Really? I don't think there is anybody here supporting the supposed actions.buddhagirl wrote:...the dominant strain tends towards support for Sogyal...
Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
- kalden yungdrung
- Posts: 4606
- Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2010 10:40 pm
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
IN ADDITION:
https://buddhism-controversy-blog.com/2 ... nstalled=0
Here we can see also many different statements /confessions regarding Sogyal`s statements and his opponents statements.
https://buddhism-controversy-blog.com/2 ... nstalled=0
Here we can see also many different statements /confessions regarding Sogyal`s statements and his opponents statements.
The best meditation is no meditation
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Saying someone supports these horrible actions seems like a pretty tough accusation!Grigoris wrote:Really? I don't think there is anybody here supporting the supposed actions.buddhagirl wrote:...the dominant strain tends towards support for Sogyal...
-
- Posts: 7885
- Joined: Wed May 29, 2013 6:13 am
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
The link above is basically a parsing of the letter which has already been linked here. However at the end Ken Holmes, who is a Kagyu translator based in the U.K., was quoted from his Facebook page:
But I would like to know who else HHK 16 warned against. Wouldn't you?
One of my lamas warned me about Sogyal in the '70s also. I'm glad he did. That was before he ever came to the U.S.KH: Exactly 40 years ago, the XVIth Gyalwang Karmapa predicted this. It is why Akong Rinpoche, to whom the 16th had spoken directly about Sogyal and one or two other lamas, would never have connections with Sogyal or let Samye Ling make connections. People thought this extreme at the time and said it was personal jealousy.
(Edit)
Q. When asked what the 16th Karmapa said about Sogyal Rinpoche, Ken Holmes replied:
KH: That his conduct would cause a lot of damage to dharma in the time to come … that bit is for sure (London, 1977) …. whether he actually told Akong Rinpoche that it was good to avoid association with him or whether that was implicit, I don’t know.
But I would like to know who else HHK 16 warned against. Wouldn't you?
1.The problem isn’t ‘ignorance’. The problem is the mind you have right now. (H.H. Karmapa XVII @NYC 2/4/18)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
2. I support Mingyur R and HHDL in their positions against lama abuse.
3. Student: Lama, I thought I might die but then I realized that the 3 Jewels would protect me.
Lama: Even If you had died the 3 Jewels would still have protected you. (DW post by Fortyeightvows)
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Adamantine wrote:It's only some, a minority, though I did mention it because I can't think of one woman with the same view. As for where, mostly Facebook and in person.. again, it's not a dominant theme. . but it exists to a degree.TharpaChodron wrote:Where are you seeing or hearing white males only having sympathy for Sogyal Rinpoche? On here I've only seen otherwise. If I'm missing something I'd like to hear.Adamantine wrote:
Was he somewhat referencing this situation with Rigpa, in which case it would be on topic? I keep encountering practicing Nyingmapa (mostly or so far all white men) who hold the students to blame for incorrect application of Vajrayana principles, and have sympathy only for Sogyal Rinpoche, the great misunderstood master. It seems that DJKR and in particular his latest book on the Guru is most often referenced to back this sentiment up. So just wondering if you got any sense how he would feel about that... because the above quote in the context of this thread reminds me of something one of these guys would use to support their view.
I checked out his Facebook page to have a look. It seems that his students are very supportive of him on there, including a lot of women. I wonder if they delete critical posts? His students seem to be quite lost from what I saw on FB.
- Adamantine
- Former staff member
- Posts: 4027
- Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am
- Location: Space is the Place
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
I wasn't talking about his FB page... just people posting on their own pages etc.TharpaChodron wrote:Adamantine wrote:It's only some, a minority, though I did mention it because I can't think of one woman with the same view. As for where, mostly Facebook and in person.. again, it's not a dominant theme. . but it exists to a degree.TharpaChodron wrote:
Where are you seeing or hearing white males only having sympathy for Sogyal Rinpoche? On here I've only seen otherwise. If I'm missing something I'd like to hear.
I checked out his Facebook page to have a look. It seems that his students are very supportive of him on there, including a lot of women. I wonder if they delete critical posts? His students seem to be quite lost from what I saw on FB.
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Adamantine wrote:I wasn't talking about his FB page... just people posting on their own pages etc.TharpaChodron wrote:Adamantine wrote:
It's only some, a minority, though I did mention it because I can't think of one woman with the same view. As for where, mostly Facebook and in person.. again, it's not a dominant theme. . but it exists to a degree.
I checked out his Facebook page to have a look. It seems that his students are very supportive of him on there, including a lot of women. I wonder if they delete critical posts? His students seem to be quite lost from what I saw on FB.
Got it, I misunderstood.
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:44 am
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Yes, the 'Tibetan Buddhism - Struggling with Difficult Issues' blog welcomes the accounts of survivors from various Buddhist organisations where things have gone pear-shaped.kalden yungdrung wrote:IN ADDITION:
https://buddhism-controversy-blog.com/2 ... nstalled=0
Here we can see also many different statements /confessions regarding Sogyal`s statements and his opponents statements.
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:44 am
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Your use of the word 'supposed' is part of what i'm referring to. If you accepted the accounts of the affected students - which fit a pattern over many years - there wouldn't be a need to use a qualifier.Grigoris wrote:Really? I don't think there is anybody here supporting the supposed actions.buddhagirl wrote:...the dominant strain tends towards support for Sogyal...
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
You seem to be talking about mirco-aggressions which are quite modern (to be detected) in the US these days. But in Europe we are not always used to be so picky about words.buddhagirl wrote:Your use of the word 'supposed' is part of what i'm referring to. If you accepted the accounts of the affected students - which fit a pattern over many years - there wouldn't be a need to use a qualifier.Grigoris wrote:Really? I don't think there is anybody here supporting the supposed actions.buddhagirl wrote:...the dominant strain tends towards support for Sogyal...
The meaning you imply on "supposed" is one possibility only. I know this word in another context. It is simply used when a lawsuit is not yet finished at court. The word "supposed" is used until that person Is convicted.
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Here is an English version of the artice in Süddeutsche Zeitung: http://international.sueddeutsche.de/po ... -and-lying This is a very good article and summary, however most of the details in this account were outlined in the letter to Sogyal.kirtu wrote:FYI: An article concerning Sogyal and the allegations of abuse appeared yesterday in the Süddeutsche Zeitung, an influential German newspaper. I haven't read it because it is behind a pay-wall.
I have to say that there are some graphic details, both physical and sexual (since Germans are definitely not prudish), that have not previously been reported in the English press (to my knowledge) and also not in the Dutch press (although a lot of the reporting in Dutch publications that I saw were also behind pay-walls). I have never seen this newspaper use such words (as quotes even), which one usually wouldn't even find in the German tabloid press (OTOH, maybe it's my reaction because I would be considered prudish actually, but I have never ever read a SZ article before using these words). You couldn't publish something like this in any highly respectable newspaper (which is what the SZ is) in English.
Kirt
Although a lot of the sordid and shocking details have only recently been revealed in the mainstream media, there has been much out there in the media and public domain over a long period outlining Sogyal's abuse, but it seems to have fallen on death ears. In fact, it made me reflect that accounts of Sogyal's abuse have been around for decades from people like Mary Finnigan. If I recall she had a close association with Sogyal Rinpoche right back in the beginning (before his rise to stardom) when he first came to England, and monitored his methods and behaviour closely and could see what he was up to pretty much from the start. Essentially she blew the whistle long ago, but she was sharply criticised by those of the establishment. Looks like she has been right all along.
Although Mary Finnigan (and others) wrote newspaper articles about Sogyal, her most revealing and no doubt detailed account would have to be her “Behind the Thangkas” revelations, published in 2010: https://behindthethangkas.wordpress.com/ which of course must have seemed scandalous back then (for some at least), but now with hindsight, very accurate. She has just updated this publication with the recent developments, as understandably she has been very close to the Sogyal issue over a long period, and had the guts, when most were naysayers, to warn others and try to stop the abuse; but sadly she was vilified.
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
I cannot accept something if it has not been proved. I have been accused of all sorts of things in my life that I have not done and I am sure you have too. I don't doubt there is some sort of grievance but I don't KNOW that there is some sort of grievance. I am not willing to play the role of judge-jury-executioner without knowing all the facts. You may be happy with the role though, I am not...buddhagirl wrote:Your use of the word 'supposed' is part of what i'm referring to. If you accepted the accounts of the affected students - which fit a pattern over many years - there wouldn't be a need to use a qualifier.
So, "supposed" it is, because that is the reality of the situation for me.
There is always a need to use a qualifier when one has not personally observed a situation.
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
-
- Posts: 32
- Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2017 3:44 am
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Yes that term would be "alleged". Not sure what is meant by "mirco" - or even micro aggressions! My comment over the weekend wasn't so much about the micro as the macro, in that the overall tone i've picked up, with exceptions, is that all the misbehaviour is alleged and therefore can't be taken as verified or proven. Consequently, i wasn't picking up much empathy for the 'victims'.Ayu wrote:You seem to be talking about mirco-aggressions which are quite modern (to be detected) in the US these days. But in Europe we are not always used to be so picky about words.buddhagirl wrote:Your use of the word 'supposed' is part of what i'm referring to. If you accepted the accounts of the affected students - which fit a pattern over many years - there wouldn't be a need to use a qualifier.Grigoris wrote:Really? I don't think there is anybody here supporting the supposed actions.
The meaning you imply on "supposed" is one possibility only. I know this word in another context. It is simply used when a lawsuit is not yet finished at court. The word "supposed" is used until that person Is convicted.
Yet when similar allegations have been made about Sogyal over the years, Rigpa hasn't generally disputed them but stated that both parties were consenting adults. Likewise, Rigpa hasn't disputed the recent claims but rather shaped their responses to avoid direct blame. If you've read any of the PR statements put out in the past two weeks, you'll know what i mean.
When i have time at the weekend i will go through and find some more examples. There is also more to say about why the people making the claims should be believed.
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Just wanting to point out the potential logical fallacy in this type of thinking:Grigoris wrote:I cannot accept something if it has not been proved. I have been accused of all sorts of things in my life that I have not done and I am sure you have too. I don't doubt there is some sort of grievance but I don't KNOW that there is some sort of grievance. I am not willing to play the role of judge-jury-executioner without knowing all the facts. You may be happy with the role though, I am not...buddhagirl wrote:Your use of the word 'supposed' is part of what i'm referring to. If you accepted the accounts of the affected students - which fit a pattern over many years - there wouldn't be a need to use a qualifier.
So, "supposed" it is, because that is the reality of the situation for me.
while this sounds honorable, up to a point, it risks dodging moral responsibility while hiding under some false sense of honor or unbiasedness...
Sure, the probability of knowing with absolute certainty, for most of us, is zero. But it should not be an excuse to turn a blind eye and not use one's judgement to evaluate the body of evidence and form an opinion. (Of course, one may choose not to bother, but then one probably should not be voicing uninformed opinions here.)
Using "supposed" here is based on the assumption that some other alternative is the truth, unless proven otherwise. What is that alternative scenario for you? That Sogyal is a saint? that he behaves honorably and never abused anyone? What basis do we have to support or suppose this alternative view? Have we seen it with our own eyes what he has been doing 24/7 over the past few decades so that we can be so comfortable defending this alternative ?
Note also that "supposed" here also amounts to calling the large number of victims "supposed liars", "supposed victims"... it is not as unbiased as it sounds.
Statistically, this is called type-I error (false positive) vs. type-II error (false negative). Ideally one'd want to minimize both...
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Whereas you are being morally responsible and unbiased by jumping to conclusions based on incomplete evidence, your honor is "true"?gb9810 wrote:Just wanting to point out the potential logical fallacy in this type of thinking:
while this sounds honorable, up to a point, it risks dodging moral responsibility while hiding under some false sense of honor or unbiasedness...
Opinions are like earholes... Judgments are for juries and judges on the basis of a (supposedly) complete presentation of evidence.But it should not be an excuse to turn a blind eye and not use one's judgement to evaluate the body of evidence and form an opinion.
No, using supposed here is a personal suspension of judgment because of incomplete evidence. And, of course, there is more than one truth, unless you are saying that your truth is somehow absolute?Using "supposed" here is based on the assumption that some other alternative is the truth, unless proven otherwise.
I am not interested in answering tour straw men.What is that alternative scenario for you? That Sogyal is a saint? that he behaves honorably and never abused anyone? What basis do we have to support or suppose this alternative view? Have we seen it with our own eyes what he has been doing 24/7 over the past few decades so that we can be so comfortable defending this alternative ?
Whereas you are 100% certain? and who talked about "large numbers" and is not your use of the term "victims" based on a presumption too?Note also that "supposed" here also amounts to calling the large number of victims "supposed liars", "supposed victims"... it is not as unbiased as it sounds.
Indeed we do.Statistically, this is called type-I error (false positive) vs. type-II error (false negative). Ideally one'd want to minimize both...
"My religion is not deceiving myself."
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE
"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."
The Supreme Source - The Kunjed Gyalpo
The Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Verygb9810 wrote:Just wanting to point out the potential logical fallacy in this type of thinking:
while this sounds honorable, up to a point, it risks dodging moral responsibility while hiding under some false sense of honor or unbiasedness...
Sure, the probability of knowing with absolute certainty, for most of us, is zero. But it should not be an excuse to turn a blind eye and not use one's judgement to evaluate the body of evidence and form an opinion. (Of course, one may choose not to bother, but then one probably should not be voicing uninformed opinions here.)
Using "supposed" here is based on the assumption that some other alternative is the truth, unless proven otherwise. What is that alternative scenario for you? That Sogyal is a saint? that he behaves honorably and never abused anyone? What basis do we have to support or suppose this alternative view? Have we seen it with our own eyes what he has been doing 24/7 over the past few decades so that we can be so comfortable defending this alternative ?
Note also that "supposed" here also amounts to calling the large number of victims "supposed liars", "supposed victims"... it is not as unbiased as it sounds.
Statistically, this is called type-I error (false positive) vs. type-II error (false negative). Ideally one'd want to minimize both...
- dzogchungpa
- Posts: 6333
- Joined: Sat May 28, 2011 10:50 pm
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
Just noticed this, although I can't verify the source and I haven't watched it yet:
Apparently it shows Patrick Gaffney and Dominique Side discussing the situation on August 11th at Lerab Ling.
Apparently it shows Patrick Gaffney and Dominique Side discussing the situation on August 11th at Lerab Ling.
There is not only nothingness because there is always, and always can manifest. - Thinley Norbu Rinpoche
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
my post was about the type of reasoning I see often, not you personally, so please calm down. I have no interest in going down the route of I vs. you, who is more honorable (who cares?!), nor was I trying to impose any particular view about this case on you.
So let me rephrase my point in a different context, which I hope would be less threatening to people:
we agree, no one can be 100% certain about most things, perhaps even when one sees things with one's own eyes. So what should one do? we do the best we can whenever necessary; in other cases, we can refrain from forming judgements (I am sure many are staying silent on this topic because of it). But if one chooses to engage, my point was, "up to a point" (and whether you have reached that point is for you to decide), one's gotta ask oneself where the resistance to form an opinion, or change one's mind, is really coming from... it's really worth investigating. Often, it is not as "unbiased" as one'd like to think.
Example:
I had have some opportunities to discuss recent US politics with various people outside of my bubble, in hope of gaining some level of understanding.
What is fascinating is that one of the common defense lines echoes what you wrote earlier, "If you didn't see it with your own eyes, how can you say he did XYZ?!" "Oh you are so naive as to believe in all that fake news...there is no REAL evidence!" "Were you there when he "supposedly" groped her?! no? then how could you believe it?!"
Basically, one doggedly bites onto one's prior, rejects info that disagrees with it, while feeding one's own confirmation bias...
We all do this to some extent, but we ought to be more aware that we are doing it, right? More importantly, where did we get that the initial prior?? (that one side is a savior, the other evil-incarnate, in the case of US politics)
Everyone is untitled to their own opinions, as well as whatever framework they choose to form them. But we should acknowledge that the reasonings are not equally logical/ rational/unbiased (whatever the conventional definitions are here...) Some views, when it comes down to it, seem more likely to be based on a dogged stubbornness (or "personal principle" if that sounds better) with roots deeper than the stated logic. Again, no value judgement, merely acknowledging it. We all have different moral compass e.g. some of us may be willing to kill one person if it saves 10, whereas some other of us would never kill no matter what the implications.
But one IS taking a stand when one chooses to dismiss the relevance of certain evidence, or puts the requirement at the level of "I have to see things with my own eyes" before I change my mind or form an opinion. Just like, "I would never kill" does come with the qualifier "its implication is 10 deaths". Similarly, "I could never wrongly accuse anyone for abuse" does come with the qualifier "its implication is many out there are lying".
that was my point.
that said, yes, if I were to write something more official than a forum post, I too would use "alleged abuse" as well.
So let me rephrase my point in a different context, which I hope would be less threatening to people:
we agree, no one can be 100% certain about most things, perhaps even when one sees things with one's own eyes. So what should one do? we do the best we can whenever necessary; in other cases, we can refrain from forming judgements (I am sure many are staying silent on this topic because of it). But if one chooses to engage, my point was, "up to a point" (and whether you have reached that point is for you to decide), one's gotta ask oneself where the resistance to form an opinion, or change one's mind, is really coming from... it's really worth investigating. Often, it is not as "unbiased" as one'd like to think.
Example:
I had have some opportunities to discuss recent US politics with various people outside of my bubble, in hope of gaining some level of understanding.
What is fascinating is that one of the common defense lines echoes what you wrote earlier, "If you didn't see it with your own eyes, how can you say he did XYZ?!" "Oh you are so naive as to believe in all that fake news...there is no REAL evidence!" "Were you there when he "supposedly" groped her?! no? then how could you believe it?!"
Basically, one doggedly bites onto one's prior, rejects info that disagrees with it, while feeding one's own confirmation bias...
We all do this to some extent, but we ought to be more aware that we are doing it, right? More importantly, where did we get that the initial prior?? (that one side is a savior, the other evil-incarnate, in the case of US politics)
Everyone is untitled to their own opinions, as well as whatever framework they choose to form them. But we should acknowledge that the reasonings are not equally logical/ rational/unbiased (whatever the conventional definitions are here...) Some views, when it comes down to it, seem more likely to be based on a dogged stubbornness (or "personal principle" if that sounds better) with roots deeper than the stated logic. Again, no value judgement, merely acknowledging it. We all have different moral compass e.g. some of us may be willing to kill one person if it saves 10, whereas some other of us would never kill no matter what the implications.
But one IS taking a stand when one chooses to dismiss the relevance of certain evidence, or puts the requirement at the level of "I have to see things with my own eyes" before I change my mind or form an opinion. Just like, "I would never kill" does come with the qualifier "its implication is 10 deaths". Similarly, "I could never wrongly accuse anyone for abuse" does come with the qualifier "its implication is many out there are lying".
that was my point.
that said, yes, if I were to write something more official than a forum post, I too would use "alleged abuse" as well.
Grigoris wrote:Whereas you are being morally responsible and unbiased by jumping to conclusions based on incomplete evidence, your honor is "true"?gb9810 wrote:Just wanting to point out the potential logical fallacy in this type of thinking:
while this sounds honorable, up to a point, it risks dodging moral responsibility while hiding under some false sense of honor or unbiasedness...Opinions are like earholes... Judgments are for juries and judges on the basis of a (supposedly) complete presentation of evidence.But it should not be an excuse to turn a blind eye and not use one's judgement to evaluate the body of evidence and form an opinion.No, using supposed here is a personal suspension of judgment because of incomplete evidence. And, of course, there is more than one truth, unless you are saying that your truth is somehow absolute?Using "supposed" here is based on the assumption that some other alternative is the truth, unless proven otherwise.I am not interested in answering tour straw men.What is that alternative scenario for you? That Sogyal is a saint? that he behaves honorably and never abused anyone? What basis do we have to support or suppose this alternative view? Have we seen it with our own eyes what he has been doing 24/7 over the past few decades so that we can be so comfortable defending this alternative ?Whereas you are 100% certain? and who talked about "large numbers" and is not your use of the term "victims" based on a presumption too?Note also that "supposed" here also amounts to calling the large number of victims "supposed liars", "supposed victims"... it is not as unbiased as it sounds.Indeed we do.Statistically, this is called type-I error (false positive) vs. type-II error (false negative). Ideally one'd want to minimize both...
Re: Very sad news: Letter to Sogyal Rinpoche / Abuse allegations
yeah like this guy on here who constantly explains to everyone what i think ...Grigoris wrote:I cannot accept something if it has not been proved. I have been accused of all sorts of things in my life that I have not done and I am sure you have too. .
-
- Posts: 1102
- Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 8:41 pm
- Location: Portugal