But still I agree, Rob, who the guy is does matter. If the message were clear and made sense we would probably take it at face value, but what he has said so far has been snarky and self contradicting, so one has to wonder who he really is, and why his message is so conflicted.

My suspicions about such things have been sharpened having seen a number of times how a few people within religious organizations attempt, without scruples, to control power, protect images or reputations, and trounce dissent etc., never giving a second thought to how it affects people, because the ‘mission’ takes precedent. I guess the thought is if it affects someone adversely, they don’t have the right stuff? I don’t know.

What we are hearing from John X altogether, is that anyone who participates on RFS is involved in “massive mental illness”, that we are all “clinging to a dream of Christmas days past” that if we ‘practiced mind over matter’ all issues would simply disappear. This is I suspect an approach of at least some people with positions in Shambhala; ignore whatever is said that is not devotionally positive, treat such feedback as if it does not exist or is at best an aberration of whomever says it, or as if it were “massive mental illness”, stick to that view and eventually others will believe it too, and dissenters will go somewhere else.

Here, with John, we see a more proactive version of that, telling us all to be as happy as Tibetan peasants that Trungpa Rinpoche has been reborn, drop any thought of problems within Shambhala, and put all your devotions towards a reincarnation in Tibet who has no connection to this community.

In essence John X seems to be posing as a student of Trungpa Rinpoche’s while actually telling us we are all insane for not being students of SMR or just getting the hell out.

To the issues of how power is sometimes even if rarely abused within Shambhala or how there is no system for conflict resolution, or that according to Francis’ post from Sept. 24th, SMR has already related to the purported reincarnation of Trungpa Rinpoche, making sure he has no claim on Vajradhatu assets (? news to me), or to how weird and woolly his assertion is, that in spite of Trungpa Rinpoche being abusive and bullying to his students, all RFSers should put their energies towards his reincarnation, jump on your damn yaks and go visit your teacher there because… he AIN’T HERE NO MORE (?) to these pivot points in the discussion we will likely get no response.

In the inspiration that anonymity can be just as intoxicating as Dutch courage and costs even less

I am in some ways glad to see your mind falling part as to who or is that whom is JOHN.

It’s the message not who is behind the message.

To Damcho

There is a WAR between the followers of CTR and the followers of SMR.

If not there would be no RADIO FREE SHAMBHALA.

No talk of an evil SMR nor evil SI.

Call it a struggle, a difference of view or WAR I really don’t care!!

So who or whom is JOHN, who CARES.

“Sometimes just basic decency, but sometimes higher principles like samaya get warped and abused, perhaps because those teachers are misguided or confused, but maybe as they carry out the war you, John X, claims is afoot.

The problem is not that I or anyone gets angry about such things, but that it is happening and that people’s lives are adversely affected by it.”

You have me wondering who you are. I have no idea if you’re an insider trying to get the CTRers to take a hike, but suspect there is a group without scruples in the inner cabala that thinks just this way.

How you frame this issue is exactly the problem; not my mind. Who declared war? Who decided that the ‘war’ was about changing SMR? How do we know who won? By stubbornness? By who has the most stuff? Nonsense, from beginning to end.

It is not only ‘mind over matter’, a glib statement if there ever was one. Ignoring things or ‘magical thinking’ does not solve problems.

I’ve had long talks with friends about what happened to us here, as well as other things that have happened in the community. Because I see something wrong and because it is disturbing on several levels, the first approach often taken even by friends is to try and fix me. ‘See anger – anger bad – stop anger’. It takes some time, but in open talks with people who are not only intent on shutting me up, I can show how the issue on the table is not ’fixing the James’.

There are shenanigans of some administrators or appointed officials, which are anathema to principles of the spiritual path on any level. Sometimes just basic decency, but sometimes higher principles like samaya get warped and abused, perhaps because those teachers are misguided or confused, but maybe as they carry out the war you, John X, claims is afoot.

The problem is not that I or anyone gets angry about such things, but that it is happening and that people’s lives are adversely affected by it. In some cases older students who knew Trungpa Rinpoche, and therefore can see how higher principles are being used adversely. But sometimes it is newer students who never met him, and who at some point see a level of duplicity that has no value on a spiritual journey.

This has nothing to do with loyalty to Trungpa Rinpoche or any ideological bent. If I were to encounter that elsewhere (and I have), I would feel the same way. Not because of loyalty to Trungpa Rinpoche, but because of what he taught us.

It has never been my intention to change SMR. I don’t think he knows nor cares who I am, so I can’t see him as my teacher, but that’s OK. He and his officials however do have certain responsibilities.

If he has a stream of teachings to carry forward, more power to him. I don’t understand why that would entail the need to purge the community of students who are still loyal to what they learned from Trungpa Rinpoche. I’m not at all sure that is SMR’s intent even as it seems to be that of some faceless officials. Be that as it may, allowing any acharaya, teacher or official to warp teachings, lie to and manipulate members, creating confusion and mistrust about his or any other teachings is a ‘no go’, regardless of where one’s allegiances lie.

This has not a thing to do with SMR versus anyone. In regard to these issues, why ever would it be?

In the inspiration that “Everyone wants a place in the sun (When possible, in the shade.)” (S.J.Lec)

Why do you care so much about SMR?

It’s mind over matter – you don’t mind and SMR and SI don’t matter.

Stop clinging to SMR and SI and if you can’t JOIN THEM.

It’s like your in a toxic relationship and instead of leaving you cling desperately to the hope your partner will change.

Well James and “et al”, SMR and SI won’t change, EVER.

So chose, stay in this insane emotional relationship with SMR and SI or back your bags and leave.

The WAR’s over and SMR won and we the followers of CTR lost.

If Trungpa Rinpoche was that screwed up (according to John), if that’s true, then really the whole thing is a sham. There’s absolutely no reason to refer to a rebirth if his previous example was bullying and abusive to his students.

I never said that SMR was abusive or bullying towards anyone; the comparison is out of left field and to imply I said that is dishonest. I do think there is a blind spot in that nothing is done when those he appoints do things which are harmful, disheartening, or outright corrupt. I believe we therefore have a systemic problem that did not exist under Trungpa Rinpoche.

I have no illusions that things were perfect, have a bag full of stories from then, but I know that VCTR actually did something when he could. He related to people who lodged complaints and didn’t whitewash or deny anything I’m aware of. Someone once asked him privately about a pattern of corruption she saw in a few officials, whether she was seeing things right or not; he didn’t do some devotional hoo doo admonishment about how if she were really devoted she’d see things differently, he said quite simply “You should trust your perceptions.”

He showed concern for even small things, petty theft or chiding someone to not use their closeness to him to seduce lovers, and on larger issues appointed officials were a few times removed from their posts, or even ‘recalled’ to Boulder when they caused harm, corrupted teachings or flipped out. There are so many anecdotal examples, proof enough for me that he exemplified what he taught in terms of vision, courage, compassion, and insight.

But if the example of the founder of Shambhala is so disturbing we can put it aside. The point was never who is better, but quite simply that there is most definitely a better way to relate to corruption and harmful behavior than to ignore or temporize it. I think Trungpa Rinpoche is a better example than John claims, but I know of other sanghas that have been exemplary in how they dealt with issues of corruption, abuse and justice. Shambhala, in this regard, is simply not up to par.

If arguments imply in any way that corruption is something to accept, that nothing can be done so we should avert our attention elsewhere, then one in fact gives tacit permission and support to just the kinds of corruption that cause confusion and harm and which one could and really should do something about.

I happen to believe that by definition, doing something about such things in such a hierarchical organization is squarely the role of administration and leadership. A declaration would have been an attempt to awaken leadership to take on this aspect of its responsibility, which it has up to now apparently disregarded.

In the inspiration of morbid fascination