Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

American Buddhist Perspectives

Home
About

Home
Buddhist
Religion News
Why can’t people just leave Shambhala Buddhism?

Why can’t people just leave Shambhala Buddhism?

Last updated on: August 15, 2018 at 12:15 pm by Justin Whitaker

Why can’t people just leave Shambhala Buddhism? 2018-08-15T12:15:32-06:00 Justin Whitaker

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

With a steady stream of abuse allegations against senior leadership and well-known teachers, many Shambhala Buddhists are asking the obvious question: should I stay or should I go?

Before the Project Sunshine report, published in February 2018, Shambhala International had maintained a relatively low-key profile in the American religious scene: a somewhat questionable but charismatic founder in the 1970s, mostly (?) standard Tibetan Buddhism teachings, plenty of drama but, perhaps, stability in its second generation…

I have gotten to know Waylon Lewis, founder of Elephant Journal, over the years, as well as Ethan Nichtern, and Lodro Rinzler and Susan Piver. But I knew them all more for their individual activities rather than as members of or teachers in Shambhala International. So my first response to the unfolding abuse of power scandal was to reach out to Andrea Winn, who authored the Project Sunshine report to find out more. as the scandal has opened up over the last 6 months I’ve watched mostly as an outsider, as I have with most contemporary Buddhism, for the last 18 years (in part as academic research, in part out of simple curiosity about this strange phenomenon and writer here).

I’ve been most interested in those urging caution about overly romanticizing Buddhism: in part likely because I have at times overly romanticized it. However, I have also seen real benefit in many aspects of the religion.

One of my earliest writings (Feb 27) on the topic noted both my lack of surprise and my hope:

This is certainly shocking but absolutely not surprising for those watching Tibetan Buddhism in recent decades and particularly in the last six months. The abuse at Shambhala is doubtless widespread and will be persistent. If the report is to be believed, and there is no reason to doubt it, senior members of the organization have long engaged in the exploitation of women, children, and others. Yet more within the organization actively covered up that abuse by threatening, demeaning, and shunning abuse victims who attempted to resolve issues.

The question now is: are they rotten to the core or is a sort of redemption possible? If they lash out at the press, victims, and advocates who are exposing problems … we’ll know that they are rotten to the core. If they support those parties with openness and honest examination and a willingness to part with the predators in their organization, then redemption it is.

I had hoped that their early response, which they labeled a “wake-up call”, would mean that they would really take the allegations to heart and seek help with a little humility. What followed, however, seemed to me to be mostly obfuscation and misdirection. I got in touch with several survivors of the abuse within Shambhala, and their anger and dissatisfaction only grew with each passing month of delayed action and attempts to minimize the damage.

I’ve also read accounts of some who have left the organization. Many of those have left in frustration or exasperation about the mismanagement of the scandal. Others have noted that in hindsight it is apparent how deeply patriarchal and damaging the organization has been since its founding.

Major figures stay, go, waver

Ethan Nichtern observes some of this in his July 20 blog post, “Stepping Down As “Shastri,” Staying For The Shambhala Community.” He recognizes, it seems, the taint of his “Shastri” title: coming as it did from Sakyong Mipham who has just stepped down in the face of numerous sexual misconduct accusations levied against him.

But, rather than denounce the guru (Mipham), Nichtern says in part, “I am resting in ‘not-knowing'” and “Anything is possible.”

Susan Piver seems to also be a bit unsure. In an excellent interview with Matthew Remski (which follows from a post she wrote and his critical response), she says she is not sure if she is in any more or out and has been moving out for five years now. The interview and the writings are highly recommended insofar as they highlight the language and modes of thought that might make it difficult for others to leave. And Remski helpfully draws from his own experiences in high demand and dysfunctional religious groups (or as he says, “cults”) to show some of the difficulties that people in Shambhala might be encountering.

Lodro Rinzler’s exit from Shambhala is perhaps the most spectacular to date. According to ThinkProgress, he quit Shambhala just after getting word that he was himself under investigation for sexual misconduct and that Shambhala centers were being asked by leadership not to invite him to promote his new book.

One leader who has so far definitely stayed in the organization has been Judith Simmer-Brown, who has 40 years of experience in Shambhala and is a professor at Naropa University. Her response to Shambhala members has also been covered by Remski (and one might hope she would follow-up with an interview like Susan Piver did).

Two things seem obvious to me at this point. First, more allegations will arise. More big-name teachers and community leaders will be named as recent or long-past abusers of their power. And second, the difficult decision of staying or leaving won’t go away. The complexity of each person’s involvement with the group simply cannot be encapsulated in any other person’s advice or experience.

The climate of abuse created by leaders in Shambhala International shows a clear pattern of leadership knowing of abuse and covering it up. This kind of activity likely led to honest, ethical people in the organization leaving, opening up paths of promotion for abusers and their enablers.

Shambhala as a “cult”

Some people who have left have used the word “cult” to describe the group in hindsight. The term carries with it strongly negative connotations to most. Another highly recommended set of readings comes from Elliot Benjamin, who has written extensively about modern religions and wrote last year a long, detailed analysis of Shambhala based on his fairly extensive experiences with the group. There, he engages in a detailed, 15-point analysis of “cult danger” in Shambhala. The result, written around December 2017, suggests nothing major to worry about.

That was before Project Sunshine though. Following a number of comments on that post, Benjamin wrote a follow-up in March 2018 incorporating further research on Shambhala. There he moves Shambhala into “Moderate Cult Danger” territory. He concludes there:

And who knows—perhaps all the courageous and honest communications of the participants of the Project Sunshine forum will significantly reduce the cult dangers of Shambhala so that in some future time, I could do yet another analysis of cult dangers in Shambhala and find that from my combined integral experiential and non-experiential perspective, that Shambhala has moved into the Neutral category, or perhaps even back into the Mildly Beneficial category. I am an optimist and idealist at heart, and I will therefore end this essay on this positive note.

However, a third article suggests a crushing of that optimism as Benjamin examines the head of Shambhala: Sakyong Mipham. There he details the allegations of abuse against Mipham and concludes that, “In truth, this is all sickening and confusing to me. On one hand I now have very little trust of Mipham, and I essentially consider him to be just another unethical guru, and that Shambhala should give serious consideration to removing him from his role of Shambhala Sakyong and ‘lineage holder.'”

The best ongoing discussion and analysis I’ve seen comes from Matthew Remski, already mentioned above. Articles like Are Cult Members Stupid? Are Cult Recruiters Evil? (Let’s Talk About Viruses Instead.) bring us both particular cases of manipulative tactics and a discussion of how they are used more generally in some religious movements. He has also shed light on powerful abuse enablers such as Dzongsar Khyentse, as in Tantric Trolling, Tantric Fixing: Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse’s Posts on Clerical Sexual Abuse.

What is often most confusing for members of destructive religious groups is the dissonance between the joy and benefit they received from the group and its prescribed practices and the recognition of abuse and/or cover-up by the same teachers and leaders. Remski discusses this with alacrity at Maybe It Wasn’t the “Shambhala Teachings” That Changed Your Life: A Brief Note on False Attribution.

Do you find benefit in this blog?
Please support independent coverage of Buddhism and join a community of patrons here.

* Photo by Aimee Vogelsang on Unsplash

Previous Post

August 6, 2018

David Foster Wallace, Irony, and American Buddhism today

Next Post

August 22, 2018 A Teaching Philosophy as Revolutionary Manifesto

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Academia Activism American Buddhism Art Book review Buddhism Buddhism Today Buddhist Ethics Burma/Myanmar China Christianity Commodification Environment Gender Happiness Health Humor India Interfaith Islam Japanese Buddhism Kant Media / News Meditation mindfulness Photography Poetry Politics quicktakes Running Teaching Technology Thailand Theism/Atheism Theravada Tibet Tibetan Buddhism Travels Uncategorized Unitarian Universalism video Western Philosophy Zen

Select a Month June 2021 January 2021 November 2020 August 2020 July 2020 March 2020 January 2020 October 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 November 2004 September 2004 August 2004

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz