Talk:Surya Das

Request Update Main Page Biography 2/3/2021

In 2008 Lama Surya Das was accused of sexual misconduct, which lead to some members of his organization to resign. He addressed the issue within his community during that year. He publicly admitted to sleeping with female students in 2020, in an article by journalist Joshua Eaton.

https://religionnews.com/2020/07/30/buddhist-teacher-lama-surya-das-admits-sleeping-with-former-students-dzogchen/

Student1718470 (talk) 18:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)Student1718470

abuse allegations section

I think this section might be in violation of the biography of living persons policy, in that it seems to be poorly sourced - there is only one article cited (other articles exist on the internet but from what I can see, they also refer to this same source) and the actual article itself would probably be considered poorly sourced as it's kind of written as an opinion piece with limited references itself (i.e. no secondary or tertiary citations).

Should this section be removed (or hidden until further citations can be provided) as per the instruction in the middle of the Talk section for this article, especially considering the seriousness of the content? "This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard."

Upper79 (talk) 14:08, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

@Upper79 How is it poorly sourced? The article cited quotes the article subject's own statements. — Wug·a·po·des​ 20:09, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

I put the allegations back in, since the report seems exceptionally thorough and it does quote Das himself. If there are counter-claims, they should be put in the sub-section as well.Bagabondo (talk) 05:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Upper79 "it's kind of written as an opinion piece" is, in itself, an opinion; the whole of the longer comment has a defensive, one-sided tone, as if sources that all derive from a single source prove that said single source lacks verity and is potentially "libelous." While it is now generally known that this type of misconduct has taken place within many, if not all religions, the fact that there is any sexual misconduct between teacher and student in Buddhist communities in particular is an extremely serious one, because it profoundly pollutes the Dharma. The roots of this "poison plant" grow from ancient mores meeting modern, still stubbornly patriarchal mores, both within Buddhist communities and in the wider world. Given such conditions, the problem arises from the lack of a clear directive given to North American and European Buddhists: recognizing, to begin with, that sexual misconduct in the setting of the interview or private meditation room has the potential to exist at all; understanding why and how such misconduct disrupts a sangha; how it can be avoided; and finally, consequences if the avoidance has been unsuccessful--expulsion being the most severe consequence. On its website, the White Plum Asanga (in the Zen tradition) has published its board document addressing misconduct of this kind, offering ways to handle (and the specific consequences of) interactions that deeply and negatively affect the student-teacher relationship. And there may be other policy documents of this sort published by other Buddhist organizations. Would that all Buddhist communities would follow their lead. Inwitinthemidwest (talk) 04:29, 18 July 2022 (UTC)