The results of the Lewis Silkin investigation into the abusive behaviour outlined in the letter to Sogyal Rinpoche written by 8 students in July 2017 was released a short time ago.
You can download the 50 page Lewis Silkin report here and you can find the French translation on the Rigpa website along with the introductory part, including the Executive Summary and Recommendations, in German, Spanish, and Italian.
Please note that the full report might be distressing to some people as it addresses serious issues including violence and sexual misconduct. Those traumatised by such abusive behaviour may find some of the content retraumatising.
I would like to express, on behalf of all interested parties, our deep gratitude to everyone who has spoken out about the abuses and in particular to those who spoke to Karen Baxter and helped her to make a report that reflects the truth.
May this report be a catalyst for genuine progress in removing abuse and the acceptance of abuse not only from Rigpa but also from Tibetan Buddhism as a whole.
Here are just the Executive Summary and Recommendation part of the report for your quick perusal.
Executive Summary
Whilst I have seen evidence that many people feel that they have benefitted greatly from having Sogyal Lakar as their teacher, individual experiences are very different. There are varying degrees of closeness to Sogyal Lakar, with the closest relationships regularly referred to as the “inner circle”. The experiences of some of the members of the inner circle are very different from the experiences of many of those who are less close.
Not all of the allegations against Sogyal Lakar are upheld, as explained in the body of the report below, but based on the evidence available to me, I am satisfied that, on the balance of probabilities:
a. some students of Sogyal Lakar (who were part of the ‘inner circle’, as described later in this report) have been subjected to serious physical, sexual and emotional abuse by him; and
b. there were senior individuals within Rigpa who were aware of at least some of these issues and failed to address them, leaving others at risk.”A number of serious concerns arise out of my findings which, in my opinion, must be addressed. Recommendations and proposed action points are set out at the conclusion of this report.Recommendations
I have been asked to set out any recommendations that I have for change within Rigpa as a result of my findings. My practical recommendations are set out below. Should they be accepted, there will be detailed work to be done in implementing the recommendations across the Rigpa organisation, which operates in a number of different territories. It will be necessary in a number of respects to take into account local laws, regulations and guidance in each such territory as well as having regard to the legal personality and governance structure through which Rigpa operates in each territory.
There are also a number of matters which may require further investigation before the Rigpa leadership is able to reach final decisions in relation to this overall matter. The possibility of such further investigations is referred to at various points above.
Before moving to implement the recommendations below, my view is that the leadership of Rigpa should consider first the overall effect of these findings on its mission and work as an organisation. In the United Kingdom, for example, the trustees would need to consider whether the findings of the report, the resources required to act on the recommendations and the degree to which the work and profile of Rigpa has in the past been closely associated with the persona of Sogyal Lakar, make it possible for the organisation to move past these events and operate sustainably and successfully in the future. Appropriate advice should be taken on this and it should be noted that in raising this issue for the trustees I do not seek to guide their decision either way, such guidance being outside the scope of my investigation and remit.
Assuming that the Rigpa leadership concludes that the appropriate overall course is to put in place structures and procedures to ensure that its work as an organisation can continue in the future without the risk of harm, I recommend the following:
1. Sogyal Lakar should not take part in any future event organised by Rigpa or otherwise have contact with its students;
2. Rigpa should take steps to disassociate itself from Sogyal Lakar as fully as is possible (having regard to any legal arrangements which may for the time being connect the organisation with him);
3. Rigpa leadership in each country (being the trustees or equivalent) and the Vision Board should, as necessary, be refreshed in order to ensure that;
a. its members are unconnected with the harmful events referred to in this report and so can credibly lead the programme of changes required;
b. its members are all publically committed to the concept that abuse will not be tolerated by anyone, or against anyone, within Rigpa (including teachers); and
c. wherever possible, the leadership should include some members who are unconnected with the student body, for example lay trustees as such would be recognised in the United Kingdom.
4. Professional management should be appointed at each major Rigpa centre. Wherever possible, the management team should include some members who are not part of the student body. Care should be taken to ensure that all members of management are able to perform their responsibilities and are not inhibited in doing so, for example, as a consequence of considering themselves bound to demonstrate ‘unwavering respect’ towards the guru.
5. An appropriate risk assessment addressing the whole range of the organisation’s activities should be conducted and regularly refreshed. The risk assessment should specifically address teaching practices which are, or have been, associated with the Dzogchen Mandala – careful, well guided judgments will need to be made on the future use of such practices in the organisation’s work. For the avoidance of doubt any practice amounting to abuse of a student should never be tolerated.
6. A comprehensive and written safeguarding policy should be put in place to ensure that:
a. sexual relationships between teachers and students are either prohibited entirely, or subject to specific safeguarding measures to ensure there can be no abuse of power;
b. any ‘lama care’ that is deemed to be necessary is carried out in a way which ensures the health and safety of those providing these services is adequately protected;
c. mechanisms for the confidential reporting of concerns are clear and can be easily found by those with concerns;
d. reports of any incidents and allegations are recorded and stored in a secure and proper way;
e. incidents and allegations are promptly investigated in accordance with the policy with appropriate follow up action taken;
f. consideration is given to reporting serious incidents to relevant law enforcement authorities and/or regulators; and
g. the management and leadership of each Rigpa entity is aware of and properly trained in its responsibilities.
7. An abuse helpline outside of Rigpa should be set up, in addition to the internal reporting mechanisms made available.
8. To the extent that it has not done so already, Rigpa should review its fundraising activities to ensure that these are compliant with local laws and regulations. This review should specifically include contexts in which Rigpa events such as retreats may be used as an opportunity for third parties such as external speakers to raise funds for other causes and/or invite gratuity payments on their own behalf. There should be absolute clarity on the proper uses of all such funds.
9. A clear approach to the engagement of speakers and teachers should be established which ensures that they are aware of relevant policies, including the safeguarding and fundraising policies, before having contact with students.
10. So far as is consistent with the wider financial responsibilities of Rigpa, a fund should be created to provide professional counselling to those affected by abuse.
11. An appropriate programme of communications related to the above steps should be undertaken with the letter writers, students and the wider Rigpa community. In addition to a first communication setting out Rigpa’s commitment to a safe and secure environment for all students and the steps to be taken in achieving that, regular updates should be given until the programme of changes has been completed.
12. Rigpa’s leadership should consider (taking further advice as necessary) the extent to which it is obliged to report any of the matters set out in this report to law enforcement authorities or relevant regulators in each applicable jurisdiction.
Karen Baxter, Partner, Lewis Silkin LLP
22 August 2018
Rigpa’s Response?
Click here to read the statement_from_Rigpa on the results of the independent investigation
Unfortunately there is no indication in this statement that Rigpa is taking a different approach to the one they have taken over the last year. The language is the same as what we’ve heard before and of as little substance. They do say that ‘Rigpa commits to act upon the report’s recommendations,’ but what they mean by that remains to be seen. Excuse my cynicism, but I have good reason for it since saying one thing and doing another and outright lying is something we’re all familiar with from Rigpa management. So far their words of healing and reconciliation have only extended to those still in the organisation. The only new thing is this ‘To acknowledge the importance of this process of healing and change, senior members of management are stepping down from their positions of governance.’ We are not given names, however. Why so vague when they have had 14 days with the report already? Plenty of time to work out who has to leave in order to follow the report’s recommendations.
Looking to the future – a message for Rigpa management
Here is an opportunity for Rigpa to truly make a fresh start. Come on my vajra family, you can do it! Find the courage of a true bodhisattva and work for the dharma, the true wisdom and compassion in Tibetan Buddhism, not the religious power structures that faciliate this kind of abuse; clean it up, remove the fuedalism and acceptance of abuse that stains the tradition so it can benefit countless future generations.
Stop acting merely to protect your status, your financial and time investment, your organisation, your religion, and your disgraced teacher. Be bigger than that; see further. And to do that you will have to stop listening to fundamentalist lamas cast in the same mould as Sogyal. Accept that the lineage is not as pure as you think it is and that the beliefs that faciliated this acceptance of abuse have no place in the modern world. Be willing to leave them behind for they cause more harm than good.
Instead show that you understand the real point of the dharma by using your own intelligence and connecting with your own deep wisdom and compassion, and give us more than vague, sweet-sounding words that you seem unable to live up to.
This is your challenge. It was always your challenge. You have failed to grasp it so far. But you can do it now if you can muster up the vision.
Current and previous students of Rigpa can participate in private discussion on this and other related topics on our What Now? Facebook Group. If you’re interested in joining, please contact us via the contact page and ask for an invite.
Anyone who has left a Buddhist sangha that had an abusive teacher can join the Beyond the Temple Facebook Group. The focus in this group is not on the abuse, but on ourselves and our spiritual life as we recover from our experience and look to the future. Click here and request to join.
The What Now? Reference Material page has links to a wealth of articles in the topics related to abuse in Buddhist communities. For links to places to assist in healing from abuse see the sangha care resources page.
Those of you who are interested in ‘keeping Buddhism clean’ could ‘Like’ the Dharma Protectors Facebook page, which posts links to related articles as they come to hand.
Very thorough report, glad to see it posted on the Rigpa Organization website.
Here’s a link to the PDF
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/580dbe87e6f2e16700cb79fe/t/5b8f7c1e1ae6cfb38491e668/1536130081917/Lewis+Silkin+report.pdf
Wow. Karen Baxter’s recommendations are very to the point. I have still to read the report.
Remembering an active Rigpa member and an ex-Rigpa member (both defenders of SL) at the congregation meeting of the German Buddhist Union in April 2018 who propounded such things as “Sex between teacher and student is the basis of our lineage” or “there is no truth, there is only individual perception”, I am happy to read a sane voice as that of Karen Baxter!
It must have been Germany…you know the philosopher F.Nietzsche, yet also the french one Foucault: “There no facts, only intrepretations”
https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-did-Nietzsche-and-Foucault-mean-when-they-declared-There-are-no-facts-only-interpretations-And-what-is-the-use-in-thinking-this-way
Whoever says this, this doesn’t make sense. If you shoot a bird, you shoot a bird. This can be said based on facts without interpretation. Key point is in that context it is used to deny conventional reality, promoting Nihilism.
When, if ever, will anyone in Rigpa state when, where and how the recommendations will be implemented and communicate that to everyone so anyone attending a Rigpa centre can be assured it is a safe place to be.
In my (as usual strong) view a loud, persistent campaign should be launched to get rid of the people Karen Baxter describes as the “inner circle”. They were all complicit in Sogyal’s corruption.70 members of the Rigpa elite have had the report since 22 August. Two weeks to formulate a credible response. And what do we get? Another bout of pious bs and meaningless waffle. They are incompetent dingbats who are still unable or unwilling to acknowledge the reality of the situation. As I have said before (several times), Rigpa is dead in the water and should be disbanded. Perhaps some remainers with a modicum of common sense between them might be able to establish an effective fresh start, but I’m not holding my breath.
I’m one of the dingbats you mention, dear Mary Finnigan! Good to know that what you feel is that Rigpa should be disbanded. This only lacks who should do that : the CIA, MI5, Deuxième Bureau?
Rigpa is dead, you say! Maybe is only a NDE, you should know better! The names you mention were ment to be protected by Karen Baxter use of ‘identifiers’. Why you don’t tell us the names of the others who spoke on the assurance of immunity, a procedure only used in UK and USA; in my country even so called ‘repentants’ of mafia groups must speak openly and show their face, then they can enter a protection programme. It was in Stalin’s USSR and current China that a delation system is the common environment in public life. Congratulations!
No doubt Rigpa is reeling from this shrewdly intelligent and thorough report and will need time to recover. I don’t see how it can continue as an organization under its present name with its founder who gave it that name now truly discredited and absent and its leading management members shown in such poor light. One truly feels for the innocent students who are caught up in the whole ghastly mess. For their sake I hope they can rebuild a new structure which will ensure them genuine Teachings of pure Dharma. One that Rigpa should have been from the start but never was. This is a time for all western Dharma Centres to face up to their shortcomings and eradicate them. Then perhaps there can be a healing of an apparently sickly form of present day Western Tibetan Buddhism. It will take wise and strong leadership to bring this about. Time for the Tibetans to step up to the mark.
Well, no-one will ever be able to say that the report was a whitewash. I have only read the executive summary, but it is relentlessly precise, thorough and pulls no punches whatsoever. It is a model of clarity and probity. The findings are clear and damning, and the implications far-reaching.
Quite apart from the damning conclusions in relation to the abuse, the finding that the process of change and new leadership must be lead by people untainted by the scandal effectively – if implemented fully – cuts the head off the organisation. The recommendation that the UK trustees reflect on the viability of the organisation as it now stands further accentuates this point, and one wonders how, if at all, Rigpa can survive this.
I have to say I am amazed at how forthright the findings are. I would even say I am shocked.
Witness P is Patrick Gaffney, SL’s most senior student, a current member of the Rigpa Vision Board, and a Trustee of Rigpa UK.
Witness O is Dominque Side, one of SL’s most senior students after Gaffney, a past Trustee of Rigpa UK, a past Board Member and President of Rigpa Europe and currently the ‘Supérieur’ (Head) of the Lerab Ling Congregation.
Witness N is Philip Philippou, SL’s longstanding International Secretary, President of Rigpa International and a current member of the Rigpa Vision Board.
https://www.rigpa.org/rigpa-vision-board/
Philip Philippou is also a Trustee of the Terton Sogyal Trust UK and Head Fundraiser for Sukhavati, a spiritual care center and hospice in Berlin. Sukhavati is one of many projects initiated by Rigpa and Sogyal Rinpoche which play down their origins so that it is difficult for the general public to see the connection. http://www.sukhavati.eu/unterstuetzen/
The report is much better than I expected, it’s obviously been prepared in a very thorough, fair and professional way.
The warning above is justified, because the full report contains a lot of testimony that’s quite sickening to read and since these were gathered from only twenty-two people, and some of them were senior students who wouldn’t admit any wrong-doing by Sogyal, it’s obvious that the true amount of abuse was much bigger.
Apparently some testimonies were only given after negotiation by witnesses for protection from lawsuits and them insisting that the whole report would be published, something which Rigpa didn’t want.
Guarantees given by Rigpa are mentioned: that no-one would be sued, but this didn’t convince many people, because over a hundred Rigpa members in Lerab Ling and elsewhere had already started a defamation suit against the lawyer who is gathering witness testimonies, a journalist and the newspaper she works for.
Recently a senior member at Lerab Ling has boasted that there has been no more talk of Rigpa being a cult since the legal action was launched, which means that it’s seen by Rigpa as a good way of silencing critics and stopping witnesses coming forward. In a recent article in the Montpellier Gazette, Marion Dapsance was careful to avoid referring to Rigpa as a cult, even bizzarely denying there’s any accepted definition of the word.
Sogyal’s deranged behaviour that’s so vividly described by witnesses in the report is undeniably the behaviour of a cult-leader and the way students accept it is classic cult symptom, so it’s going to be interesting to see how the report affects the lawsuit.
If they read do it all, the effect on students who still support Rigpa will be unavoidable, it’s hard to imagine any normal person not being horrified by all the descriptions of violence and sexual abuse or how anyone could not see it as mental illness.
There were plenty of reasons to be cynical about why Rigpa commissioned the report, but from Karen Baxter’s description of the way it was set up, Rigpa was obviously warned that they might not like the results. A law firm of that sort wouldn’t risk its reputation by being biased and it’ll collect the fees whether the client is happy or not.
But Rigpa had to be seen to be doing something official and because of Sogyal’s failing health and his status as a fugitive it may have been decided to take the risk of throwing him under the bus to try and save the business. The focus on him as the main problem could have distracted from the complicity of senior students, although Karen Baxter was too thorough for that to happen.
The most important thing is the report’s effectiveness as a catalyst for positive change, and this depends entirely on the integrity of senior management, but going on their performance over the past thirty years, there doesn’t seem much hope.
Karen Baxter’s recommendations should be treated as indispensable, but they can still be ignored and Rigpa can claim it’s be relying mainly on the advice of senior lamas….. the ones who’ve been ruthlessly prepared to ignore all the abuse and keep turning up year after year to endorse Sogyal and take the cash.
Recommendation number 12 is : ‘Rigpa’s leadership should consider (taking further advice as necessary) the extent to which it is obliged to report any of the matters set out in this report to law enforcement authorities or relevant regulators in each applicable jurisdiction.’
This reminds everyone involved that the report has upheld complaints of criminal activities and they are now legally obliged to report them, and it seems to say they should get legal advice to help them understand exactly how much trouble they could be in if they don’t. But it’s difficult to imagine this warning leading to a queue of senior students outside their local Police stations.
The sad truth is that in most cases like this, the changes, when they are finally forced on an organisation are just cosmetic, not behavioural: the paedophile bishop is moved to another diocese, the fraudster CEO resigns with a huge pay-off and gets a job in another branch, the crooked politician apologises ‘sincerely’ but keeps the money, and the all the supposed wonderful new understanding, the ‘principled’ resignations and contrition are all fake because the beliefs and culture that allowed the problems to flourish for so long remain exactly the same as they ever were. It’s hard to see how Tibetan Buddhism can be different.
when you read the report it’s obvious tha’s
Rigpa is a cult ( definition of a cult: ttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/may/27/cults-definition-religion)
there were abuse and the disciples was in deny (still are)
that Sogyal is giving a very bad name to buddhism
why is not in prison?
Have you read the report? Why is not in prison it’s in the report, at the beginning!
It’s an investigation based on a UK civil standard of evidence and a balance of probabilities:
In a criminal court you’d need proofs beyond reasonable doubt.
It’s called civilization: even a delinquent has right to defend him/herself.
@ Vera
……or instead of defending himself, if he knows he’s guilty, the delinquent can run away immediately at the first hint of trouble and hide in a distant country like Thailand for example, that has no extradition treaties with the countries whose justice he doesn’t have the courage to face.
Someone has to actually take him to court for there to be legal action, but in France the statute of limitations prevents you doing so after 5 or 6 years have passed (depending on the crime) apparently, and it takes people 5 or 6 years or more to get to the point where they might feel strong enough to take that kind of action. Before then, they are just trying to cope with the trauma and get their lives back on track. Australia has no statute of limitations and they have an extradition treaty with Thailand, but someone who was the recipient of the abuse needs to start the action. Do any of them have the funds for that kind of thing, let alone the resiliance required for a court case? I don’t know, but I figure that’s why no one has taken court action since Janice Doe, and that’s why Sogyal is not in prison.
I don’t understand how anyone can remain his student after this, but I suspect many will. The brainwashing is strong.
If a victim wanted to proceed with criminal charges then that shouldn’t involve a lot of expense on their part – of course the standard of proof ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ is tougher than that required in a civil suit: ‘on the balance of probabilities’. In a criminal prosecution the victim would have to endure cross-examination and i can imagine that the defence would be arguing that Sogyal’s behaviour was consensual. So yeah, it would be an arduous process for trauma survivors.
I think court proceedings in Victoria were recently changed so that under-age victims in rape cases don’t have to endure cross-examination. A young woman in Geelong was raped by several brothers and whilst they were charged, it was eventually dropped as the teenage girl couldn’t face the additional anguish of having to be cross-examined in court – a further violation. As far as i understand it, her and her mother then campaigned for the process to be changed – so that at least one positive aspect came out of her horrific ordeal.
Concerning Australia not having a statute of limitations in sexual abuse matters, was that a recent change following the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Sexual Abuse – and does it apply to either or both civil and criminal cases?
Hello
After reading the whole report I have no doubt about Sogyal Rinpoche being an abuser. I wonder if he is mentally ill or has some sort of tumor in his brain that is making his judgement so bad.
Today I was checking the Charity Commission’s website to see Rigpa’s financial situation as they claim they have so many money troubles at present. I also checked the Terton Sogyal Trust and I was gobsmacked to see the trust has around £1,200,000 in current net assets (as per December 2017). The purpose of the trust is spreading the dharma (https://terton-sogyal.co.uk/index.php/tertoen-sogyal.html) and as far as I know this would just be another fund for Rigpa.
Can you believe this?
Cant’ find what gobsmacked you, dear Catherine! And then what it are net assets? Real Estate, cash, equities, shares, Amazon stocks in Wall Street? Please give us what you saw ina a precise link!
Thanks
Just visit the Charity Commission website, look for Terton Sogyal Trust and download the last report delivered. It is very easy and open to everyone.
http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends23/0001059323_AC_20171231_E_C.pdf
Visited the page: that money is in restricted funds, than cannot be used as such but only in the interests and surplus gains they might generate. They are bound by donors to specific use and you can see that in the annual sheets. Those funds must have been constituted many yerars ago.
BTW, in 2017 no exchange was made with Rigpa International and cannot be used to cover losses in any Rigpa entity.
It’s no proof of financial mismanagement and is strictly surveyed by the UK Charity commission.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/managing-charity-assets-and-resources-cc25/managing-charity-assets-and-resources
So Rigpa has committed in its statement that several officials will be resigning. Does anyone know if that’s true and if so, who would be resigning?
They just sent an email: Patrick Gaffney, Philip P. and Dominique Side are stepping down.
Is this a proven to be true ?
Wondering if anyone is willing to start a go fund me to hire KB to continue the investigation as mentioned near the end of the report.
Further allegations
Throughout the course of this investigation I have been contacted by a number of additional people who have further stories of abuse. Regrettably, the scope of this investigation has had to be limited to investigating the Complaint and there came a point when it was not feasible to conduct further interviews.
I have assured those who raised concerns with me that I would alert Rigpa to the fact that there are more concerned students and former students who would like the opportunity to be heard.
To ensure a proper investigation is undertaken, any such process needs to be truly independent of the influence of those individuals who I conclude have been involved in failing to deal with concerns for many years.
Do it yourself! Put your money where your mouth goes ( btw, a SR remark!)
nice, now I remember why I stopped posting here…
I think it’s a good idea, but I have a feeling that any money raising at this stage should be for survivors therapy and legal fees, becasue the only investigation now that will make it quite clear that this kind of behaviour is criminal, is a criminal proceeding.
The idea would be to find out who knew what and when. For example seth, mauro, robert, vincianne, catherine, adam, valerie, vrena, ros, giles, gyurme, ian, sebastian, most of the national teams, board members etc (it’s a very, very long list). I’m not saying that all of these people knew the full depths of depravity, but they definitely knew bits of it.
If there’s any hope for change NONE of those people can have ANY role in rigpa going forward, they are true believers and with them at the helm they’ll just end up with more of the same.
I am not interested because I don’t care either way.
I would think that anyone who has any idea of saving rigpa might want a complete purge…and make sure former complicit sycophants who fled before the letter, but haven’t had the decency to be truthful (those hanging out in amsterdam), should not be allowed back as management either.
Is that gyurme who translates for OTR?
yes, he started in rigpa
There a few interesting Rigpa sprouts likewise: http://www.beingbodhi.com/about-bodhi.html
That’s not kind. Please be more respectful in your comments in future.
As Lauren Auder reminds us, “over a hundred Rigpa members in Lerab Ling and elsewhere had already started a defamation suit against the lawyer who is gathering witness testimonies, a journalist and the newspaper she works for.”
I hadn’t read that Rigpa was attempting to sue a journalist but concerning their suit against the French Lawyer (for calling them a cult or whatever), will this nasty act of revenge be rendered hopeless given the robust nature of the Lewis Silken report?
In France that report has no legal value; it’s based on a tipical anglo-american so-called best practice.
What you call ‘robust nature’ is wishful thinking.
Karen Baxter says it clearly: it’s based on a UK civil standard of probabilities, it’s not a criminal standard, where you need proofs ‘beyond reasonable doubt’. Has that lawyer that kind of proofs?
@ Vera
Unless the Public Prosecutor has specifically intervened to make it a criminal defamation, which would be unlikely here, defamation is civil not criminal, in which case ‘On the balance of probabilities’ is exactly the standard of proof required.
French defamation law is one of the world’s most defendant-friendly, that is it’s heavily weighted in favour of the defendant. The claimant has to satisfy strict requirements, including proving that the statement they claim was defamatory was made with deliberate malicious intent and not based on fact, whereas the person accused has to show that they acted in good faith based on information available to them at the time and in the public interest or the statement refers to an inquiry, which is the case here.
So it’s very unusual to sue a lawyer in possession of multiple testimonies of abuse and violence collected on behalf of a French state-funded and highly respected organisation working to help victims of cult abuse by claiming made a remark that’s damaged your business. ( He didn’t even actually use the word ‘cult’.)
French defamation law is based on the right of freedom of expression guaranteed by the European Convention on Human Rights, and so suing the press is often seen as an attack on free speech and freedom of the press.
The Lewis Silkin report was scrupulously compiled by a professional lawyer, so it should be equally valid for consideration as the opinions of the lawyer working for Rigpa and could be cited as corroborative evidence from a reliable source unrelated to the defendant, especially as it was also commissioned by Rigpa itself. So yes, it could have legal value.
All things considered, a defamation suit was a strange course of action, especially for Buddhists who claim to practice Lojong and not least because it drew even more public attention to the whole issue. Many people think it was only launched cynically to frighten Sogyal’s victims and stop them testifying, and that seems a reasonable assessment to me, because most people are afraid of being sued and losing their homes or other assets.
Rigpa had to commission the report but desperately hoped it wouldn’t work against them and this was a particularly vicious way of trying to make that less likely.
It didn’t work out so well though.
You say that calling the report ‘robust’ is just wishful thinking: I personally found reading it a very disturbing experience, so I wonder just what amount and level of abuse and violence it would have to contain before you did consider it ‘robust’.
Is all rigpa board high level teachers now to resign as well as the 3 so far declare to do?
Oder all know about abuse behind thankas, but hide thought it were the action of a crazy Dzogchen Meister, so they can’t really be blamed surely? But those that rely on income positional difficult.
Its a Crazy World Times ,Yes?
Where is compassion? In the Tibetan morals and values oral sex is beyond anybody can imagine. Mr. Sogyal’s crazy wisdom teaching appears to me like a modern day cult and all the people around him are equally responsible.
Karma doesn’t discriminate. Soggy and his cronies have made their bed and now it’s time for them to lie in it.