / Triratna itself. I wholeheartedly concur with this and have no doubt that such gratitude and appreciation is healthy.

But as for individuals, so also for groups: there is a shadow side. In the case of our relation to Sangharakshita, it can shade over into simply ‘ignoring’ or thinking that we’ve dealt with the issues. I feel we have up to now actively refused to countenance that he is, as he has now made clear, like all of us ‘human – all too human’. I don’t think this has done any favours either to him or to our ‘collective selves’.

It is obvious from many discussions over the last 20 years that for many Order members it can seem ‘disloyal’ and deeply ‘wrong’ even to suggest that Sangharakshita may have been ‘unskilful’ in his sexual activities. This even though Sangharakshita himself had commented that there is probably an irreducible element of craving in sex, which makes it, in the final analysis, inherently unskillful, as well as that that there was an element of ‘appetite’ in his sexual relationships. However, the publication of the ‘Personal Statement’ makes a significant difference. I trust that views around these issues will rapidly move on in the Order and that people will appreciate my motivations in writing this whether or not they agree with my perspectives.

However, I want to make it clear from the outset that I’m writing from very much ‘within’ the Order and because I care deeply about the Order. I write as a fully-engaged Order member, chairman of a Triratna centre and as a private preceptor. I value our Order and wider Triratna community and feel that we have a lot to offer this suffering world. So I consider it my duty to our Order and the Triratna community to ask that we really do address these issues, as I feel strongly that the lack of resolution around them is significantly holding us back from our real potential and effectiveness in our collective compassionate task of communicating the Dharma in a world greatly in need of it.
A word about ‘loyalty’. “Loyalty to our teachers” is one of the acceptance ‘vows’ at ordination. However, the concept of ‘loyalty’ can be misunderstood to mean unquestioning devotion. Sangharakshita made it clear in the past that he did not consider the teacher-student or mitra-kalyana mitra relationship to be fixed – the ‘roles’ may at times be reversed. Clearly, the primary principle is ‘loyalty’ to the Buddha, Dharma and Arya-sangha.

The Dharma in this context includes the precepts, as ‘transmitted’ by the teacher (preceptor). If the teacher (preceptor) acts in a significantly unethical way, there is nothing ‘disloyal’ in the student (preceptee) pointing this out – in fact, quite the reverse, it would be ‘disloyal’ not to. Clearly, if the student or ‘disciple’ does not point out unethical action on the part of the teacher (preceptor), the result is liable to segue into collusion. At a collective level, this becomes ‘group’ behaviour, ethical dysfunction and denial. In my view, this is exactly what we have had, and still have within Triratna. It could also be argued that, to the extent this is not addressed, it undermines our collective capacity to ‘transmit’ the precepts.

Hence, I think we need to look squarely at ‘our stuff’, collectively, in a way we have not done before. I’d also like to point out that although I’m focussing here on our attitudes to and relation with the founder of our Dharma community, the ethical misconduct has involved many more of us over the years, in a variety of different ways. I was involved in the Croydon centre during the years when it quite definitely had developed the characteristics of a ‘cult’, including misuse of power, rigid hierarchy, mistreatment and ‘brainwashing.’ Until the spell was broken, I and others literally could not believe the criticisms that were percolating in from ‘outside’ – they seemed incredible – after all, wasn’t it obvious to everyone that the Croydon centre was the leading edge of the whole movement? In my own case, the unethical, abusive behaviour was in terms of harsh speech and bullying, which was endemic in the situation at that time, and of which I was also a recipient. I was able to move on and apologise only after I left Croydon for Bristol and even then not until I literally got ‘cult-busted’ by Sthiramati (whose eventual resignation from the Order was over the very issues I’m writing about here).

I note two particular things from the Croydon experience which I feel pertain to Triratna as a whole. There were criticisms ‘percolating in from outside’, and then there was the inability on the part of the those enmeshed in the Croydon centre to believe or even credit them. In our current broader context, the ‘criticisms percolating in’ parallel how Triratna is regarded by many other Buddhists. Obviously there is no single, unitary view, but a constant drip-drip of opinions have percolated into my consciousness over the years. Most of these are pointing to denial regarding Sangharakshita’s sexual misconduct and there being something ‘cult-like’ about Triratna. The other aspect is our overall resistance to taking this feedback seriously, or even to consider that there might be something we still haven’t really addressed (for all the millions of words that have been written and spoken). There is a collective resistance to truly acknowledging the dark or shadow aspects of our history and genuinely making amends.

The dark or shadow side doesn’t just include aspects of our relation to Sangharakshita but other outbreaks of the kinds of behaviours that were characteristic of ‘old’ Croydon – e.g. harshness, bullying and ‘power mode’ controlling behaviour, sometimes rationalised as ‘fierce friendship’. There also has been significant sexual misconduct by people who seemed to be rationalising it with reference to Sangharakshita’s behaviour and the views he expressed around the alleged ‘place’ of sexual activity in kalyana mitra relationships. There has also been the promulgation of and inflexible insistence on views around sexuality, marriage, families and women, which have given rise directly or indirectly to a lot of pain and frustration and have put people off the Dharma life, or at least the Triratna approach. We’d be deluding ourselves if we feel that they all have been satisfactorily addressed.

In many of these areas we are no different from a large number of other Buddhist sanghas and groups where such issues have emerged. As is evident from this article http://www.lionsroar.com/confronting-abuse-power/, a large number of western sanghas have faced up to issues of sexual and other impropriety on the part of their teachers. The outstanding difference is that we, as a sangha, have not truly faced what needs facing. In the context of other sanghas which have really addressed sexual and other impropriety, especially on the part of their teachers, the issue is explored more in terms of sexual misconduct or the misuse of power, position and authority. I believe that for us, this is the area on which we can, and must, gain clarity.

To do so would mean at this stage regarding the actions of Sangharakshita (and others in our historical context) not in terms of the outcomes for the individuals affected, but in terms of what can be known ‘objectively’. To explain, of the men with whom Sangharakshita had sexual relations, some express much suffering as a result and some regard themselves as having been abused, while others express that they had no problems about what happened or even regard themselves as having benefited. However, the main point that I’m making is that these outcomes, around which most of the contention has circled, are responses to what was already clearly sexual misconduct.
To illustrate this, what follows are points about Sangharakshita and his sexual relations which are more or less public knowledge, inside and outside of the Order, many of them supplied or confirmed by Sangharakshita himself:

– “Quite a number of young men, all aged 18 or over, but still much younger than Sangharakshita, had … sexual relationships with him…” (The Triratna Story)
– Sangharakshita spoke of ‘experimenting’ with sex (i.e. with his male students).
– This ‘experimentation’ continued over a sustained period.
– Sangharakshita claimed that male same-sex sexual activity could be of ‘benefit’ in kalyana mitra relationships, i.e. ‘spiritual friendships’ between an experienced Dharma practitioner – traditionally understood as a teacher – and a less experienced practitioner.
– In some instances, young men who went on spiritual training events at the FWBO retreat centre where Sangharakshita lived were allocated to accommodation in Sangharakshita’s bedroom. A number of accounts attest that sexual activity ensued.
– In all, or virtually all cases, Sangharakshita was considerably older than those he had sexual relations with.
– He was their teacher and the founder of the movement to which they belonged and they were his students or ‘disciples’.
– Sangharakshita said that he believed that all of these relations were ‘consensual’.

I’m attempting to represent, without interpretations, ‘what is known’ to have happened. With a little non-fanciful interpretation, it could be suggested that probably most if not all of these young men were rather in awe of Sangharakshita and may well have been flattered by receiving ‘special’ attention from him, even to the extent, for some, of going beyond their usual sexual preferences and engaging in sexual activity with a much older man. Neither is it very fanciful to suggest that the ‘teaching’ on the supposed place and benefits of sex within kalyana mitra relationships could have been used to persuasive effect. Indeed both of these have been attested by some of the men who were in receipt of such attentions on Sangharakshita’s part.

So, on the question of ‘consensuality’, what we have in probably all of these cases would have been a very unequal relationship. Though some students / ‘disciples’ could and did say ‘no’, I think it would be obvious to pretty well anyone outside of the ‘Triratna bubble’ that this represents a Teacher misusing (‘abusing’) the implicit power of his position in relation to a relatively vulnerable ‘disciple’. That is, ’vulnerable’ in terms of their youth, some still being in their teens, their relative immaturity and their openness to Sangharakshita’s charismatic authority. I don’t particularly like to use terms like ‘Triratna bubble’, but I’m afraid that the failure of our sangha overall to perceive this situation as one of significant sexual misconduct makes one wonder about our collective relationship to the world ‘out there’.

Issues of safeguarding and ethical policies for people teaching at Triratna centres are, despite our collective tardiness in addressing the need for them, now recommended for all centres (though not ‘effectively obligatory’, which might seem remiss in the light of both our history and the prominence of these issues in society generally). In the light of these policies, and in order to evaluate whether Sangharakshita’s actions represented significant ethical misconduct or not, we only have to imagine what our response might be now to a scenario at one of our centres involving a late middle-aged male Order member doing exactly the same with a number of young, including teenaged, female friends and mitras, and on occasion using ‘spiritual’ rationales for getting the young females to agree to sexual contact. This would clearly be serious misconduct, yet collectively we have never accepted that Sangharakshita’s essentially identical actions in this regard were also, clearly, serious sexual misconduct, let alone taken responsibility in relation to it.

What would taking responsibility mean – especially in a collective sense? Obviously responsibility for one person’s ethical behaviour cannot be taken by others, either individually or collectively. So when I speak about ‘taking responsibility’ here, it is specifically about the rest of us in the Triratna Order and community clarifying our relation to Sangharakshita with regard to these issues.
Sangharakshita has now taken responsibility for himself – to some degree – in his ‘Personal Statement’ and if he has more clarification to offer along these lines, all well and good. However, though our ethical guidelines are meant to guard against exactly this kind of sexual exploitation and though the kalyana mitrata and sex ‘teaching’ is no longer promulgated, we have not collectively and publicly repudiated them. So, I believe, our collectively taking responsibility for this would, in the first place, mean reaching a point where we, as an order and community, can publicly recognise and accept that these actions on Sangharakshita’s part were serous sexual misconduct, and that such misconduct is unacceptable in our circles whomsoever perpetuates it. Without such explicit acknowledgment, our ethical guidelines are based on very insecure foundations and people would be quite justified in questioning whether we mean what we say.

As far as I can see, in practical terms, any effective move to our ‘collectively’ taking responsibility will only happen to the extent that the College of public preceptors acknowledges and promulgates the vital importance of moving forward in these regards. This is not to say that ‘taking responsibility’ should be limited to College members – it clearly needs to involve our entire Community. However, I believe that structurally the College alone has the centrality and influence to carry this forward.
It is very unlikely that the (Buddhist) world at large is going to accept that our many years of what amounts to collective denial are really over if we just issue another carefully-worded public relations statement – any more than the relevant sections of ‘The Triratna Story’ has done, even though this represented a small move in the direction of opening up. In any case, simply acknowledging is not enough.

I believe that, to truly move on, collectively, an independently arbitrated ‘truth and reconciliation’ process is indispensable. Preferably this would be conducted with sensitivity by fellow Dharma-farers. It’s notable that we are far from being alone as a sangha facing up to such issues. For this very reason, there are Buddhist-run organisations such as ‘An Olive Branch’ to which we could have recourse. ‘An Olive Branch,’ for example, offers to conduct ‘a deliberate, multi-step process of listening and of education after there has been an ethical breach by a member of an organisation’s leadership’ (http://www.an-olive-branch.org/). Engaging in such a process would help us in Triratna to reconcile ourselves to ‘shadow’ aspects of our history, as well as giving those who feel or have felt hurt or damaged the opportunity to be genuinely heard.

This would necessarily mean our being genuinely open to the fact that people who say they have been hurt, or subsequently have suffered, as an outcome of involvement with Sangharakshita and FWBO/ Triratna are speaking their own truth. This does not, of course, mean simply accepting whatever they say, which is one reason why arbitration is necessary. People who have been hurt and then not listened to, or even vilified (and this has happened) might be liable to put their complaints more and more extremely. The truth needs to be clarified, but putting something over-strongly does not mean that there is no basis. Can we find our way to listening and acknowledging that people have indeed suffered as a result of becoming sexually involved with Sangharakshita?
In this context, fears of litigation have been raised of late. If we are to acknowledge truth and pursue reconciliation, these fears need to be put aside. Our ‘collective act’ at this stage would be to say something to the effect that we, the Triratna Order and Community acknowledge that we have not fully acknowledged Sangharakshita’s sexual misconduct in the past, that we do so now and that in the interests of ethical clarity and transparency we are willing to seek reconciliation with those who feel they have been hurt, have suffered or have been ignored and shunned.

We, collectively, cannot ‘apologise’ for Sangharakshita, only he can do that, and he has now gone some way towards doing so. But we can apologise for our collective ‘group behaviour’ in ignoring of the truth of the situation and of whatever the consequences of that ignoring have been, including disbelief and sidelining of those who have spoken of themselves as damaged by their sexual experience with Sangharakshita. Following on from this, there is the question of addressing the results of other instances of misuse of position and power – sexual or otherwise – in our collective history. Of course, much restitution has been made already for, e.g., what happened in the Croydon situation in the 80s. But this did not only happen in Croydon, and not just in the relatively distant past.

I’m addressing this to our entire community but, as noted above, I’m directing it specifically to the College because as far as I can see, it is only the College that can effectively enact what I and others in our community believe needs to happen for us to genuinely resolve our ethical blind spots regarding the past and move forward. I’d very much like to see the College discussing this at the earliest opportunity and then offering their considerations and recommendations for action in the light of the safeguarding and ethical policies now enacted at all Triratna centres.

Thank you for your attention.

Tejananda
- 557
  
  tenpel on January 15, 2017 at 7:05 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you very much, Tejananda.
  
  This gives me some hope and light that things could move to the better, towards listening, compassion, reflection of ethical and Buddhist values, save spiritual environment and a deep learning process that enables spiritual growth and maturity without the continuation of denial and risks of future harm for other faithful seekers.
  
  It feels so hopeful and well reflected (based on my experiences and what I witnessed I am not very optimistic that such sick patterns can be healed really) that I myself feel a bit uplifted and I wish you and the order members and followers very much a good progress in these attempts.
  
  My heart is always with those who been harmed but it’s also with you and the order. We are all human beings, our delusions misguide us, so we can err gravely and blind ourselves. But if we open up to the suffering of others and if we reflect our own failings truthfully, honestly and if we led guide us by impartial compassion and wisdom, healing is possible – not only heeling but deep and profound spiritual growth and learning.
  
  Thank you very much for sharing your open letter and thoughts here with us and thank you also for your faith in us as your fellow Buddhists. Even if you don’t want or can’t contribute any more here, I would appreciate if you could give a feedback how successful your attempts for change will have been.
  
  I wish you and the individuals of the order all the best. Maybe, how the order deals with that could be a pioneer role model for other communities in the future. It won’t be without pain I fear but if at the end there is clarity, truthfulness, learning, reconciliation and a deep compassion for those who have been harmed – including excuse and recompense – it’s all worth these insecurities and pains. Deep growth can be based on pain and opening up to these processes needs the courage to face and allow that pain but if at the end there is a deeper wisdom and understanding and an increase of inner qualities, the pain will be felt as comparatively little and as having been worth to have gone through.
  
  All the best,
  Metta, t
  - 558
    
    frenzy on January 15, 2017 at 8:26 pm
    Reply
    
    Tejananda, much apriciation for your article and the recognision of the intensions on this thread by posting it here.
  - 559
    
    Karmabandhu (Mr Anon) on January 16, 2017 at 8:43 am
    Reply
    
    Thanks Aparimana and Tejananda for publishing these pieces on here.
    - 560
      
      joc on January 16, 2017 at 12:55 pm
      Reply
      
      Dear Kharmabandu, thank you for supporting your fellow order members and others in this way. Great. I know that working publicly is a big step for those of you who care about Buddhism and Dharma, so it is great to have a growing number of you posting here. Please encourage more to do the same. Welcome Kharmabandhu. (I hope you enjoyed your recent retreat?)
      - 561
        
        Karmabandhu (Mr Anon) on January 17, 2017 at 7:51 am
        Reply
        
        Hi Joc. Thanks for that. At first I kept my name secret for two reasons: 1) A number of contributors on here use pseudonyms. 2) I thought it might help me to speak more freely. Overall though, given the sorts of stuff I write on FB under my own name I don’t think it made any difference and there was something I really didn’t like about being “under cover”. I felt compromised, so when Gunasara, Tejananda, Aparimana, and Patrick Baigant popped up I thought it would be ridiculous to continue in this way.
        
        I think you may be mistaking me for someone else re a recent retreat. I can make the occasional weekend but otherwise don’t have the time. 🙂
        
        562
        
        No name on January 17, 2017 at 10:35 am
        Reply
        
        Karmabandu
        Welcome and thank you for not hiding-I suspect one reason for keeping your name secret may have been for fear of repercussions from within the Order rather than from outside it so well done on being brave enough to state who you are. Personally, having been threatened and maligned by the Order and its supporters I choose to remain under a pseudonym
        I read with some concern your views on Buddhism and family elsewhere and wonder……..
        Are you aware that the Buddha’s description of family life as a ‘narrow, dusty way’ was addressed to an aspirant who was considering an ascetic lifestyle? Are you aware that elsewhere, in the Mangala Sutta, Lord Buddha stated that protecting ones parents and caring for children is “the highest blessing”? What relevance do you think these two views bear on contemporary, Western religious life?
        Are you aware that historically, of the major schools of Tibetan Buddhism ( Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu, Kadam, Gelug) only ONE (Gelug) was founded by a monastic?
        Are you aware of the view held outside the Order that S deliberately misled lay followers over this issue, manipulating them to a perspective of aversion to family life by reference to the scriptures designed specifically for ascetic aspirants?
        I note you are a parent. Do you feel parenthood has enhanced or diminished your good qualities?
        Where do you stand on S view of the family as “the enemy of the spiritual community”?
        Which perspective in terms of its benefits to the majority of Western Buddhists practicing the teachings of the Buddhist traditions do you consider to be most beneficial in the contemporary Western setting: that which encourages a positive and supportive view of family life or that which condemns it?
        Can you see how it might be considered plausible by some that S deliberately twisted the Buddha’s words on family so as to build male, single sex communities where he could then procure sexual partners? Do you believe this may have been part of his motivation?
        Finally, and entirety hypothetically, if the whole world were to convert to Buddhism and chose to abandon family life and live in single sex communities, practicing “attachment free” same sex sex, how long do you think Buddhism and civilisation would last?
        
        563
        
        Karmabandhu (Mr Anon) on January 18, 2017 at 9:13 am
        
        Hello. This is just to thank you all for your responses and say that I am grappling with a couple of massive work projects at the moment so won’t have time to write anything much over the next couple of weeks. I will reply when I have a bit of space.
        
        564
        
        joc on January 17, 2017 at 11:43 am
        Reply
        
        Dear Kharmabandu, yes I think I have you muddled up with Darmabandu. (There seem to be lots of Khama Dhama and Bandu combinations).
        
        Kharmabandhu: What one ‘teaching’ or ‘doctrine’ do you now consider not to be Buddhist / Dharma? Perhaps with so many Buddhists on this thread / site, this would be a useful discussion? What do you think? I invite order members to take the lead here.
        
        Dear Tenpel – Please do not do any more work than you are already doing, but a former mitra asked me to ask you if it is possible to reverse the thread so that the last post appears closest to the original post. He cannot find us easily. Another person asks if you are willing to start a new post with the BBC prog itself as many have not seen it. Danke im voraus x
        
        565
        
        tenpel on January 17, 2017 at 9:32 pm
        
        Ok I reversed the order. Let me know if this improves the usability / user experiences of the blog or not.
        There is also an option “Break comments into pages with [50?] top level comments per page and the [last/first] page displayed by default!”
        Should I try the latter too and what options would you suggest?
        
        566
        
        joc on January 17, 2017 at 11:41 pm
        
        This is better, Thanks Tenpel. Yes, the pages could also help. Danke.
        
        567
        
        tenpel on January 18, 2017 at 12:27 am
        
        Ok, I clicked for the option “Break comments into 50 pages with top level comments per page and the last page displayed by default”.
        Let me know if this us useful or not. Thank you!
        
        568
        
        tenpel on January 18, 2017 at 12:31 am
        
        I also enabled “mark down” for comments: https://en.support.wordpress.com/markdown-quick-reference/
        
        569
        
        frenzy on January 18, 2017 at 3:05 pm
        
        Hi Tenpel and Joc, It seems the subthreads are still showing new post at the bottom. I find it more confusing this way, my suggestion though being 50 per page – bottom to top (to synchronise with the subthreads) but if you feel it is better the way it is now i will adjust!
        
        570
        
        tenpel on January 18, 2017 at 8:36 pm
        
        I changed now to:
        
        Break comments into pages with 50 top level comments per page and the last page displayed by default
        Comments should be displayed with the older comments at the top of each page.
        
        Is that good or not? If you wish changes, pls let me know. I am not an expert in how to organise comments in WordPress. I lack time to do tests. So I need your feedback. Thanks. T
        
        571
        
        tenpel on January 19, 2017 at 2:00 am
        
        Sorry, these modes of organising the comments seem to create more confusion than clarity. I changed back to listing all comments of the post on a singular page. The first entry is the oldest.
        
        In this way the chronology is clear and also how the thread of discussion unfolded. You might to have to scroll now more but you can easily find comments or scan comments by using the CMD+F or CTRL+F search function of your browser.
        
        The blog enables 10 levels of sub-comments. Sadly, on mobile devices, the deeper the comment level the uglier it looks like because this theme is not responsive and I could not find a theme with similar options as this one which is also responsive.
        
        572
        
        Karmabandhu (Mr Anon) on January 18, 2017 at 9:31 am
        
        Joc. Having said I won’t write – it’s hard to resist. I think Aparimana nails it when he says Sangharakshita outlines a neo-Platonic “stairway to heaven” approach to the spiritual life, where we ascend to ever more refined and positive mental states and then just simply “jump” off from there into Nirvana [please ignore the two obvious rockn’roll references!]. This is a path but is not the one taught by the Buddha and in my experience and that of others not one that many of us can effectively follow and if we did we’d at best end up sat on a cloud somewhere playing a lute – ie. it’s not Buddhism. Now clearly, this isn’t all to be said on the matter. There is also a lot of traditional Dharma in the mix, but I do think that at best it is a mix of two essentially contradictory approaches.
        
        573
        
        No name on January 19, 2017 at 9:18 am
        
        This. Model assumes an ever ascending path to p erfection. How can this allow for karma? If we reject karma AFAICS it can’t be Buddhism – not accepting karma is pretty much the highest wrong view in dharma
        
        574
        
        joc on January 19, 2017 at 10:15 am
        
        Dear Khamabandhu Mr Anon – Grazie. Any ideas on how to extricate Buddhism /Dharma from ‘the non-Buddhist stuff’ in practice so that OMs stop presenting non-Buddhism as presented by Sr? Maybe Buddhists on this site have some ideas on this? A few participants are discussing what is Triratna’s definition of sexual misconduct on T&R site now. It would be good to have a definition of that. What is your Triratna definition?
        
        575
        
        tenpel on January 19, 2017 at 10:37 am
        
        To extricate dharma from non dharma needs true expertise or a true master. What the Buddha gave as a definition of sexual misconduct I quoted already. You can find it here in a side widget of that article about Buddhism and sexuality http://info-buddhism.com/Buddhism-Sexuality-Cabezon.html
        
        576
        
        tenpel on January 19, 2017 at 11:31 am
        
        BTW. This brings us to the thought what can be expected to be achieved spiritually from a movement that has no clear lineage and a founder who is not liberated or who at least achieved high spiritual results like stream entry or the path of seeing!?
        
        Are the lay precepts according to the Vinaya/pratimoksha given and understood correctly?
        
        577
        
        frenzy on January 17, 2017 at 11:45 am
        Reply
        
        Mr Anon/Karmabandhu, Frenzy is not my real name. You can probably imagine the variaty of motivations for people to use a false name… But in your case i agree it would have been ridiculous to continue this way.
        
        578
        
        Karmabandhu (Mr Anon) on January 18, 2017 at 9:34 am
        
        Mr Frenzy, given that no one is going to come round and beat you up and the Order’s track record of taking people to court is non-existent. Even the blessed Madeleine Bunting, upon meeting Subhuti for a radio show after her article came out, simple got a smile, handshake and an amiable chat. What exactly do you have to fear?
        
        579
        
        Karmabandhu (Mr Anon) on January 18, 2017 at 9:35 am
        
        Same comment with better punctuation – Mr Frenzy, given that no one is going to come round and beat you up and the Order’s track record of taking people to court is non-existent – even the blessed Madeleine Bunting, upon meeting Subhuti for a radio show after her article came out, simple got a smile, handshake and an amiable chat – what exactly do you have to fear?
        
        580
        
        frenzy on January 18, 2017 at 2:19 pm
        
        Re Karmabandu:
        I have explained my choice to use a false name to tenpel (a while back) but i don’t feel like getting into it here.
        I hope we can bring back the exchange to relevant topics.
- 581
  
  Tejananda on January 18, 2017 at 9:53 am
  Reply
  
  There’s a discrepancy in my article that I forgot to correct before I posted it – the final sentence ends “the safeguarding and ethical policies now enacted at all Triratna centres”, and to be accurate I should have written ‘almost all’. The current situation re safeguarding is summarised in the following note.
  
  Tejananda
  
  Munisha, Triratna’s European Safeguarding officer, comments:
  
  “I’ve been working on developing Safeguarding policy for Triratna’s European Chairs’ Assembly since 2013. Model policies were published in 2015 and revised in 2016. https://thebuddhistcentre.com/eca/safeguarding-children-and-vulnerable-adults-2016
  
  I just wanted to explain why it’s not possible to make safeguarding provision obligatory, as you suggest in your article, “Opening the thatch”.
  
  a) all Triratna centres are legally autonomous and
  b) Triratna is not British, but international. ‘Safeguarding’ policy and practice as understood in the UK are very particular to the UK and utterly unknown in many other countries. People in other countries don’t like being told what to do by the British. I’ve tried!
  
  This Safeguarding rollout has been very successful, as can be seen in this recent report. https://thebuddhistcentre.com/eca/european-triratnas-safeguarding-rollout-well-under-way
  
  A new Safegarding officer, with more hours, will be appointed in the next couple of months to carry on this important work.
  - 582
    
    frenzy on January 18, 2017 at 2:59 pm
    Reply
    
    ”Those European Triratna centres so far without safeguarding policies are in countries where there is so far no concept of “safeguarding”.
    This seems untrue.
    Tenpel: could you say something about this? In regard to your view on this in general and the situation in Germany? Are they creating more ilusions..?
    
    Just a few observations.
    It seems there is only a safequarding children and vulnarable adults policy.
    It thus seems it has been very suggestive that in respond to the BBC was stated that there is an Overall Safeguarding Officer.
    There are only some vaque quidelines (available for recommendation), not a policy, nor structures, nor grievance- and reconsiliation procedures, in regard to concerns and ethics involving boundaries in the teacher-spiritual aspirant relationship.
    Their draft for dealing with serieus breeches of the law/precepts is for some reason still not made official. An if i understand correctly: these would also just be a recommendations.
    The new safeguarding officer is, i understand, an Om. And not available for complainents but for ‘Triratna Office’, as complaints are supposed to be dealt with locally.
    They have simply disregarded accounts as untrue or value the teachers view as valid (there is an Order account from last october about Bjorn that shows this).
    - 583
      
      frenzy on January 18, 2017 at 3:34 pm
      Reply
      
      I forget to say: thank you Tejananda for passing this on.
    - 584
      
      frenzy on January 18, 2017 at 5:40 pm
      Reply
      
      Tenpel/Joc:
      Would it not be fair to expect Triratna’s alledged polocies would contaín a concept of “safeguarding”..?
    - 585
      
      tenpel on January 24, 2017 at 9:22 pm
      Reply
      
      (revised comment)
      
      Thank you for this Frenzy.
      
      Those European Triratna centres so far without safeguarding policies are in countries where there is so far no concept of “safeguarding”.
      
      What does that mean “countries where there is so far no concept of ‘safeguarding'”? It is not clear what it means therefore it is very ambiguous.
      
      Does it mean there is no concept of ‘safeguarding’ from the pov of government laws, or does it mean there are no people who care about ‘safeguarding’? Is there a concept of ‘safeguarding’ in Germany for instance? Does Triratna have ‘safeguarding’ policies in Germany?
      
      Is the concept of ‘safeguarding’ an invention of modern times which is imposed now newly on us? Do we have to install means that protect the leader, the group, the individuals from the abuse of power only when concepts of ‘safeguarding’ exist? If they not exist, does it mean we don’t have to care or consider to install them?
      
      IMO, the whole statement is not precise but very ambiguous. I think the problems you see start from this fuzziness. And maybe it is intentionally expressed that way or the person couldn’t express himself clearer.
      BTW, fuzziness is the common sign of so called “cults”. The fuzzier the things are expressed or communicated the easier reality can be ignored, hidden, bend or distorted.
      
      Now, with respect to Germany, of course the concept of ‘safeguarding’ exists. There are laws that prohibit state certified therapists to have sex with their clients. Such acts are punishable by law. Behind such a law is a concept of ‘safeguarding’ because the damage has been proven and understood and it is wished to protect clients from that harm. However, there are gray zones not covered by that law (sex between Heilpraktiker and their clients or spiritual teachers and their students etc.) But does this mean there is no concept of ‘safeguarding’? No. It has just not been extended to such situations. And while the US Spirit Rock Insight Meditation Center has clear ethics (call them safeguarding or not), including “A sexual relationship is never appropriate between teachers and students.”, does it mean because the German Buddhist Union did not set up such codes for German Buddhists that there is “no concept of ‘safeguarding'” in Germany? No. You can apply that way of reasoning to other countries and I guess it becomes clear that Tejananda has not well thought out what he said here.
      
      It would be good Tejananda can give a list of those countries in which Triratna has not installed safeguarding policies and from which Tejananda/Triratna assumes such countries don’t have a concept of “safeguarding” and then lets check if this is true or makes sense in any way.
      
      From the pov of compassion and genuine interest for the wellfare of others, not having safeguarding policies I see as sign of a lack of concern for others, a lack of compassion. If you have compassion and if you see/witness the abuse of power and dharma in Buddhism or religion a “concept of “safeguarding” will naturally manifest. I think you don’t need lawyers to develop that 😉
      
      I found it inspiring reading many years ago The Sakya Monastery of Tibetan Buddhism’s Code of Conduct 2005. For details see here:
      Committing to ethics which counter any type of abuse, including child abuse 2012/07/11
      
      I think the Buddhists who set up this code of conduct didn’t have in mind if or if not a “concept of “safeguarding” exists in the US. It just feels like they had genuine concern for others and their own leaders. Note: safeguarding policies also protect the leader(s) of a religious body! Therefore, not installing such policies expresses also a lack of compassion (and ignorance) for the own leadership IMO.
      - 586
        
        frenzy on January 25, 2017 at 12:17 pm
        Reply
        
        Thank you for your reflections and thoughts on this Tenpel.
        Munisha’s mail definitaly creates more questions than that it answers. Especially ”fuzzy” as it is supossed to give information about ”safeguarding and ethical policies now enacted” in relation to Tejanandas articles, which is clearly refering to sexual misconduct (even serieus sexual misconduct) regarding teacher/student/attendee relationships. I completely agree her/this ”note” does not reflect actual genuine concern.
        It is worrysome she is not able to express herself clearer being both safeguarding (children and vulnareble adults?) ófficer and communication officer. (on top of the issue of conflicting interests…)
        I also wonder what exactly supports Tejananda’s adjusted assumtion that there are ”safeguarding and ethical policies now enacted at állmost all Triratna centres”. As there seem to be no such polocies, merely polocies for safeguarding children and vulnareble adults… Also indeed their revised ”model etical guidelines” – 2016 misses the clarity of the Spirit Rock’s ethical codes.
        I noticed furthermore it says ”Munisha Triratna’s European Safeguarding officer”. The request for a list (at least from her) of European countries that don’t have a concept of “safeguarding” and (for her to) check if this makes sense therefor seems very ligitimed.
        
        587
        
        frenzy on January 25, 2017 at 12:45 pm
        Reply
        
        worrysome íf she i not able to express herself clearer
        
        588
        
        tenpel on January 25, 2017 at 4:19 pm
        
        Yes. It can also be unintentionally based on self censorship, it could chosen deliberately to communicate in such unclear ways. However, fuzziness is a common mark of so called “cults.”
        
        589
        
        frenzy on January 25, 2017 at 3:17 pm
        Reply
        
        And as she is speaking as Triratna’s European Safeguarding officer it makes no sense to me at all she says ”People in other countries don’t like being told what to do by the British”…
  - 590
    
    NO NAME on January 18, 2017 at 6:04 pm
    Reply
    
    Sorry , but this is BS
    if you can make rules for communities and, from the UK, tell people in India and elsewhere they will be thrown out or sanctioned for going against moral principles, you can suggest to all centers worldwide that they agree to the implementation of a safeguarding policy and withdraw their status if they do not
    The whole concept of legally autonomous centers is a convenient legal get out clause for just situations as this. Elsewhere, when Lingwood ordered the name change, the whole Order jumped and centers internationally leaped into line and changed their names literally overnight. No vote was taken and the change was imposed from the top down internationally without any dissent being taken on board-the real reason for the name change [Google search showing the FWBO Files in its top 3 for 10 years, no matter how hard FWBO IT eggheads tried to change it] was deliberately hidden and Dennis invented some s;;;t about the the Order having become ‘international’.
    
    Apparently, Munisha doesnt agree.When it suits Triratna it is a ‘worldwide community’; when it does not, it becomes a ‘collection of legally autonomous centres’
    
    I wonder if the real reason dharma politician Munisha doesnt want this is because it increases the numerical possibility of someone reporting Sr to the police? After all, the more people obliged to report abuse if they detect it, even retrospectively, the more chance Dennis will wind up behind bars [perhaps he can wear an orange Guantanamo suit on the refuge tree?]
    - 591
      
      frenzy on January 18, 2017 at 10:14 pm
      Reply
      
      Well if safeguarding is in place at adhisthana we will see what it is worth…
592

Stephen on January 15, 2017 at 1:49 pm
Reply

Thank you for this contribution Tejananda. It is indeed heartening to see Order Members such as yourself and Aparimana leading the way in opening up the thatch. Thank you for your bravery and courage in making this significant public post.
593

No name on January 15, 2017 at 2:32 pm
Reply

Dear Tejananda
While we might differ over some of the issues you raise, in general this post ( along with Aparimana’s) shows greater wisdom and openness than has been exhibited from within the Order for two decades. I have just seen the Files author who read your post and, while he too feels that your analysis has some flaws ( in particular the value apportioned to the recent ‘apology’), overall he too was impressed deeply by the wisdom of your perspective. Let us hope that the college of preceptors have the wisdom to move forward in the direction you here set and begin to address the other elephants in the Triratna room, such as recompense for survivors and the removal of false and misconduct facilitating doctrines from within Triratnas spiritual curriculum
In the short term, thank you for what you are doing. It’s great for the dharma and has the potential to restore Triatnas credibility in the eyes of Buddhists everywhere
Shabash
594

No name on January 15, 2017 at 5:32 pm
Reply

Just reading a passage from a book by Michael Dillon ( Lobsang Jivaka) the transsexual who lived with S in Kalimpong.
Dillon told S, in the strictest confidence, that he had been born a woman. When Dillon applied for bhikshu ordination, S went behind his back and told his prospective preceptors about this, thus preventing him from receiving full ordination at the time. S told Dillon in retrospect that he did this to “protect the reputation of the dharma and the sangha”
The hypocrisy of this leaves me flabbergasted. To think what S was up to at the time, not to mention the perversions he introduced subsequently into the dharma path and those he carried out as part of his ‘experiment’ while wearing the robe is beyond belief.
595

Tejananda on January 16, 2017 at 11:07 am
Reply

Thanks for the kind and constructive comments, Tenpel and others. I trust that things are moving forward, but don’t underestimate the fact that we still have a long way to go. Nevertheless, I’m fairly optimistic.

Metta to all, Tejananda
596

No name on January 16, 2017 at 7:09 pm
Reply

With all due respect to Tej and A for their excellent contributions, Is that it then? It’s taken 500 postings to get a couple of OMs to talk sense. We need more. There are so many questions to be answered. We need to know what is being done to help survivors and we need to know how Triratna are going to address the issue of non Buddhist teachings being passed off as dharma. It’s all very well S admitting that his teachings have more to do with his personality than dharma but which ones is he speaking of? Surely, Triratna doctrine must be subject to scrutiny and faults removed, as was the way with the early Buddhist Councils
This current, excellent change of direction in the Order must not be treated as an end; it is just the beginning
We must siege this moment and move forward, for the benefit of all Otherwise, this is all talk
- 597
  
  tenpel on January 16, 2017 at 9:53 pm
  Reply
  
  Yes, it’s just the start. We have to see how it proceeds and how much honesty and sincerity is been put into the changes.
- 598
  
  frenzy on January 16, 2017 at 11:56 pm
  Reply
  
  I can emphasize your frustration no name.
  It seems obvious the current situation reflects that the issues are indeed profound ”in that the entire doctrinal structure of the Order is not actually Dharmic, and supports a cultish set of social norms”…
  Aparimana says that he is not convinced that there is any future for the Order.
  Adressing the issues the way A and T do does not imply we must assume their analysis is met with much genuine apriciation (as in that is will lead to more accountability, corrections, specifics about what the appologies are for and ammends) by the Order in general or the Preceptors college.
599

No name on January 16, 2017 at 7:11 pm
Reply

Seize
600

joc on January 17, 2017 at 4:32 pm
Reply

I am posting this in two places here and on Truth and Reconciliation (Triratna) facebook group:

Why is an order member allowed to spread rumours which were already rumours according to him such as Mark threatening to kill Sr? This gets spread to mitra and newcomers without Mark even knowing about it. I have just seen another very nasty portrayal of Mark by order member V. Would any order member like to comment on how this stuff keeps getting reinforced with no right to read or reply from the person it claims to be about? Shame, shame, shame on this one sided boys’ club. This is the second time this week that I have heard or read about Mark trying to murder Sr …..
A woman in Norwich told me some time ago that Sr had fled to London to escape Mark, ‘his jilted gay lover’ because his life was in danger.
She has swallowed this rubbish as truth. This is so dangerous. Really awful.

This ‘It is common knowledge’ stuff is what has fuelled the denials and defamation of those harmed. It is a sick continuation of the harm. It is what ‘The Triratna Story’ reinforces to the detriment of those harmed and to mislead newcomers and mitra. It really stinks. (Oh yes, it is expressed in a way that is acceptable to whoever edits or manages these order only spaces.No negative mental states …..just a nasty one-sided portrayal with opinion presented as fact and no right to read or reply.
- 601
  
  No name on January 17, 2017 at 10:28 pm
  Reply
  
  Karmabandu
  I wanted to repost these qs so you don’t miss them, after reading something you wrote on family life
  I read with some concern your views on Buddhism and family elsewhere and wonder……..
  Are you aware that the Buddha’s description of family life as a ‘narrow, dusty way’ was addressed to an aspirant who was considering an ascetic lifestyle? Are you aware that elsewhere, in the Mangala Sutta, Lord Buddha stated that protecting ones parents and caring for children is “the highest blessing”? What relevance do you think these two views bear on contemporary, Western religious life?
  Are you aware that historically, of the major schools of Tibetan Buddhism ( Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu, Kadam, Gelug) only ONE (Gelug) was founded by a monastic?
  Are you aware of the view held outside the Order that S deliberately misled lay followers over this issue, manipulating them to a perspective of aversion to family life by reference to the scriptures designed specifically for ascetic aspirants?
  I note you are a parent. Do you feel parenthood has enhanced or diminished your good qualities?
  Where do you stand on S view of the family as “the enemy of the spiritual community”?
  Which perspective in terms of its benefits to the majority of Western Buddhists practicing the teachings of the Buddhist traditions do you consider to be most beneficial in the contemporary Western setting: that which encourages a positive and supportive view of family life or that which condemns it?
  Can you see how it might be considered plausible by some that S deliberately twisted the Buddha’s words on family so as to build male, single sex communities where he could then procure sexual partners? Do you believe this may have been part of his motivation?
  Finally, and entirety hypothetically, if the whole world were to convert to Buddhism and chose to abandon family life and live in single sex communities, practicing “attachment free” same sex sex, how long do you think Buddhism and civilisation would last?
  - 602
    
    No name on January 25, 2017 at 12:18 pm
    Reply
    
    Karmabandhu
    Now you’re back, how about answering these questions? Also, if the Order has changed its teachings on family, why is Padmavajra still teaching anti family views during men’s ordination retreats?
603

joc on January 19, 2017 at 7:05 pm
Reply

I have been asked on T&R to indicate some anti-family / anti-women ‘teaching’ that is still in public domain and readily accessible. There is soooooo much. For example: Bob: Do you anticipate that as the New Society gets bigger that we will develop a system in
which children will be brought up, you have said quite a lot against the family, so if we are
going to abolish the family are we going to provide an alternative?
S: well, We don’t abolish the family so much as abolish the nuclear family. I mean you have
got males and females that means you have got potential mothers and fathers. Some of those
potential mothers are going to become actual mothers and some of these potential fathers are
going to became actual fathers. Whether they are,… even though they happen to live in
Women’s communities and Men’s communities or even Strict women’s communities !
(laughter) It’ll happen somehow !(laughter) Well all right, that is the situation, well what are
you going to do about it? Well I think the best thing is that after birth the child remains with
the mother in a community of either women or women and children. The girls remain there
indefinitely, the boys remain there until they are old enough to move into a men’s community.
I mean the age to be determined according to the needs of the child. I don’t see any real
problem in this at all. It seems quite straightforward.
Pete: Do you think that a boy brought up in a women’s community would be OK.?
S: He should be removed much earlier than the girl needs to. I mean I am not quite sure what
the best age would be, but I don’t think that a boy should stay beyond say eight years. After
that he should be,. maybe there should be communities that.. where men who especially want
to devote themselves to bring up and educating boys. Communities in that case would be
perhaps schools at the same time, until the … just talking off the cuff a bit. You could have a
spiritual community-cum-school. I mean at Padmaloka we’ve got a community member who
came when he was fifteen…

Are people on this site concerned about Sr’s / Lingwood’s vision? And the fact that this has relatively recently been uploaded as audio and transcript for worldwide use? (There is nothing on any of the pages to indicate that this is not Triratna’s position. It features as Sr in full flow teaching student disciples.
604

No name on January 21, 2017 at 1:05 am
Reply

https://thebuddhistcentre.com/news/letter-triratnas-college-preceptors
https://thebuddhistcentre.com/news/statement-urgyen-sangharakshita
The Triratna College of Preceptors have issued a statement in support of Sangharakshitas pretend apology
I would invite any interested parties to read these, form their own opinions about that they do and don’t say, then post responses here
One thing is clear. Three issues need to addressed before the Ordeer can move. o
1) proper safeguarding policies for students and teachers ( not ‘children and vulnerable adults’) need to be finalised and implemented
2) A genuine and sincere apology, outlining what has occurred needs to be issued and real help for survivors and victims provided, including where appropriate compensation
3) Those teachings which bear ‘the marks of Sangharakshitas personality’ as he put it must be identified and taken out of circulation- Triratna members have argued that. certain of these teachings are no longer relevantand there is therefore no need fr concern. Some of these ideas are so dangerous and abuse facilitating that they need to be removed from the public domain. Otherwise, they may be perpetuated.

Those pointing out abuse have been told that the abuse that occurred at S hands should be considered acceptable because of the era in which it occurred. (” This was the 60s and everyone was experimenting sexual) It was therefore nor ‘abuse’

If I whip a black slave and call him nigger, we know that as slavery and racism. Following the above reasoning, beating and racially abusing someone 150 years ago was neither slavery nor was it racist.

Elsewhere we find the claim that the Triratna Order is not a hierarchical organization ( with corporate responsibility) but merely a collection off legally independent entities. this claim comes from the same people who refer to themselves as an ‘international organization’, with a system of ranking members ( Mithras, ordained Mithras, Private Prececptors, public preceptors- they even where different markings on keys sac to indicate rank).
This flimsy tactic to deny any mutual or corporate responsibility is used to justify inaction where action is sorely needed. It is an argument that conveniently exonerates all from within the Order from either accepting responsibility for past. indiscretions or assuming responsibility for shaping the future
The sooner Order members realise they have been duped into playing the role of Guinea pig n make it up as you go along experiment by a sexually obsessed mad professor, the sooner perhaps they will be able to take their heads out of the sand and their fingers from their ears and wake up into the 21st century Western Buddhist world. Until they do so, they will remain the objects of suspicion and derision that the last 30 years have shown them to be.
There is a sense in the Order that they are a spiritual elite, the only Buddhists genuinely ‘going for refuge’ ( an act which takes place formally each day in ALL traditions when Buddhists recite their prayers and in practice, whenever they applying harm and principles to their mental continuum) The reality is that, from outside the Order, they are widely recognised among other Buddhists as a cult and as such, objects of contempt and derision, as well as of compassion and pity.
If ever they are to be treated seriously and occupy the place the dedicated practice of some of their followers genuinely merit, they will have to address the three issues outlined above.
- 605
  
  No name on January 21, 2017 at 1:08 am
  Reply
  
  Applying harm? Auto complete rides again
- 606
  
  tenpel on January 21, 2017 at 3:03 pm
  Reply
  
  Just read the statement by the Triratna College of Preceptors.
  
  What came to my mind is:
  
  1) It must be painful to be forced to address these things again and again in the public.
  I appreciate and respect that its been faced and dealt with. Its by far better than denial and attack an approach recently chosen by Rigpa/SR.
  It is hard to follow this way of facing and acknowledgement. However, I think it’s the only way that does justice to those been harmed and that can form a basis for truthfulness and honesty which are the pillars for any spiritual progress or a healthy community that enables spiritual growth. Truthfulness and honesty are also pillars of the Bodhistattva path and bodhicitta.
  
  2) the statement is very short in considering the pain done to those been harmed. In fact those been harmed are the only ones who are doubted in the letter “can make it hard to know what is accurate” – there is no doubt at all that Sr or the Order leadership might not have been accurate. Instead, a lot of emphasise is placed on issuing loyalty and sticky fellowship to Sr.
  
  3) there are no thoughts whatsoever, that the presented doctrine by Sr should be investigated / carefully reconsidered (which was at least addressed in Sr’s own Open Letter – a mix of the unenlightened qualities of his personality in the presentation of what he taught or presented to be the dharma). This is a crucial topic as the discussion and details shared here and elsewhere have shown – e.g. the claimed superiority of same gender sex over heterosexual relations/family, the demand of rather invasive relationships with praise of sex between teacher and student as a means for spiritual progress etc.)
  
  4) there is no trial or offer to council the harm with a proper third party organisation, like http://www.an-olive-branch.org/ which Tejananda suggested but instead the College of Preceptors seems to want to deal within the limitations of the organisation with the limitations of that organisation and its founder. How can this ever be healing and lead one beyond one’s limitations?
  
  These are my quick thoughts after having read the statement by the College of Preceptors and without having read no name’s comment.
  What do others think?
  - 607
    
    No name on January 21, 2017 at 3:57 pm
    Reply
    
    Totally agree TP but
    “1) It must be painful to be forced to address these things again and again in the public” is inaccurate. Why?
    The addressing has only just started: the allegations have been surfacing and resurfacing for 40 years or more. They have never been addressed. The response to the Guardian from Kulananda( Michael Chaskelson) in 97(?) was a pack of lies, and the Triratna Story was/ is a total whitewash- these have been mirrored by the narrative within the Order until now. It’s taken at least 20 years since the FWBO Files for the Order to admit the truth and TRY TO BEGIN addressing the issues raised therein
    - 608
      
      tenpel on January 21, 2017 at 4:10 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you no name for this correction!
  - 609
    
    frenzy on January 21, 2017 at 4:03 pm
    Reply
    
    It is so good the complexity of issues and Triratna’s enduring hypocracy are now discussed and criticised openly. I also indeed miss the selfcritisism, the aknowleding of the ”cultic social norms” in how the issues fom the past were complicated and coumpounded to the suffering as well as how they are still effective.
    - 610
      
      tenpel on January 21, 2017 at 4:28 pm
      Reply
      
      Its really somewhat self-revealing that there is no direct or real self-criticism but rather scepticism over accounts by those been harmed … .e.g “though it is always hard to know precisely what happened”.
      
      However, its already something to say “the more complex and problematic aspects of our history”. You wouldn’t read any such sentence from the NKT or Rigpa, that’s why I really appreciate that there is at least a basic acknowledgement of the problems – though not as sincere, open, self-aware or compassionate as I or others would wish. Of course, it matters also if this more open approach is meant honestly or if it is just part of a damage control strategy suggested by skilful PR strategists. I have no clue about the motivations behind it and highly likely these are also mixed/complex.
      
      The lack of compassion I see in this statement, the sceptical approach to those who have been harmed combined with long elaborations of expression of total loyalty towards Sr and the order is somewhat self-revaling. If ideology is placed over the welfare of the individual then the life force of the Dharma – especially Mahayana dharma – which is great compassion (great= all beings without exceptions + taking responsibility to alleviate their suffering) is cut off. Groups with inhuman, fanatical or fundamentalist tendencies tend to place ideology over the well being of the individual. The individual must fit into the doctrine. This undermines compassion & wisdom or “the wisdom of individuality” (one of the five types of wisdom associated with the lotos family of Buddha Amithaba which also counters attachment.) Cults tend to lack totally that “wisdom of individuality” and compassion – thought they might speak a lot about compassion and wisdom.
611

NO NAME on January 21, 2017 at 5:52 pm
Reply

I wonder if Lingwoods apology to non Triratna Buddhists extends to Gary Beesley for writing the FWBO Files [particularly now, when it seems so much of what he wrote is being confirmed?

What about the Dfes enquiry he instigated into the FWBO, where Order representatives were accused of attempting to insert a false, abuse facilitating doctrine [‘Not over identifying with ones sexuality’] into a secondary school, locally agreed syllabus?

At the time, the Order wriggled out of it by claiming this phrase referred to “the level of a beings desire”, despite its use to denote gender preference at the time being practically universal. Through such sophistry, helped along by the fact that the FWBO education officer was a close colleague of the supposedly neutral Dfes advisor, the Order escaped scrutiny, though they were forced to change the contentious phrase.

In retrospect, one can see that encouraging teenagers not to ‘over identify with their sexuality’ could very easily be stage one in converting youngsters into willing abuse victims/members of the ‘New Society’; 1st question ones sexuality, 2nd try an alternative perspective, and so on, all the way into Dennis’s bed?

Beesley was vilified, Standing Advisory Councils told to ignore him, along with NASACRE and the Interfaith Network UK, mainly because the Order had infiltrated these at every level

Now it looks as though the allegations were true and the unknowing [?] Buddhist who attempted to insert the non-Buddhist doctrine of not following ones supposed gender preference [which is what it boils down to] was actually complicit in attempt to create the building blocks for his New Society, young willing victims for him to abuse while they believed this would lead them beyond their ‘conditioning’ into the ‘old ways’.

Was it wrong to point this out, especially considering all we know now? Is it right that Beesley has been condemned and vilified throughout educational and buddhist circles for decades because he pointed out the truth? Is this an apology for that vilification? Perhaps an OM here could ask Munisha, since she was the FWBO chief education officer at this time. Do tell; Om sure hes all ears???
- 612
  
  tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 1:18 am
  Reply
  
  Someone sent me this link:
  
  To untangle the distortions would need some effort. A friend commented offline:
  
  You really have to be someone who has received initiation and understands the processes to realise how bad this really is. To a non Buddhist it might even seem good spirited and relaxed- there are just so many faux pas in the video- she even critiques monasticism and makes a joke about a man painting his genitalia, exposing himself while saying ” how’s that for the three jewels”
  
  There seems to be more confusion in Triratna than in the NKT. I think it would be wise to seek proper teachings and guidance outside of Triratna by genuine and well educated teachers. This seems to be even more important considering this statement someone sent me in that context too:
  
  I had a lot of discussions with Triratna people. Their idea of refuge, bodhichitta, etc. was very strange. Their best aspect was compassion. But they had no teachings on Lojong, or on wisdom. After years in the group.
  
  You had to become a Mitra to get more teachings. And to do that you had to promise to only for for refuge to Triratna for the rest of your life.
  - 613
    
    No name on January 22, 2017 at 11:53 am
    Reply
    
    If this weren’t so serious an issue it might be funny
    Yet here we have, on a public forum for all to see the Triratna version of a ‘tantric teaching’
    Has this person received the relevant initiations?. Have they completed the ngondro ? Have they completed collection of mantras required to even think one might be qualified to discuss this practice publicly?
    Let’s face it, the commentator doesn’t even know how to say the word dakini ( dark eenie?) let alone have any qualification to give teachings on. the subject
    Elsewhere we find completely incorrect version so of the mani mantra, the Vajraguru mantra and the white Tara mantra: in the Triratna prayer book, they even transliterated the phrase ‘ ha ha’ as ” laughter”
    And yet Order members refer to their cult as the only serious Buddhist organization in the West, at ” the vanguard” of western Buddhism.
    They even dare to refer to heir ‘tradition’ as three vehicle Buddhism when, as can be seen from the above and elsewhere, they don’t even have one functioning vehicle. One wonders whether this ignorance mirrors the fact th S himself never received any serious tantric teachings. In such a situation I guess you don’t have any choice but to make it up as you go along.
    In summary,hat we have here is evidence, not that these naive innocents are the guardians of the dharma, but rather they are destroyers of it, with their negative attitudes towards monasticism ( “as long as the vinaya exists, the lamp of the dharma will exist” the Buddha) and the secrecy of the tantras, this Order represents one of thte greatest threats to Dharmas existence in recent history
    - 614
      
      tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 1:06 pm
      Reply
      
      I think I wouldn’t go so far. Just practicing metta & shamatha is a worthwhile thing which can bring great benefit.
      
      The problems start with unclear or distorted ethics or if confusion, attachment or hate is been justified or increased by wrong teachings.
      
      I am concerned when I see that the acting out of attachments and confusion (old men’s sexual desire for young men, running around naked/exhibitionism etc) gets justified with distorted or misguiding dharma explanations. The dharma is not used as a mirror to question one’s egoistic limitations or habits but to justify them. With such an approach neither egoism nor the kleshas (afflicting emotions) can be reduced or overcome, no nirvana can be achieved. One is just bound more deeply into samsara and this approach increases bad habits and the causes of suffering. Such damage is not done to only oneself but to all who follow such teachings or misunderstandings.
      
      I wondered if we have to live with systems that have such limitations? As an outsider I think, yes. But I can choose not to follow such a misguided route and to say frankly that I regard this as wrong. Still, there are good aspects too.
      
      In the long run however if such acting out of desire and confusion is perceived to be buddha’s teachings western Buddhism indeed has a big problem.
      
      The hostility against monasticism or celibacy seems to be a mark of the strong clinging to one’s own desires. The point is totally missed that the Buddha said that non desire is highest bliss and that following desire is like licking honey on a razor blade.
      
      I think this shows how important the vinaya and monasticism is and that hostile approaches against them are only signs of one’s own confusion/attachments and in turn increase confusion/attachments and hostilities.
      
      Nevertheless, I wish all Buddhists from Triratna & Sangharakshita all the best.
      - 615
        
        frenzy on January 22, 2017 at 1:47 pm
        Reply
        
        Re Tenple: the acting out of desire while empasizing non attachment is odd at best but would you not consider seeing through the nature of desire (and aversion) the ”goal” rather then ”eradicating” desire? (the middle way vs ascetisme) Just to get your view clear.
        Is only a celibate buddhist monk cable of ”achieving” an áwakened state? As i would tend to disagree.
        
        616
        
        frenzy on January 22, 2017 at 2:01 pm
        Reply
        
        seeing the nature of desire (and aversion) rather then ”seeing through”
        
        617
        
        tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 3:00 pm
        Reply
        
        (revised comment)
        Hi Frenzy,
        there are different ways to deal with desire. Seeing the nature of desire (and aversion) is one way.
        
        If “seeing the nature” in that context refers to their lack of independent existence such wisdom about their ultimate nature (emptiness, selflessness) will lead to Nirvana. In the state of Nirvana, there is no desire anymore. All levels of desire (pertaining to the desire, form- and formless realm) and their seeds have been overcome – forever! – have been eradicated. Taking this understanding as a basis of investigation, it becomes clear that eradicating desire and aversion is the final aim or result. However, on the way to achieve that final aim, just being aware of desire (and aversion) (practice of mindfulness), seeing their ontological nature (meditation on emptiness) or just learning to understand how they function (analytical meditations) are prefect means to that final aim and can be also temporal goals or steps.
        
        What makes me a bit perplex watching the video is that there is both, the mentioning of the overcoming of desire while at the same time Vajrayogini is introduced in a way that it appears to be a method to live to the full of your desires.
        But Vajrayogini practice is a method to overcome desire (+ignorance and hate). She is especially suited for people who have a lot of sexual desire – at least this was told to me. But you can’t overcome your sexual desire by running around naked, painting you penis in three colours and showing your genitals to the world. Such behaviour is based on likes. And likes are most often based on attachment. Misunderstanding Vajrayogini practice to find complete expression in following your likes – and risking thereby to increase your attachments – highly likely won’t overcome or reduce those attachments but nourish, sustain and increase them. Therefore, this approach very easily might become (or might be already) a deluded, self-harming process from a spiritual perspective.
        
        From a mundane perspective it might be wonderful or “liberating” to find justifications to run around naked. I have nothing against it from a mundane perspective. People should and can enjoy their lives, likes and preferences. I am happy for them. I was a hedonist myself before I turned towards Buddhism and (maybe) if you have nothing else, this is the best you can do as long as it doesn’t harm others. However, if I (or we) consider this topic from the pov of the Dharma (Buddha’s teachings, including the tantras) and from the pov of spiritual progress aiming towards the liberation of the mind (aiming to achieve niravna; nirvana which includes the total pacification of the fetters & freedom from samsara), this is IMO a totally mistaken approach.
        
        I doesn’t make me wonder if there is more confusion. Not only this, there must be more confusion if such things are taught publicly and are not countered within the movement but, rather (I guess) embraced because it fits so well the own desires …
        
        618
        
        frenzy on January 22, 2017 at 4:14 pm
        
        Thank you tenpel for your clear respond!
        It is good to avoid making a caricature of Triratna. It is by my knowledge not a regular practice to run around naked with painted genitals. 🙂
        
        619
        
        tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 5:36 pm
        
        We must be fair to all sides! Nobody is helped by drawing a caricature of Triratna.
        
        (Though, from the side of good humour and insight, however, a caricature can be very useful if it helps to get a point…)
        
        620
        
        Triratnavisitor on January 22, 2017 at 9:24 pm
        
        Tenpel, I think you have arrived here at the central problem with Triratna, which is that they have turned the aim of Buddhism from the cessation of suffering to the fulfilment of some notion of personal potential. I have heard a senior order member, in a public lecture which will be on one of their many websites somewhere, state that this is what the Four Noble Truths are really about. I do not know, but I suspect that this is the product of Sr’s attempt to infuse Buddhism with aspects of Western thought, including neo-Platonism and Romanticism, plus a desire to fashion a philosophy which immediately appeals to 20th century Westeners. It is, of course, a recipe for narcissism.
        
        This is somewhat speculative. It is difficult to work out what they believe – they don’t interact with the rest of the Buddhist world much, and they won’t tell you unless you become one of their Mitras. I believe however that a significant number of Order members may have adopted a traditional Buddhism while remaining in Triratna out of sentiment or inertia. In spite of the cult like characteristics there is a diversity of approach in the Order I believe.
        
        621
        
        tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 10:58 pm
        
        Thank you for your thoughts and feedback.
        
        I observed also that there are order members who sooner or later are not really satisfied within Triratna and start to look around at other groups and start to go and listen to non-Triratna teachers. Though this is not really endorsed but rather discouraged by the Triratna leadership (“we have all what you need” is one of the claims some former followers told me), it appears there is no real big pressure (unlike NKT or Nydahl) to withstand to look outside of the group or to visit Buddhist teachers from other traditions (or to go to other Buddhist centres or places etc not being part of Triratna group identity). The cases I got to know, the Triratna leadership or fellow order members were not really happy with it but tolerated it.
        
        Yes, clearly there must be diversity.
        
        622
        
        No name on January 23, 2017 at 7:00 am
        
        Problem is, these inexperienced unqualified. Students go to genuine teachers, receive teachings and even initiations, then go back to the order and give lectures on their understanding..
        Prakasha sneaked into a VY wang and a few months later gave a course on the practice
        Unqualified.
        
        623
        
        tenpel on January 23, 2017 at 5:04 pm
        
        Oh. Oh.
        
        624
        
        frenzy on January 23, 2017 at 8:05 am
        
        I agree about the diversity, i know they are trying to integrate insight pratice more these days also. A lot of people must find themselves in an akward position, though it doesn’t counterargue any of their mayor issues in regard to the confusion in the teaching still in many places of the movement, the denial still going on, the cultic social norms, the powerstuctures etc.
        Tenpel could you remove my post from januari 22 12,26 pm..? It seems better in place here.
        ”I think the teaching of concepts and interesting storytelling, no mather how enthusiast, is bit of a problem in Triratna… I have the experience their insight practices are actually mostly reserved for Ordermembers (and focusses on sadana and reflecting on the elements) thus IMO making insight practice an elite thing. It must be said that inside this framework there have been rebels and poineers, bringing together shamatha and vipassana practice, making vipassana available for a broader public, with teaching based in sati.
        It is not uncommon though to not being introduced to, for example, the three marks of existance till many years and many retereats and i came across a GFR (going for refuge) mitra who related to Pratītyasamutpāda as unconditioned reality.
        
        625
        
        NO NAME on January 22, 2017 at 3:08 pm
        Reply
        
        Re celibate monks-NO All types of practitioner can achieve the enlightened state-hence a very long and well established tradition of lay yogins in Tibet
        nb 3 of the 4 main sects in Tibet were founded by laymen. This renders the Triratna claim of its having a novel approach to buddhism because they are not monks but rather serious buddhist practitioners ridiculous There have always been serious lay practitioners since the time of the Buddha himself
        
        626
        
        tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 5:34 pm
        
        Re celibate monks-NO All types of practitioner can achieve the enlightened state-hence a very long and well established tradition of lay yogins in Tibet
        
        of course! it was not my intention to suggest or to claim you have to become an ordained or practice celibacy to attain one of the three types of bodhi.
        
        one of the lay practitioners, Dromtönpa the main desciple of Atisha, was even somewhat like the abbot for many monks though formally the abbot must be a fully ordained monk but they respected his high achievements including renunciation.
      - 627
        
        No name on January 22, 2017 at 5:18 pm
        Reply
        
        “I think I wouldn’t go so far. Just practicing metta & shamatha is a worthwhile thing which can bring great benefit.”
        Nevertheless such practices do not lead to liberation, only at best God realm rebirth
        To present ones vision as a path to enlightenment when it doesn’t do what it says on the tin is disingenuous . Even coupled with close placement of mindfulness on the elements as Frenzy suggested, it still looks scary other a complete path
        What they have done is cobbled together parts from three different cars, no need plans reticular I order, ing what th a a few bits of washing machine and then claimed they’re selling the Rolls Royce of Buddhism
        
        628
        
        tenpel on January 22, 2017 at 7:11 pm
        Reply
        
        Yes. The benefits of metta and calm abiding. That’s something. That’s good!!!
        
        True, it’s not wysiwyg. True, there are elements of self-deception and deceiving others either intentionally or unintentionally. True, you might find out your car doesn’t work as the ads promised.
        
        Therefore, people need to check what they sell and what they buy.
        
        True, a naughty attitude (as you find it in the NKT too) combined with the lofty proclamations about oneself in the light of plain reality make you a fool or a laughingstock.
  - 629
    
    frenzy on January 22, 2017 at 12:26 pm
    Reply
    
    I think the teaching of concepts and interesting storytelling, no mather how enthusiast, is bit of a problem in Triratna… I have the experience their insight practices are actually mostly reserved for Ordermembers (and focusses on sadana and reflecting on the elements) thus IMO making insight practice an elite thing. It must be said that inside this framework there have been rebels and poineers, bringing together shamatha and vipassana practice, making vipassana available for a broader public, with teaching based in sati.
    It is not uncommon though to not being introduced to, for example, the three marks of existance till many years and many retereats and i came across a GFR (going for refuge) mitra who related to Pratītyasamutpāda as unconditioned reality.
    - 630
      
      No name on January 23, 2017 at 1:16 pm
      Reply
      
      Just realised CPP letter was a letter to OMs subliminally instructing that they continue to question the validity of allegations, despite ALL THE EVIDENCE. However it was also a letter to S, ensuring him of a) their continued unquestioning faith and b) their determination not to allow his own peculiar version of the teachings to be changed? And they want to be perceived as ‘open’? HA!
      - 631
        
        tenpel on January 24, 2017 at 12:40 am
        Reply
        
        I was asked to post this. It was leaked. The person who provided it said Björn gave his permission. The content proves the point no-name made in his last comment.
        
        Mahamati writes, 31st October 2016:
        “ I have written the attached with the aim of helping us all to understand the background to Björn *’s recent letters posted on Facebook. I guess that some of you reading this will not have seen these letters, which are about a time when he was visiting Bhante at the Madhyamaloka annexe in late 2002. What I write may not be relevant to you, however for those of you interested, or maybe even concerned, I hope that what I have written here will be of interest and helpful to you. I originally posted this on the Buddhist Centre Online Shabda Articles space on 20th October and this version newly posted on 31st October is very slightly amended in the first two paragraphs, including mention that I am now again in communication with Björn, otherwise the text remains the same.
        Response to letters on Facebook from Björn * by Mahamati
        It has been suggested that I could say something about Björn *’s time with Bhante in 2002, in addition to what Parami and I wrote to Order Convenors and others in 2012. This was posted again on 8th October on The Buddhist Centre Online on the Order Connection space in the thread arising from the BBC Inside Out (East)
        Björn and I had very warm communication at Madhyamaloka back in the early 2000s, including the period when he was spending time with Bhante. After he contacted me from Germany in 2012, again we had warm communication on Skype and exchanged quite a few emails. Very recently, near to the end of October, Björn contacted me again asking to speak, and we have had further positive communication by video Skype and also email which at the time of writing continues.
        I hope what I write sheds light on concerns which some Order members have ex- pressed in response to Björn’s most recent communications, addresses some of the questions that have come up, and provides a little more context should it be needed.
        Bhante has given us some indication of his experiences of the time when he was ill, from late 2002 for the best part of the next two years, in A Moseley Miscellany, under the title ‘A Season in Hell’ (this was originally published in Shabda). Björn was spending time with Bhante near the beginning of this period, in fact at a time when things were getting worse: As Bhante wrote, “The insomnia was cumulative in its ef-fect. Tiredness was piled on tiredness, suffering on suffering, torture on torture” (p.76). I spent a lot of time with Bhante during this period: he mentions me in this piece
        of writing: “Another friend who helped me was Mahamati. Once, when I was getting even less sleep than usual… he remained at my bedside all night, holding my hand and talking to me in a way that made the time pass more quickly” (p. 80).
        During the period when Björn was spending time with him Bhante was living alone in the annexe at Madhyamaloka and he told me that he realised that he had been living on his own for too long and that this had been a mistake. Soon after that, Michal (later to be ordained as Nityabandhu) moved to the Madhyamaloka annexe to live with
        Bhante and a very close friendship developed which of course continues to this day. So what actually happened when Björn was spending time with Bhante, in particular regarding any sexual contact, which naturally concerns Order members because of the contradictory accounts?
        There are a few times in my life when I have heard contradictory accounts of events both of which were believable but which could not both be true, and yet it was not possible to disbelieve either party. In my communication with Björn in 2012 I never I asked Bhante directly and although remembering many details of his time with Björn he told me that he does not recall ever being naked with him, nor touching him sexually. And, indeed, Bhante affirmed his celibacy since the late 1980s, which certainly coincides with everything I have ever heard. (I have heard that some Order members have been doubting this.)
        Soon after Björn contacted me in 2012 I arranged at his request for him to speak on the phone with Bhante. (Before that Björn had sent me a letter to read to him.) Bhante told me afterwards that he felt the conversation had gone well. However, Björn was upset and wrote to me that he felt that he could not talk with Bhante about their time together. I told Bhante, who said that he had been willing to speak with Björn about that, but he seemed to want more to talk about his issues to do with lineage and his questions in this respect about Bhante and Triratna.
        Before their phone call, I had told Björn that if he came to Birmingham Bhante would be willing to see him, and that I was sure that I could find the money to help him come. He was interested in visiting, however after the phone call he did not want to do this, which I felt sorry about. I felt it was a lost opportunity. About seven months later, he contacted me to say he would like to talk again with Bhante by phone. However I had to let him know that this was not possible as Bhante was not well. (This was February 2013, shortly before the move to Adhisthana.)
        Finally, I think it not at all in character that Bhante would have asked or wished for Björn to speak to no-one at all about the intimacies of their time together – it is not a matter of a request for ‘secrecy’.
        It looks from what Björn wrote to me (as well as to Bhante) in 2012 – and from what I gather he said at the time – that keeping confidences was not about sex but about be- ing with Bhante when he was openly vulnerable and in need of support. It seems that Bhante did not want this to be the subject of discussion far and wide; however, if Björn had said that he wanted to speak to a few friends – which after a while, of course, he did do – I am sure that Bhante would not have objected.
        If Björn’s account is correct, they had both agreed that, in Björn’s own words, “others don’t need to know”, but later on, and understandably, Björn realised that it was too much for him to keep to himself. By his own account he felt that he was bearing the burden of Bhante’s confidences, his emotions, vulnerability, all on his own; and he was disappointed that Bhante seemed to him not willing to be publicly vulnerable. So, as he explains in one of his letters, he spoke with some others at Madhyamaloka.
        Bhante came to hear about this in a roundabout way and probably felt that he was be- ing called to account for allowing Björn to come so close to him; so when Björn next met up with him he found that Bhante was upset and from then on their friendship was not the same.
        I have heard that some Order members have asked how those of us living at Madhyamaloka at the time “allowed” this to happen i.e. allowed Björn – a youngish Mitra in his mid to late twenties – to come so close to Bhante at a time when Bhante was vulnerable. In a way this is a fair question. However, although perhaps in retrospect we could have headed off a situation which sadly did not end well, I think it is under- standable that this did not occur to us at the time: Björn was not with Bhante in any official capacity, but simply as a friend and, especially given Bhante’s ill health, I was glad for Bhante to have the companionship of any of his friends at that time.’’
        
        632
        
        NO NAME on January 24, 2017 at 8:04 am
        Reply
        
        Whitewash-Bjorn was used for sex, just like dozens of other young men were. I suggest Triratna seniors read this and look at themselves.
        
        Remember the BITE model of cult characteristics?
        
        Four Aspects of Mind Control
        (as it relates to people in cults)
        
        1) INFORMATION CONTROL:
        
        Important information which is available to the general public is withheld from members and potential members.
        Deception is the basic feature of all cult recruitment. It is also what keeps people inside cults.
        Information is one of the best weapons against cults.
        In cults information about the cult’s history, purposes, doctrines, financial disclosures, methods of dealing with problems, counseling, training, and discipline for offenses are kept as confidential as possible.
        Only those members with trusted status are allowed inside information.
        
        2) THOUGHT CONTROL:
        
        “Truth” and reality are distorted for those inside the group by subtly changing the definitions of common terms with new meanings through the use of code words, cliches, and slogans.
        Different words make the members feel special and separate from outsiders.
        These different words confuse outsiders who want to understand what the group believes and talks about.
        The change in definitions of significant words keeps even the members from understanding their own beliefs.
        Leaders of cults repress questions by conditioning their members to employ “thought-stopping” statements, prayers, hymns, Bible verses, mantras, tongues or rituals to drown out doubt, questions, anxiety or uncertainty. “I can’t think about that.” “How can you question (the leaders) after all they have done?” etc. The intention is to stop questions regarding the system or leaders.
        The word “faith” is employed in a negative sense. Members are conditioned to view “faith” in terms of blind submission to the leaders, rather than positive certainity in God’s love.
        Members are conditioned to feel guilty for any curiosity about what is going on within the group; curiosity is a lack of faith. (Therefore, even after some people leave a mind control group, they may be afraid to examine information which explains the background of their old belief system.)
        Typically, the word “grace” has a different meaning from the Biblical use. The “God” of the group is also different from the God of the Bible. God is defined by, and eventually becomes the group.
        
        3) EMOTION CONTROL:
        
        Guilt, fear and shame are projected onto the members, prompting blame toward themselves for their depression, lack of understanding, anxiety, or inability to cope, rather than examining the leaders, the group’s policies, history, doctrines, scandals, and at times, even crimes.
        Phobic attitudes or behaviors are sometimes noticeable when attempts are made to converse with members regarding their belief in the group or its leaders.
        Fear, anger, rage or repetitious statements which only go in circles keep the members from thinking through to any rational conclusions.
        Fear of confrontation with family is common, resulting in very few people being rescued.
        
        4) BEHAVIOR CONTROL:
        
        Tight control of behavior secures the leaders’ position of authority and importance.
        The behavior control impresses members and outsiders to view the group as especially spiritual or successful.
        The leaders link the required behavior to their special “revelation” of a text of scripture. However the required behaviors are usually superficial controls, affecting appearances and outward activity rather than inward character. These can include grooming, daily activities, career choices, clothing, specific technology, posture, speech mannerisms, food choices, recreation, education, even decisions about marriage, sex and children. (They usually do not deter moral sin.)
        If a person does not conform, he may be urged to become more like an older group member; to follow the leaders’ “example”.
        OBEDIENCE TO THE HUMAN LEADERS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT LESSON TO LEARN.
        The leaders cannot totally control one’s inner thoughts, but if they can command behavior, hearts and minds will usually follow.
        The behavior control isolates the members from society even more effectively.
        
        633
        
        NO NAME on January 24, 2017 at 8:25 am
        
        Most people believe there is truth and there are lies. “Alternative facts” are lies.
        
        634
        
        frenzy on January 24, 2017 at 9:52 am
        
        I am reposting this, from december 2, 2016:
        https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByPI1gZWqGl7M2ZobXV0b2FLYWs/edit?filetype=msword
        Summary, by Björn:
        ”Dennis Lingwood is the perceived head of the organization ‘Triratna’ (formerly the ‘FWBO’). Seemingly out of gratitude for the transmission of Buddhadharma to the West, it looks as if his disciples were ready to fulfill him every wish. However, he did not leave the tradition as it is (which is impossible to grasp for one person, anyway), but he changed it to suit his own needs in terms of lifestyle and sexuality. His opinion was that women are occupied with reproduction and family, whereas men find it easier to transcend themselves. Thus, he encouraged heterosexual men to let go of their attachment to femininity, by having sex with men. It seems like there was a sex-rota for him at ‘Padmaloka’, the main center for ‘men who have asked for ordination’, in the seventies and early eighties – a rota to have sex with him. He also made up his own refuge tree, that people prostrated to (including myself); he changed traditional mantras, such as a mantra for protection during pregnancy, into his own longevity mantra, that many people recite, even now. When I was his assistant, employed at ‘FWBO Central’, he was quite free to build a relationship of trust with me. It seemed like he was ill, and in need of help. Officially, he was supposed to be celibate, as a so-called ‘anagarika’. However, as I was so in awe of him, I also tried to fulfill him wishes. He was intimate with me; not in terms of physical coercion; I was vulnerable to the projections I had on him; he got sexually aroused by that. When I told a colleague in this institution, Dennis immediately withdrew his ‘friendship’. Afterwards, I left my job, and a number of consequences ensued, gradually leading to illnesses (brain tumor), loss of employment opportunities, and loss of the family home. I tried to still protect Dennis’ reputation for quite a while, but when I heard that Dennis had done this with quite a number of young men, I went to the police; usually cases of sexual abuse are handled by the criminal police.
        The reason why I call it abuse is because this individual created a separation between a public world, where he can appear in public as an ‘anagarika’ (celibate/homeless wanderer), and privately as a lover who breaks young men’s attachment to reproduction and feminity.”
        
        635
        
        tenpel on January 24, 2017 at 11:43 am
        
        Thank you for this. It is important to give Björn’s account space and light.
        
        636
        
        frenzy on January 24, 2017 at 10:01 am
        
        And ( a part of) Aparimana ‘s post, of january 13, 2017:
        
        ”Someone asked whether any Order Members were aware when Bjorn made his allegations, and what they did about it.
        
        I received an email containing Bjorn’s letter, I think this must have been not long after he wrote it. I believe it was distributed quite widely by email, I am not sure by whom, though it was followed by an Order Office email asking everyone to delete every copy they had of the document!
        
        I did nothing more than write to Bjorn thanking him for writing the letter and expressing how important I believed it to be (this was some time later, when I found out how to contact him on Facebook).
        
        I consider myself thoroughly free from any need to reverence Sangharakshita, but as an Order Member, it was not obvious what to do, beyond offering a little support to Bjorn.”
        
        637
        
        frenzy on January 24, 2017 at 11:32 am
        
        As now, if i undersand correctly, Triratna has implemeted safeguarding polocies at (almost) all centres, i was wondering what exactly is the protocol that is being followed here..?
        Triratna Order-mèmbers (to honor the emphasis as by Sr intended): some people are very interested to find out more about your Secret Safeguarding.
        ps. Do you mind if i shorten this to SS in future responds?
638

joc on January 24, 2017 at 11:26 am
Reply

Thanks to Tenpel and the person who has offered us an insight into Mahamati’s role in longterm cover up and denial.

Mahamati’s article / post was shared with all order members . It was an attempt of the inner core around Sangharakshita to control the narrative – even after the airing of the BBC programme on 26th September 2016 (3 disclosures of abuse made to BBC specifically about Sangharakshita). Mahamati avoids mention the three allegations of sexual abuse of trust with past mitra / OMs.

Those close to Sangharakshita – as we can see from last week’s statement – are still undermining the validity of complainants’ disclosures and clearly align themselves to ‘Bhante’ Sangharakshita, even as they ask people to tell their stories on the space they control.

Bjorn had no access to the publication site (The Buddhist Centre on line and Shabda) or a right to reply. Mahamati undermines the experiences of Bjorn. They are dismissed, reframed, minimised and denied. Mahamati seeks to focus the reader on the needs of elderly Sangharakshita and his status as ‘Bhante’.
Mahamati tells us that Bhante has not had sex as if it were true. Bjorn is therefore cast as either deluded or a liar: “And, indeed, Bhante affirmed his celibacy since the late 1980s, which certainly coincides with everything I have ever heard. (I have heard that some Order members have been doubting this.) Mahamati subliminally chides ‘doubters’.

I have been in contact with Bjorn since February 2015.

In 2002 /3 Sangharakshita was in late 70s and wearing the golden kesa of celibacy.This is when the sexual relationship with Bjorn took place. (Sangharakshita was clearly actively involved as a participant)

In 2009 Sangharakshita made claims in ‘Conversations with Bhante’ that he had been celibate since mid-1980s. (Dharmaghosha braved censorship when he queried this in Shabda 2010. He wrote in about a very distressed mitra who had disclosed a sexual relationship with Bhante with him in 2002 / 3 when at Madhymaloka. He wrote that the mitra said that Bhante had told tye mitra ‘not to tell the others’ about their sexual activities. OMs were told again in shabda by inner core that Bhante had never broken his vow of celibacy. They clearly hoped that the Bjorn story would be buried.They pulled rank on Dharmaghosha and silenced him.

2003 is also the year that OM Yashomitra’s letter was finished. Nobody at Madhymaloka seems to have been concerned about mitra Bjorn’s state of mind after this disclosure or made any links to the similarities in the two men’s stories. If they did, they chose to bury them. In any case, they were busy dealing with Yashomitra’s letter and confirming that Bhante could not recall being sexually active with him…..

Almost a decade later, In 2012 Bjorn sent a letter / email to some order members detailing the sexual relationship with Sangharakshita which took place 2002 / 2003.
Two people connected to Triratna at the time have confirmed that order office told them to delete all copies of Bjorn’s email. (Someone is tracking the information / email about this so we can see for sure who wrote it.) The inner core continued to confirm that Bhante had not broken his vow of celibacy. (i.e.Bjorn therefore must be deluded or a liar)

Bjorn was not able to see or reply to what was written about him in order only documents which all order members except whistle blowers can see and read Thanks to a small number of ex-order members, Bjorn’s experiences were shared outside the order and could be finally heard.

Maitribala was able to make contact with Bjorn, too. Last year they spoke extensively a few times. I also spoke to Bjorn twice. Eventually, Maitribala sent Bjorn all the information that was being circulated about him in-house in ‘confidential order only spaces’ as it is unethical to spread myths and lies about an ex-mitra with no right to read or reply. He was careful to make sure that Bjorn felt listened to and supported.

Since then Bjorn has tried to tell his story publicly to order members, friends and family. It has been a very difficult time for him – again.

When talking to Bjorn, we took great care only to share materials about him with him. He did not know that so many others has made claims of sexual misuse / spiritual abuse. He did not find out about them until just before Xmas 2016. This was also a huge shock to him.

Bjorn has very recently written direct to Sangharakshita at Adhisthana and simply asked him to share the nature of their relatinship fully with him and OMS. . Bjorn will share his response or non-response with members of the Truth and Reconciliation (Triratna) site on FB.

With Bjorn’s permission, I have several other documents about him written by order members and members of the inner core.

Thank you to Tenpel and the person who sent through Mahamati’s article / post of 31.1.2016. If you are an order member, please accept thanks for sharing what is necessary to get to the truth and for seeking Bjorn’s permission to do so.
- 639
  
  tenpel on January 24, 2017 at 12:19 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you.
  
  IMO, the leaked document is clearly a case of control of information at the costs of those being harmed and for the benefit of the reputation of Triratna and Sangharakshita. IMO, it aims only to maintain the status quo (power, influence, material and spiritual status or possessions, lack of taking responsibility, denial, refusal of compensation etc.) of the Triratna leadership. The problem is not Sr – his sexual desires, his lack of control and the abuse of religious authority, spirituality and power to bring young men (against their initial will) into bed with himself by applying emotional or religious pressure and manipulations – but as the problem are portrayed (subtly or more explicitly) those like Björn who were harmed and speak up. The latter are not reliable, shaky in mind, disorientated or so but Sr was the vulnerable man who needs our compassion, understanding and support. Again any honest compassion to those been harmed is totally absent. These are all familiar patterns in systems of abuse and those who enable it and cover(ed) it up.
  
  This letter aims to silence the voices and accounts of those who have been harmed by undermining their creditability, robbing them of their voice (again), further undermining that they get a voice and are being heard and listend with honesty, being taken seriously! It makes them the “victims” a second time – as it is so often the case in cases of the abuse of power or sexual abuse.
  
  For me the letter reveals a huge amount of dishonesty and pretence and for me it undermines any faith in Triratna/FWBO’s public claims to take these abuses in any way seriously. Moreover, it clearly shows that in-house counselling or setting up websites Triratna controls where people being harmed can report their stories is a huge self-delusion if not a dishonest means to keep control. For me as an outsider it looks like now that these claims and “solutions” by Triratna just serve as means to control the information, to control the stories at the expense of those being harmed and for the benefit of Sr and Triratna. Tricky and well advertised or sold means for reframing and rewriting the history of abuse of the faithful within Triratna.
  
  I would be happy if Triratna could prove the opposite!
  
  I think now, if Triratna is in anyway sincere with their claims to take the long term abuse of faithful young men within their organisation and by their leader, Dennis Lingwoood, seriously, there is no way except than to start a third party counselling. The system and way of thinking seem just too rotten and twisted. The lack of expression of sincere compassion and the doubting of the accounts of those who have been harmed were already clear warning signs that indicated an insincere / pretended process. This new account just approves these warning signs.
  
  I think it would be good to share now more accounts here of those who have been harmed. I am still uneducated with respect to Yashomitra’s or Björn’s accounts and I guess I am not alone with this. I am much interested to hear / to read their voice (if possible) too.
640

frenzy on January 24, 2017 at 1:05 pm
Reply

Here is Yashamitra’s account again http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/Yashomitra.htm
Björn’s account is a longer read, see link above, but he wrote a summary esp. for this blog, the one which i just reposted.
It took them years to get to the point of writing an account and i know it took YM years to write it.
I have some contact with both of them.
I would not necessarily want to discourage anyone who would want to speak out here but it must be said it must be very difficult for people with either past or current related issues to speak out publically even here. What would be their needs..?
- 641
  
  frenzy on January 24, 2017 at 1:32 pm
  Reply
  
  Reposting extract from Prasannasidhi’s letter of resignation adresed to Dhammarati and Order members, 2010:
  
  ”I also believe that he was misusing the natural power and authority of his position as a spiritual teacher, and the love and devotion engendered in me in relation to him in that position, to meet his needs for sex and intimacy in a way that was unskilful.”
  ”Counsellors that I have seen, including a counsellor from Survivors UK, consider that the above equates to a form of sexual abuse.”
  
  Reposting extract from ex-Sthiramati from letter of resignation 2010 adressed to MAHAMATI:
  
  ”I would summarise my concerns as being focused in the areas of sexual misconduct, inadequate boundaries and cultic or controlling group behaviours, compounded by the lack of informed and truly moral leadership on how the Order should understand and respond to these problems, as shown for example by your and Subhuti’s rapturous endorsement of “Conversations…”. It is particularly damning that no-one addresses the crucial factor of the breach of fiduciary duty and teacher-disciple boundaries. Everyone inside the WBO/TBC, it seems, is engaged in denial of how destructive such behaviour can be and has been.”
- 642
  
  tenpel on January 24, 2017 at 4:27 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you!
  
  And thanks to those who had the courage and did the painful and much needed work to write down their experiences so that others can read and understand what they experienced and what’s going on. The summarised account by Björn which you posted I read already. I will read Yashimitra’s testimony asap.
  
  (Sometimes I miss links posted already or information because I cannot read all of the comments due to a lack of time. Thank you for your patience with me. I am rather new to the details and Triratna history and what is clear to you is not necessarily clear for me.)
  
  With respect to the second part in your comment:
  It can be very helpful to write down what happened to oneself or others and to share it with a broader public or the public in general. It can be very healing too or a process in the healing itself; but it can be also very painful and open up past wounds again. It is hard to say what is best. I don’t want to push anybody to share their story.
  
  My experiences in being open about what happened to me was good for me and others.
  However, it depends much on harm or the nature of the harm – e.g. to write about general abuse of power as I and other experienced it is very different to sexual abuse, it is even more hard if men were sexually abused by men (or women). It depends also on the process where one is currently, one’s personality, how one has reflected on it, one’s life situation, inner situation, inner strength, outer support …
  That’s why I respect any decision by any person who was harmed by the abuse of power. I think, the key guideline should be no further harm to anybody who has been harmed already by these types of power abuses (including sexual abuse or sexual manipulations). Nor should those who were harmed be abused for any hostile agenda against the person or group who did or enabled / covered up / justifies the harm.
643

No name on January 24, 2017 at 1:26 pm
Reply

Yashomitra’s Shabda Article March 2003
[prefixed as ‘open to all’]

Last year I wrote in and said that I was contemplating whether or not to stay in the order and that I wanted to write about the issues that have raised the question in my mind. What I have to say here is a combination of my own experience and reflections upon it. It is one amongst a number of things that I have written about over the past couple of years. Some of you may think it is time we all let these issues go, that they are long past, out of date, that the order has moved on. I disagree. I do not believe that the order has moved on greatly, I know many order members personally have not been simply able to put it all behind them, and I think that there is too great a tendency to herd these elephants under the order’s collection of carpets. Some of what I write may contradict what I wrote in shabda a few years ago in the wake of the guardian article. I was aware then that I was not giving the whole story, as regards my relationship with Sangharakshita, but at the time I wanted to say what was on my mind and did not want to write anything about Sangharakshita without having spoken to him about it. Since then I have spoken to him and had some correspondence. As to why I have decided to write about all this now – I no longer feel that I need to or should protect him or the Order.

I moved into the Aryatara community a few days after my seventeenth birthday in May 1980, and continued at school until the end of term. After a few weeks of community life someone suggested I wrote and introduced myself to Sangharakshita so I did. I was flattered to receive a postcard in return suggesting I come to padmaloka some time to meet him. In June that year I went to padmaloka for the weekend, excited at the prospect of a personal meeting with the founder of the Movement. The evening I arrived I ate dinner with the padmaloka community. Someone mentioned that there would be a puja later in the evening and as I was keen to attend I asked where the shrine room was. One of the order members who lived there was being very friendly and kindly offered to show me and so we walked through the house together. On reaching the then shrine room – a room at the front of the house – the order member told me that this was where it was. Then he kissed me. I was stunned, it was entirely unexpected as I knew nothing of the homosexual culture thriving in the fwbo at the time. I simply froze. He led me up to his room, locked the door behind us and proceed to have sex with me. I was horrified. It wasn’t rape, I didn’t resist, but the reasons for that were not entirely straightforward. It just so happened that only the day before I had, on the strong recommendation of order members at Aryatara, read Chintamani’s article ‘Leaving Mother and Initiation into Manhood’. In it he had suggested it could be helpful for men to have sex with other men – younger men with older men especially as I remember – along the lines of the (subsequently in my experience) oft quoted ‘Greek Love’. Helpful in terms of breaking one’s dependency on women and becoming a man. An order member, a Buddhist teacher, had recommended it and here now another order member was helping me breakthrough by doing it to me. After some time he let me go, unlocked the door and I went to my room in a daze. It would be true to say I felt traumatised. I felt confused and dirty. I was convinced that if I said anything people would simply think it was my own fault and they would think I was disgusting.

The next day I went for a walk with Sangharakshita. I said nothing about the experience of the previous night, and probably very little about anything at all. He didn’t seem to notice. At the end of our walk he patted me on the bum and said he would see me again soon. My immediate thought was that the fwbo was a front to procure young men, boys for this old man – I had no idea before then of Sangharakshita’s homosexual tastes.

My room mate back at Aryatara (now Satyaraja) eventually managed to get me to tell him about what had happened to cause me to exist in a daze unable to talk very much about anything for two weeks. Padmaraja, to his credit though his motives may well have been mixed, complained to Sangharakshita. The upshot was a planned apology from the order member at padmaloka on my next visit – a men’s event. Sangharakshita seemed disbelieving of there being a problem, saying that he thought I wouldn’t have sex with anyone I didn’t regard as a friend. The order member concerned invited me into a room, possibly his though different from the previous one, and smilingly apologised. He then immediately propositioned me and made to kiss me. This time I didn’t respond and instead walked out.

18 months or so later I was ordained and had left Aryatara. The previous year had been difficult, I came in for a lot of criticism at Aryatara, in particular from one order member who, possibly acting on behalf of Padmaraja, made it his duty to try to undermine me. I was accused of many things – being power hungry, manipulative, deceitful. At one point he threatened to hit me – quite seriously, it was clearly not a joke. Eventually, three months after returning from my ordination retreat at Tuscany I got to the point where I simply didn’t feel able to carry on. Odd as it may seem I did not feel critical of the way I was treated. The ethos at the time was that the Dharma was the best and only true path; Sangharakshita was the best Buddhist teacher around; the fwbo was probably the only buddhist tradition in which people were really practising; at Aryatara everyone was convinced that theirs was the best situation in the fwbo. If you left – and this was made clear every time anyone had left Aryatara in the time that I was there – it was your problem, you had not been able to take the pace, you weren’t up to it. The day I walked out the door at Aryatara, leaving the community to move to Brighton, I was accompanied by a stream of abuse from the aforementioned Order member, the last words I remember being ‘Fucking coward’. Unfortunately I believed him.

I left Croydon and moved to Brighton where I felt welcomed and accepted by genuine friends. Soon after the move I went to Padmaloka for an order weekend. On arriving, as usual we checked the notice-board to see where we were to sleep. My name was listed for ‘Bhante’s room’. I had noticed on previous visits that there might be a name or names listed to sleep in his room. I had never thought anything of it. I went upstairs with my sleeping bag, knocked and walked into the small attic room. Sangharakshita was already in his double bed. I looked around for the mattress I would sleep on and seeing none asked him where I was to sleep. He didn’t speak but simply patted the bed next to him.

I was billeted in his room the next few times I went to Padmaloka for retreats or Order weekends over a period of about six months. Nothing was ever said by him or anyone else. It was nothing out of the ordinary. I don’t know how many of us were set up in this kind of way, but it was a fair number not just two or three. No doubt some had the presence of mind to spurn his advances, but it was not as simple as that for me. I was in a state of considerable turmoil having left Aryatara under a very dark cloud just three months after returning from my ordination retreat full of enthusiasm and inspiration. I was 18 and already felt that I had failed as an Order member. So to be the object of such special attention from my Teacher and Preceptor, the founder of the Movement was a great boost. I imagined that perhaps he would want me to become his companion. I guess there was quite a lot that I would do for that kind of attention. And he was kind and encouraging.

Six months or so after the first time, I once again went to Padmaloka but this time found that I was not to stay in his room. As at the beginning nothing was said. No explanation, nothing. I was devastated, felt rejected and confused. I experienced many of the feelings that one would expect after being dumped at the end of a ‘relationship’. What I understand now is that the hurt I experienced was much more as a result of the betrayal of the idea or hope that what I was being offered was a spiritual relationship. The sex was something I went along with because I was being offered something that I treasured very much – the friendship of someone I valued and admired greatly. But the end of the so called ‘relationship’ signified the end of any kind of close relationship with Sangharakshita. I was obviously no longer flavour of the month. There was and is a lot of talk about kalyana mitrata in the Order. In my first few years in the Movement more or less all the ‘friendship’ that I received or was offered from more experienced men in the Order had a sexual interest. In some cases I was told quite explicitly that they wanted to have sex with me to help me and to be my kalyana mitra.

A couple of years ago I spoke to Sangharakshita about my experiences with him. I wanted to talk it through with him and ask what he thought of it now. The first thing that made this problematic was that he said he had no memory of anything like this taking place between us. That is certainly strange and is hard to understand except either as an indication of old age creeping on or as a result of the insignificance of one more sexual encounter amongst the many at the time. However there is no point in speculating as to the reasons for his memory loss. Having explained in a certain amount of detail what I had experienced I asked him how he saw his sexual encounters with his disciples now. He said that he had related to me and others like me as a ‘friend being with another friend’. Then and now I find this hard to accept. It is hard to believe that someone in his position, who in his teachings displays such an apparent awareness of the dynamics of teacher pupil relationships, could be so obtuse when it comes to relationships with his own disciples. He is quoted in the Response to the ‘FWBO files’ as saying ‘When one comes into close physical or emotional contact with another person in the context of a sexual relationship, usually all sorts of psychological projections take place.’

How much more so a sexual ‘relationship’ with ones Teacher? As I put it to him at the time (a couple of years ago), would you not think that it would be unlikely that a teenager could relate to his spiritual teacher, the man who ordained him and had founded the order into which he ordained him, who was 40 years his senior, as simply ‘a friend being with another friend’? The fact that any closeness in our connection ended with the ending of the sexual ‘relationship’ compounds my belief that this was at best wishful thinking on his part. Not only did I not experience myself as simply being a ‘friend being with another friend’ with him, the way in which he consequently related to me suggested that, despite always being friendly towards me, neither did he in any meaningful way consider me to be a friend.

This is the man who is my Preceptor! I am by no means alone in feeling misused and disillusioned in the way I have described. I think it is impossible to calculate the effect this could have on someone’s relationship to the Order and to the Dharma.

Perhaps I should say amongst all this that I do not deny my own part in what I chose to do and therefore in the consequences of my actions. I have never sought to find someone else to blame. I live with the choices I made. However I think it is impossible to deny the objective harm done both by the actions of my Teacher and the culture of the FWBO at the time. Although it was not something that I made anything of for a long time I was always conscious of that part of our relationship that I had been unhappy about – but felt that I should not, was not ‘allowed’ to question. There was the general attitude which discouraged anyone from questioning him and his behaviour. People were intellectually intimidated by him and in awe of him. Very few if any would have the courage to question him. So his actions went unquestioned and in part were emulated. I did not have the tools then to talk in a way that could be genuinely helpful and objective about my experience. And no one was able or willing to help me do that. There was too much invested for all of us. Perhaps for many there still is.

In my experience we in the order maintained a conspiracy of silence. On the one hand Sangharakshita was held up as the embodiment of the Ideal, as the Buddha in our midst. And on the other he was known to be ‘screwing’ his way through the male half of the Movement. In the absence of there being anywhere else to turn to glimpse the Ideal, Sangharakshita being the sole Teacher to the whole Order, in order to hold onto the Ideal it was necessary repress the awareness of what he (and others) was doing. This was a massive psychic split which continues to have its repercussions.

Begin to deny and repress what you see, hear and understand to be true and inevitably this leads to confusion, an inability to deal with reality in many other respects. We all know the story of the Emperor’s new clothes but few of us have been prepared to acknowledge its truth when applied to our own situation.

The fwbo files response says this: ‘Some will undoubtedly be scandalised by his behaviour. However, it is surely in the nature of experimentation that it defies norms, and at this time Sangharakshita was prepared to experiment in all areas of his life, including sex.’ In an interview published in Golden Drum in 1988 Sangharakshita is quoting as saying – in relation to homosexual sex – that ‘I therefore thought I should perhaps experiment a little in this field’, and that although there was ‘some appetite – I was guided more by intuition than appetite.’

Reading this again I am struck by two thoughts. Firstly I find it hard to accept that 10 – 15 years of sexual relationships and the likely reality that such an experiment involved not just 4 or 5 or 10, but dozens of young men, could ever seriously be considered as an experiment. That fact allied with my own experience suggests also that the implication of inconsiderable appetite was simply not true. If it had just been a handful of relationships then one could perhaps have been prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe what he said. But the numbers involved and the time-scale make what he had to say blatantly untrue. No one challenged him at the time and now, largely since the furore caused by the Guardian article died down, still no one challenges him. The silence is deafening. More than that there are many, notably those at Madhyamaloka who leap to his defence.

Secondly I can’t help wondering at the nature of a person who relates to sexual involvement with people who regard themselves as his disciple as an experiment. It seems a cold, and clinical way of talking and thinking about it, at odds with how one tends to think of any kind of personal, human relationship, let alone a Teacher – disciple relationship.

People have talked in terms of a blind spot. That seems to have been the case, though the term itself is not weighty enough to communicate the seriousness of the matter.

Sometimes in defence of him and the actions of others, people have talked about how the culture of the time was different to the present. That there was a ferment of experimentation going on and people did not view these things in the same way. I disagree. I don’t think many people would think of the 80’s in the same light as the 60’s and 70’s, as a time of exploration. Most of my friends at the time, those who were not significantly involved with the FWBO, when told about my experience would immediately respond by saying they thought I had been abused. The idea of sexual ‘abuse’ and its reality is not a more recent invention.

Present and future generations rely on the ethics of those who tell us what has happened for a truthful account. For many who were not involved with the FWBO or in the Order in the 70’s and 80’s, the Response to the ‘FWBO files’ will be seen as the reference for answers to what did really happen, what really went on in the early years.

Unfortunately the section on issues relating to sex in the ‘Response’ is repeatedly disingenuous. By talking in terms of the present it conveniently avoids the issue of confronting the reality of the past. Hence:

‘Sangharakshita and the FWBO do not seek to undermine heterosexual relationships or family life.

‘The Files makes two serious charges in relation to sex and the FWBO: firstly that it teaches that homosexuality is superior to heterosexuality, and second that members are “converted” to homosexuality through coercive psychological means. Both of these charges are untrue. Coercion of any sort is anathema within the FWBO.’

All of these statements may be largely true in relation to the FWBO as it is now. As I have been mostly inactive within the FWBO and WBO for the past five years it is hard for me to comment. I have reason to believe that it is still by no means the whole story. However they are certainly not true in the case of the FWBO as it was for many years throughout the 70’s and 80’s. The fact that something is not written down does not mean that it did not happen. In my experience one was constantly confronted by the gaping chasm between the real and the Ideal in the FWBO but told that in the case of the FWBO the Ideal was for the most part the real.

The FWBO did seek to undermine heterosexual relationships and family life. It did teach that homosexuality was superior to heterosexuality. Members were ‘converted’ to homosexuality through coercive psychological means. Coercion of any sort was not anathema within the FWBO. I seem to remember the FWBO being defined as the ‘activity of Order members’, or something along those lines. There is no doubt in my mind that many Order members were responsible for all of the above. There was a culture at the time of these kind of things being in some respects the norm.

Many people were damaged as a result of the way things were. This is not simply an unfortunate consequence of the immaturity of the Order and the individuals within it. It is a disaster for those affected in that kind of way. The place that you believe offers you a safe refuge, in which the Ideals of Wisdom and Compassion, of spiritual friendship, are repeatedly upheld and proclaimed, becomes a place in which you are manipulated, undermined and used. That is a disaster. The world turned upside down. The Orders inability to deal with and look at its shadow is as dangerous as the same kind of blindness in an individual.

The unfortunate consequence of the kind of dis-information and half truths we have all been given as a defence of Sangharakshita and the earlier FWBO/WBO is that it becomes harder and harder to believe what is being said. When can you be sure that you are simply being told the truth of what has happened? There was an attempt to discuss the issues of what went on in the past only as a result of having been forced into a situation where there was no longer any way of hiding the truth. And then it seems there was a considerable attempt to scapegoat the situation in Croydon to deflect criticism from Sangharakshita and the rest of the Order. It also, I believe, makes it inevitable that there will be attempts to communicate what some see as being withheld in ways that may in the end will be more harmful than simply coming out with it. Most if not all of us will have seen the pamphlet ‘The World Turned Upside Down’ and other of the ‘FWBO Satires’. Much of what has been written in these pieces is true or points to the truth in an exaggerated fashion. Perhaps they paint the Order as worse than it is or has been. But sometimes it seems that you have to shout loudly to get anyone to listen.

Newer people may feel that all this is the past and that it does not affect them. Not so. It may be the past but it is our past, part of our collective history and affects us all either directly or indirectly, whether through our having been involved in some way or simply being part of an organisation that has all of this as a significant part of its history. There is no escaping the fact that what you experience as the present WBO is significantly conditioned by the acts of the past WBO.

I had many good experiences through the times I have written about, I have not erased them from my conscious memory. It is not that I do not value all the people who were genuinely my friends, with no strings attached. All the good things, all the kind and loving friends made life bearable when I would often feel that I’d had enough. I am conscious that what I have written has been my experience and my reflections upon it, and that the way I have responded to my experience is my own responsibility. Others may have not had the same experience. Some may have had an largely helpful experience of being in the WBO/FWBO through the 70’s and 80’s. Others may have responded quite differently to very similar experiences. None of this denies the truth of what I have written.

I have felt that it is important to write about what my experience has been, though it has taken me years to get to the point where I felt ready to do so. I anticipate that I may be asked not to submit it to Shabda, however I tend to feel that in the end the truth will come out and there is no point in hiding it. In my experience hiding the truth tends to lead to distrust and suspicion, whereas truthfulness eventually leads to greater trust and understanding.

See also some comments on Padmaloka by other order members
- 644
  
  tenpel on February 22, 2017 at 10:34 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you Frenzy and no-name for making me aware of Yashomitra’s report. It took me a while to take time to read it. I cannot digest too much of such accounts. Also, I want to be open and have space in my mind while reading it.
  
  Now I read it and it makes me speechless and sad, also, I feel disgust. The indoctrinations, perversions of the Dharma, the manipulations and the lies and twists the leadership has put on it are very clearly described and make totally sense, the damage been done can be felt and understood. This is such a rotten culture! In light of how Munisha, in charge of safeguarding, described the abuse in her safeguarding podcast just 3 days ago:
  
  A lot of the allegation from the past, to do with people not being happy with sexual relationships, that they’ve had as less experienced Buddhists with more experienced Buddhists…
  
  it becomes more and more shockingly clear how brainwashed they all are. I know “brainwashed” is a rude non-academic term but what else can describe this loss of touch with reality and fellow human beings?
  
  What a hard time Yashomitra must have had to come to that clarity and truthfulness as expressed in this letter! My deepest respect!
  
  I hope he was able to pursue his spiritual path under genuine non-deceptive teachers and that he is well!!!
  
  @wangdak, I still might need two weeks or so to read your comments. At the moment I am rather slow in reading and responding. I need also time to digest these things.
645

joc on January 24, 2017 at 3:48 pm
Reply

Dear Tenpel, please delete 1.08 comment (see email to you)
- 646
  
  tenpel on January 24, 2017 at 3:59 pm
  Reply
  
  I deleted 1:08 comment. I hope I got the right one!
647

NO NAME on January 25, 2017 at 5:54 pm
Reply

SPEAKING OF ‘FUZZY CULT SPEAK’:
“…how glad we are that Bhante has felt able to make this statement and how much we welcome the confessional nature of the contents. I believe it will contribute to the further INTEGRATION of some of the more complex and problematic aspects of our history.”
WT… does ‘integration’ mean here? Answers invited.
Integrate…absorb?….camouflage to hide?…..forget……?
- 648
  
  tenpel on January 25, 2017 at 6:28 pm
  Reply
  
  Maybe smooth and peaceful transition without stirring up things?
- 649
  
  NO NAME on January 25, 2017 at 6:34 pm
  Reply
  
  And “Although Bhante’s message is personal, it is effectively a public statement and therefore generalised in form”
  
  Firstly, it is not “personal”, it names no one in particular and everyone in general. [Why? Legal reasons, too many names to remember, too many names forgotten
  Secondly, it is not generalised because its a public statement, it is generalised because to have gone any further IN PUBLIC, naming names and/or acts of abuse perpetrated, would open the door of litigation.
  
  The whole letter is couched in shadow speak, twilight language which, when examined knowing the background, actually says something opposite, often almost entirely;
  
  “Come to us if you need help” means “dont tell anyone else”
  
  “it is always hard to know precisely what happened in personal relations between other people”
  means “even though there are mountains of evidence, doubt the accuser-even though this letter supposedly admits their testimony is valid”
  
  And “especially at such a distance in time”
  means……..so it no longer matters, lets just forget about…… “These arent the droids youre looking for”…….”
  - 650
    
    tenpel on January 26, 2017 at 1:05 am
    Reply
    
    I agree. Additionally,
    
    especially at such a distance in time
    
    I think this is also a means to undermine the creditability of past accounts or past testimonies. What can we say about the past when it is so long ago? So, whatever was told in the past, we should doubt it now and not take it seriously anymore.
    If this way of thinking would be reasonable, history doesn’t make any sense.
    
    In a recent article about Trump the journalist quoted a source which said that it belongs to the means of manipulators or dictators to sow doubts in facts and truths and to undermine the clear boundaries between truths and falsities until people cannot really understand anymore what is true and what is false. The undermining of people’s distinctions in what is true and a falsity plays into the hands of those manipulators, dictators etc. because the more people have doubts the easier they can be manipulated, the fuzzier things appear the easier reality can be distorted and bend. (Its more complicated when one considers the topic of “What is truth?”. However, basically, truth can be discriminated and recognised. Though you can deny a car accident (a car crashed with a tree for instance) by claiming there was no car accident because there was no tree! However, methods can assure you that both, car accident and the tree exist and that the claim “there was no car accident! (and no tree)” is a falsity.)
    
    We can all witness how Trump and his crooked inner circle (e.g. Spicer & Conway) apply these means nowadays… Another effect of these means is, sooner or later people get tired from these manipulative games and the constant flow of manipulative propaganda will ripen in some effects – especially if the voices opposing these attempts stop to speak out or are silenced. Who controls the information (and Triratna is really good in that) controls the narrative. This is another point why it is so important that people tell their stories and are not silent. These attempts have to be countered, corrected, pointed out, not accepted but exposed.
    - 651
      
      frenzy on January 26, 2017 at 4:39 pm
      Reply
      
      The fuzziness, manipulative information, suggestive, factbending and disempowering statements reminded me of Mr Anons ”What we have been guilty of though is dissing, belittling or dismissing what people say.”…
      Actual change depends on the will to make changes by the inner circle but also on ”critical mass”.
      I think we are doing quite well exposing, supported by facts and clear analysis…
      
      ”Critical mass (sociodynamics)
      
      In social dynamics, critical mass is a sufficient number of adopters of an innovation in a social system so that the rate of adoption becomes self-sustaining and creates further growth. The term is borrowed from nuclear physics and in that field it refers to the amount of a substance needed to sustain a chain reaction.
      
      Social factors influencing critical mass may involve the size, interrelatedness and level of communication in a society or one of its subcultures. Another is social stigma, or the possibility of public advocacy due to such a factor.
      
      Critical mass may be closer to majority consensus in political circles, where the most effective position is more often that held by the majority of people in society. In this sense, small changes in public consensus can bring about swift changes in political consensus, due to the majority-dependent effectiveness of certain ideas as tools of political debate.[citation needed]
      
      Critical mass is a concept used in a variety of contexts, including physics, group dynamics, politics, public opinion, and technology.”
      - 652
        
        frenzy on January 26, 2017 at 5:29 pm
        Reply
        
        From ”Some of the Sheep Are No Longer Asleep” (by Dave Hodges)
        
        ”Just Who Is the Alternative Media?
        
        One does not have to maintain a website or host a talk show to have an effect in the war on corruption and tyranny. I have met several people on Facebook who share articles that they identify with and they send these articles to scores of people. Many of these same people will also write an accurate and succinct summary of world events in a paragraph or two, insert a clever picture, which serves to enhance the meaning, and then send it on. They, too, comprise the alternative media.
        
        How Does the Process of Awakening Work?
        
        Scientists from the prestigious Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute have determined that if just 10% of any given population holds to an unshakable idea, that the idea will become adopted by the majority of the country. However, the scientists who belong to the Social Cognitive Networks Academic Research Center (SCNARC) found that if the ideas are shared by less than 10% of the population, the idea will not progress and will eventually die out.
        
        Success Comes With a Price
        
        Our newfound awareness comes with a price tag. You, I and anyone who reads these types of articles are a threat to the establishment and must be dealt with. Assassination is no longer a widespread option (…), as there are too many of us.”
        
        🙂
      - 653
        
        No name on January 26, 2017 at 5:52 pm
        Reply
        
        Excellent analogy. I would continue it by suggesting that a nucleus will be forced to mutate as the electrons surrounding it increase to the point that their combined gravity overwhelms the formerly dominant pull of the nucleus. In .practical terms, if the grassroots movement in Triratna develop a strong enough shared sentiment of justice, truth, reconciliation, recompense and cleansing of doctrine, the old guard will be forced to move with the times or die out. Either way, change becomes inevitable once critical mass is reached. It’s moving faster in that direction than it has for the last few years. However, the old ways are strong and senior figures deeply entrenched and institutionalised so there is still work to be done. Sadly for the old guard it’s become a self reproductive nightmare, with disclosure breeding further disclosure, rendering the depth of corruption visible for all to see
654

NO NAME on January 26, 2017 at 6:09 pm
Reply

Actually , that’s just an analogy:in reality an electron, unlike a planet or a satellite, is electrically charged, and has an electric charge that undergoes acceleration (changes velocity and direction) will emit electromagnetic radiation, losing energy in the process. A revolving electron would transform the atom into a miniature radio station, the energy output of which would be at the cost of the potential energy of the electron; according to classical mechanics, the electron would simply spiral into the nucleus and the atom would collapse.
Which means if the analogy really applies, the increased activity in the electrons augers the death of the Order
655

No name on January 30, 2017 at 4:02 pm
Reply

OMs are having difficulty reconciling Sr supposed spiritual side with his mundane behaviour. I have a question would a truly spiritual being (assuming compassion, empathy and concern for others are ‘ spiritual’ qualities) do what Sr did? Remember, his so called ‘profound wisdom’ has led to deaths, neuroses, breakdowns, attempted suicides, broken marriages ( probably a number of abortions as well) not to mention placing in jeopardy the gift of the dharma for generations to come truly spiritual?
Remember, we were all ‘ blind’ to the truth of the dharma when we first engaged. Then a man comes along who humbly tells us he knows more than we do and we, desperate for answers, project all our fantasies and hopes onto him, simply because he appears to fit the bill.
As time went by however, it became clearer and clearer he was not the wise man we had projected and, as his recent, somewhat pathetic plea for forgiveness in the light of impending death shows, is in reality just as weak, fragile and needy as the rest of us.
So, did we encounter a deeply spiritual man? Or was this a case of ” in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king”? Are we not victims of our own weaknesses and projections, our own inadequacies? Have we not bought into a serious case of ‘ group hype’ and then spent so long buying into it that the only way we can now understand our predicament is by blaming Sr ‘dual nature’?Perhaps, in the end, is the reason we cannot admit that Sr is a predatory monster in monks robes simply because, implicitly, we were responsible for his creation and to admit to his imperfections is to admit to our own?
656

No name on January 30, 2017 at 7:26 pm
Reply

It’s a bit like a famous chef who sometimes likes to pee iin the food he offers. If you knew this, you wouldn’t eat anything he offered you- period. Wake up! The chef has peed in your food! ” but the food s well prepared and he’s wearing a chefs hat” YES, BUT HE PEED IN YOUR FOOD- don’t you get it?
657

NO NAME on February 3, 2017 at 7:28 pm
Reply

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-38857036

THE REASON THE ORDER DONT OWN UP
1] LINGWOOD WILL BE IMPRISONED [AND WHY SHOULDNT HE BE? PEOPLE DIED!]
2] MORE IMPORTANTLY, UPPER HIERARCHS WILL BE HELD TO ACCOUNT AND SCRUTINIZED
3] BECAUSE THE ORDER THINK COMPASSION FOR ONE MAN IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN COMPASSION FOR “DOZENS OF YOUNG MEN, SOME OF THEM UNDERAGE”-VISHVAPANI

Roger Dodds, 81, abused colleagues while working for Sheffield City Council’s education department between 1975 and 1993.
The council has been accused of failing to act and moved Dodds to a position working with schools after complaints. It said it was now “deeply sorry”.

One victim told the BBC he held the council responsible for the abuse he suffered.
“I was the victim of a really horrible man,” he said.
“The council are so responsible. I even think at times the council are more responsible than he was. They allowed it to happen. Everyone knew. Everyone in the council knew but they chose to do nothing about it.”

Another victim, ……., who waived his legal right to anonymity, said he was subjected to “terrifying” assaults over an 18-month period.
However, he said when he told council colleagues what was happening, he was told to stay quiet.
Another man said he believed more victims might still come forward.
“We are just the tip of the iceberg,” he said.

Sheffield City Council said it welcomed the fact Dodds had been brought to justice.
Jayne Ludlam, executive director for Children, Young People and Families, said the authority’s thoughts were with the victims.
She added: “We are deeply sorry that Dodds committed these offences while working at Sheffield City Council decades ago.
“We are glad to see that, finally, such cases of historic abuse are coming before the courts, justice is being done, and victims are having their voices heard.
“Despite the fact that this happened more than a quarter of a century ago, we have accepted responsibility and would never defend the indefensible.”

JUST CHANGE THE NAMES AND THE STORY IS THE SAME-OR WILL BE ONE DAY
- 658
  
  tenpel on February 4, 2017 at 10:36 pm
  Reply
  
  This is the publicly available footage of Glenn talking openly and honestly about the abuse that happened to him aged 16 with Padmaraja.
  - 659
    
    jigmeyeshe on February 23, 2017 at 12:50 am
    Reply
    
    The link to Glenn’s account is now missing. ‘The video is private’.
    - 660
      
      tenpel on February 23, 2017 at 1:02 am
      Reply
      
      Yes. I saw it. The interviewer said he has total control over it. Obviously Glen decided to set it private. Hopefully he sets it public again. In the video he says that he wants to have it in the public. Don’t know what made him change his mind. He gave a very good account into the dynamics. When I watched it I was thinking: ‘he is so open about it, what will he do if his neighbors or environment gets aware of it?’ It needs a lot of courage to speak about it in that way in the public. Also, you might not want it to dominate your life or being alienated as Mark had to experience it… I respect the decision of course though I would wish people could watch it.
661

tenpel on February 4, 2017 at 11:54 pm
Reply

FYI
I updated the post, embedding the BBC and the new YouTube Video in which Glen tells his story.
662

No name on February 5, 2017 at 6:16 pm
Reply

It seems pretty sure that the Order is now reaching critical mass and that the division therein created by the chosen fews unwillingness to admit to anything that might undermine their current status is only adding to the strength of that division.
The ball is now in their court. They can either admit to past misdemeanours and begin to reach out to the people they have damaged or risk the attention of external agencies, such as social services, the police and the media
Ironic that the silence designed to prevent scrutiny should act as it’s very cause.
It is now no longer ‘if’ but ‘when?’
663

joc on February 5, 2017 at 11:29 pm
Reply

Simon / Maitribala has tried to ask safeguarding questions and effect change. He is effectively excommunicated now in that he is not getting, he says, communications sent to other order members. It is important that Triratna develops a whistle blower policy.

We have heard on the grapevine that the safeguarding officer has reported something to do with a teenage boy and a much older man to social services somewhere. This could, of course, be Glenn and Padmaraja. It could also cover, of course, Yashomitra’s (and others) account of what happened to him aged 17 at Padmaloka with an order member and later with Sangharakshita, who patted the traumatised teenager on the bum, according to ex-Yash’s disclosure (made to OMs in print in 2003 – but withheld from Indian OMs ). According to ex-Yash, Sangharakshita later patted the only bed in the bedroom and managed to get the already violated young man into bed with him. Why would one report Glenn’s case involving Padmaraja and not the other cases involving Sangharakshita (and others)? Did anyone from order office / college report the disclosures made about Sangharakshita over the years? Given that Glenn’s case is historic, then the other cases also fall into this category.

I note that order member Sanghaxxxx , who says she goes to college meetings, writes very beautifully and sympathetically to Glenn beneath the video footage of Glenn’s disclosure on the T&R site (same footage as available publicly). She did not wish to comment on anything to do with Sangharakshita. I have asked her to read the posts on Truth and Reconciliation and see if she develops an opinion about the disclosures made by several of the known young men who have made complaints over the years and the similarities to those made by Glenn. I ask her to share her opinions with us on T&R. Several others also say they have experienced harmful fallout due to very similar goings-on.

We have been told on the grapevine that there are more disclosures of similar content being made in house, so perhaps all will be collated and handed over to social services at last? After all, one cannot have safeguarding connected to Padmaraja and not include the documents which name others for not dissimilar behaviours. Or have I missed something?
It could, of course, be that Trirana college / order office now do understand the concept of ‘Responding well to complainants’. They must now also respond well to complainants from the past – whoever is complained against and whatever their place in the hierarchy.
- 664
  
  frenzy on February 6, 2017 at 5:32 pm
  Reply
  
  Joc, you touch on an interesting point, being a continious lack of consistency in their aknowledgements.
  Croyden has allready in the past served to deflect from the broader issues.
  
  Denial has various aspects:
  
  denying the truth of what happened/peoples reality
  downplaying the harm
  rationalising what happened
  aknowledgement without consequences
  The aspects of denial include misrepresenting and manipulating complainents, people who initialy merely ask for help with their confusing and sensitive issues, and goes as far as ostracising, blackening, shaming and blaming.
  They include also past and present deceptive claims for ethical safeguards and polocies.
  The aknowledgement needed for an honost and genuine healing proces would have to include all this, not just one aspect.
  
  No name, i am not sure about the critical mass. I think there is a lot of attachment still to the group (think) and that people are afraid of the consequences to be and even think more critical.
  Though for sure a lot is happening many people involved in Triratna might not be aware of the public attention or the issues might feel as if they have not much no do with their own experience of Triratna. They might find it difficult also to make a connection about it in their local sangha.
  - 665
    
    No name on February 6, 2017 at 7:33 pm
    Reply
    
    Whatever happens the cat is out off the bag and change is now inevitable. How far reaching it goes remains to be seen but the abuse perpetrators are constructed like a house.of cards and when one goes the rest follow
666

joc on February 7, 2017 at 9:53 am
Reply

Thee are many ‘friends’, mitra and order members reeling due to the continued revelations about the shadow past and its implications for the present. Some are still convinced that none of it can possibly be true. This is how The Triratna Chairs Assembly ask Triratna missionaries to present the past in their guide for new teachers and group leaders. It is propaganda. No mention is made of the many disclosures of past and present OMs. None of the concerns are addressed. Newcomers are to be told that one man is to be blamed – the author of FWBO Files. They are directed to FWBO Files Response. (Some of this has, however, disappeared since BBC programme went out on Sept 26 2016) Newcomers are also directed to ‘The Triratna Story’ (free on line still). It too is propaganda concerning the past as it was written and published in house by in house writer and editors with a vested interest in whitewashing the past.

Background material on the FWBO Files etc
There’s four documents on-line that still regularly upset people new to the FWBO/Triratna –
especially if they stumble across them unexpectedly. This will often be after they have visited us,
had a positive experience, and decided to find out more about us via the internet – and they discover
the FWBO Files! For this reason, it’s best if at all possible to take the initiative and forewarn people.
The four are –
1. The Guardian Article, published in – guess what? – the UK’s Guardian newspaper, in October
1997. This basically drew attention to the troubles in Croydon in the 1980s, plus
Sangharakshita’s relationship with Mark Dunlop. Although its over 12 years old it’s easily the
most-quoted “evidence” used against us.
2. The FWBO Files, published anonymously on the internet in May 1998. This was a
comprehensive attack on Sangharakshita and his ‘lineage’, plus pretty much everything else

Triratna Chairs Assembly | Resources for group leaders and teachers | this version September 2011 | page 13/ 13

about the FWBO! The author’s identity has become known to us but we have chosen not to
publish it – he does however have a record of attacking various Buddhist groups eg the NBO.
3. A recent (2007-8) flare-up when the same author wrote anonymously to various MPs, Govt
ministries, and newspapers making various allegations against the FWBO. As a consequence
the MPs tabled a number of questions in Parliament about the FWBO, all of which were
answered quite satisfactorily – but the fact of their being asked was (predictably) used by our
critic to prop up his case against us.
4. Wikipedia on the FWBO or Sangharakshita. In some ways this is the hardest to counter as
one or two of our critics have become expert on Wikipedia and entries there can simply be
amended almost at will – so as soon as we correct it, it can be changed again. Also, even if
an article is ‘locked for editing’ (which is possible on request) there is no guarantee it will be
locked in a satisfactory state.
The FWBO’s ‘Response’ is available on-line at http://response.fwbo.org/fwbo-files/response.html
This is a well-argued and comprehensive refutation of the many allegations in the ‘Files’, it is a very
good read although quite long. There has been talk of preparing a shorter ‘response – however the
best ‘response’ is likely to be personal communication and talking things through.
Two other documents that may crop up are (1) Bhante’s ‘Last Will and Testament’ and (2) his more
recent ‘Conversations’. Both are in the public domain (on his website http://www.sangharakshita.org) and
it’d be wise to be familiar with them.
FWBO Discussion
FWBO Discussion (http://discussion.fwbo.org) is an on-line resource containing a selection of articles
by Order Members reflecting on the FWBO and WBO. It arose out of Vishvapani’s work for the
FWBO Communications Office. In his preface to the site he wrote:
“The Friends of the Western Buddhist Order is a diverse and thoughtful community,
whose members frequently debate matters of teaching and issues affecting the FWBO,
its history and its future. This debate has often been invisible to non-members, and this
site aims to open that debate and reflection to a wider audience. The site links to
articles already online, written by members of the Western Buddhist Order and others.
Initially at least, the focus is – perhaps inevitably – on topics that have caused
controversy…
667

No name on February 7, 2017 at 12:57 pm
Reply

So, if we want to know what sangharakshita is apologising for, the answers are in the Files at ex-cult.org/FWBO
And now the ‘lies’ turn out to be true!

I’m sure the author remains public enemy number one, for telling the truth!!
668

tenpel on February 7, 2017 at 5:29 pm
Reply

After I learned here how dishonest, deceptive and skilful TBO distorted (distort still) the reality – including the defamation of victims of abuse and critics – I updated the post above with some passages and asked two persons familiar with the subject to kindly write an updated article that enables less informed readers to get a better access and deeper understanding of the facts and the skilful twists, and distortions / manoeuvres of denial, attacking critics, defence of behaviour by Dennis Lingwood TBO has put on the facts.

I have to confess, I myself allowed to be deluded by the TBO damage control and victim/critics blaming tactics and the skilful twists they have put on it. Sadly, the TBO got even support by an academic in creating a narrative they had sincerely reappraised their past. In fact, they did not as the many details in the comment section clearly demonstrate. I spoke also in London some days ago with a person familiar with and effected by the power tactics of Triratna.

The sections I added to the origin post posted on Sept 27, 2016 are:

However, there are also many traces of dishonesty by Triratna that show that the group is far away from a sincere reappraising of their past and an honest communication of the current situation. For instance, Triratna claimed to the BBC “Sangharakshita stepped back from any official role in the running of Triratna in 2000.” But Triratna runs a charity called Uddiyana whose stated purpose is the “support and assistance for Urgyen Sangharakshita … enabling him and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide”:

http://beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1046398&subid=0
Data for financial year ending 31 December 2015
Triratna Buddhist Community (Uddiyana)
Income £146.0K Spending £57.2K
Aims & activities
Support and assistance for Urgyen Sangharakshita, founder of the Triratna Buddhist Community (formerly FWBO) – enabling him and his office to guide the activities of the Triratna Buddhist Community Centres and members worldwide. These activities include meditation and Buddhism, social work, body work, cultural activities and support for residential spiritual communities and ethical businesses.

Other worrying examples of dishonesty, denial, whitewashing, in-house counselling, emotional blackmailing of victims, unhealthy power structures, safeguarding policy installation, or victim blaming can be found in the comment section. For instance, the claimed safeguarding policy were put in place only after Triratna (TBO) learned the BBC were investigating them (similar to the removal of the video on their website claiming that sex between teacher and student was acceptable, inspiring and entirely discretionary). Katherine Hopper (Munisha), a diligent defender of Triratna, is the TBO’s communications head and at the same time TBO’s chief safeguarding officer. An upcoming post will address some of these tactics and behaviours. Dennis Lingwood (Sangharakshita) issued a personal statement in Dec. 2016.

On 30. January 2017 Glenn’s Story was posted on YouTube. Glenn is talking openly and honestly about the abuse that happened to him aged 16 with Padmaraja at the Croydon Buddhist Centre. I have added the link to Croydon Buddhist Centre so that people can know it is in reality a Triratna Buddhist Centre and that Triratna is FWBO. It is important to be transparent about name changes and who they are. I invite someone from Croydon Buddhist Centre and Triratna to comment on the similarities between what the order head Sangharakshita was teaching and doing with what Croydon order head Padmaraja was teaching and doing.

(video link to Glenn’s story)
669

No name on February 7, 2017 at 6:25 pm
Reply

Just an example of whitewashing and outright lies, , thought I’d repost this
It’s a total, denial of a now acknowledged fact and is from the official FWBO Response to the Files. Seemingly an increasing number of sections of the Respoonse appear to be being either heavily edited or removed completely -site can be still accessed by the wayback machine:
http://web.archive.org/web/20071005122042/http://response.fwbo.org/fwbo-files/response30.html

It’s presente
d so part of a line by line analysis of each allegation made in the Files

III Theory and Practice
d | Sex and the FWBO
[QUOTE:] Persons involved at a more superficial level might find it genuinely difficult to accept what goes on within the inner circle of the organisation, but the fact is that once a person becomes an Order member (and in certain cases, even before), efforts may be made to convert the said person from heterosexuality to homosexuality. (p.19)

[ANSWER:] The FWBO Files makes two serious charges in relation to sex and the FWBO: firstly that it teaches that homosexuality is superior to heterosexuality, and second that members are “converted” to homosexuality through coercive psychological means. Both of these charges are untrue. In the absence of evidence for these charges within the public domain, The FWBO Files constructs a wholly fictitious sense of an “inner circle” where such attitudes are actually found, though remaining invisible.
- 670
  
  tenpel on February 7, 2017 at 9:54 pm
  Reply
  
  Wow, what a denial of the facts!
  
  A new article here on the blog will also include some points related to this.
  I am amazed how much I allowed myself to be fooled by this skilful TBO/FWBO PR!
  
  But no wonder, people in the FWBO were so brainwashed that they feared heterosexual relationships (TBO recommended “to keep them at the edge of the mandala”) and had no problem to believe that single sex relationships (male-male, female-female) are superior. Naturally, an outsider might be easily also fooled by their semi-open (or pretending-open) approach and what they sold to the public as truth.
  
  It looks like a mandala of deception and self-deception… I think, it was, is and will be a lot of work to untangle their distortions, denials and misleading information…
671

NO NAME on February 12, 2017 at 3:49 pm
Reply

Let’s see what more the week ahead brings, eh? Things are moving thick and fast and stuff is happening as we speak, Im sure.
672

tenpel on February 19, 2017 at 8:45 pm
Reply

There is a new The Guardian article about Triratna (published this morning): “Fears mount over scale of Buddhist sect sexual abuse” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/19/buddhist-sexual-abuse-triratna-dennis-lingwood

We will post a second article on that issue later the day. As you can see, Munisha – the TBO “overall safeguarding officer” who is at the same time also TBO’s communication head or PR head – is really good in whitewashing and downplaying what happened and why it happened …
673

Whitewash, Dishonesty & Culture of Abuse in the Triratna Buddhist Order (TBO) – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on February 19, 2017 at 10:53 pm
Reply

[…] Munisha’s seemingly rational and balanced response at the end of the Guardian article – “Everybody knows he’s had sexual relationships with some of the people in the community. Some people around today say they were very happy with those relationships, and some say, no, they didn’t really want to, and felt confused by his advances and felt he should not have put them in that position.” – is in fact nothing more than the downplaying of the deep harm people have experienced. (See for instance the stories of Mark, Prasannasiddhi, Glen, Yashomitra, Ananda or Björn.) […]
674

joe on February 24, 2017 at 5:33 pm
Reply

It is interesting that the senior party is believed to the detriment and denial of what the junior party says: Mark, ex-Prass, ex-Yashomitra, Bjorn ….. Can so many really have got similar things involving manipulation so wrong?

Ex-Yashomitra also tried to get Sangharakshita to tell the truth about their sexual relationship. Here is what Lingwood says in ‘Conversations with Bhante’: 2009 There was the Guardian article and there was Yashomitra’s letter in
Shabda.
Both the article and the letter contained allegations that were at variance with my own recollections, and I am therefore puzzled. In Yashomitra’s
case, I remember him and being with him, being at Padmaloka and at Il Convento in Tuscany for his ordination course. I remember going for walks with him and so forth, but I have no recollection of any sexual contact with him. I find that puzzling, because I thought I remembered every encounter, even if the details sometimes elude me.

Maybe BJorn remembers the details that elude Sr in this case? The details being that Sr was the active partner in oral sex and joined in other sexual activities quite happily. Thanks to BJorn for telling the truth.

Maybe the details elude LIngwood when the sexual partner is under the age of consent, as in ex-Yas;s case or when the sexual activity takes place well after Lingwood claims he became happily celibate and whilst wearing a golden kesa.

Mahamati has stated that he has no reason not to believe Sangharakshita, who seems to be claiming that he has not breached his vow of celibacy. This, as a member of The Art Of Truth and Reconciliation (TRiratna) Facebook group points out would justify a sacking in the real world as a dereliction of safeguarding duty. Sanghrakshita actually says he asked another OM to put a bed in his room for the very handsome young mitra, who he had had spiritual control over in the lead up to the sex that took place between them. The sex that apparently eludes Sr’s memory …Noone offered a duty of care to the handsome young mitra. Noone monitored what was happening when BJorn became his ‘companion’ and someone even put a bed in the room at Sr’s request …. ANd noone except Dharmaghosha supported Bjorn who disobeyed Sr and told the truth that a sexual relationship was taking place that St had told him to keep secret. Dharmaghosha was silenced by others when he flagged up concerns about Sr claiming to have been celibaye since mid 8s.

So …. another sexual partner is denied, dismissed, denigrated in ‘normal for FWBO / Triratna’ power mode.

It takes guts from Bjorn to tell his story and Bjorn is to be thanked and congratulated for telling the truth. It shows just what lengths Sr and those close to him will go to NOT to tell the truth and to avoid any apology.
- 675
  
  tenpel on March 12, 2017 at 2:10 am
  Reply
  
  Thank you. I agree and thank also Björn for his courage and insistence on the truth.
  Its all deeply troublesome. The whole hints a totally rotten culture of thinking. This rotten culture has manifested again, when the TBO leadership gave Sr the opportunity to slander via TBO structure one of his former victims (Mark) who dared to speak up and to insist on the harm he has experienced and is experiencing from Sr’s actions. Safeguarding? Is safeguarding to denigrate or silence or defame victims and to promote the view of the perpetrator?
676

The NSPCC, the Triratna Buddhist Community and the Safeguarding of Children – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on February 27, 2017 at 1:24 pm
Reply

[…] FWBO / Triratna – Sangharakshita – Cases of Sexual Abuse (on Buddhism Controversy Blog with more than 650 comments, 2016) […]
677

A Letter To The College of Public Preceptors By The Aryaloka Spiritual Vitality Council – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on May 4, 2017 at 9:38 pm
Reply

[…] FWBO / Triratna – Sangharakshita – Cases of Sexual Abuse […]
678

NSPCC Opens Triratna Case – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on May 17, 2017 at 9:11 pm
Reply

[…] FWBO / Triratna – Sangharakshita – Cases of Sexual Abuse […]
679

Spiritual Master on May 20, 2017 at 9:51 am
Reply

My time with the Ipswich Buddhist Centre was a mixed bag. In time, I came to see the FWBO as a cult-like and controlling movement as my following sharing will allude to.

https://ipswichbuddhistcentre.wordpress.com/2016/10/26/ipswich-buddhist-centre-experience/

https://ipswichbuddhistcentre.wordpress.com/2016/10/31/legal-disclaimers-reporting-abuse-at-the-ipswich-buddhist-centre/
680

Free Spirit on May 20, 2017 at 12:22 pm
Reply

I saw a lot of hypocrisy in the movement. Those with high paying jobs who donated large sums to the centres and who confessed to not having a meditation practice were mysteriously fasttracked to Ordination. Those who questioned the Order were sometimes subjected to ridicule, emotional abuse and severe restrictions were placed on their freedom.

In my opinion and experience the FWBO was an abusive movement within which I experienced deriding treatment, chastisement, disrespect and severe emotional abuse. It was only after I had fully left the movement and detoxed from that toxic control energy several years later was I able to recognize that it was unhealthy abuse.

My only regret was that I did not see the signs sooner before investing a lot of my time into their centres and businesses. It is mentioned here in the benefit of public interest. I am also well past organizations threatening to sue me for not keeping quiet. In every instance this has happened in my life invariably I have been able to speak the truth later without reprisal – despite gag orders and the like.

Problems started for me when the Order began to attempt to interfere in my personal life including my relationship decisions. There were lots of silly rules about what one could and could not say in the centres. If it challenged some invisible ‘status-quo’ or some unspoken rule one could not say it.

There were ways you were expected to behave – except there was no way of knowing what those expectations or rules actually were because in reality they only existed in the minds of the Order members who made them up as they went along to maintain their position of illusory superiority! (cult dynamic)

Others in the Order had admitted to having gay sex with the founder of the movement Sangharakshita. Just Google the FWBO Files.

I will not name those who admitted to such things but suffice to say there were many who shared such things with me – enough to show me that those who were ordained in the beginning were ordained out of favoritism because they consented to casual gay sex with Sangharakshita.

Thus I saw the movement had no serious spiritual credibility as it was tainted by serious breaches of the sexual conduct precept. I am not gay myself and have no issue with homosexuality in itself – but sexuality and spirituality rarely mix well and can give rise to a host of serious ethics violations and abuses.

Things like free-will of the individual, the freedom to pursue relationships and different career paths were in my opinion not respected in the FWBO and the Ipswich Buddhist Centre. There was a strong undercurrent consisting of the push to become ‘as FWBO as possible’ – by this I mean that it was expected and was also seen as desirable to become fully integrated into the FWBO and their philosophies. Anything ‘non-FWBO’ was perceived as a threat to the movement and thus there were a lot of strange notions floating around – one had to be politically correct in what one said, one had to seek
permission to do things in one’s life and once one was in the FWBO it was an unspoken thing that it would be a one way trip into lifelong subservience.

In the end I began to see the light and saw the movement for what it was – a thousand or so Buddhists that had followed a leader embroiled in sexual controversy and scandal. It seemed to me also that the movement was a magnet for emotionally wounded men (me alike at the time) and many of those individuals compensated for their emotional deficiencies by controlling or abusing others whilst hiding behind the structure of the FWBO

I also experienced my own upset and sense of injustice at the time and worked to own my part in the story, yet the FWBO continued to ignore the lessons and my concerns – even years later when I sought a formal apology, and then went on to help a criminally fraudulent company put me in jail, which was unsuccessful, because he himself had a dishonest deposition.
681

Free Spirit on May 22, 2017 at 3:18 pm
Reply

I want to do my moral duty and report this cult known as the Triratna Buddhist Community. It was named the FWBO (Friends of the Western Buddhist Order), prior to a name change made in order to try and shake off its questionable past.

Many people have had the courage to stand up and tell the truth about sexual abuse at the hands of the leader. This is a very serious allegation, but one that Sangharakshita (also known as Dennis Lingwood or Bhante) has formally admitted, confessed and apologized for.

Here is the evidence for the cult activites and links to press articles and TV documentaries where people speak up about what happened. In total there are 100+ whistleblowing websites made, but here are the ones to substantiate the truth

http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/triratna-buddhist-community/-/triratna-buddhist-community-sangharakshita-dennis-lingwood-triratna-controversy-fwbo-1374581

https://vimeo.com/195316886 (BBC Inside Out Report)

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/19/buddhist-sexual-abuse-triratna-dennis-lingwood ( UK Press)

Here is Bante’s confession

thebuddhistcentre.com/news/statement-urgyen-sangharakshita

and a public letter from the Preceptors College admitting sexual wrongdoing

thebuddhistcentre.com/news/letter-triratnas-college-preceptors
682

Martin on June 11, 2017 at 11:00 pm
Reply

I experienced the same pressure to engage in homosexual sex at the Sydney (Australia) branch of this movement. When this happened, I started to search the web for the movement and came upon Mark Dunlop’s articles online and quickly left the movement. The leaders, astoundingly, tried to justify both the abuse of Mark, and the attempted abuse of myself.,, saying that the “spiritual friendship” was for my benefit. “Spiritual friendship” was a code word for sexual abuse of young men by the leaders. I got away untouched, but had I been a little psychologically weaker, as many in the group were, I too could have been another victim of this corrupt group. This happened only a few years ago, not way back in the 1970s or 1980s. The abusive nature of this group continues. Avoid ANY branches of this movement around the world. The poisonous sexual abuse culture is far from gone.
- 683
  
  tenpel on June 12, 2017 at 1:37 am
  Reply
  
  Thank you Martin for sharing this!
- 684
  
  NO NAME on June 14, 2017 at 12:13 pm
  Reply
  
  SHABDA-Vidyaratna, Melbourne 98 [ this date and Martins account makes it clear that Sydney and Melbourne are being run on the same heterophobic framework and is clear evidence that these gay conversion activities are either recent or current]
  
  (This piece written Dec 97) I have not reported in to Shabda for a couple of years but am tempted back into print by a couple of recent developments in Melbourne and beyond. … Not much has been said in Shabda in the seven years I have lived here about the ongoing difficulties in the chapter and FWBO situation here and some of what has been said has seemed to me to be lacking in honesty.
  
  My perception is that the centre and council here have ceased to be sufficiently representative of what I would regard as genuine Buddhist � principle and practice. The way Dayamegha has been treated by Buddhadasa in particular, but also Siladas, I regard as quite shameful, unskillful and quite indefensible.
  
  Unfortunately I cannot persuade the president, Devamitra, or Vessantara as overall Chapter convenor, that this is the case or indeed, to do anything very much. I cannot say it gives me any confidence whatsoever in the Preceptor’s college or the grasp of ethics of some senior Order Members. I was amused to read in the ‘official’ responses to the Guardian article that abuses of ‘power’ and status a la Croydon could not occur again. Seems to me they both could and have!”
  
  (Vidyaratna�s February report): “I reported in last month for the first time in years. To my surprise, my report was deemed to be in breach of the speech precept, so I was asked to change it, which I did. I was then asked to consider withdrawing altogether, which I thought about but decided against it. It still failed to appear, due to an ‘accident’. Not the only report last month which failed to appear either….As it turns out, the Order Members who deemed my report unsuitable were themselves criticised and appear to be unconcerned about some of the events in Melbourne or the effects of some actions…
  
  I am left with considerable reservations about the way the movement is developing and the capacity of some of those who seem to be running things to actually do so in a way I support. I think the atmosphere of secrecy that surrounds a number of issues is very unhelpful and unhealthy. I am inclined to the view that this is an English ‘disease’, little groups of ‘right thinking chaps’ deciding things in private. Can’t let the masses know, y’know and all that rubbish. FWBO Melbourne has been run like that for years, to its considerable detriment. I wonder what else we, as Western OMs, don’t know about events in our centers or in India. How do we know that it has not been decided that certain things should be kept from us?”
685

Stephen on June 13, 2017 at 10:06 pm
Reply

Is Martin able to shed more light on the processes and persons involved? Thank you for sharing. This is also a strength.
- 686
  
  Martin on June 14, 2017 at 4:20 am
  Reply
  
  Hi Stephen. I have left this place behind me now. I am not going to name anyone. If anyone from Sydney happened to be reading this, they would have little trouble working it out. For those who are not part of this cult… stay away. Or. Get out of there.
- 687
  
  Stardust on June 14, 2017 at 6:52 am
  Reply
  
  It seems the concept of ”spiritual friendship” is still abused to divert from adressing issues… Thank you Martin, it is important to get information such as yours to get insight in how the unsufficiently adressed issues ‘from the past’ are stil affecting dynamics in present time.
688

Stardust on June 15, 2017 at 4:55 pm
Reply

From https://www.freebuddhistaudio.com/texts/read?num=FBA97&at=text&q=zen&p=2 ”A Letter to Norman Fischer
January 28th 2003”. Publically available on the free buddhist audio website which contains the ”sound and text archives of the The Triratna Buddhist Order”.
It is linked to on the article from this thread.

This imo is relevant for the NSCPP and Police.

”Sometimes people acted badly and, without really seeing what they were doing, they used bullying or manipulation (… ) Sometimes that got really bad, and sometimes they copied Sangharakshita’s sex life, which made it worse still.”

”The detail made it worse, as some people had always known it would. It wasn’t just a short period of experimentation, it went on for twenty years. It wasn’t just a few lovers, it was dozens of people. And was it really an aspect of friendship, as Sangharakshita had
said? Some of the men were very young, even under the legal age of consent, which had been 21, and they hadn’t always felt free to say no.”
- 689
  
  tenpel on June 15, 2017 at 10:51 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you. The NSPCC case article is linking to this (I only detected this now). Nevertheless, thank you for highlighting it because I was not aware of it because I didn’t follow the suggested link. To make that more known, I wrote to the NSPCC, informed some people and added it as a quote at the top of the NSPCC article.
690

Stardust on June 16, 2017 at 12:43 am
Reply

Posted the 15th of june, Adhistana Kula archive:
”Why restorative approach”

The is no mention btw of the case opened by the NSCPP.

”We have asked Janine Carroll, director, http://restorativenow.com/ to work directly with those who remain unhappy about their sexual relationships with Sangharakshita in the 1970s and ‘80s and she is also advising and training us on how we can effectively extend the process to the resolution of other outstanding disputes and harms (for example by training some of the presidents of our public centres in Restorative process*). By its nature the more personal work is confidential, and it has already begun.”
https://thebuddhistcentre.com/adhisthana-kula/why-restorative-approach

It does not give information on wether the selection process is controled by the Adhistana Kula as seemed to be the case here.
https://thebuddhistcentre.com/adhisthana-kula/reconciliation-process

This is a worldwide organisation…
- 691
  
  tenpel on June 16, 2017 at 9:03 am
  Reply
  
  I find this phrase “those who remain unhappy about their sexualsexual relationships with Sangharakshita” alarming!!
  
  If I were harmed by Sangharakshita and the TBO culture I wonder if I would use that opportunity because I find this deeply dishonest, manipulative and a denial because it’s not about me being “unhappy” but me having been abused, manipulated, indoctrinated and brainwashed by a sick leader and a sick culture which enabled these abuses. The phrase doesn’t take those been harmed by sexual abuse and the abuse of power seriously it plays the harm down to a personal issue, to a personal unhappiness / in the context of the dharma this further insinuates “you are a bad practitioner”.
  
  It’s a common strategy also of the NKT cult to respond to criticism with “if you are unhappy about NKT…” such phrasing implies the NKT hasn’t done anything wrong it’s you who are wrong, it’s you who are unable to keep a happy mind – it’s your fault, you are not even a good practitioner. It’s your personal business, therefore you have to fix it.
  
  Apply this analysis to the TBO phrasing, then you can understand that the phrase basically implies, Sangharashita or TBO haven’t done anything wrong but if YOU are not happy with your “sexual relationship” (it was abuse of power or sexual abuse in many cases, not a “sexual relationship”!) then we the good guys from the TBO offer you help… / what type of help, btw? To learn to be happy about “sexual relationships” which I experienced and judge as sexual abuse?
  
  Thinking from the perspective of person been harmed would I in any way have faith in such an offer, such a “restorative process” or the intentions and mindset behind it?
  - 692
    
    Stardust on June 16, 2017 at 10:26 am
    Reply
    
    Just one more respond to that… They are just so mad…
    
    I agree, the formulation adressing ”those who remain unhappy with their sexual relationship with Sangharakshita” is alarming, especially together with TBO’s respond over the years…reflecting shamefull treatment of people who felt violated! By their most senior and apparently well respected OM’s…
    Although the mediator is supposed to be a professional external mediator, it is only her as it seems, and she is for some reason TBO’s choice… How much does she know about Triratna’s dysfuntionality? What information has she been fed so far. It is quite complex material…
    Also aknowledgement seems vital, not the again mentioned emphasis of forgiving and apology…
    I am getting soooo bored with forgiveness and apology!!
    On top of that what about the criteria that you need to have had a sexual relationship with SR… what about others? What if Sr has forgotten..?
    It is, (sorry for the repetitions…) not clear who controles the selection. Some people have, by the A kula (for example Mahamati) and CPP, been denied their truth of having had sexual contact with Sr alltogether! I understood from their previous offer Mahamati was to represent Sr………………. What is their understanding of integrity, healthy ethics and boundaries…?
    
    And hey you there A K members, you might not like the blog here much, but what about not putting up information on the nscpp case and reference number on the Kula blog..?
- 693
  
  NO NAME on June 16, 2017 at 1:56 pm
  Reply
  
  HOW DOES TRIRATNA DEFINE “independent, external scrutiny”?
  
  ”We have asked OUR COLLEAGUE Janine Carroll, director, http://restorativenow.com/ to work directly with those WITHIN THE ORDER who remain unhappy about their sexual relationships with Sangharakshita in the 1970s and ‘80s and she is also advising and training us ORDER MEMBERS on how we can effectively extend the process to the resolution of other outstanding disputes and harms (for example by training some of the ORDER MEMBER presidents of our public centres in Restorative process*). By its nature the more personal work is confidential, and it has already begun.”
  
  This is the dogs
  This is still keeping everything behind closed doors, beyond scrutiny.
  You hire your mate to train TBC members to resolve everything in house
  
  “By its nature the more personal work is confidential, and it has already begun.” ‘
  “Its all ‘personal’ ‘confidential but we are dealing with it. Its ok, Dont worry-“These are not the droids we’re looking for”
  
  When I click my fingers you will wake up feeling refreshed and totally brain washed
694

Anomymous on July 10, 2017 at 3:53 pm
Reply

Adhisthana’s reconciliation kula/program is a shim-sham.

They claim to offer a reconciliation process for those harmed by him or the movement, but in reality, they just respond and say something along the lines of the feedback will be used to understand similar events in future, at least thats what they said to my complaints.

It does nothing to address the outstanding complaints of abuse.

So its a scam, to make it look like they want to reconcile and help people, but they write a basic acknowledgement and say the feedback will be used to understand similar events in future and that’s it!
- 695
  
  x on July 11, 2017 at 9:34 am
  Reply
  
  My recent request for mediation after their ”reconsiliation offer” has not been responded to either. My request for mediation around escalation re a relationship with a uk based senior om 1,5 years ago was denied then too.
  The above suggested approach sounds very familiar also locally. (netherlands) Suggestions made for wanting to help, some aknowledgement (verbally) Then: nothing/fatalisme. More violations of trust, integrity and agreements follow when asking for practicle help. Boundaries and needs not respected. No accountability for any of this being possible. This only leading to íncrease of manipulations and shaming. (i posted an account with some of the communication of om’s to me here previously)
  
  I have recently been let known that there are now ethical quidelines. (?) And that they are sorry if (if…) they did not respond to my questions in a way that was helpfull.
  
  Bear in mind: the dynamics one is exposed too are toxic.
  - 696
    
    tenpel on July 11, 2017 at 10:58 am
    Reply
    
    Thank you. Sadly, this is what those familiar with such dynamics expected.
    
    It looks like I missed to read your account. Can you send a link to it?
    
    I wish you all the best, genuine support and friends and recovery.
    Let me / us know if we can do anything do for you.
  - 697
    
    Stardust on July 11, 2017 at 9:55 pm
    Reply
    
    x@ Respect. _()_
  - 698
    
    x on August 20, 2018 at 11:40 am
    Reply
    
    To report I have been invited and participated in their restorative process.
    I was told this process was wrapped around my needs. Subsequently those where fully ingored and i was cutt off after a selfserving letter from the Ethics Kula vaguely suggesting responsability had been taken.
    I think any communication within context of a continuation of a complex of deeprooted organisational issues, lying at the heart of the matters anyhow, is rather counterproductive and the offering of this restorative approach a mere validation of their deceptive narrative of accountability.
  - 699
    
    x on August 20, 2018 at 11:59 am
    Reply
    
    Tenzin,
    I have sent you for more insight the related documents and a more elaborated personal report.
700

Spiritual Master Free Spirit on July 13, 2017 at 2:01 pm
Reply

I can add to my previous sharings that I received the legal all-clear to release my Life Story into the public domain as a mainstream book later this year as well as to release extracts, so if the owner of this blog wants me to post a guest blog about my experiences he can contact me via the email address submitted in this comment form.

There were some obstacles as it contained some 30 pages of a candid sharing of my experiences with Triratna (then the FWBO)

My lawyers told me that I had to give the movement a chance to review the material and to have the opportunity to formally object.

The movement raised no objections thus in due course, more of my experiences can be freely shared.
- 701
  
  tenpel on July 13, 2017 at 4:15 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you! I will read it ASAP.
- 702
  
  tenpel on July 14, 2017 at 5:15 pm
  Reply
  
  Sorry, the material is not suitable for this blog. I won’t post it.
703

tenpel on July 14, 2017 at 5:14 pm
Reply

A good example how to deal with the abuse of power by Lamas or Rinpoches who (ab)use their power position to have sexual relationships with their students has been set in New York.

The Sangha of the »Kagyu Thubten Choling«, a New York-based monastery and retreat center in the Kagyu school of Tibetan Buddhism, hosted a Sangha-wide Disclosure Meeting. They informed their community that their founder and principal abbot of the monastery, Lama Norlha Rinpoche, had been involved sexually with a number of female students over the last two decades.

At the meeting it became clear that most of the women felt the (sexual) relationship to be detrimental to their psychological and personal wellbeing. The Sangha involved An Olive Branch, to facilitate a restoration of organizational health. http://www.an-olive-branch.org

Lama Norlha has since been removed from the teaching seat and KTC has established a new ethics policy that specifically prohibits sexual relationships between students and teachers, and a clear grievance procedure for resolving complaints and concerns through their Ethics Council.

See more here: https://www.lionsroar.com/kagyu-thubten-choling-addresses-sangha-about-lama-norhla-rinpoches-sexual-misconduct-with-students/

A good discussion can be found here: https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1412138312213001&id=100002505372892
704

R.J. Nadon on August 20, 2017 at 7:31 pm
Reply

I was involved with FWBO and it effected my mental health and career. I have always blamed my own stupidity for trusting it and did not think of it as being a victim. Now I am not so sure. I think the roof should be lifted from this religion as well as other established religion. I still think about what happened at age 70 and so I guess the WBO is still inside me controlling my thoughts and feelings
- 705
  
  Stardust on August 20, 2017 at 8:50 pm
  Reply
  
  The Triratna saga continues with ”A Complex Personality: A Note.”
  Starting off as following:
  ”In the personal statement that I issued on December 30th 2016 I said, among other things, 1) that the FWBO/Triratna sometimes bore the marks not of the Dharma but of my own particular personality and 2) that that personality was a complex one. These words have been the subject of much discussion within the Order and in some quarters they have been seriously misunderstood. The fact that I spoke of the FWBO/Triratna sometimes bearing the marks not of the Dharma but of my own particular personality has been taken to mean that those marks were always negative. Far from this being the case, I believe that those marks were almost entirely positive, as will be seen if we take a look at some of the strands that go to make up the complexity to which I refer.”
  https://thebuddhistcentre.com/adhisthana-kula/complex-personality-note-new-piece-writing-sangharakshita
  A reminder of the context in which this notorious comment was made:
  ”I being its founder, Triratna sometimes bears the mark not of the Dharma but of my own particular personality. That personality is a complex one and in certain respects I did not act in accordance with what my position in the movement demanded or even as a true Buddhist. I am thinking in particular of the times when I have hurt, harmed or upset fellow Buddhists, whether within Triratna or out of it.”
  http://www.sangharakshita.org/personal-statement.html
  - 706
    
    Stardust on August 21, 2017 at 4:31 pm
    Reply
    
    The personality traits mentioned being: having ”a natural afﬁnity with Buddhism”, prevering ”the positive to the negative”, being ”drawn to the arts rather than to science”, being ”a good organizer” and a ”cosmopolitan”.
    
    Maybe giving some more insight would be welcomed by some into how these personality traits relate to the mentioned ”particular” ”times”.when having ”hurt, harm or upset” as suggested in the ”personal statement”…?
    Do pass on the suggestion please.
    - 707
      
      Stardust on August 21, 2017 at 5:27 pm
      Reply
      
      His eyes fortunately form no obstical anymore for public communications: ”Now that I have retired from active participation in the work of Triratna, I may feel like involving myself in matters of public debate.”. ” Some of my friends may consider this a better way of using my time and energy than writing about my complex personality, which may seem rather selfindulgent.” It does.
- 708
  
  tenpel on August 20, 2017 at 10:45 pm
  Reply
  
  Thank you for sharing.
  Naivety is only one of many causes you need also the setup and work of many people to be involved in this. Like with a con artist, if he is really good he can cheat quite anybody. So, it’s never only one‘s own fault.
  
  I wish you well-being, ease, clarity and joy. T
709

Mark Dunlop’s Response to Sangharakshita’s February 2017 Memoir – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on September 2, 2017 at 7:30 pm
Reply

[…] FWBO / Triratna – Sangharakshita – Cases of Sexual Abuse (on Buddhism Controversy Blog with more than 650 comments, 2016) […]
710

Kevin Mcgeever on December 22, 2017 at 8:40 pm
Reply

The FWBO are still in contact with perpetrators of psychic and sexual abuse from the 90s who are now in Scotland, Dabidh Grannd. Murderers, horrifying uses of blackmagic.

. Awful people I could never have imagined in my worst nightmares.
- 711
  
  tenpel on December 26, 2017 at 6:54 pm
  Reply
  
  Kevin, these are heavy and seem to be exaggerated accusations. Murderers; blackmagic, … what are you talking about?
712

Kushinagar Online on December 27, 2017 at 11:14 am
Reply

hi great post. i have designed a website specially for Kushinagar as i can feel after reading your post that you have great attachment with kushinagar. Check out our website http://www.kushinagaronline.com
713

tenpel on May 12, 2018 at 12:06 am
Reply

For your general information

Two articles were taken down with respect to Triratna, “The NSPCC, the Triratna Buddhist Community and the Safety of Children” + the “NSPCC Opens Triratna Case” article. Details will be given soon and the comments (which contain very valuable and important information) will be provided via a PDF.

A new article about TBO and safeguarding on a talk Munisha gave just in Germany about safeguarding and Triratna will also be posted. I hope these tasks can be finished in the next 5 days.

For those who need to access the old articles – e.g. to search for certain details or information found in the comments, please use the wayback machine or web archive for the time being: https://web.archive.org

I apologise for any inconvenience. Thank you for your patience and understanding.
- 714
  
  tenpel on July 3, 2018 at 4:09 pm
  Reply
  
  UPDATE
  
  Now also the two links were removed from the post which linked to the “The NSPCC, the Triratna Buddhist Community and the Safety of Children” and the “NSPCC Opens Triratna Case” posts under the headings of “Update February 2017” and “Update May 2017”.
  
  Both posts are still in a revision process which takes more time than initially thought. The revised posts will make clear why both posts have been taken down. We also need to revise the comments of those posts which we want to continue to provide via a PDF (one post hat about 500 comments and very useful information). The revision of the comments we have to make in order to avoid legal threats or a legal case.
  
  Munisha sent me the following statement regarding conflict of interest as Communication Officer and Safeguarding Officer:
  
  I took up the post of Communications officer for Triratna in 2013. In that post, I started noticing the need for central Safeguarding policies for Triratna. As Communications officer I had the skills to write such policies, particularly as I had written Safeguarding policies in my previous job. Soon it became clear it would be important for Triratna to have a named Safeguarding officer too, and it was natural for me to take on that title, having written the policies.
  
  It was only after writing Triratna’s response to the September 2016 BBC report that it became clear to me that there was a potential conflict of interests between Safeguarding and PR as an aspect of Communications work; that my Safeguarding work could be dismissed as merely an attempt to make Triratna look good. I would utterly deny this, but nevertheless, in October 2016, a few weeks after the BBC report, I stood down as Communications officer to concentrate on Safeguarding, which has been my job ever since.
  
  https://thebuddhistcentre.com/news/observer-interview-what-i-really-said-munisha-triratna-safeguarding-officer
715

Triratna: the eye of the storm – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on July 3, 2018 at 3:01 pm
Reply

[…] passages in the FAQ concerning Mark Dunlop and former German Mitra B are highly contentious, but I feel that both of these individuals can argue their cases quite […]
716

Clergy Sexual Abuse & Buddhist Ways of Dealing With Abuse | Triratna’s Whitewashing Terminology – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on July 15, 2018 at 1:19 pm
Reply

[…] An example shared by Triratna of a person who found the “sexual relationships” useful is Sanghadeva. Read his account, which he gave for Shabda, the TBO internal newsletter, carefully. In fact it took him 15 years (!) to see these “sexual relationships” as “helpful”. However, there are still others who have clearly reported to be harmed – e.g. here a list of 9 human men: Matthew & Tim, Mark, Jerry, Prasannasiddhi, Glen, Yashomitra, Ananda or Björn. […]
717

Sangharakshita Obituary – Tibetan Buddhism – Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on December 4, 2018 at 10:16 pm
Reply

[…] FWBO / Triratna – Sangharakshita – Cases of Sexual Abuse 2016/09/27 […]
718

Stephen Clayton on January 5, 2019 at 9:24 pm
Reply

I had a brief 2-3 year involvement with Triratna around 2005-2008 and in Leeds. These abuses were spoken about in hushed tones by some order members and everyone knew, though nothing was EVER said during formal community discussions. In such discussions Bhante would be feted and fawned over. I found the whole culture to be hierarchical and sycophantic – if you said anything that challenged local order members then that was the easiest way to become marginalised. This is very subtly abusive and 10 years on I see it all as very cult like.

What interests me now is that many order members have held professions that would have compelled them to speak out about abuse were it happening anywhere else (e.g. social work) though within the order and within their own community they were silent.

I left very confused about the power dynamics and feeling very ostracised for daring to have views that ran ‘against the grain’ including on joys of – dare I even say it here – formless meditation!!

What I learned is that the most dangerous thing about ourganisations such as Triratna is the suspension of critical thinking – and the tendency to alienate and subtly punish this capacity within group members. Human nature is thrown out in pursuit of some sprurious and idealised Buddha nature.
- 719
  
  tenpel on January 5, 2019 at 10:12 pm
  Reply
  
  Hi Stephen, happy to hear that you enjoy formless meditation. I enjoy it too.
  
  I agree, the strange point is that these abuse were acceptable to psychologists, therapists or social worker who would not accept it in their working area and who definitely should now it better. Within Rigpa professional therapists even used gaslighting as therapy manipulating victims of Sogyal Lakar to believe that the abuse they experienced is not due to Sogyal’s harmful actions but family issues etc long ago in their early life. The amount of blindness and lack of critical thinking, as well as self-manipulation, self-brainwashing, denial and projections amongst these professionals is really breathtaking.
  
  Happy to see that you are out of that!
720

Prajnacitta on June 14, 2019 at 12:36 am
Reply

In the video in Post 40, DL is actually talking about himself , not his ‘observation of others’.

I have drawn up Lingwood’s astrological chart and he has Moon in Scorpio. everything he says about ‘what happens at the end of relationships’ and/or the ‘exclusiveness/possessiveness’ of sexual relationships is just an accurate description of the significance of having your natal moon in Scorpio. No deep spiritual insight here at all !! This man is just lacking in self-awareness and projecting his ‘observations’ as if they are issues of others and not himself. the fact that he is ‘horrified’ about the effects of Moon in Scorpio is a reflection of how much his sexuality is in his Shadow (in a Jungian sense) and how much he is unaware of it and its effects.

This presentation is an extraordinary expression of ignorance and lack of self-awareness.
721

Prajnacitta on June 14, 2019 at 5:06 am
Reply

Comment on Post 75

“The reason why Sangharakshita wanted to keep his relationship with the guy secret is that his seniormost disciples had strongly advised him to desist from sexual activities as indeed as far as we know he had done since the late 1980s.”

This is an extraordinary admission that the senior members of the FWBO are complicit in DL’s sexual abuse and that therefore they are, in fact, accessories to the assaults because this comment shows us that the senior members of the FWBO were aware of DL’s sexual predilection and had decided to take steps to mitigate the worst effects of this.

Its very hard for devotees in a cult to stand up to the cult leader and “strongly advise’ that person of to a course of action; particularly if that course of action is to do with his ‘personal life’. That sort of thing can get you kicked out of such a group or at least incur the dis-favour of the only leader / teacher in the organisation, thus jeopardising your position in it. The fact that they were prepared to take that risk (that DL might throw them out) only goes to show how bad the problem of his sexual predilections were.

The senior order members must have felt their position was very threatened, or perhaps even the existence of the FWBO was seriously threatened by the behaviour of DL. In a cult situation, there are very few arguments you can take to the man who has complete spiritual authority over you and actually convince him to do anything; but saying something like: “You must stop this sexual activity or it will destroy the FWBO and destroy all the work you’ve done over the last 35yrs”

But not only did they know about his sexual behaviours and their unbeneficiality, the fact that they have kept silent about his whole issue – and, moreover, tried to maintain the lie that ‘DL was celibate since the 1980’s’, means that they are part of the very culture of silence that goes hand in hand with systemic sexual abuse.

These senior order members are thereby ‘enablers’ by this act of not speaking out and are thereby guilty of facilitating the abuses committed by DL,
722

Prajnacitta on June 14, 2019 at 6:05 am
Reply

Comment on Post 125

“In general, I think its also important to see, that Triratna has also kind people….. I met some Triratna followers (after they left Triratna). All of them follow now different groups or teachers and they didn’t report any real or deeper damage … So it looks to me, Triratna is – as long as you don’t become or are manipulated to become the sexual prey for the desire of the leader (or anyone) of the group, the damage can be also low if it exists at all.”

In my experience in a Buddhist cult group that operated out of a ‘temple’ just outside Norwich at the same time at DL was at Padmaloka, whether or not you were psychologically damaged seems to have correlated with the depth of your involvement in the group. That does not necessarily have anything to do with the length of time within the group, but more your proximity to the centre. If you think of a cult as a web with the leader as the spider in the centre, depending on where you are on the web largely determines how affected you are by the cult think and therefore how psychologically damaged you may become.

I knew many members who were not especially adversely affected by being in the cult due to their lack of direct relationship with the cult leader. As this cult leader had a voracious heterosexual appetite, older males living in parts of the UK away from Norwich and who never visited the temple had very little contact with him and so were much more likely to not be adversely affected. Many of them would leave the group and have nothing but good things to say about their time in the group, how much they learned, how good the people were etc – and even how good the teacher was. The truth is, though, that they just did not know anything about what was going on.

The more you were around him and got closer into his ‘trusted circle’, the more likely you were to be abused (if you were female) and the more likely you became complicit in the abuse if you were one of the cult’s trusted organisers/administrators. All the senior members of the group over at least a 25yr period were aware of what was going on in terms of this teacher’s sexual relations with / sexual abuse of female students and this was the cause of many significant ructions with the group in the years 1974, 1978, 1987, 1994 and 1999.

These (mostly male) administrators (‘trusted right-hand men’) therefore had to endure a developing schizoid mentality as a means of reconciling their experience of the man with their faith in him as a spiritual teacher, until they could not longer do so – at which point they left, either quietly disappearing or by trying to ‘negotiate’ or argue with the cult leader, which effectively led to them being expelled from the order.

For the women who were sexually involved with him, the damage was much more profound. Inevitably, if they dared to end any sexual relationship with him, they were disparaged, denigrated, belittled and tormented until either they returned to him; or if they determined they were not going to do that, they really had no option but to leave the group and ‘abandon the spiritual path’. Some women were very psychologically damaged in this way. Worse still, some were so damaged that they are still covering it up and are still in complete denial about the abuse they suffered to this day.

HOWEVER, this is not to say that there are more insidious forms of psychological damage that occurs to people, not matter how short their involvement in such a group. The ideas, philosophies, practices of groups like the BSBA and FWBO are so tainted and distorted, it takes a huge amount of effort for people to untangle their minds of the deceits and dualities that such lies and distorted practices perpetuate. Obviously though, the more you were involved in such a group, the more deeply those lies and deceits are entrenched in your mind/heart. Sad to say many who left went on to join other similar cultic-like groups (interestingly not to the FWBO though, as far as I am aware).
723

Prajnacitta on June 16, 2019 at 2:19 pm
Reply

A thought has just occurred to me that one way DL may have successfully continued the deceits about his sexual activity is in the choice of words that he has used to describe his sexual activity status since the mid 1980’s.

‘Celibacy’ means: living as a single person, referring to a person who is unmarried
it came to be used to mean ‘not having sex’ because in traditionally Christian countries, one was not permitted to have sex before you got married. But actually, it does not, literally, mean ‘not having sex’ [from the Latin ‘caelebs’ meaning single].

The correct word for ‘not having sex’ is chaste or chastity [from the Latin ‘castus’ meaning pure].

It is inconceivable that a scholar like DL would not have been familiar with such linguistic subtleties and it seems unlikely to me, given other demonstrable deceits and other twists of language and teachings, that he would not have made use of such philological confusions to his advantage. Knowing full well that he was ‘unmarried’ since the mid 1980s, he could happily and readily say that he has been celibate since that time. why do this? Because if he was speaking truthfully, then his words would carry the resonance of truth when heard by others and be readily believed.

Bill Clinton applied the very same tactic when he swore under oath when he stated that he “.. did not have sex with that woman’, referring to Monica Lewinsky. As an older woman pointed out to me, oral sex was not considered to be ‘sex’ amongst teenagers of the generation living prior to the sexual revolution of the 1960’s.

I don’t think DL is very good at lying; but I think he is a master wordsmith.
- 724
  
  Amy on July 24, 2019 at 7:01 am
  Reply
  
  @Prajnacitta,
  
  There is also a third definition for the word “celibacy” which is the tantric “technique” of retaining the sperm during (tantric) sex. Monastics are considered “celibate” as long as they are (supposedly) able to do this tantric trick. (It’s not an exact science, since children are born from these so-called “tantric” unions.) So, if you’re hearing a Tibetan Buddhist use the word “celibacy” chances are good that he/she is really thinking about this third definition, (since most of them seem to consider themselves Vajrayana practitioners).
  - 725
    
    Prajnacitta on July 24, 2019 at 6:27 pm
    Reply
    
    They are using the wrong word then.
    Or they are deliberately using the wrong word because they are trying to confuse and obfuscate either themselves or others, or both.
    Which is what I was saying DL was doing.
    So you seem to be agreeing with me that they are being as deceitful as DL ?
    
    Not sure what you mean by ‘third’ definition? I have only given one – what is the second one you are referring to ? There is only one definition of the word ‘celibacy’, given as above.
    
    Usually when you hear the word ‘tantric’ being used it indicates that the person is somehow trying to spiritually justify their sexual activity. Are you saying that some monks use the word ‘celibacy’ in the same way ?
    - 726
      
      Amy on July 25, 2019 at 1:59 pm
      Reply
      
      @Prajnacitta,
      
      Celibacy, 1st definition: abstaining from sex completely (what most people think when they hear that word).
      2nd definition: single and unmarried, (not necessarily abstaining, and what you were talking about).
      3rd definition: tantric technique (withholding the sperm during sex and delaying or stopping orgasm).
      
      I don’t know if all Buddhist monks use the tantric definition of celibacy, but Vajrayana (Tibetan Buddhist) monks sure do. Yes, they do it on purpose, knowing full well that many Westerners know nothing about tantric techniques, so when people hear a Tibetan Buddhist monk say he’s “celibate” they assume he’s really celibate. That may or may NOT really be the case though, especially if the monk does Tantra/Vajrayana. They think it’s a big secret, and they take vows not to ever tell anyone, but the information can be found everywhere, so the “secrecy” is a big joke. Anyone who really wants this information can find it. Most people don’t check though. They just take a monk’s word for it when he says he’s “celibate” and assume he means the 1st definition.
  - 727
    
    Amy on July 25, 2019 at 2:29 pm
    Reply
    
    @Prajnacitta,
    
    And yes, I am agreeing with you that the tantric ‘monks’ are being deceitful in the same way that you’re talking about with FWBO and others. Some of them may actually be celibate, (and just do visualizations), but you never really know because it’s easy to deceive by thinking that they are “celibate” as long as they are doing the “technique” so they aren’t really breaking their vows. Yeah, right! They are kidding themselves, as well as the rest of the world.
- 728
  
  Amy on July 24, 2019 at 7:14 am
  Reply
  
  Prajnacitta,
  
  Of course, I am not sure if FWBO is a tantric group or not, (but you never really know what they do in secret, or if they consider themselves ‘initiates’ into some sort of mystic tradition that uses those techniques).
  - 729
    
    Prajnacitta on July 24, 2019 at 6:45 pm
    Reply
    
    If you make your teachings up, you can call yourself whatever you like and do whatever you want, whether in secret or not.
    
    Sexual relations in the context of Kalyana Mitrata would probably been openly talked about in ‘tantric’ terms in the FWBO literature had it been considered as a ‘tantric’ act as this would have lent the appearance of authority and legitimacy to the practice. So the fact that it wasn’t talked about like that probably indicates that it wasn’t.
    
    However, the fact that so much of the sexual activity in the FWBO went on in secret, particularly between the primary teachers and their students, makes the FWBO have much more in common with Catholic run care homes than obscure tantric sects.
    
    Systemic sexual abuse always seems to have organisational strategies to cover it up, keep it quiet and keep it hidden; strategies to protect the perpetrators and vilify the victims. That’s what tells you there is something going on that is wrong.
    - 730
      
      Amy on July 25, 2019 at 2:13 pm
      Reply
      
      @Prajnacitta,
      
      Yes, that’s exactly what I mean. That’s why I said I didn’t know if they thought they were doing Tantra or not, since they can make up anything and do stuff in secret, and claim anything. Even if they aren’t doing Tantra, the behavior seems to be pretty much the same in all these different “status/enlightenment” groups.
      
      I am so sick of these men (and women too) using “spirituality” to justify their sexual lust. They should just drop the “celibacy” sham and quit lying and making excuses. Maybe their lust wouldn’t be so out of control if they just lived like normal human beings.
731

tenpel on July 21, 2019 at 8:51 pm
Reply

Here is a new Observer article:
“Buddhist, teacher, predator: dark secrets of the Triratna guru”
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jul/21/sangharakshita-guru-triratna-buddhist-dark-secrets
732

Prajnacitta on July 22, 2019 at 2:04 am
Reply

This older article from the Guardian is also worth a re-read:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/19/buddhist-sexual-abuse-triratna-dennis-lingwood
733

Prajnacitta on July 22, 2019 at 2:38 am
Reply

Interloka Response

Interloka have made a response to the Guardian’s presentation of the findings of the report at their website: http://www.interkula.net/response-to-the-observer-article-21072019-from-the-interkula/

What is especially telling about the state of Triratna is that in over six months since the report was presented, the College of Preceptors and Adhistahana have made no response to it and, therefore, have instituted on action as a result of it:

“We received virtually no response to these recommendations from the Ethics kula or the College when we first sent them to the then-Adhistana kula on Dec 3, 2018”
734

Prajnacitta on July 22, 2019 at 3:07 am
Reply

Kulananda describes Triratna as a Cult

This article from Kulananda can be found at:
http://goingforrefuge.blogspot.com/2017/09/interesting.html

Its an extraordinary confession from someone who was so high up and involved in FWBO/Triratna. A full admission that he was in a sexual relationship with DL 1977-79 but without any glimmer of awareness that such a relationship is necessarily sexual abuse. If he recognised that, he would probably better understand his emotional reaction to being ‘dumped; by DL, and have a clearer idea of what was really going on.

Instead, he (and DL) chose not to talk about it and ‘swept it under the carpet’; and yet he retained a relationship with DL as ‘the spiritual teacher’ at the centre of the mandala. Such years of denial simply serve to entrench the psychological schism that rape and sexual assault initiate. Had he left FWBO and denounced DL back in the 1980’s, he would now be better off emotionally, psychologically and spiritually; at the very least he would be seeing those things that he expresses that he has a glimpse of in this article, with greater clarity and distinction – which is to say greater insight.

The torment of those who are sexually assaulted/abused by their spiritual teachers is made worse by always having to forgive their attacker and venerate their attacker. At least when one is raped on the street, one does not have to face one’s rapist in every meditation centre where you go for Refuge. Refuge ? to a Sangha with a serial rapist at its head ???? As much as a strip club is not a refuge for a woman who has been raped, so neither is any FWBO centre.

Its really very clear. A teacher with whom you have had a sexual relationship is guilty of sexual assault. And anyone who is guilty of sexual assault is not ‘Venerable’. You can only continue to call someone like DL with a venerative title such as ‘bhante’ if you are in denial about the fact that sexually he assaulted you.

Triratna/FWBO is not ‘cultish’; it is a cult.
And a psychologically damaging one at that .

What Unites Us, What Divides Us
Posted by Kulananda on Thu, 14 September, 2017

“As a recently ordained Order member, I’d begun an intimate relationship with Bhante in 1977 and was suddenly and starkly dropped from that in 1979. One moment we were very close, living together at Padmaloka, seeing each other several times a day, then one day – without warning or discussion – I was simply dropped. It was as if I ceased to exist in his world – almost literally. He came down to breakfast, I said hello, he ignored me as if I were invisible and didn’t speak to me again one-to-one for many months. His attention turned to another young man. That led to my leaving Padmaloka in a state of furious confusion. I went to London and founded Windhorse Trading.

After a year or two I made my peace with what had happened. Bhante and I never discussed it and I returned to work for him in various ways in the years that followed. I don’t know what his side of the story was, but for my part I let it all drop.

I love the Order and am grateful to Bhante for having founded it. I’m hugely grateful to him for having helped me to the Dharmic perspectives I take on things. I would never have arrived at these without him. They are a gift beyond price.

But towards the end of my time as a member of the Preceptors’ College and increasingly since then, my love of the Order and my gratitude to Bhante have come to be mixed-in with perceptions that are increasingly critical of how certain aspects of his personality play out in the Triratna project. I believe that our collective failure to address these leads to unreality and distortion. It can leave an almost cultish-ness at the heart of things that, I believe, will ultimately be our downfall. “
- 735
  
  Stardust on July 31, 2019 at 12:33 pm
  Reply
  
  @Pranjacitta
  I found this post of yours (734) particularly helpfull.
  
  As part of psychological defence mechanisms one would develop cognitive dissonance. To stay in the group this would be most defenitely needed. In Triratna they do so while ‘listening deeply’, pretending to have ‘difficult conversations’, offering a ‘restorative process’ ‘extend compassion’ etc etc… It involves extended gaslighting. It’s amazing to see how far they have taken it… through the Adhisthana kula’s alternative reality blog, and will continue to do so I am sure. Psychologically damaging even without having been abused sexually.
  The labeling of sexual misconduct as experimentation, relationships, naivity, even as unskillfull or unethical behaviour etc is part of the denial. However sexual assault is imo a very charged term. Ofcourse there are many variations. The manipulations can be subtle yet involve boundaries being crossed. Abuse of power, trust and position are inherently part of such sexual abuse. It involves primarily a violation of boundaries, integrity and betrayel of trust. An attempt to openly and honostly adress what happened and what those consequences are would lead to getting denied, gaslight, possibly bullied, blamed, shamed and eventually having to leave the group and dealing full on with the disillusionment, confusion, emotions, the losses, emotional and spiritual betrayel and PTSD symptoms. Abuse can become more evident through its consequences.
736

emahaho on July 22, 2019 at 9:05 am
Reply

Thanks prajnacitta, haven’t seen this before. A bit reassured by his late gotten awareness, was concerned about his mindfulness work.
From all accounts, after he was dumped, he became a sangharakshita clone anyway, actively perpetuating “homosexual spiritual mentoring”
Watching with interest if his worries about a schism or downfall will occur. Can see a power struggle between Parami and Subhuti, but both forces of conservatism anyhow.
737

Prajnacitta on July 22, 2019 at 5:11 pm
Reply

The fact that others perpetuated the ‘homosexual spiritual mentoring’ (sexual relationships as an aid to spiritual evolution in kalyana mitrata) shows several things:

1) it legitimised DL’s sexual abuse of students
2) it institutionalised sexual abuse in the order
3) it served as a means of justifying to themselves the awful pain of being sexually assaulted by ones spiritual teacher by ‘normalising’ it
4) it is a way to accept the abhorrent as acceptable and thereby not feel it as wrong or abusive
4) and therefore makes it somehow OK to inflict such pain and torment on others

If you did it to others, then you are as guilty of sexual assault as DL. But since you don’t want to admit to yourself that you have sexually assaulted another you would be unable to concede that you were sexually assaulted by DL. It is by this means that K would have been able to ‘let it drop’. Otherwise he would have to face the full horror of what he has done and the full horror of what has been done to him.

That’s the psychological defence mechanism process. in the meantime, there is also the fact that if he confronted himself/DL about this whole issue, he would have had, at least, a spiritual crises, and would very likely have had to leave the FWBO. He had no incentive to do that because then he would have had to give up everything that he had been doing and thereby end his career. And thereby not be in a position to extort money by setting up a business to make money out of a mindfulness meditation practice freely given to him.

I’m not sure about Parami, but Subhuti I think is a very dangerous character. He is the ’eminence grise’ of the FWBO, he has been so close to the centre for such a long time. At the very least, he is the ‘doctrinal enforcer’ as he has been the one writing the ‘definitive’ tenets of the FWBO, especially in the latter years of DL’s life. It is also inconceivable that he is unaware of everything that DL has done over the years; if so, he must be complicit with so many of the things that have gone on. And yet he is always below the radar…..
738

emahaho on July 23, 2019 at 2:44 am
Reply

Good analysis!

Sangharakshita was steam and Subhuti engine, inseparable
739

Stephen on July 23, 2019 at 10:12 pm
Reply

Excellent analyis by Prajnacitta. Perhaps this could be a guest post if Prajnacitta is agreed?
- 740
  
  Prajnacitta on July 24, 2019 at 6:43 pm
  Reply
  
  I am ok with that
  - 741
    
    tenpel on July 24, 2019 at 8:58 pm
    Reply
    
    Thank you. I didn’t follow the discussion and don’t know exactly to what comment it was referred to as a guest post but if it is useful I am happy to promote your comment by making a guest post out of it.
    - 742
      
      Stardust on July 24, 2019 at 9:36 pm
      Reply
      
      May I suggest to combine Prajnachitta’s analysis with a respond to the Interkula’s respond as in his post nr 730 and so it includes also clearly the article in the Observer? Definitely worth a guest post…
      - 743
        
        tenpel on July 24, 2019 at 9:40 pm
        Reply
        
        Could you kindly pull this together to make a guest post out of it? You could send the guest post by email. I can’t take time to pull this together. An introduction to the guest post might be needed too. So, what about a “Guest Post by Stardust”?
        
        744
        
        Stardust on July 26, 2019 at 6:20 pm
        Reply
        
        It would be good also integrating feedback on the restorative proces by those whom paticipated. I have one, fairly damning, account so far and will ask permission to quote from it. Maybe feedback can be sent to you Tenzin? So it can be sent to me anonimously?
745

emahaho on July 24, 2019 at 3:30 am
Reply

https://www.facebook.com/groups/TAOTAR/
A group that people can join, with triratna and ex triratna people, called art for truth and reconciliation (triratna).
Personally, I find it helpful to be able to dialogue with others, it helps me unpack the trauma.
And it’s great that there is now so much substantive information available on the net that people can read up and reflect on, to decide for themselves whether to get involved or stay with triratna.
746

emahaho on July 25, 2019 at 12:08 am
Reply

Sangharakshita is a lying psychopath, yesterday I read his lengthy convoluted twisted delusional rebuttal of a resignation letter by prasanasiddhi, I remember him as a sweet young boy who had been his “sex companion”, basically a character assassination and smear, couched in the.. I am so sad I did the best for him I did nothing wrong I don’t know what he is talking about he is confused mad etc. The worst thing, sangharakshita is such a con artist that I almost believed him.
- 747
  
  Prajnacitta on July 25, 2019 at 1:50 pm
  Reply
  
  Emahoho – I have not seen that rebuttal. Are you able to copy and paste it here ? Or provide a link to where it can be found ?
748

emahaho on July 25, 2019 at 12:43 am
Reply

Prajnacitta, sangharakshita moon in scorpio, that figures. Moon instinctive sense of getting comfort, found in scorpio in hiding. Scorpio about sex and power, inextricably linked really, and with deception.
Sun in virgo, was it? Control freak..

It seems to me that all five energy precepts were broken. Power, taking not given, sexual abuse, lies, delusion.
749

emahaho on July 25, 2019 at 1:08 am
Reply

Moon in scorpio could also be sense of betrayal by, distrust of the mother. Sangharakshita’s personality held an intractable misogyny of white women, devil incarnate as far he was concerned. This personality trait was perverted into spiritual teaching.
So maybe it was true, he wasn’t “naturally” homosexual.
Mind you, all transmitted religions contain a core of misogyny.
750

emahaho on July 25, 2019 at 11:08 pm
Reply

Prajnacitta, it’s among the numerous responses on triratna page https://thebuddhistcentre.com/node?page=102
https://alaya.thebuddhistcentre.com/index.php/s/dSraqWy1FacPDXg#pdfviewer

Sangharakshita did the same with Mark. I am grateful to Mark who continues to speak up for all of us. But I have not seen prasanasiddhi’s reply.
751

emahaho on July 25, 2019 at 11:31 pm
Reply

Amy, when I was in fwbo, there were rumours, but I used to get evasive answers. So I never found out the truth until years later I had left, when I read fwbofiles. When I questioned sangharakshita himself, he too denied it. Years afterwards I realised he had used a form of words “he did not have a relationship” – this was while prasanasiddhi was his companion. Another woman, an order member who questioned him was told curtly to mind her own business.
752

tenpel on July 26, 2019 at 2:11 pm
Reply

A new French article on Triratna:

https://www.la-croix.com/Religion/Bouddhisme/abus-sexuels-ete-commis-communaute-bouddhiste-Triratna-2019-07-24-1201037358

[Translated by Google translate]

Sexual abuse was committed in the Triratna Buddhist community

Investigation

A report by nine of the 2,000 members of the Triratna Buddhist community and highlighted by The Observer reveals that many adherents have been victims or witnesses of sexual abuse. If measures have been taken, this is insufficient, according to the majority of respondents.

Augustine Passilly, the 24/07/2019 at 16:46 Last modified on 24/07/2019 at 16:58

Sexual abuse was committed in the Triratna Buddhist community

The Triratna Buddhist community was founded by Sangharakshita (pictured right), born under the name of Dennis Lingwood and deceased on October 30th. CC BY 2.0 / AKUPPA JOHN WIGHAM / FLICKR

Speech is increasingly liberated around the phenomena of influence and drift in the spiritual and religious communities, whatever the confession. This time, it is the Buddhist universe that is targeted. A report, dated October 30, made on the initiative of nine members of the community of Triratna, has been revealed to the general public through the article published by the British weekly The Observer, July 21.

Of the 423 people interviewed on a network of 2,000 members in 29 countries around the world, including France, nearly one in five – 16% precisely – would have been a victim or witness of sexual abuse, without having been contacted by the “Repair procedure” put in place in 2017.

The founder Sangharakshita at the origin of sexual abuse

A deviant system that was instituted by the founder of the movement, himself, Sangharakshita, born under the name of Dennis Lingwood and deceased on October 30, 2018. Initiated to Buddhism by Tibetan monks in India, where he spent twenty years, this British returned to England and in 1967 founded the Friends of the Western Buddhist Order (AOBO), later renamed “Triratna Buddhist Community”. He developed his own interpretation of Buddhist spirituality.

Read also
In Burma, the extremist Buddhist movement Ma Ba Tha continues under another name

“Many ideas were unorthodox,” notes The Observer. Lingwood encouraged heterosexual followers to experiment with homosexuality to increase their openness. He was very critical of the nuclear family [two parents and their children, Ed] and mixed communities in general. ”

The abuse also turns out to be financial. “The most invested members can be put under pressure to work, sometimes full-time, in the service of the low-wage community,” said former member Mark Dunlop, interviewed by La Croix.

Sexually abused, like other members, by the founder of Triratna, the latter decides to leave the movement in 1986 after having spent fourteen years there. According to Mark Dunlop, “a number of members of the order have imitated the behavior of Sangharakshita”.

The testimonies quoted in the report confirm this. “I was sexually abused by a former member of the order,” says an adept ordered for over fifteen years. “I know several cases and the details are awful,” says another, also within Triratna for more than fifteen years. They include questionable interventions by members whose profiles are most prominent to discourage victims from filing complaints. ”

A repair procedure is in progress

Contacted by La Croix, the Triratna community claims to be aware of these abuses for more than twenty years, without ever excluding Sangharakshita. “Our main goal is to ensure the well-being of all who have suffered in the past. We are committed as much as possible to solving their problems, “says the institution. In 2013, the managers actually engaged “formal protection work”.

Read also
Around or beyond the Dalai Lama, the awakening of Buddhism in France

Launched four years later, the “reparations procedure” must “learn to deepen difficult discussions, to reflect on the mistakes of the past, to learn from them and to propose policies, protocols, specific procedures as well as training to help deal more effectively with the challenges that the community will face from now on and in the future, “reads Triratna’s website.

However, according to the conclusions of the report published on October 30, “there are potentially dozens of people injured by bad behavior who have not received support in this [procedure]”.

However, it is difficult for British psychologist Michelle Haslam to comment on the movement founded by Sangharakshita. This ex-adherent of the New Kadampa Tradition – which draws on the tradition of Tibetan Buddhism Kadampa – and author of a report on her sectarian excesses explains that “it is really difficult to define a sect. Many people consider that Triratna is a sect, others do not. It’s a question of interpretation. ”
—————————————-
[About La Croix newspaper]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/La_Croix

“La Croix (English: The Cross) is a daily French general-interest Roman Catholic newspaper. It is published in Paris and distributed throughout France, with a circulation of just under 110,000 as of 2009. It is not explicitly left or right on major political issues. The newspaper rather adopts the Church’s position. However, La Croix ought not be confused with a religious newspaper—its topics are of general interest: world news, the economy, religion and spirituality, parenting, culture, and science. …”
753

emahaho on July 27, 2019 at 12:24 am
Reply

Sangharakshita was implying that he was beyond attachment, that’s what he means by he is “not in a relationship”. If you were in fwbo in those days, it will be crystal clear to you. If you were unable to be homosexual, then use women for sex (preferably one night stands) so long as you do not get attached to them, do not develop feelings or bonds.
- 754
  
  Stardust on July 27, 2019 at 6:43 am
  Reply
  
  @emahaho
  That one rings very true with me. Generalised one could maybe say this is rather ‘male’ sort of spiritual bypassing, that is prevailing in Triratna. A more ‘female’ way being submissive. Prevaling also. Not my cup of tea. 😉
  - 755
    
    Stardust on July 29, 2019 at 12:46 pm
    Reply
    
    Did not mean to discredit the complexity of it all…
    I recall an essay by Aparimana aknowledging and giving insight into Triratna’s culture of avoidance in communication, telling half truths etc. I think it was posted by him in the TAOTAR. Maybe you could look that up Emahaho, if you are joined? Thanks.
    - 756
      
      emahaho on July 30, 2019 at 10:08 am
      Reply
      
      This is something I have written over the last few days, but I have been thinking about the issues for years.
      
      These views are highly controversial, and many order members would consider that I should resign for holding them, so it is risky to air them, but I don’t see any other way for us to move beyond our unwanted legacy.
      
      Also, although it is rather long, it is still too short to really back up the points I am making.
      
      ******
      
      I wrote earlier that I believe the “sex and kalyana mitrata” episodes are “just” the most prominent and tangible aspect of deeper problems in the order originating from the influence of SR. This is an attempt to clarify what I meant, and to look at what this might mean for “Truth and Reconciliation”.
      
      I see three main factors which came together to create the “sex and KM” episodes.
      
      The first, most obvious one is that Sangharakshita was overpoweringly attracted to young men, as he himself acknowledges. This is not in its own right particularly troubling (though suffering from compulsive craving does indicate rather limited progress on the Buddhist path). I think that those who want to protect SR and his reputation would like to see this as the only issue, and to regard it as roped off from the rest of who he is. Then they can maintain that SR is still a great Buddhist teacher, with an isolated weakness that has not affected the rest of his work or teaching.
      
      But of course, there was much more going on to make these episodes so damaging, and these other factors cannot be compartmentalised – they are part of who SR is, they have leaked out into the rest of his life, and have become incorporated into the culture of the movement he founded.
      
      The second of the three crucial factors is around SR’s truthfulness.
      
      Given the central role that truthfulness plays in the Buddhist path, many people will assume that SR is very honest, and it may be important to them to be able to see him in this light. Subhuti, for example, wrote in Shabda (August 2010) that: “I have never found him to have lied in the forty years I have known him”.
      
      However, although SR might not tell explicit “black is white” lies, in my experience he routinely manipulates and deceives by using half truths and misleading facts. I am a bit surprised that this is not more often commented on, because it is not hard to spot. Perhaps it is literally unthinkable for many people.
      
      I have many examples in mind, but for brevity, I won’t try to back this up fully here. A well known example illustrates the point: SR used to encourage heterosexuals to experiment with homosexuality by telling them that it was as trivial as changing from tea to coffee. The very strong implication is that this was his own experience, yet we know that he was drawn irresistibly to young men exclusively and had not “experimented with heterosexuality”. Sangharakshita has since pointed out that he never explicitly said “I am heterosexual”. OK, so perhaps, in some very narrow sense, he was not legally lying, yet he was saying something that was not true in his own experience in order to get others to do what he wanted. In any normal situation this would be seen as manipulative and dishonest.
      
      This tendency to manipulate by misleading, albeit without explicitly lying, is not limited to his sexual relationships – it is a theme throughout his communication, it cannot be compartmentalised as just a blind spot around sex. It has been an important factor in how he has related to the movement, and inevitably, it has also influenced what some order members consider to be acceptable communication.
      
      And this brings me to what I think is the third factor in these ‘KM sex’ scandals. In my observation, SR does not strive to faithfully communicate the Buddha’s teaching; rather, he cherry picks what he wants from the Buddhist tradition in order to put across his own message.
      
      As one Order Member put it:
      
      “For Bhante ‘Tradition’ is not some sort of recommendation. When he uses the word ‘tradition’ that is just Bhante addressing the Buddhist world out there to which he is forever bonded by making out that he is a Buddhist in the first place. He does not care about tradition he just finds it tickles his fancy when he encounters similarities between his approach and the historical tradition. So he always mentions it when he sees it not because he is impressed by tradition but in a sort of sociology of religion kind of way. […] He appeals to tradition when it suits him to do so.”
      
      Since SR has not felt obliged to faithfully communicate what the Buddha taught, there has been plenty of room for SR’s teaching to be influenced by his tastes and desires, to the point where it often takes leave of the Buddhist tradition altogether and cannot make any claim to be an expression of the Dharma.
      
      Where the needs of the teacher influence the teaching, you find “Teachings of Convenience” – teachings that are given because the teacher finds it convenient for their disciple to believe it, rather than because the teaching is helpful to the recipient. Our movement’s culture abounds in Teachings of Convenience. The teachings on “Greek Love” were, of course, archetypal Teachings of Convenience, and few would now try to claim the they were authentically expressing the Dharma taught by the Buddha. However, Teachings of Convenience are not limited to a blind spot in the area of sex, they are ubiquitous in our culture. This is not an isolated flaw in an otherwise great Buddhist teacher. Again, for the sake of brevity, I won’t list more examples now.
      
      While Teachings of Convenience have been used on an almost day-to-day basis to get people to do whatever is required at the time, in the background, SR’s tastes have shaped the overall trajectory of his teaching to the point where now, since the seven papers, we are working within a framework that only appears to be “Buddhist” due to the details of the language used. We now have an entire doctrinal system based around the psychology of inspiration, imagination, and ascent to angelic states of being. However beautiful this may be (and it is not without value), it is leading people along a path fundamentally different from the one Buddha taught, where freedom is found by a penetrating awareness of ordinary immediate experience. SR’s recently codified teaching describes a path to heaven, not a path of liberation.
      
      This non-Buddhist doctrinal framework has only become crystal clear in the last few years with the codification of SR’s teaching in the seven papers, however, the underlying psychology has been at work for a long time, and it has been essential in allowing abuses to take place. This ‘path to heaven’ model supports ideas like giving yourself up to the higher will of your teacher; relying on inspiration to carry you through immediate difficulties and reservations; and disregarding your own needs to contribute to some higher good. It is much easier to manipulate people who are inspired to give themselves up to something higher than it is to manipulate people deeply grounded in their immediate experience.
      
      Again, this is not a small oversight of an otherwise great Buddhist teacher, but an indication that SR is not actually a faithful exemplar, or teacher, of the Buddhist path.
      
      SR is impressive, of course; many people are attracted to this, and assume that talent and charisma are necessarily marks of progress on the Buddhist path. However, they they are not. I can agree that SR is ‘immense’; that he is highly intelligent with a huge knowledge of art and culture; that he is charismatic and has a powerful effect on people who are receptive to him; and that he can be kind when it suits him to be kind. However, none of this is proof of being an accomplished practitioner of the Buddhist path.
      
      The fact that SR can, at times, speak with insight and clarity about the Dharma and Buddhist tradition means that he does have much of interest and importance to communicate, but it is not possible to rely on his teaching uncritically. A true Buddhist teacher needs to be better than just “good in parts”.
      
      I don’t think that Truth and Reconciliation is going to be possible without letting go of the idea that SR is a great Buddhist teacher, because it makes it impossible to see the situation for what it is. If you carry the assumption that SR was honest and has faithfully taught the Dharma, then you miss the fact that it was precisely the dynamic of deceit and manipulation through bogus teaching that has made this so painful for those affected. They feel that they have been duped and used because they have been duped and used, not due to some innocent misunderstanding. While SR is seen as a great Buddhist teacher, it is very hard to avoid “victim blaming” – after all, if something has gone wrong, surely it cannot be the fault of the great teacher?
      
      SR’s ways of being have, inevitably, become incorporated into the culture of the movement he founded. To see SR’s shadow side clearly is to see the shadow side of our movement’s culture clearly. Genuine Truth and Reconciliation will heal not just the immediate victims, but the culture of the movement too.
      
      I realise that this is not going to be easy, though. I have noticed over the years that for some order members, SR is a symbol so deep in their psyche that it is absolutely untouchable. From what I can make out, for these people, holding SR in a positive light is psychologically essential. This makes this realistic discussion of SR’s dark side quite impossible, since it would feel like an existential attack – and for good reason, since losing this glowing symbol would massively shake up their psyche with possibly damaging consequences. Unfortunately, I just don’t see how Truth and Reconciliation is going to be possible with these people.
      
      There will be many others whose psyches are not totally dependent on maintaining a sacred projection onto SR, but who do see the order so much in terms of SR, that to discredit him would be to discredit the order. These people may see SR as the source and guarantor of all our teaching, and see order members as essentially passive recipients of his system. For those who see the order in this way, what I have written above may seem like an attack on the order, even an attempt to destroy it. For such people, I suspect that Truth and Reconciliation is only possible hand-in-hand with a re-visioning of the order. We can come to terms with the past and move on if we see SR not at the great teacher who provided a complete system, but as the founder of our community who introduced us to the Dharma. If we see SR as having given us a starting point, rather than a finished product, then his flaws do not matter much, because we are responsible for sorting out the wheat from the chaff, and evolving the order in the light of our own insight and practice.
      - 757
        
        Stardust on July 30, 2019 at 5:12 pm
        Reply
        
        Yes, that’s the one. Thank you…
        It sure is an interesting read.
        
        What is not emphasized here so much is that ofcourse SR/DL and other om’s have equally influenced what in TBO have been considered acceptable relationship ethics.
        
        Among other the perpetuated sexual relationships within kalyana mitrata context, the complicity and denial within the order, combined with the cultivation of a utilitarian attitude towards woman and the valuing of casual sexual relationships higher than commited ones show something of the psychological defence mechanism process well described by Pranjacitta in his post 736, of how the abhorrent/abuse was legitimized, normalized and institutionalised.
        
        The response of the A Kula to the recent Observer article should be understood in context of all that what has been layed out in the open all the way up to the present.
        I do not share the Interkula’s sentiments of being saddened. I rejoice in the latest article in the Observer.
        
        Having said that I am not sure if I will want to write such guestpost now Tenzin, Bruno, Pranjacitta and others. Maybe someone else will be inclined. Anyhow I presume the comments are being well read within TBO also.
      - 758
        
        emahaho on August 1, 2019 at 3:02 am
        Reply
        
        updated version, from aparimana, including examples of paltering, and teachings of convenience
        https://docs.google.com/document/d/13wMMLzt2dVecCROJ7fKMpOYyfkhCqz3PZIJXkFubLUs/edit?usp=drivesdk
        
        “psychologists have recently introduced the term “paltering” to the study of deception:
        “Rather than misstating facts (lying by commission) or failing to provide information (lying by
        omission), paltering involves actively making truthful statements to create a mistaken
        impression.””
      - 759
        
        Prajnacitta on March 17, 2020 at 12:21 pm
        Reply
        
        Well written Emahoho, insightful. Thankyou.
760

Stardust on July 27, 2019 at 6:19 am
Reply

I am a bit puzzled with Michelle Haslams speaking as an expert on Triratna as wel as her view that it is difficult to define a sect.
- 761
  
  tenpel on July 27, 2019 at 7:43 am
  Reply
  
  The article was made under strong time pressure. Contact was made with me 12:20 pm, July 22. Answer was expected until 2:30 pm same day. I contacted the journalist around 2:40 pm same day per email. She contacted me same day 2:52 per telephone from France.
  
  The journalist wanted to hear from me details on Triratna and I had to stress different times that I am not an expert on Triratna and she cannot use me as a source but that I will help her finding contact with ex-members and Inform. Which I did. I have no clue how Michelle came in but given Michelle’s professional background and lack of expertise on Triratna the restrained comment by her makes sense but is not useful for the whole subject.
  
  I warned also the journalist to use good and well informed sources otherwise the quality of the article will suffer.
  The journalist wanted to have all together the very same day. I had to insist different times that I am not an expert on Triratna, not to use me or what I said to her for comment. I stressed that I cannot answer her questions – she still continued to ask me other questions – but that I will help her to have qualified people. So I gave her contact details to 4 ex-members and Inform.
  
  Because she still wanted to make use of some basic information I shared with her on telephone she wanted to quote some things I said to her in order to help her to understand the basics of the Triratna background. Per email I gave permission to quote the following: “I think Triratna thinks with the death of Sangharakshita the problems are fixed. They are not. Behind the abuse is a powerful indoctrination, complicity and whitewashing which has to be questioned and understood.”
  
  So, I think the article and the qualities or lack of qualities must be considered from this rushy and hasty background.
  - 762
    
    Stardust on July 28, 2019 at 8:23 am
    Reply
    
    @Tenzin, thank you for your thorough respond. Maybe Michelle can kindly explain what happened also.
    - 763
      
      tenpel on July 28, 2019 at 12:22 pm
      Reply
      
      Ok. Btw, I’ll put you in contact with Prajnacitta. He replied today. I am a bit busy but will find time late the day to connect you both. T
  - 764
    
    tenpel on July 30, 2019 at 7:25 am
    Reply
    
    Here is the official English version of the La Croix article: https://international.la-croix.com/news/widespread-sexual-abuse-alleged-inside-triratna-buddhist-community/10590
765

Bruno on July 27, 2019 at 12:41 pm
Reply

It is important to get voice for the FWBO mitra and young order members who made vesectomy only because of pressure and indoctrination from senior men, also at time of homosexual mentoring. Indoctrination to make vasectomy was made in Windhorse Cambridge and strong in Mexico. In Mexico Triratna says they did investigation but report was denial and whitewashing by man who love Sangharakshita.
- 766
  
  Stardust on July 27, 2019 at 5:53 pm
  Reply
  
  @Buno
  Would you give permission to be quoted in a questpost by me? If you would want to add or alter anything you can also contact Tenzin. I would like to integrate the nature of their “restorative process”. Will take a few weeks trying to get it right.
767

thrivingafterthenkt on July 30, 2019 at 11:12 pm
Reply

Hi all.

I’m not sure how Augustine got my details but I agreed to speak to her. I attended Cambridge Triratna young Buddhists evenings on and off for over two years, and attended many retreats. I then ‘cult-hopped’ after leaving the NKT and lived with two order members in training. It was like rehabilitation after my experience with the NKT. Less emotional invalidation and nihilism, but over time the cult qualities became more clear. The spiritual narcissism, the protection and worship of the leader obviously. I slowly became ‘deprogrammed’ from my ‘buddhist’ beliefs from the NKT and then saw some similarities that triggered me. I then read the (non-whitewashed) testimonies and felt utterly sick. It became clear to me that I was simply cult hopping without addressing the underlying issues and that I actually had complex PTSD from my involvement with the NKT. I went through a period of feeling deeply disturbed about gurus. I now have nothing to do with Triratna although had just returned from Buddhafield, when I read the article in the Observer. I went to the non-buddhist activities during the festival.

Augustine asked me some very rushed questions and I was hesitant despite my involvement as my report is on the NKT. I told her I believe it is difficult to define a cult because I believe that to be true. I said many other things including more about my opinion on the abuse which I believe would have been more helpful for her to quote than that 😦

Michelle
- 768
  
  tenpel on July 31, 2019 at 7:33 am
  Reply
  
  Dear Michelle, thank you very much for this detailed and honest explanation and sharing of your experiences with TBO and the background of the interview.
  
  “Rushed questions” fits well also my experiences with Augustine.
  
  Thank you for your work,
  Big hug, t
  - 769
    
    emahaho on August 1, 2019 at 3:08 am
    Reply
    
    Likewise, thank you Michelle, and big hug too
770

bruno on July 31, 2019 at 6:51 pm
Reply

Stardust can use information.
- 771
  
  Stardust on August 1, 2019 at 3:28 pm
  Reply
  
  @Bruno.
  Someone else is now possibly doing the/a questpost. It is unfortunate the Interkula survey questionaire was not published wider. I personally did not hear of it untill the findings where published.
772

Stardust on August 1, 2019 at 5:14 pm
Reply

The Observer article is been picked up on.

”This article was posted on the Guardian’s site Sunday, detailing acts of sexual misconduct in the Triratna Buddhist organisation much broader than initially revealed in the 1990’s. I’ve written about this before, when talking about Triratna and their former leader, Sangharakshita, but it seems that the issues extend beyond just his own transgressions, and that they have in some ways been obfuscated by the group. The meaning of Sangharakshita, ‘one who is protected by the spiritual community,’ is looking rather apropos, it seems.

The latest revelations come as reports by both current and former members interrogate the extent of abuse and the lack of appetite to tackle the issue effectively. It seems that “more than one in 10…claim to have experienced or observed sexual misconduct while in the order.” This is both in the UK and abroad, naming Sangharakshita and other high-level members, and, crucially, against both men and women, whereas the initial allegations pertained only to men.”

https://staggeringbrink.wordpress.com/2019/07/23/triratna-worse-than-we-thought/
773

tenpel on September 6, 2019 at 7:57 pm
Reply

I was requested to post the following here:

IMPORTANT NOTICE
My solicitors, Hudgell, have submitted a claim for personal injury to Triratna. They are ready to take evidence from anyone else, who has suffered from abuse while involved with this group, at any time in the past.
Anyone of any nationality can contact Hudgell about this, provided that abusive behaviour took place somewhere in the UK; perhaps many years ago.
You can contact Hudgell directly by visiting:
http://www.hudgellsolicitors.co.uk
Please consider this carefully as vulnerable people are still at risk, whatever Triratna presently claim.
774

thrivingafterthenkt on September 29, 2019 at 9:45 pm
Reply

Hi all. I would like to share my experience of posting in the Triratna Art of Truth and Reconciliation group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/TAOTAR/.

I posted asking people’s opinion on whether Triratna practiced trauma informed mindfulness, as from my experience I don’t believe it does, but wanted to check this was correct before writing this online anywhere. I was then asked by order members to ASSIST Triratna in becoming more trauma informed as they are aware this is a problem. I was then warned in private messages that there were ‘dangerous’ people in the group, and was warned that Triratna would try to use my name as some kind of consultant or expert so that they can claim they are becoming more trauma informed.

So I said on the thread that any use of my name on any trauma related materials is without my consent and will result in me taking legal action. I also stated that it is not empathetic to ask someone who has clearly stated they have trauma associated with a group to assist that group in becoming more trauma informed! I gave my feedback that I don’t think the TAOTAR group is a safe therapeutic space for people harmed by their involvement with Triratna and let them know I had received private messages warning me of ‘dangerous’ people and therefore I did not feel safe there. And I then exited the group.
775

tenpel on March 14, 2020 at 12:28 am
Reply

Here is a new video with Jon Atack and Dr Michelle Haslam about Triratna and safeguarding:

	Tenpel on A Timely and Important Book…
	tenpel on The Monk Who Had No Confidence…
	Mike on The Monk Who Had No Confidence…
	tenpel on Fact-finding results in respon…
	tenpel on The Monk Who Had No Confidence…
	Mike on The Monk Who Had No Confidence…
	crazyplantwomanakama… on Fact-finding results in respon…
	Tenpel on Fact-finding results in respon…

Triratna Buddhist Community (Uddiyana)

See also

Update February 2017

Update May 2017

Updates 2018

Updates 2019

Updates 2020

Rate this:

Share this:

Related

UPDATE