I was raised in an extreme rightwing Protestant Church that was a borderline cult. There was one man in that church who severely beat his wife and son and molested his daughter. This went on for years and all the “elders” in the church knew about it. Nothing was done until someone anonymously reported the man as sex offender. After that, the people in the church refused to enforce the sexual offender laws (the father couldn’t be within a certain distance of his daughter, etc.). Finally, the elders of the church did the classic “blame the victim” thing and said it was the daughter’s fault. That was the final straw, and my family left the church. Because of all of that, I was hyper aware of any kind abuse allegations made within religious circles, and avoided any group that had even the slightest hint of such abuse.
My first Buddhist teacher was in the Tibetan tradition, and she was not into the whole “crazy wisdom” thing. Ethics was the foundation of all of her teachings. I wouldn’t have ever taken her as a teacher if they hadn’t been, but sometimes abuse can be well hidden. If something like that had revealed itself later, I probably wouldn’t be a Buddhist today.
So, I guess I’m lucky I saw early on what happens when religion goes bad. I managed to avoid all the shady Buddhist groups, but others haven’t been so lucky.
I’m guessing that many of you haven’t heard of Geshe Michael Roach. He’s another abusive nut job, but he was shut out by his main teacher, Lama Zopa Rinpoche, and the Dalai Lama. When I was living in Dharamasala, he planned to show up and hold some vast teaching event, but the Dalai Lama said, “No, you aren’t.” Anyway, Rolling Stone wrote a whole article about him: Sex and Death on the Road to Nirvana - Rolling Stone.
Indeed. The thing is, these are genuine memories and an important cultural moment. They should be understood and shared: but in order to better understand the context, not just as a nostalgic celebration.
Sadhu! It’s so important to remember that the abusers don’t represent their tradition: they betray it.
I have, and yeesh. There were genuinely weird stories. Reginald Ray is another one.
One woman, a Hindu practitioner, wrote a whole book about premature claims to enlightenment. This is the book Halfway Up the Mountain by Mariana Caplan. The most frightening thing about that book is that she felt the need to repeat, over and over again, that, “If the guru is asking to sleep with your 12 year old daughter, something is wrong.” I personally don’t understand how someone can get to the point where they wouldn’t think that was wrong, but I know that there’s a lot of complex psychology going on in these abusive situations.
Interestingly, she’s associated with Naropa University, which is part of Shambala. Hmm, maybe I shouldn’t recommend her book after all.
The procedures to follow when a bhikkhu is difficult to admonish — reprimanding him in private, admonishing and rebuking him in a formal meeting of the Community — are the same as under Saṅghādisesa 10, beginning with the fact that a bhikkhu who, hearing that Bhikkhu X is being difficult to admonish, incurs a dukkaṭa if he does not reprimand him. The question of perception and the non-offenses are also the same as under that rule.
Hope you dont mind if a bit off topic , Fyi Confucious appears didnt teach of absolute loyalty , it isnt exactly His teaching and saying so would not be accurate . Here’a true event that happened to His famous student . I will make the story short .
One day Zeng Shen (曾参) or better known as Zengzi (曾子) get beaten by his father and passed out due to a heavy blow on the head (beaten with a heavy stick) . After the incident Zengzi didnt turn up for classes for couple of days and later Confucious was made known by another student the happening , Zengzi was summoned and Confucious admonished him , telling him if it is a light disciplinary action then one could thus tolerate but if it is a heavy punishment and involving risking life then one should not submit to it .
Clan dynamics explains it all. Teachers within a lineage or clan will defend each other (even the scalliwags), out of a need to preserve the reputation of their clan as a whole. That’s what a clan does: offer protection for its members.
So what about teachers from other clans doing the rebuking then, from outside? Again, clan dynamics holds them back as well. They could very potentially make their hands dirty by invoking a conflict between clans: such rebuking effectively pits one clan’s reputation vs another clan’s reputation. Neither clan wants their reputations dragged down in the slightest, which a conflict might cause, as collateral damage. So everyone across the board (who thinks and operates by clan dynamics) saves face by doing nothing.
I’m not all that reassured by knowing that my Confucian overlords should stop short of beating me almost to death with a stick. Your exception only proves the rule, IMHO. I’d like to hear from you where the mechanisms of push-back are, where the protection is for those at the bottom of the hierarchy, within Confucianism, such that Confucianism is not the delight of Narcissistic elders, who use all sorts of psychological forms of abuse like gaslighting, invalidation, etc. (again, Dr. Ramani is the expert in all the clever tricks of Narcissists).
Sure, there are several “shoulds” in Confucianism, where elders should not abuse juniors, but I fail to find any actual mechanisms of redress, when these “shoulds” don’t get followed. There is no protective mechanism, other than suggestions, that I can see.
I have a quotation from Analects 4.13, as translated by James R. Ware’s “The Sayings of Confucius” (Library of Congress Catalog Card No. 55-11642):
(Confucius): “Tseng Ts’an, my doctrine is strung upon one single thing.”
(Tseng Ts’an): “I agree.”
When the master left someone asked, “What did he mean?”
“The Master’s doctrine consists solely of loyalty and reciprocity.”
Well, I’ve put together a bunch of such suttas on these 2 pages. Some are quite strongly worded, threatening rebirth in hell for transgressing (which I would call a mechanism of punishment), etc:
Not all suttas listed there answer your question, but many of them do. You should find dozens.
Also, many of the Sangadisesas are about a procedural reigning-in of stubborn, manipulative, and abusive monks. Sg 2, Sg 3, Sg 4, Sg 10, Sg 11, Sg 12, Sg 13.
By living together with him, know him as
an angry person with evil desires;
a denigrator, obstinate, and insolent,
envious, miserly, and deceptive.
He speaks to people just like an ascetic,
addressing them with a calm voice,
but secretly he does evil deeds,
holds pernicious views, and lacks respect.
Though he is devious, a speaker of lies,
you should know him as he truly is;
then you should all meet in harmony
and firmly drive him away.
Get rid of the trash!
Remove the depraved fellows!
Sweep the chaff away, non-ascetics
who think themselves ascetics!
Having banished those of evil desires,
of bad conduct and resort,
dwell in communion, ever mindful,
the pure with the pure;
then, in harmony, alert,
you will make an end of suffering.
There’s a sutta I’m scratching around for, but can’t find at the moment. It’s the perfect mechanism against Narcissism, as best as one can achieve (which jives very nicely with Dr. Ramani, and I repeat, you can virtually never bring a Narcissist to justice, you can merely “grey rock”, then escape, and never return).
The sutta is about voting with your feet (which is a mechanism of doing the best to correct a bad situation). It says that if you train in some place, but you become worse off for it, not better, then you should leave. But if you become a better person for having trained there, then you should stay. I’m pretty sure this sutta is in the MN. It makes no direct mention of Narcissism, but none the less gives clear instruction as to the best course in that case, which I feel is in sharp distinction to the Confucian perspective, which would far moreso have you tough it out, no matter how gruelling your masters make your life, since you must be loyal to them.
Here’s that Analects 4.18:
As you serve your parents [or any elders, we might extrapolate], you should remonstrate with them only slightly. If on doing so you find that they are set on having their own way, be even more respectful and do not thwart them. Even though this overwhelm you with toil, do not become angry with them.
“Mendicants, in a poorly explained teaching and training, the donor should know moderation, not the recipient. Why is that? Because the teaching is poorly explained.”
323
“Mendicants, in a well explained teaching and training, the recipient should know moderation, not the donor. Why is that? Because the teaching is well explained.”
Yes, perhaps I was being a bit overly grand: there are “duties” in the Canon: towards one’s parents and teachers for example. But I understand these more as advice on how to be a better son or monk than as “moral obligations” in the Western sense. It seems to me that the Buddha here (in the Vinaya) is just defining social roles and expectations. This social effect of law is, in my opinion, quite different from “morality.”
To quote a sutta you highlighted above:
Those mendicants who explain a light offense as a serious offense are acting for the hurt and unhappiness of the people
In this case, a minor dukkaṭa related to a community action probably shouldn’t overturn the vast thrust of the dhamma to prioritize seclusion and our own practice over trying to go around correcting others, no?
Oh, jesus. I actually read a book by that wack-job. I just thought he was a mediocre scholar, I didn’t realize he had started his own cult. Interesting to note that he was once part of Shambala.
I think there’s a delicate balance to be struck where we aren’t the sort of people who nitpick each other (too much correcting, admonishing), but then again too little admonishing is also a problem - as a sense of entitlement or even invincibility can grow around never getting admonished from anyone. Everyone is going to have some minor flaws which are probably best overlooked, saving the impactful occasions of admonishing for the times when it really matters (and of course, using right speech the best we can). BTW: once a discussion forum gets too nitpicky over little things, it becomes not very fun to participate in.
The Middle Way manifests in many different dimensions, in the Holy Life.
Indeed, this is very true, especially for a spiritual teacher. Criticism is not merely a dissenting opinion but is seen as undermining the authority, even the enlightenment of the teacher. It is, I believe, this very dynamic that led to the first schism in Buddhism.
