There seems to be a lot of neurosis on the part of westerners around this very thing (you can feel it in the article), but accumulation of merit is extraordinarily important and inextricably a part of the Buddhist tradition.

Regarding the Sakyong’s comment about gaining merit by supporting the puja, this is simply how the whole thing has always functioned, and there are many such assertions in the scriptures. A major blind spot in the comments is that there’s a difference between the accumulation of merit and the accumulation of wisdom. If you were at the puja, you could accumulate wisdom as well as merit; supporters only get merit.

Doing divinations and receiving donations for them are an absolutely normal part of Tibetan spiritual culture, something Trungpa R himself did. People in traditional culture normally do not make major decisions like marriage or retreat times or starting businesses without prophetic or astrological support. This is part of the many services a qualified lama renders to Tibetan society. This isn’t spiritual materialism but help to people as long as it’s done by a sincere, qualified person. Receiving donations for this service is normal and part of the requirement that the supplicant must give to get something. Think of Marpa having to gather gold in order to receive teachings in India. Within its social and spiritual context this perfectly normal and doesn’t in any way automatically fall within all these breathless charges of spiritual materialism.

Now if I could just get everyone else to agree with me….

…and it is nice to have a tulku fullback on the bench in case the game gets close.

Perhaps you could consider how you might feel if someone created a public blogsite full of posts referring to “Trungpa”, without the standard honorifics or other terms of respect, accusing him “spiritual materialism” and general corruption for his drinking, his spending money on suits and his Western style and behavior, etc. Now consider further how you might feel if this blogsite used the name “Shambhala”, was written by Shambhala students who were never students of Trungpa Rinpoche and who perhaps had never met him, and called for the purging of his past teachings from the Shambhala canon as materialistic, generally corrupt and on the wrong track. Consider how you might feel if, to support all of this, these posts questioned the legitimacy of his training in Tibet, and whether he had actually received full empowerments in the Kagyu and Nyingma lineages.
This seems analogous to posts on this thread, calling His Eminence “Namkha Drimed” without honorifics, accusing him of spiritual materialism and general corruption for his divinations and his Tibetan style and behavior, rejecting the current and future teachings in the unfolding of the Shambhala lineage by the Jampal Sakyong with the support of his father-in-law, questioning whether Namkha Rinpoche actually received the full empowerments of the Rinchen Terzod from Trungpa Rinpoche, and doing all this on a “Shambhala” blogsite.

Likely, many of the contributors of the negative posts did have to deal with similar criticisms of Trungpa Rinpoche – likely mostly from outsiders – during his lifetime and after. How did you feel? How did you deal with them?
When I am asked about Trungpa Rinpoche’s drinking or other apparent corruption based on conventional norms, I usually try to find a way of saying that he held unconditional awareness, and that alcohol or anything else supposedly threatening to unconditional awareness can actually be used as a medium for its practice, due to inseparability from that awareness. That is, I try to say that Trungpa Rinpoche was a Vidyadhara, who always held the truth of the inseparability of samsara and nirvana, and from it manifested extraordinary upaya, for the benefit of beings. I try also to say that this was all by way of pointing out something about ourselves, our birthright of wakefulness, something which we already possess and have the inherent potential to realize fully.

As we know, it can be difficult to convince someone of this in any ordinary dialog.
Unless a person has had some sense or direct experience of unconditional awareness, and some connection through it with a teacher – or at least a sense that such connection is possible – that person is likely to believe you are just a cult member using the lingo of your cult. And saying that someone is a “holder of unconditional awareness” is likely to come across as the height of cultishness.
I feel in a similar position defending or supporting H.E. Namkha Drimed Rinpoche to the contributors on this blog thread (not that he needs my defense or support!).

I wonder whether any of the contributors attended the Kalapa Festival in Halifax in the Summer of last year, or the Gesar Festival at Dechen Choling in Spring of this year. Hundreds of Shambhala students were able to connect with His Eminence at and around those events. At the Kalapa Festival, His Eminence gave an amazing empowerment for his Yeshe Tsogyal sadhana, and a powerful lung for “Ocean of The Play of Enlightened Activity, A Daily Offering to Warrior Gesar, Great Being Tondrup, King of Werma, Tamer of Enemies”, a protector practice that Trungpa Rinpoche wrote at His Eminence’s request during his second giving of the Rinchen Terzod in Tibet. His reminiscences of Trungpa Rinpoche from that time were extremely moving, and also sometimes quite humorous. When retelling a teasing joke that Trungpa Rinpoche had made during a private ceremony with just the two of them, His Eminence cracked himself up, and laughed and slapped his knee for what seemed like a very long time. In aspects of both profound brilliance and earthy warmth, the presence of His Eminence and his connection with Trungpa Rinpoche were fully evident at the Kalapa Festival.

Beyond what I would call the more direct experiences that many of us have had with His Eminence, I have been able to speak about him in private audiences with several other highly esteemed Rinpoches close to our sangha. They have all shown the greatest respect for him as an eminent senior lama of their lineages, and encouraged me to connect further with him and generally to support the Mukpo-Ripa family. I would rather follow the clear advice of these Rinpoches than be swayed by any aspersions on a blogsite.

So far as divinations and spiritual materialism, I find both the logic and the evidence of the negative postings to be flawed.

It is not spiritual materialism merely to charge money for “goods and services”, not even for entirely spiritual goods and services. We charge for Shambhala levels, for events with visiting teachers, for empowerments.
There are at least three bases for charging.
First, there are financial practicalities and necessities. Representing these by charging appropriately for spiritual goods and services could further be regarded as encouraging those interested in spiritual goods and services to relate with practicalities and necessities as parts of their spiritual path.
Second, there is the tradition of dana or generosity in supporting the Dharma activity of the gurus; this tradition dates at least to the time of the Buddha, and is well-established in Tibetan and Indian cultures.
Third, there is the creating of an awareness of the value of the teachings by charging for them, or by somehow setting an expectation of donation around them. I am reminded for this basis of the story of Marpa bringing sacks of gold to Naropa (we all know what happened to that!).
There is the matter of excluding someone from receiving spiritual “goods and services” solely on the basis of money, but this is neither part of our practice nor that of Ripa Ladrang.

Spiritual materialism, as I understand it from our teachings, has not to do with merely charging money, but, on the part of the student, with an attitude, of “expecting something in return” and of “hope of gaining merit” for oneself. It is something with which we as students on the path are always working. At the same time, both the Vajrayana and the Shambhala path are “accomplishment” vehicles, in that they support attaining realization in one lifetime and creating enlightened society. In working with spiritual materialism, it is the responsibility of the student to understand such accomplishment — and various aids to it available through siddhi — in the proper context – mostly basically, the context of egoless primordial awareness or basic goodness, and of compassion arising from those.

So the allegation of spiritual materialism applied to divinations could not be based on merely charging a student money for them, or on the student trying to accomplish something through them, as long as the student is aware of spiritual materialism and working with right basic attitude.
Other possible bases for the charge of spiritual materialism would involve not the student but the teacher or the divination itself. These include:
1. divinations are bogus in general
2. the particular form of divination is bogus
3. the divinator is bogus, i.e. not an authentic spiritual teacher or a capable divinator
4. regardless of whether or not the divinator is capable, the divinator is duping or manipulating the student to receive money for the divination, especially duping or manipulating based on the student’s habitual tendency toward spiritual materialism as described above

So far as (1), “divinations are bogus in general”: The Vidyadhara Trungpa Rinpoche held the mirror divination, and used it effectively to escape from Tibet, to see Shambhala, to direct his activities and to advise his students. There are descriptions of this in “Born in Tibet” and elsewhere. He also had divination-like awareness siddhi, the basis for the possibility of particular divination methods, with which he advised and directed students. There are many examples of this that many students of Trungpa Rinpoche can recount.
So far as (2), “the particular form of divination is bogus”: H.E. Namkha Drimed Rinpoche is a principal holder of the Gesar arrow divination. He used this particular form of divination effectively for his party to escape from Tibet. Even other Rinpoches rely on his divinations.
I think not having confidence in the Gesar arrow divination in particular would amount either to having no confidence in Gesar, or to having no confidence in the divinator’s abilities or intentions, which falls into bases (3) and (4) above.
So far as (3) and (4), this just gets back to:
(a) having experience of H.E. Namkha Drimed Rinpoche, and Dharmic connection with or at least favorable impressions of him, or
(b) having confidence in those who do, either other students or other Rinpoches.
Short of amazing displays of relative siddhi (such as the Buddha made when invited to a “debate” with competing spiritual leaders, descending from the sky in the midst of flames), this isn’t really something that can be further argued or mandated, and it was the same with Trungpa Rinpoche.

But one other basic point of evidentiary logic, which I feel actually gets to the heart of the matter regarding this website: not having evidence for something does not constitute having evidence against it.
Regardless of exposure, not having experienced a Dharmic connection with a teacher does not mean the teacher is not Dharmic.

I don’t want to be too presumptuous myself, but one obvious hypothesis seems to be simply that the genuinely devoted students of The Vidyadhara Trungpa Rinpoche who are the principal contributors to this blog site are also saddened and disappointed, about not having experienced the same degree of connection with The Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche or with H.E. Namkha Drimed Rinpoche that they experienced with The Vidyadhara. Based on this lack of connection, there is lack of confidence, and based on this lack of confidence, there is doubt. When not cut at any of the three times for cutting, doubt is articulated and communicated, and leads to things such as this blog thread.
I say “this blog thread”, because I’m not arguing against the entire website, although I do feel the attitudes of this thread pervade the entire website to some degree. But, for example, I think that asking for more information about finances, urging more transparency and accountability around finances, and offering financial suggestions are all very different than accusing a student or a teacher of spiritual materialism and generally questioning divination practices. Asking for clarification about finances seems to me more like real investigation than presumption or just basic doubt.
With that said, what should one do about such doubt? I think the answer is the same for all of us: practice, seek the advice and support of your guru, and follow it wholeheartedly.
Have any of the authors of accusatory postings on this blog thread gone to The Sakyong, to H.E. Namkha Drimed Rinpoche, or to another Rinpoche with whom they actually feel a close connection, and said, “I don’t feel a connection to the teachers and the current teachings in Shambhala. Instead, I feel doubt and suspicion, even of their authenticity and legitimacy. I have become concerned about the direction of the Shambhala organization and even the propagation of the lineage and the preservation of its founding teachings by the Druk Sakyong. Is what is happening really what Trungpa Rinpoche wanted for Shambhala as Druk Sakyong? How would I really know? What should I do about all this? How can I reconnect with Shambhala? How can I regain confidence? If it is not possible for me to reconnect with Shambhala, what should I do? Should I start a blogsite for everyone who feels like me, so that we can articulate whatever doubts arise?”??
Okay, so I am teasing by that last question; I hope I am not being too mean in doing so. Actually, I am very sympathetic to people this situation of disconnection, if this hypothesis applies at all. I have close friends in this situation, and I feel that, in some form, I have gone through it myself. (Plus I think that any Vajrayana teacher is eventually going to put his or her students into situations in which they will experience and have to deal with doubt.) While I never had what I would call real or serious or basic doubts about The Jampal Sakyong or The Vidyadhara, I did go through a longish period of feeling vaguely or mildly but discouragingly and divertingly lost and confused about my role and relationship to the Shambhala organization, lineage and teachings.

What woke me up from that spell was actually meeting H.E. Namkha Drimed Rinpoche, in an airport baggage claim area in 2001, before most of us (including me) knew anything about his connections to Shambhala (this meeting was thanks to the seemingly innocent suggestion of a friend who had been a close student of Trungpa Rinpoche and had been introduced to His Eminence several years before by another Rinpoche).
The circumstances of this meeting were not what I would call ordinary for me (although for His Eminence, it may have been just another completely uplifted day with the dralas). The connection with The Druk Sakyong Trungpa Rinpoche was vividly present within a much bigger picture of the Shambhala lineage, its power and its mission. It seemed that the gurus of the lineage were coming, gathering, taking the next step, and kicking it into high gear, and that I was being reminded of a long-term vow to get up and do something. With his first words, His Eminence described his connection with Trungpa Rinpoche to me, and it felt like one of those rare situations in which the truth of the words is manifest in the presence and atmosphere.

In light of all the rich and amazing developments of the next several years, up to now – the Rigden Abisheka, the weddings of The Sakyong and Khandro Tseyang in Halifax and Orissa, the publication of “Ruling Your World”, the Dharmaraja Guru Yoga and other sadhanas by The Sakyong, the Shambhala Dzogchen or Vajra Garchen teachings, Compassionate Leadership teachings, the Kalapa and Gesar Festivals, the revelations of connections in the lineage of Gesar, the availability of Gesar and drala teachings and practices including His Eminence’s as well as the Vidyadhara’s, the enthronement by H.H. Penor Rinpoche of Khandro Tseyang as Sakyong Wangmo, the re-introduction and availability of the Scorpion Seal, and the recent proclamation of the Shambhala path – it seems the big picture that came along with His Eminence was quite accurate.

To me, all this seems like the continuity of the Shambhala lineage, the lineage Sakyong Vidyadharas, coming through with power and clarity, and with abundant offerings for sangha members and for the entire world, at a time of intensified need. (We have a practice emphasizing something like this continuity, the Dharmaraja Guru Yoga.)
It doesn’t seem there has to be rejection happening within that abundance, but that there could be expansive appreciation and celebration of it, and one could still find and focus on one’s own path within it. No one seems to be preventing that, except us in our own confusion.

I am pouring out my heart right now, and I am hoping I can trust Shambhaleans on this blogsite with it. No matter!
This has become quite a long post, and I feel I have covered feelings and direct experience, logic and evidence, and heart connection and lineage in addressing the issues of spiritual materialism and the presence and role of His Eminence Namkha Drimed Rinpoche in our sangha.

Perhaps I could have just cut to the chase by responding to Gesar’s post:
Yeah! What you said!
“If we know what we stand for then what is the big deal?
…
Do we really have to wait for everything to be fixed before we feel comfortable enough to meditate?”

I’m going to sit now…

Your old friend and co-worker,

Suzanne (Head) Duarte

“There were a lot of people like me who worked hard to put the mandala together and who made substantial sacrifices.”

Protecting people from burnout is one of our big challenges. Another concern is supporting our aging students so they can retire with dignity.

Peace be with you Martin,
Ian