Mary Finnigan，英國新聞記者，也是藏傳佛教評論家。她曾幫助索甲仁波切將藏密事業打入倫敦社會，為此她感到後悔。她說：「索甲仁波切雜交，在1970年代中期是藏傳佛教圈中每個人都知道的事，從那時以來，他一直有規律的在從事這件事。但是他假裝的很好（…）。(Sogyal’s promiscuity was obvious to every one in the mid-1970s in the Buddhist community and that’s what he has been doing systematically ever since,” she said. “But he puts on a good show. He offers people a dumbed-down version o Buddhism which appeals to people who want a quick fix.”)」（摘自：Dialogue Ireland ）
幡然醒悟的藏密信徒Mary Finnigan，自有來自圈內的觀察及觀點。她在英國guardian.co.uk 的「Mary Finnigan專欄」，有多篇評論藏傳佛教的文章，為西方（特別是歐洲）的揭密部落客所轉載。她的這篇「喇嘛性侵案件讓人質疑佛教禁忌」，受到網友的熱烈迴響及討論。從網友的迴響來看，歐洲人顯然是比美國人有批判力、有洞悉力、有質疑力的。歡迎網友前往蹓躂。
*中文翻譯提供：有心人axzy2*
Mary Finnigan：喇嘛性侵案件讓人質疑佛教禁忌
— 對索甲仁波切的指控突顯了危險的佛教禁忌，反對流言和堅持忠誠
1994年11月的美國女子Janice Doe(化名)對西藏喇嘛索甲仁波切提出1000萬美金的求償官司，指控他從事性，精神和肉體虐待。此案最終庭外和解，Janice Doe 被要求簽署保密協定以換取賠償金。
索甲否認虐待的指控，但最近在加拿大電視台播放的紀錄片「以開悟之名」，卻對此提出新事證。一個化名咪咪(Mimi)的年輕貌美女孩，描述了一段性虐待的關係。她是索甲1994爆發刑事訴訟以來，第一位聲稱受到索甲性剝削的女性。
索甲仁波切（姓Lakar，仁波切稱號的意思是“人中之寶”）是藏傳佛教組織Rigpa的領導人，該組織在41個國家有130個中心。他著有暢銷書《西藏生死書》與一部和基努李維合演的電影「小活佛」。索甲可算是除了達賴喇嘛以外最出名且相當成功的上師。他的佛教超級巨星之路在發生Janice Doe事件時，看起來只是遭遇了短暫的挫敗，儘管他駭人聽聞的性生活傳聞在網路甚囂塵上，與日俱增。
這些指控帶出了一個更廣的問題：遭風光的宗教領袖伸出狼爪的受害者，為何不願出面譴責其暴行？在加拿大的紀錄片中，咪咪表現出斯德哥爾摩症候群之特質，對施虐者自相矛盾的的反應。她說：他打我，同時帶給我如庇護所般的關懷。
社會學家阿曼達凡埃克(Amanda van Eck)是倫敦經濟學院，邪教信息資源部門的副主任。她說：恐懼大概是這些女性沉默的主因，在一些團體中他們害怕遭到報復，這意味著她們不希望公開發言。在另一方面，還有另一重壓力，恐懼負面的效應，像是詛咒、不受保護、被惡靈附身、或被其他的邪惡力量攻擊等等。
她還說：受害婦女們也擔心，外面的世界都被這些人面獸心的邪教頭目者把持著，自己還能相信誰?
許多婦女只能匿名在網上論壇敘述性虐待事蹟，拒絕現身說法，實在是因為她們也想走出這段歷史，而不是一再重溫這受創的經驗。有些婦女也覺得這麼做方能保護他的家人。
在我個人經驗中，佛教組織有兩大禁忌，這是個雙面刃，可帶來好處也方便操控。其中一個對八卦流言特別管用，就是教導人們要保持平靜的心理狀態，可以有效地防止流通批評意見。
另一個就是三昧耶戒─藏傳佛教的核心，一個宣示忠誠的制約。它維繫著教師與弟子的關係，但它也成為一個可怕的威脅─違背你的三昧耶戒將對你和你所愛造成很嚴重的後果。
另一個因素是婦女接受了組織核心的大師們所承諾的崇高地位。婦女被說服將上師當作本尊且要符合上師的要求，承受繁雜的工作和性需求。她們被隔絕於家人和朋友之外，並阻礙她們和外界接觸，並說服她們將團體視為家庭和把上師視為父親般的愛人，而上師擁有絕對的權力和控制。當婦女們發現她們被虐待、剝削和深陷在脅迫人的邪教當中，通常已經太慢而不可自拔。她們投資了全部的心血和生活，使得離開組織變成不可能的任務。
無論索甲是否如聲稱般性虐待，他們提出另一個問題：這又矮又胖的西藏喇嘛怎麼吸引年輕貌美的西方女人？答案根植於密宗─唯一以性團體作為開悟途徑的佛教傳統。加帝夫大學的傑弗瑞‧薩繆爾解釋：第三轉法輪的無上瑜伽，性團體（譯按:應指輪座交合）被視為開悟必須的雙運體驗。它創造了一些終極實現之感，換句話說就是成佛。
但薩謬爾說：雖然神秘的性愛版本出現在西藏的佛經中，但它不應該跟現在新密教運動混淆也不該視為近代佛教正確的演變。人們應該有個健康的警告：一個老上師要求年輕女性為性行為可能不是為了幫她開悟。
海外藏人難民不斷受到無法控制的威脅。他們的社會習俗禁忌包含批評喇嘛，達賴喇嘛和其他在西方教學的喇嘛也受制於此社會習俗。對索甲種種的指控雖讓他們懷疑，但他們還是支持他。更尖銳的觀點則指出，這種沉默的陰謀關鍵在於索甲撒了一堆錢在西藏高層的緣故。
© guardian.co.uk, 1 July 2011
Lama sex abuse claims call Buddhist taboos into question
Allegations against Sogyal Rinpoche highlight the dangers of Buddhist injunctions against gossip and insistence on loyalty
Mary Finnigan
In November 1994 an American woman known as Janice Doe filed a $10m lawsuit against the Tibetan lama Sogyal Rinpoche, charging him with sexual, mental and physical abuse. The case was dealt with out of court and Janice Doe signed a non-disclosure agreement in return for a cash settlement.
Sogyal denies allegations of abuse, but fresh evidence against him was recently aired in an investigative documentary called In the Name of Enlightenment, broadcast on Vision TV in Canada. A beautiful young woman identified as Mimi described an abusive sexual relationship. She was the first person claiming direct experience of Sogyal's exploitative attentions to go public since the 1994 lawsuit.
Sogyal (surname Lakar – Rinpoche is a title that means "precious one") is the frontman for a Tibetan Buddhist organisation called Rigpa, which has a worldwide reach with 130 centres in 41 countries. He has a bestselling book, The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying, to his name and he starred alongside Keanu Reeves in the movie Little Buddha. Sogyal is a formidably successful guru – probably the best known Tibetan after the Dalai Lama. His trajectory into Buddhist superstardom suffered only a temporary setback following the Janice Doe lawsuit – despite the fact that lurid rumours about his sex life circulate on the internet with increasing volume and persistence.
The allegations raise a wider question: why are victims of sexual exploitation by charismatic religious leaders reluctant to denounce their abusers? In the Canadian documentary, Mimi highlights the Stockholm syndrome – a term used to describe the paradoxical reactions of individuals who bond with their abusers. "The person beating us, she says, "is also the only one giving us affection – and food and a roof over our heads."
Sociologist Amanda van Eck is deputy director of Inform, the cult information resource at the London School of Economics. She says fear is probably the main reason why women stay silent: "In some groups there has been fear of retribution," she says, "which means they don't want to speak publicly. In other cases, which may overlap with fear of retribution, they are fearful of negative consequences – damnation, of not being saved, of possession by evil spirits, of being attacked by negative forces and so on."
If the outside world has been demonised by cult leaders, Van Eck says, women may also be fearful that no one can be trusted.
Many women who have described abusive sexual relationships anonymously on internet forums refuse to come out of hiding because they want to move on, rather than relive traumatic periods in their lives. Some also feel a need to protect their families.
In my personal experience, there are two taboos in Buddhist organisations, both of which have merit and both of which can be used as manipulative tools. One of them is an injunction against gossip – useful when trying to establish a calm mental state, but also useful to prevent the circulation of critical comment.
The second is samaya – the bond of loyalty that is one of the key tenets of Tibetan Buddhism. It supports the relationship between teacher and neophyte, but it can be deployed unscrupulously as a threat – break your samaya and attract dire consequences to yourself and your loved ones.
Another factor is that acceptance into the inner circle around an important guru delivers high status within the organisation. Women are persuaded to view the master as a deity and to be compliant with his wishes and whims, to undertake a punishing workload and be available for sex on demand. They are separated from family and friends, discouraged from contact with the outside world and persuaded to see the organisation as family with the guru (confusingly as father-lover) in absolute power and control. By the time women realise they are being abused, exploited and embedded in a coercive cult, it is often too late for them to extricate themselves. Their investment is total and their chances of making lives for themselves beyond the organisation have dwindled into non-existence.
Whether or not Sogyal's relationships were abusive, as claimed, they raise another question: how does a short, overweight, Tibetan lama manage to attract beautiful young western women? The answer is rooted in the mystique of tantra – the only Buddhist tradition that includes sexual union in the path that leads to enlightenment. Professor Geoffrey Samuel from Cardiff University explains: "In the third initiation of the highest yoga tantra, sexual union is introduced as a parallel to the experience of enlightenment. It creates certain sensations that help towards experiencing the state of ultimate realisation – in other words Buddhahood."
But Samuel says that although this arcane version of sacred sex is present in Tibetan Buddhist scriptures, it should not be confused with the modern neo-tantra movement and nor is it appropriate for recent converts to Buddhism."People should have a health warning" he says. "An elderly guru seducing a young woman probably isn't doing it to assist her towards enlightenment."
Tibetans outside Tibet are refugees who feel constantly under threat from forces beyond their control. Their social conventions include a taboo against criticising lamas. The Dalai Lama is constrained by this and so too are the majority of other lamas teaching in the west. They have closed ranks around Sogyal, regardless of their misgivings about the allegations against him. A more cynical view of this apparent conspiracy of silence hinges on the fact that Sogyal pulls in a lot of money – some of which is channelled into Tibetan worthy causes.
謝謝有心人axzy2提供中文翻譯！我的英文果然比德文爛多啦@@"
回覆刪除