A few years ago a vajra sister recounted an exchange she had with Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche at Seminary in 1985, at a teacher/meditation instructor meeting. Rinpoche had just recently finished a year of retreat in Nova Scotia and was not entirely well physically. Also, from time to time, he would go into a kind of other-worldly realm in his manner of communicating and manifesting. This lady, well ahead of her time, had the thought that Rinpoche might not be with us too much longer, and she was brave enough to address her sensibilities directly. She had a simple line of questions with the Vidyadhara that went to the effect of: “Sir, when you leave us, what advice do you have regarding who will lead us?” Rinpoche responded in a matter-of-fact way: “I am the guru.” This lady went on to probe a little further, asking: “Won’t [so and so] be able to help us?” Rinpoche replied somewhat more forcefully: “I am the guru!” And she went further: ‘Won’t the Vajra Regent continue your teachings?” And the Vidyadhara became adamant at that point, with an even more forceful response, saying, “I am the guru!” [1]

As we know, fundamental issues of practice and lineage have been extensively considered in this web-based forum and in other situations, such as various Shambhala Congresses. The change in lineage orientation, practice, and study that has been taken by Shambhala International has been recognized by many sangha members as disruptive and disheartening. Many of us feel like it is important to maintain a much closer connection with Trungpa Rinpoche’s teachings and his approach to dharma practice, and that this would bring a greater sense of meaning and joy into our lives. This has been discussed extensively numerous times.

I think it is necessary for those of us who have these deeply felt concerns to shift our approach and determine how we may go further, and what kind of approach is spiritually satisfying and realistic. The years have moved along, and, while maintaining a keen sense of lineage tradition, we also must acknowledge the fact of impermanence and that times have changed. It is easy to point out where there are shortfalls, but at some point we need to clarify what we want to do in an affirmative way. We need to determine what kind of effort we can apply to the situation and make a commitment to go forward.

That being the case, I would like to present for the sangha’s consideration what, in effect, becomes a statement of purpose for those of us who would like to return to the spiritual principles we were brought up with by the Vidyadhara. The points made below might seem so obvious as to be hardly worth stating. But if we are to proceed in a practical manner and reignite our sense of sanghaship and lineage connection, then it is probably useful to explore our feelings by stating what may be obvious.

Going a step further, some sympathetic readers may look at this and say, ”Well, that’s great, but it is pie in the sky. How are we going to implement such a thing?” In regards to this response I would like to ask that we apply patience and take things step by step.

We could consider our concerns in two stages. The first stage is akin to prajna, i.e., let us define what it is we feel as valuable to put our energy into. Then, once that is somewhat clarified, we can move to an upaya orientation, and work on the how and the practicalities of accomplishing such things.

Having said this, I will break my own rules slightly and suggest that, first of all, there are avenues of influence that exist within Shambhala International that have not been fully developed. I think the Vidyadhara defined “vajra politics” as a group’s collective expression of buddha nature. If there is some straightforward person-to-person and group-to-group collaboration that is willing to address difficult issues, I feel our sangha has the sanity to navigate through this process. On a very nitty-gritty level, we have lots of real estate in terms of practice center space that, in many cases, is currently underutilized. In spite of the economic downturn, it is highly likely that there are levels of untapped participation from sangha members who feel there has not been an adequate response to their spiritual concerns over many years and have reduced the amount of money they contribute as a result of those feelings. On an important philosophical level, we have the wealth of the Ri-me, i.e. non-sectarian, tradition of Jamgön Kongtrül the Great, and with a genuine approach of open-mindedness, I am confident a new style of leadership can arise within our organization, where the various approaches to practice and study can be accommodated in an intelligent, respectful, and balanced manner.

In terms of natural hierarchy, the teachings and practice approach of Trungpa Rinpoche must be given the proper attention and space that they deserve within the organization. It is not reasonable to have Shambhala International “cut, paste, and morph” what Trungpa Rinpoche gave us, and expect that this kind of treatment of the dharma will be accepted across the spectrum of the sangha.

To return to practical considerations, it seems important to be aware that we must take individual responsibility in regard to considering what we are doing. We are probably approaching the end of what can be substantially accomplished by a high degree of reliance on the internet. The recent Radio Free Shambhala thread of “Heart in Palm” has over 400 reader comments attached to it. This has been a useful process, but we have to move on. If there is interest in going forward, there will be the need to rouse the energy and commitment to do the multitude of obvious things. Maybe some of us will have to drive a couple of hours to attend a nyinthün, a deleg meeting, or a dharma discussion. There will have to be mountains of patience put into the discussions and interactions with others in the sangha in order to come up with acceptable solutions that respect a wide range of feelings.

Having said all of this, let us return to the prajna side of things and see if we have a coherent vision that is inspiring and worthwhile for our efforts. Please read and consider the following. Comments are appreciated, but pretty soon there will need to be phone calls and face-to-face meetings. In my mind, more full-scale nyinthün practice is exceedingly important under these circumstances. Lastly, I would like to remind everyone: “Be careful what you ask for because you might get it!”

In draft form, the following policy directions are presented for consideration by the sangha. They emphasize the importance of Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche’s Kagyü and Nyingma lineages, dharma teachings, and path of practice. Further, the Shambhala Training Levels as taught for the past twenty-year period are regarded as essential to be continued. These general statements are presented in more detail as follows.

The Vajradhatu Shambhala sangha should focus its energies in order:

• To support a sangha that studies and practices the buddhadharma as presented by the Vidyadhara, Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche as he taught in the context of the Kagyü and Nyingma traditions of Tibetan Buddhism. This is generally known as the Vajradhatu tradition.
• To support a sangha that studies and practices the Shambhala teachings of Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche. The Shambhala Training and graduate levels that have been established for many years should be maintained, including the Warrior’s Assembly and Kalapa Assembly.
• To encourage the practice of sitting meditation for all levels of membership. This practice opens up the depth of nonconceptual insight. Nyinthüns, daily sitting practice, and dathüns are essential. Dharma teachers and administrators should be at the forefront, setting an example for shamatha-vipashyana practice.
• To encourage spiritually beneficial relationships with eminent Kagyü and Nyingma Tibetan Buddhist masters. In particular, close relationships with Karmapa Urgyen Thinley Dorje, the Ven. Khenchen Thrangu Rinpoche, Dzongsar Khyentse Rinpoche, and others should be furthered.
• To establish and confirm specific shrine-room spaces, where the shrine imagery and liturgies are consistent with Vajradhatu practice traditions and principles. To encourage teaching and meditation sessions whereby the sangha may practice according to Trungpa Rinpoche’s teachings in these shrine rooms. In particular, effort should be applied to increase the activity of the full weekend nyinthün, and the Vajrayogini and Chakrasamvara feast practices.
• To promote the social and cultural traditions of Shambhala and Vajradhatu that were created during the lifetime of Chögyam Trungpa.
• To remember to further the manifestation of Nova Scotia as the geographical center of Shambhala society.
• To make every reasonable effort to reintegrate sangha members who have drifted away over the years. In particular, to utilize the deleg system for this important purpose.
• To request Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche and the Sakyong Wangmo to officiate at Shambhala events, and thus present the dignity, basic goodness, and spiritual inheritance of our Shambhala and Buddhist world. Furthermore, to request that they increase their presence at the Halifax Kalapa Court and convene regular Kalapa Assemblies.
• To respect that some sangha members will want to follow the practice path set out by Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche, and to see that shrine-room space and administrative support is appropriately allocated for this purpose.

If we are to pursue this general direction, we will need to proceed with energy, intelligence, and a sympathetic attitude towards a wide range of sentiments. The Vidhyadhara taught that virtuous and enlightened activities are always difficult and require manual effort, like laying brick upon brick to create a useful building. He also taught that negative activities are much easier, and usually come with a big sweep because they go along with habitual tendencies. With that in mind, I would suggest that it is helpful to consider simple, practical questions from the outset, such as:

Would we take advantage of the direction proposed, and attend feasts and nyinthüns organized along these lines?

Would we be inspired to teach and staff the traditional Shambhala levels? Does this direction represent an approach we could recommend to others?

Can we find the leadership and dharma teachers from among our ranks who we can support and respect?

An array of realistic and kitchen-sink-level considerations such as these need to be kept in the picture from the very beginning. I trust that this is helpful in furthering the sangha’s noble aspirations.

It has been interesting to see how the insight and good wishes of the sangha have unfolded through this web site. My good friend Mark Szpakowski and I have had occasional chats over the last year regarding how much of a community environment can be created in a web based format. He takes the general position that you can do a lot in a cyber/web format and I generally go with the old school notion that a community really needs a bricks and mortar environment. I have enjoyed the exploration of this theme with Mark and also found it satisfying to contribute a main article to Radio Free Shambhala. 

I would like to go further with the principle of sangha-ship by presenting a proposal for the consideration of the sangha and students of the Vidyadhara and Shambhala. I will be somewhat specific here, realizing that there may be good suggestions forthcoming that would result in modifications to what is said below. It is also possible that the following plan may meet with general approval from people and that this idea could go forward in a straightforward manner. The proposal is to:

Have a Vajradhatu Style Group Retreat to Practice and Study the Teachings of the Vidyadhara 

Location: Province of Nova Scotia
Time: Summer 2009

A. I would propose this be undertaken with the following philosophical understandings-

1. That the sangha  would do so recognizing that Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche is the true holder of the lineage of the Shambhala Sakyongs and, as such, has the duty and samaya to represent the dignity and goodness of Shambhala in the presentation of his office. This duty of the Sakyongs relates to manifesting Great Eastern Sun culture to those abiding as citizens of Shambhala and the world at large. The Sakyong is, furthermore, wonderfully supported in this sacred responsibility by the presence of the Sakyong Wangmo.
    
2. That the social and political theory of the Kingdom of Shambhala recognizes the diversity of the aspirations of its citizens as may be held by individuals, families and communities guided by the principles of basic goodness and the vision of the Great Eastern Sun. 
    
3. That with consideration of the principles mentioned above, in Shambhala society, various valid spiritual traditions, both Buddhist and other traditions will be respected and nurtured. Furthermore, that some students of the Vidyadhara, Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche may want to create a sangha situation that focuses on the teachings and spiritual traditions presented by Trungpa Rinpoche in a manner very close to the way he taught during his lifetime. Trungpa Rinpoche presented these teachings variously under the names of the Kagyu, Nyingma and Shambhala lineages and also as the Vajradhatu tradition.
    
4. That a true sangha, so convened, must take the responsibility to maintain an attitude of a tamed or shinjanged approach in conduct and in speech according to the basic teachings of the Buddha. The sangha needs to also maintain the gentleness of Shambhala and a common sense of civility and respect that would be held in esteem in the broader reaches of society.
    
5. That the issues of practice and textual traditions fundamental to any valid Vajrayana tradition be respected in the manner taught by Trungpa Rinpoche. Furthermore, the issues regarding the process of vajrayana transmission will need to be addressed by the sangha as the process of the change of generations continues. This issue can be worked with in a gradual, respectful and intelligent manner. 
    
6. That in order to enhance the quality of harmony, the following texts be considered to be intrinsic to the program:  Unlimited Friendliness (the Metta Sutta), Shambhala Edict of Wholesome Human Conduct, and the Bodhisattva Vow from the Bodhicharyavatara.

B. The following considerations pertain to convening a Vajradhatu tradition group retreat and relate to the format of practice and study. 

1. The retreat be held in a modest but comfortable facility in the province of Nova Scotia for about 10 days during the summer of 2009.
    
2. That the retreat be organized with an emphasis on group sitting practice, listening and discussing recorded talks of Trungpa Rinpoche. Also, the schedule would have Sadhana of Mahamudra and Vajrayogini and Werma sessions for practitioners already having those transmissions. 
    
3. That certain understandings would be accepted and adhered to by any individual participant regarding the participation in the program. Those would  relate to attendance at the meditation and study sessions, observing good conduct and meeting prearranged financial and work commitments.

C. That in order to expedite the proposed program, a working committee be requested to do the practical and administrative work to accomplish the group retreat. [Important Note - NONE of these individuals (excepting myself) have been informed in advance of this request]

1. Ken Friedman – coordinator for tape plays of Trungpa Rinpoche talks and the related discussion group.
    
2. Charles Marrow – coordinator for meditation practice sessions and shrine room protocol.
    
3. Mark Szpakowski – general dekyong and coordinator for communications.
    
4. Andrew Speraw – coordinator of facility and finances
    
5. Other interest contributors can be included

This concludes the proposal for a Vajradhatu tradition group retreat. I fully trust the intelligence and good wishes of the Sangha to consider what has been presented in a balanced and mature manner. As a request / suggestion for web comments…..I feel that given the practical (and visionary) nature of this particular topic, that those responding include their full name, city or town of residence and a method of contact, i.e.phone number or email address.

Thank you for your interest.

Charles Marrow 
545 Main St. 
Mahone Bay Nova Scotia 
Ph: (902) 531-2491

I very much appreciate this forum for dialogue which gives the sangha an avenue to reflect on how we would like to proceed, as individuals and as a sangha, to continue as practitioners of the buddhadharma and Shambhala teachings. As far as a means of communication that are open to me, there is not much available where I can address these concerns. So I think Radio Free Shambhala is pretty good. With this in mind, I would like to express my appreciation for the moderators and all the contributors who have added their posts to this web site regardless of the degree to which their views might coincide with mine.

The ability to have a coherent discussion regarding changes to the lineage view and dharma practice of our sangha has been slow in coming. It has been my feeling that the administration and the leadership of Shambhala have not readily acknowledged two things that I think are important. Now, these topics are gradually finding their way into discussions on this web site and, presumably, into other conversations. The two topics that I would like to consider and that are closely related are:

A: There is a division in the sangha, and

B: Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche has made and is continuing to make significant and some of us might say “dramatic” changes in the spiritual approach of Chögyam Trungpa Rinpoche.

Regarding the first topic, I think it is fair to say that any reasonable Buddhist would regard a division in the sangha as not a good thing. So we probably agree on this point. Regarding the second point, some might feel an affinity to the Sakyong’s vision and feel that his vision is very appropriate to their inspiration, some may feel deeply disturbed by what the Sakyong is doing and many might have mixed feelings about the new approach of Shambhala Buddhism. So I am comfortable suggesting that there is a broad range of feelings about adaptations to the teachings and practices of Trungpa Rinpoche that are now being presented as Shambhala Buddhism.

Let us first discuss the topic of division within the sangha. The historical Buddha gave an important vinaya teaching which addresses the serious nature of a division in the sangha. From a scholarly point of view, the issue of dividing the sangha is somewhat complex. A key element is that the sangha must be harmonious for the fault of dividing the sangha to occur and what is regarded as a harmonious sangha would be subject to interpretation. But suffice it to say, as sangha members, we instinctively feel that a divided sangha is not healthy. Under these circumstances, any balanced and mature communication that can alleviate some of this tension is regarded as laudable in the Buddhist tradition.

We can be a little bit more thorough and consider why a division in the sangha is a problem. After all, there are 84,000 collections of dharma, many personality types that will find affinity with various teachings, we are liberal and broad minded people and certainly there is room for great diversity. Is this not the case? Are not disagreements somewhat normal? On this point, the traditional texts are very clear: “As long as the sangha is divided, the five paths will not be realized”, meaning that if there are fundamental unresolved issues within a practicing community, it is pretty hard to make progress on the spiritual path. Practically speaking, if the sangha is divided in regards to fundamental spiritual principles and the related practices, there will be a natural underlying tension and a certain amount of competition, even if unstated, as to where the sangha’s spiritual and material resources will be directed.

The second topic is that Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche has made significant changes to the Vidyadhara’s teachings coming from the Kagyu and Nyingma traditions and also to the teachings of Shambhala. The Sakyong proclaimed a spiritual lineage of Shambhala Buddhism at the year 2000 Kalapa Assembly. Again, whether this is a positive, negative or mixed development will be perceived differently by different people. I would like to be simplistic for a moment and merely note that there is a difference.

Using myself as an example, I became a member of Karma Dzong in Boulder in 1977 which was the main seat for the Vajradhatu Buddhist organization. Vajradhatu, under the spiritual direction of Trungpa Rinpoche, followed the Kagyu and Nyingma traditions of Tibetan Buddhism. The emphasis was on a certain approach to sitting meditation followed by mahayana teachings, the Kagyu ngondro and the yidam practices of Vajrayogini and Chakrasamvara. The view and teachings of the Nyingma tradition were elucidated by the Vidyadhara at important points in his teaching. Now that the West has some thirty-odd years of experience of Tibetan Buddhism, there is some understanding that Trungpa Rinpoche’s approach is pretty classic, and is well known amongst informed Buddhists. That is to say it follows the tradition of the Karmapas, the Rimé tradition, and the teachings that the view of Ati is the highest view. The Surmang Trungpa lineage is within the Karma Kagyu school which can be traced directly to Gampopa and is therefore about 1,000 years old. This tradition has had many, many committed practitioners over the centuries in Tibet and also a notable number in the West in recent decades.

In regards to the Shambhala teachings of Trungpa Rinpoche, these have been presented to many people in the Shambhala Training levels, graduate program, the Kalapa Assemblies, etc. This format  is well known in our community and many of us would regard Shambhala Training as having been very helpful to many people over a long period of time.

Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche is teaching and encouraging others to teach the lineage, the view and the practices of Shambhala Buddhism. This lineage came into existence under this name in the year 2000. I do not think any other master ever taught something known as Shambhala Buddhism. This teaching seeks to unify the Shambhala and Buddhist paths and articulates the principle of basic goodness as the overarching principle. This principle is represented by the image of the Primordial Rigden. Shambhala Buddhism is presented as more applicable to the modern times and the problems of this era. It is also regarded as being more applicable to a greater number of people.

In the practice methods, Shambhala Buddhism presents a view of sitting meditation that promotes the value of shorter sitting periods and also recommends using a closer technique with more control used in mindfulness meditation. It presents the mahayana teachings and then one proceeds to do the Primordial Rigden ngondro followed by the Primordial Rigden abhishekha, the Werma Sadhana practice of Trungpa Rinpoche and then the Scorpion Seal retreat. The Kagyu ngondro and yidam practices of Vajrayogini and Chakrasamvara are presented in Shambhala Buddhism as optional, and presumably valuable practices that can be done after the completion of the Scorpion Seal retreat at the discretion of the practitioner. As the primordial Rigden ngondro is only a few years old and the format for the Scorpion Seal retreat is still being worked on, there have only been a very few acharyas who have worked with this path to a significant degree. It is still being formulated, without much previous human experience. 

The Sakyong, through his administration, has indicated that, with a view to unifying Shambhala and Buddhism, the Shambhala Training levels will be mixed with the new Shambhala Buddhist curriculum. This new approach to the Shambhala teachings is presented under the curriculum title of the Way of Shambhala. There is a possibility that the name of “Shambhala Training” will be phased out altogether in favor of “The Way of Shambhala”. An individual entering this new program will receive Buddhist teachings in an explicit form. As we know, in the Shambhala Training format, it was possible to complete the entire program, even up to receiving Werma Sadhana without becoming Buddhist. Some may feel this inclusion of Buddhist teachings in the Shambhala context is very good.

In these summations, I am trying to be neutral and merely highlight some of the distinctions in the Shambhala Buddhist approach in contrast to the Kagyu Vajradhatu tradition with Shambhala Training being presented as a separate stream of study and practice.

My reaction to this whole process is that the current Sakyong and the administration has crossed the line in what modern parlance would call “non-negotiables”. One could make up a simple story, as an example. Say that I am an Italian man, who likes my home country and falls in love and marries a German woman. I go and spend time with my wife’s family and her German father begins to expect that I will become patriotic to Germany, root for their soccer team, sing their national anthem, adore German beer, give up my love for opera and Italian wine and totally get into the German national spirit. “Well, sorry to say to you guys, I am an Italian and I like my Italian thing and that is just the way it is!” In short, one would feel that these kinds of expectations are unreasonable.

From the point of view of spiritual development, in my own experience, I feel that the presentation of Shambhala Buddhism is a distraction. I do not have much connection to it and I have explored its theory and practices to a reasonable degree.  Needless to say, there are students of Sakyong Mipham who are inspired by his example and are undertaking the Shambhala Buddhist path with enthusiasm. So, once again, I am merely trying to clarify and stabilize the notion that a) the Kagyu Vajradhatu path is different from Shambhala Buddhism, and that b) there is a division in the sangha.

Perhaps it is because of my background as a member of the Dorje Kasung that I believe it is sometimes most skillful to approach complex situations with a degree of simple-mindedness and literalism. In discussions that we have had on this web site and elsewhere it is easy to get drawn into notions that “This way or that way is the pure, enlightened or correct way,” or that “This is what Trungpa Rinpoche really wanted,” etc. In fact, there are certain traditional methods for exploring the validity of a path of dharma through study and contemplation but that is not the purpose of this article. Here, I am trying to focus on two simple facts that are related to the experiences of individual practitioners and that also have a big impact on the vitality and cohesion of ourselves as a sangha, i.e., a group of practitioners.

I will go one step further into an area that is maybe somewhat more difficult, but necessary. This is to say that, in some form or another, there will have to be a process by which the direction of the sangha is clarified. The issues discussed thus far have been in the air for some number of years now. For example, in 2004 there was a conference in Boston called the Mandala Conference that produced a document called The Ground of Openness and Trust. I personally feel that the observations made at that time are still quite applicable to our situation. What is needed now is to have a mechanism for discussing and coming to practical decisions regarding the issues raised at that time.

From the vantage point of looking back to the discussions of the Shambhala Congress of 2003 and the issues that are still with us, I have to be somewhat blunt regarding my observations. I feel like there was, and still is, an approach to communication coming from the Sakyong and Shambhala International where expressions of the principles of inclusion, diversity, respect for elders, etc. are regularly circulated. However, when we observe how actual policies are implemented, it seems that every effort is made to march on with the predetermined agenda of furthering Shambhala Buddhism, while the feelings of those who have an affinity to maintaining Trungpa Rinpoche’s dharma and the practice traditions of Vajradhatu are related to as minimally as possible. One might get the feeling that it is the hope of the administration that if they just proceed, then those of us who did not really like these changes would eventually conform or just get out of the way, perhaps even leave the sangha altogether. Needless to say, this does not encourage a good sangha atmosphere.

To conclude, I would like to recap a statement made by His Holiness Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche when he was in Colorado around the time of the Vidyadhara’s parinirvana. I heard the following quote from two different reliable sangha friends. At this time, His Holiness said something to the effect that:

Now that the Vidyadhara has passed away, various lamas will come to the sangha and will want to present their teachings. My advice to you (the Vajradhatu sangha at that time) is that you ignore those lamas and continue with the teachings you have received from the Vidyadhara.

It is my feeling that this advice applies today.

I know some of these are difficult points, but I trust that presenting these issues will be of some benefit to the practicing community.