Roundtable on Sexual Violence at the recent Sakyadhita Conference in Kuching, Malaysia

As many have already mentioned this is sensitive and difficult work which requires transparent and sustainable solutions. In Australia (as an example) Buddhist organisations ought not consider themselves above the law and which Policies, Regulatory requirements, or laws they will follow (from which they see a benefit), and which they will choose not to.

Whilst the core problem of human existence is Ignorance and Craving there is no understanding of Dharma and the way out of Suffering unless there is considerable Virtue and Sense restraint in all circumstances. An applicant for ordination in any Tradition or a visitor to a Monastery, a retreat centre, or a Buddhist “centre” needs to have a reasonable expectation (and assurances) that the leader of that Group, or the speaker that evening, is a moral exemplar. That they have access to the Ethics, Governance processes and discipline that will ensure Higher virtue in Body, Speech and Mind by all Monastics and teachers - in all circumstances.

The Suttas clearly show that the Buddha stressed the absolute necessity of both upholding the law of the land and living in accordance with the Dharma. The Scholars on this site can easily point to the Suttas that draw out complex relationship between Kings (as it mainly was in those days), Monks and the laws of the land. For a sincere practitioner the Buddha ultimately encourages that an individual lives virtuously in all circumstances, secluded and at a distance from all unwholesome states.

There is no Regulatory authority in Buddhism and within a Country there may not be an effective network of Buddhist organisations that can actively ensure that there is Good governance, complete compliance with the Vinaya, and through application of the laws of the land - in that setting.

In the present era of multiple organisations saying that they are Buddhist or “our Buddhism is better than their Buddhism” the principle of Caveat Emptor (the buyer or enquirer alone is responsible for checking the quality and [suitability] of goods before a purchase is made) sharply applies.

This task is made more difficult for a potential enquirer if they are unaware of their own Ignorance and Craving when they first approach Buddhism. Potentially even harder if an individual is struggling with Depression, highly disillusioned with the world, and expecting a quick panacea for their unpleasant feelings.

As in most circumstances in life the enquirer of Buddhism might not check at the outset (and then regularly) the Terms and Conditions of the relationship that they are entering into; how disputes and remediation within the Buddhist context takes place in that organisation; and most importantly how to “self-check” that they understand the Uprooting of Suffering, and not just the management of Suffering.

The Faith Trust Initiative has made the wonderful resource:
Responding to Spiritual Leader Misconduct Handbook_FINAL_Digital_9_29_22.pdf (5.9 MB)

free-for-all for those who may have initial concerns about a Leader’s conduct.

In State of Victoria, Australia the powerful initiative of all Faiths with the State Government produced -for Buddhist Communities n - a very thorough toolkit on
Supporting-Buddhist-Communities-to-Prevent-and-Respond-to-Family-Violence-Toolkit.pdf (3.0 MB)

I applaud the Web of accountability developed in Victoria and the clear description of the multiple and integrated services available:

Thus, well-intentioned Monastics and lay practitioners would recommend that any involvement with a Buddhist location (Monastery, Retreat centre, Meditation room, Online forum) check first the application of the Vinaya, Code of Conduct, and the law of the land - in that setting.

If they have reasonable concerns and evidence that they take it up in writing with the Buddhist location and ask for a considered and written response. Concealment tactics or “spiritual” deflection should be a red flag that the complainant ought to approach a local authority that can consider and take up the matter - as in the web of accountability.

Known concealment over a long period of time or inaction by those that should hold their own organisation or Tradition to account - will damage Trust and integrity in the sincere practitioners, whether they are Monastic or lay.

In Australia it would appear that there is an increasing need to adopt the Web of Accountability in Victoria and lobby that it is applied in all States and Territories. And it applies to Monastics and lay supporters.

Whilst the Australian Sangha Association and the Federation of Australian Buddhist Councils do not have sufficient membership to mandate change nor sufficient experience and depth to craft an adequate response - an open letter to both organisations demanding transparent action is now very necessary.

A few experienced allies in a number of Countries (post their attendance at the Sakyadhita conference) have started to share resources and plan new initiatives to ensure a new web of accountability in their country. Look out for materials and websites as the initiative grows. I am rarely on Sutta Central but I will post appropriate information when it becomes available.

Because of the gravity of the Royal Commission into Institutionalised Child Sex Abuse Religions workers were singled out as the first category that had to be Mandatory reporters of any suspected Child sex abuse that had been mentioned by anyone to them. Here is the Western Australia requirement:
mandatory_reporting_ministers_of_religion_information_sheet.pdf (172.8 KB)

Subsequently, Anglican and Catholic Churches made strident efforts to develop Safe Church Policies and transparent accountability.

I and others will endeavour to work with competent and experienced allies to establish a “Safe Buddhism” response that initially will look to have an external Whistleblower portal and a confidential and safe route - very soon - for Victims and Survivors. A web of accountability that can be trusted and sufficiently independent and well resourced.

Given the fragmented nature of Buddhism in Australia and the inability to cooperate appropriately it is now more than likely that State And Federal Government will be needed to be lobbied for resources and skill together with experienced help from Universities, benefactors, and agencies.

If anyone has an unresolved difficult and sensitive issue right now I would encourage them to go the Authorities in their State whilst some of us do our best, under the Vinaya and Dharma, to find solutions and develop implementations of a Higher Virtue.

4 Likes

Dear Venerable @Pasanna, thank you so much for your response :folded_hands:

I just want to respond to the three questions you asked:

1) why are the witnesses and survivors not being taken seriously when they are making complaints?

That’s an important question, broadly speaking, throughout time, history and context, people generally struggle to take survivors accounts and complaints seriously. It is especially challenging when the person accused of perpetrating harm is in a position of authority, trust and is well respected by the community, such as a spiritual teacher/leader. In my experience, most victim-survivors of sexual violence have lived experiences of not feeling listened to or not being taken seriously by responders including police, lawyers, health workers, friends and family. Responses that blame, ignore and fail to take victim-survivors seriously, can be harmful, long lasting and can contribute to victim-survivors being reluctant to seek support in the future. Judith Herman wrote the following passage in her book Trauma and Recovery (1992):

Blockquote: It is very tempting to take the side of the perpetrator. All the perpetrator asks is for the bystander to do nothing. The perpetrator speaks to the universal desire to see, hear and speak no evil. The victim on the contrary asks the bystander to share the burden of pain. The victim demands action, engagement and remembering.

In the Dharmadatta interview between Damcho, Venerable Tenzin Dadon and Venerable Karma Tashi Choedron (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g5wK6p9CUgQ) they describe monastics trying to speak out about sexualised violence who were threatened and some beaten. In the interview, the Venerables also state that the problems of sexualised violence and other forms of abuse (eg modern slavery/coercive control and emotional abuse) are systemic and institutional in the countries they mentioned. Because the violence and abuse is systemic and institutional, there are fears that taking survivors seriously might result in all the monasteries closing or villages losing their teachers. Thus victim-survivors in those contexts are not being taken seriously because many people within and outside of Buddhist institutions feel the allegations threaten ‘Buddhism’ itself.

It’s difficult to speak to how monastics who are victim-survivors in Australia are currently being responded to. It might be different in the Australian context and it’s always wise not to generalise. But the perpetration of violence and abuse is a human problem and not confined to any singular country or post code - it’s something I believe we should all be alert to and responding to in whatever context we find ourselves in.

2) why do they not feel that their complaints are valid enough to prosecute under local law, especially in a non-religious country like Australia?

This is an important question as well. Unfortunately many victim-survivors are reluctant to formally report crimes in Australia. According to the AIHW 9 in 10 women do not report sexual assault to the police in Australia (https://www.aihw.gov.au/family-domestic-and-sexual-violence/resources/national-plan-outcomes/systems-and-institutions/women-who-experienced-sexual-assault-where-the-incident-was-reported-to-police). Similarly, only about 10% of LGBTIQA+ people surviving sexual assault report the crime to police (https://www.unsw.edu.au/content/dam/pdfs/ada/gvrn/research-reports/2025-03-national-survey-lgbtiqa-sb-experiences-of-sexual-violence-report-2.pdf). The primary reasons for non-disclosure often include feelings of shame, and concerns that other responders will minimise, blame or place responsibility on the victim-survivor for somehow ‘causing the sexual assault’. The conviction rates of perpetrators sexual violence is very low in Australia and often victim-survivors feel they are on trial (having to prove sexual violence was perpetrated against them) which results in victim-survivors being re-traumatised by the proceedings (Issues Paper: Justice responses to sexual violence - Law Council of Australia). So, that’s the lay community in Australia. I can only assume that the barriers to reporting or seeking justice are just as challenging or possibly more challenging for monastics who are also victim-survivors.

That’s not to say that legal action is impossible or should be discouraged. This interview again with Damcho and Carol Merchasin speaks to the power of legal action and investigation in a US context which improved sexual safety in Buddhist centres: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RYxmFddfCwY

3) how can we empower witnesses and survivor-victims to step forward in a way where they will be believe and supported?

Another great question, thank you Venerable Pasanna! The answer is in the last part of your sentence. Letting people know that they will be believed and supported if they have concerns about sexual harassment or assault (or any other type of abuse and exploitation) in Buddhist monasteries and centres is a great thing to communicate. People and organisations can easily communicate this message without a victim-survivor having to come forward and make a disclosure first. For this reason having a visible sign up in the monastery or Buddhist centre can be useful and signals to victim-survivors, to perpetrators and to responders (everyone else) that the centre is aware that harm may be being perpetrated and is willing to respond and take action to stop violence and abuse. But signs and committments alone are unlikely to improve organisational safety


Most survivors who disclose sexual assault will only share an aspect of what has happened to them - the reasons for not disclosing everything is often a effort to uphold human dignity and personal safety. It’s good practice not to push survivors to share any details they don’t feel comfortable to share. Working with whatever details a person has shared with you is a good place to start. We can always ask, “what do you need?” and “How can I support you?” If the person says “I don’t know”, then we can be supportive by presenting a range of options e.g. “Is this something you would like to discuss with a lawyer or the police?” or “Would you prefer to use Restorative Justice approach?” (Transforming Justice Australia) We can also ask “have you shared this with anyone else? How did they respond to you?” and “There are support services available, is this something you would consider accessing? Or not” and just support the persons decision making about what they think is best. Always follow a persons lead on their preferred action to take or not to take knowing they know their context the best. We can also affirm that “even if you couldn’t stop the violence and abuse, it doesn’t mean you just let it happen” - all victim-survivors including children resist abuse committed against them, even if that resistance is covert and just in the privacy of our own minds.

Witnesses also need a lot of support and this is something that Damcho, Venerable Tenzin Dadon and Venerable Karma Tashi Choedron have highlighted. The institutional abuses they discussed also impacted a number of other monastics (who were not the primary victim-survivors) but who were trying to speak out and protect victim-survivors. These are questions are for every Buddhist monastery, centre and community to answer.

I am grateful for the resources Venerable @Mettaji has shared. I particularly liked the Victorian resource “Supporting Buddhist Communities to Prevent and Respond to Family Violence” (the do’s and dont’s section is an especially helpful guide for people wanting to improve how they respond). I also want to share this last Insight Exchange resource “Talk” which explores how we can respond without relying on anyone’s disclosure to begin providing a useful and supportive response: https://www.insightexchange.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Talk-A-reflection-resource.pdf

Thank you so much Venerable Pasanna for your point about taking inspiration from the lessons and approaches from other religious organsations and applying them in Buddhist context to improve safety. It is also great to see Nan Tien Institute’s reporting example. Rainbodhi also has a safeguarding policy (note you need to scroll through the about section to find the policy): About | Rainbodhi I think these attempts are a good start but definitely more could be done institutionally. I also think creating institutional Ahimsa and safety is a responsibility each monastery to take up in their own way to sustain non-violence and non-harming in the long term.

I hope this is useful and I am always happy to discuss!
Much gratitude,
Letty :folded_hands:

7 Likes

Sadhu, Sadhu, Sadhu Letty

4 Likes

In response to feedback from this thread and external agencies an appeal was started yesterday, initially to the Buddhist Society of Western Australia Community, for an independent Safe Buddhism website:

An extract from BSWA’s enews (newsletter):

Safe Buddhism Initiative

Venerable Mettaji, with support from Ajahn Brahm, is leading a new initiative to create a “Safe Buddhism” website—an independent platform to promote safety, transparency, and ethical conduct in Buddhist communities. It will offer resources on the Vinaya, Codes of Conduct, dispute resolution, and support pathways that align with Australian law and good governance.

Read on for Venerable Mettaji’s message sharing more about this important initiative.

An appeal for a Safe Buddhism initiative
by Venerable Mettaji (with the full support of Ajahn Brahm)
Multiple alarming allegations of abuse by Buddhist monastics overseas were raised at the recent Sakyadhita Conference in Malaysia. I documented this in a
Sutta Central post on Sakyadhita Conference Panel discussion

As there is no regulatory authority for Buddhism in Australia—and mindful that no Buddhist community is immune from risk—it is proposed to outline the principles of Vinaya (the monastic code) and good conduct in Buddhism through an independent Safe Buddhism website.

A Safe Buddhism site would initially collate existing resources and contacts available now for the benefit of the four-fold assembly, and those new to Buddhism, in Australia. The aim will be to reinforce the role that Vinaya and Codes of Conduct apply in each Buddhist setting, and how they integrate with Australian law and good governance.

A small coalition of qualified professionals recommend that the elements of a Safe Buddhism website should provide the following for lay visitors and supporters:

· Inspect the Vinaya of all Traditions and clearly understand the vows of a Monastic.
· Understand the importance of a Code of Conduct in every Buddhist location.
· Provide guidelines on Dispute resolution (where necessary) and the multiple paths, including external resources, presently available.
· Post Non harm statements from Elders in their Tradition - clarifying their position that Abuse is not acceptable in any circumstance.
· Working with experts, lead to the creation of a confidential portal for reporting serious abuse - and how it will be followed up by Independent and professional personnel.
· Highlight Support services and Resources that are available (including Government agencies) for victims of abuse: INSIGHT EXCHANGE is a fine example and provides “free (donated) information, insights and reflection materials to people in any community, service or system”.

There are some wonderful resources, including necessary Training, already available - such as the Supporting Buddhist Communities to Prevent and Respond to Family Violence toolkit - that could be a guide for a future Australia - wide toolkit.

If you can share professional experience and are open to assist the initiative please email: silaforsbi@gmail.com. We would love to hear from you.

This appeal is to enquire and check that sufficient resources are available to create a sustainable and meaningful solution. Grants and Regulatory assistance will be sought to ensure that the website has sufficient awareness in Australia.

Meetings to start to design the initiative further will commence immediately after Vassa, although preparatory work is continuing. They will start with online sessions guided by experts in the field so that the resources generated and produced are thoughtful and instructive.

Please let us know of any external groups that could help guide the concept stage and elements to be delivered.

With Metta
Venerable Mettaji.
This initiative has the full support of Ajahn Brahm."

We hope some good resources will be forthcoming to establish this independent portal.

2 Likes

Dear Venerables and other colleagues,
Thank you for this discussion. I met Venerable Mettaji in Kuching and was part of the Rountable on Sexual Violence. Ann Gleig and I have co-authored a book on the topic of sexual violence and misconduct in American and transnational “convernt” Buddhism. It is going through a legal process currently and we hope that it will be published soon. We wanted to share a piece we just recently published as part of a special issue on religion and sexual abuse that may be helpful to some participating in this discussion. In particular, it highlights the importance of a survivor-centered approach, using a feminist framework. We really feel that it is impossible to understand abuse and responses to abuse in North America without grasping what feminists studying the dynamics around sexual violence call “rape culture.” Briefly, cultural, social, legal, and political structures normalize sexual violence, minimize its effects, direct sympathy and protection towards perpetrators, and generally punish or marginalize survivors that come forward. These structures work inside and outside of Buddhist institutions and they resist intervention. I say “North America” because that is where the discussion has been taking place, but obviously many of these dynamics occur elsewhere as well. Anyway, I’m including the link to the citation but if anyone wishes to see a pdf, they are welcome to contact me off the list. (I wasn’t sure if it is possible to attach a pdf here.)[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0048721X.2025.2538957?scroll=top&needAccess=true]

3 Likes
2 Likes

Dear Venerable Meetaji

Thanks for your initiative in making Sangha responsible for non-harming of lay people.

Its commendable bhikkhus lead this process. I hope you don’t encounter any backlash. I hope you don’t suffer compassion fatigue.

I wonder if I could indulge in an off topic diversion. About the situation in Sri Lanka. There young boys are re-homed in monasteries and can serve under a bhikkhu. Many reports indicate this practice is riddled with some of the worst sexual, emotional and physical abuses. The harm done to young boys due to their youth and reliance on the abuser is severe.

I wonder if once your Australian project is established and your compassion reservoir refilled, if you might consider putting your leadership and experience towards the Sri Lankan dilemma?

:anjal:

2 Likes

Hello Jara,

I think the initiative will be supported by the four-fold assembly and reiterate the importance of an Oath against Harm in all circumstances.

Here is one developed 5 years ago that probably did not get enough traction and take up at the time:

In the practice of the Dharma, I hold the student-teacher relationship to be a sacred connection which prioritises the spiritual development, maturation, and well-being of the student.
Similarly, I hold that Dharma organisations exist to provide safe environments which allow those who practice the Dharma to thrive in supportive communities, founded on aspirations of good-will for all, and supported by a strong ethical foundation of non-harming.
I acknowledge that any behaviour which would be categorised as abusive—whether emotionally, physically, financially, psychologically or sexually—or which is exploitative, coercive, or an abuse of power, or which attempts to cover-up such behaviour, is harmful and unnecessary in the practice of the Dharma. It is unacceptable in all circumstances.
I am aware that harm has been caused by failures to meet these standards in the past, and I declare my commitment to maintaining them for the well-being and benefit of all. May this commitment help the Dharma to flourish, both now and in the future, and may it help to alleviate suffering and create a more compassionate world.

Presently, Buddhism in Australia has insufficient collaborative resources to implement a major project yet an independent Safe Buddhism website is likely to be supported and enhanced by allies, agencies, State and Federal Government (most of whom will not be Buddhist) - who favour Morality, Prevention from Harm, Safety, and consequences when important measures are not followed.

I and others are conscious that trust, confidentiality and sensitivity are keep parameters in the creation of a Confidential portal - to report abuse, and the establishment of an appropriate and independent victim and survivors group.

The Heartwood Survivors programme has been consulted for advice - given their experience and insights. Many on the Advisory Board were in Kuching and involved in the Panel.

Dr. Chandana Namal Rathnayake, also on the Heartwood Advisory panel, first alerted the world to the problems in Sri Lanka through a thesis in the UK. This article Child Ordination in Sri Lankan Buddhist Monasteries: Is It a Cultural Exception or a Cause for Concern? explains his research.

Dr Namal, in my discussions with him, is seeking a sensitive and thoughtful response and would benefit from support in the Sri Lanka diaspora and engagement with officials in the relatively new Sri Lankan Government. Australian Buddhists - especially from Sri Lanka, can get involved now and start a Sinhalese appeal. After Vassa I will try and hold a few meetings with important individuals to try and influence a response.

Initially, whilst it might take a little time, a Safe Buddhism solution might be transferable to other countries . Yet, right now, it is a moral and ethical duty for the Traditions and Countries mentioned in Kuching, and Amy and Ann’s recent paper, to reinforce the required Morality, Ethics and Conduct - that the Buddha prescribed. And Government, agencies and lawyers use legal redress - to enforce accountability and compliance.

4 Likes

Apologies, if this is not of use. My mind has just felt that perhaps the Buddhist Community could learn from survivors of clergy abuse in Catholic tradition. I have recently joined this network: Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests. I understand, different terrain to be addressed. Still, this network and I imagine others would have a lot of knowledge that could be learnt from. And it brings me joy to think of the multi-faith - coming together.

2 Likes

https://www.buddhistdoor.net/news/buddhist-nun-and-abbots-in-cross-litigation-over-sexual-assault-exploitation-claims-in-southern-california/

The nun, identified in court filings under an alias, claims she was brought from Vietnam to the city of Westminster in January 2024 with promises of a religious worker visa, a path to US citizenship, and assistance in securing a green card for her nephew. While residing at Dieu Ngu Buddhist Temple, the nun has alleged that she was sexually assaulted and raped three times by the abbot, Venerable Xuan Ngoc Ho, also known as Thich Vien Huy. According to the complaint, the assaults occurred as recently as March 2024, with the abbot at times entering the women’s dormitory while intoxicated, despite security measures meant to prevent such entry.

2 Likes

Also in Thailand

https://www.buddhistdoor.net/news/thai-survey-reveals-deep-concern-about-buddhist-clergy-misconduct/

Thai Survey Reveals Deep Concern About Buddhist Clergy Misconduct

Roughly one in four (25.42 per cent) respondents criticized Buddhist governing bodies for being ineffective in preventing or responding to monastic misconduct. Another 23.74 per cent reported that monks who broke monastic precepts often displayed hostile or aggressive behavior.


In light of recent scandals, public sentiment appeared to support stronger regulatory measures. The survey asked participants about a draft bill aimed at protecting and promoting Buddhism, which included legal penalties for misconduct among both clergy and laypeople. A majority—80.76 per cent—strongly supported criminal penalties for monks who violated the monastic code, and an additional 13.59 per cent expressed moderate support.

However, opinions were more mixed on other proposed measures. Only 17 per cent strongly supported criminal penalties for laypeople who knowingly engaged in sexual relations with monks. In contrast, 63 per cent favored strict penalties for monks making false claims about supernatural powers. Some 35 per cent backed penalties for individuals who distorted the Buddhist teachings, and 44 per cent strongly supported criminalizing false accusations against monks made without evidence.

And in South Korea

South Korean Court Awards Damages to Woman in Sexual Harassment Case Involving Buddhist Monk

https://www.buddhistdoor.net/news/south-korean-court-awards-damages-to-woman-in-sexual-harassment-case-involving-buddhist-monk/

The ruling has been seen by advocacy groups as a significant step toward justice for survivors of sexual harassment within religious organizations. Legal experts noted the court’s explicit recognition of retaliatory transfers as a form of harm, marking an important precedent in whistleblower protection and workplace harassment cases.

Just some news from the past 2.5 months

ETA:
And more subtle, but just as devistating, is the everyday spiritual abuse that occurs in many monastic environments.

5 Likes

thin on details, though.

1 Like