Sunday, November 25, 2012

An Open Letter to Ken McLeod



Ken,

I have not written this letter before because, until now, I had hoped that there was still a glimmer of dignity in you that would enable you to respond my grief, but your silence and your embarrassing legal threats against Grace Schireson and Adam Tebbe have shown me otherwise.  Though I’ve now lost all hope, I remain grateful for your finally waking me up to what is most important to you as a teacher: saving face. 

Before I started my blog, you ignored me; maybe you were thinking that, like an old stain, I would eventually fade away.  After I started my blog, you could no longer ignore me, but you still refused to acknowledge me.  You dodged and stonewalled and then, when my blog received public attention, you had your attorney (student? Board Secretary?) Robert Conrad step up efforts to protect your reputation and keep up appearances while you vacationed abroad and wrote vacuous newsletters to your loyal following back home.  You carefully avoided mention of any public “scandal” and reported instead on your adventures sipping local wine and savouring Buddhist poetry while, over here, the ugly struggle continued.  Did it ever once occur to you to do something helpful for someone other than yourself during this time?  In a way, it is a saving grace that my hope was finally snuffed out by the evidence of your callous indifference, because now I am at liberty to tell you how I really feel. 

This is my grievance procedure.

I have heard that you have shared emails I wrote over the past three years—a few, short emails in which I sought to reassure you that I was well and still cared for you.  Perhaps you shared these emails to discredit me and divert attention away from your own behavior.  If you know anything about trauma, Ken, and I think you do, inconsistent emotional reactions shouldn’t surprise you.  Yet they seem to.  Despite your being able to write that it takes five years for a student to get over a relationship with her teacher, you seem unable to conceive or care that this might have been the case for me.  Have you ever wondered what goes on in those five years?  Have you ever asked yourself what a student might be feeling?  I notice you have never written about those details.  Well, I can tell you: lots of confusion, lots of contradictory thoughts and emotions, a stream of pain that seeps in as one gradually, very gradually, thaws and starts to feel again.  Those emails I wrote were written because I still had some lingering hope, a deluded hope that was not ready to admit the full force of your deception. 

For the first few months after you dropped me, I expected you to reappear.  I was not yet able to conceive that you could be motivated by something other than kindness and compassion.  I could not believe that you would allow a student to fall in love with you, stand by as she risked everything to be with you and then, after spending a couple of nights with her, decide to take off and leave her naked in your dust.  It was just too painful to consider that I might have been used and discarded, just like that, and by someone to whom I’d entrusted myself completely.  So, as the first few months went by, I convinced myself that you were waiting for the air to clear before resuming contact with me, that you wanted to leave the student-teacher thing far behind so that we could be together again on equal footing.  When that stopped making sense, I believed that your sudden withdrawal was a way of continuing to care for me as a teacher, showing me “there is nothing to hold on to”, a killer lesson but intended for my own good.  I found every reason not to believe that you were escaping the mess you’d helped make of my life and were leaving me to clean it up alone.

By a weird fluke, I met a woman (W.) who had also been a student of yours.  W. was very troubled about her relationship to you and, when I asked her about the details, I discovered that you had pressed her, a married woman, for intimacy during a retreat.  You had asked W. to sleep with you and, when she refused, you dropped her as a student and never spoke to her again.  She had been studying with you several years and was shocked and devastated by your behavior.  But the thing that was most shocking and devastating to us both was that you were seducing us at the same time.  Actually, you had already seduced me, and I was in the midst of separating from my husband in order to meet you after that very same retreat.   It was a life-changing moment for me but apparently it was just the same old same old for you.  W. also told me that she was not the only one struggling with her feelings for you at the retreat; another woman was noticeably fawning over you as well.  That woman drove you to and from the retreat.  I had asked you once who that other woman was, and you had told me she was “just another student”.  You used to use that same expression when receiving messages from students while we were skyping.  I wonder now if that is how you referred to me behind my back: “just another student”.

Once we got over the initial shock, W. and I had a few more enlightening conversations.  She told me about so-called “energy practices”.  She was in fact the one to explain to me what you were doing with me in your hotel room in Montreal.  What for me was a frustrating exploration of desire, using a practice that I did not understand or enjoy, was for you, apparently, what?  Using sexual energy to power your spiritual practice?  Was that what that was?  She told me that you had several other partners, female students, with whom you also practiced these techniques.  She told me that I actually met one of them when you and I were in Toronto.  You introduced me to her yourself at Mindcamp.  Remember?  She gave me a funny look. In retrospect, I understand what it meant.  It was pity.  For there I was thinking that you and I were about to embark on a spiritual journey together, a journey I believed in and left my marriage for, while you apparently were seeing me as a fresh supply of energy.

I wrote to you once that I had forgiven you for getting “cold feet”.  That you didn’t love me, or fell out of love with me, was something I could have lived with.  But this was not just love gone sour.  You were my teacher and you deliberately concealed your involvement with other women students, led me on, and then abandoned me.  Love me?  You didn’t give a shit about me.  My yoga teacher, a student of Hart Lazer, told me that you told Hart over lunch in Montreal “she’s leaving her husband but it’s not going to work out between us”.  That night you met me in your hotel room.   Why would you say that to him and not to me?  If you had doubts, you might have had the decency to share them with me.  I was in the midst of leaving my marriage for you.  Have you no idea what another human being might be going through in such a situation and how vital that piece of information would be?

It took me about two years to begin to speak openly about my experience.  That is when I spoke to another student who put me in touch with the Unfettered Mind Board President, your friend Stephanie.  At the time, I approached her out of concern for you and other students.  I had not yet fully connected with my own anger because to do so, Ken, I would have had to connect with the utter vanity of what I had done to my life to be with you, the absurdity of having left a good man for someone who would treat me this way, the heartache of witnessing my ex-husband’s struggle to let me go so I could pursue what he and I both thought was my “spiritual path”, the pain of facing my children’s lack of understanding and my own inability to explain my actions to them.  I had imagined that Stephanie, as your friend and as someone who already knew about us, would be sympathetic to my distress and sensitive to my concerns about the patterns of behaviour that put you at risk of causing more harm to yourself and your students.  Instead, she hit me with red tape and asked me for a “written statement”.  After a few more fruitless exchanges, I could see this was not going anywhere.

About a year later, I spoke to an authorized Unfettered Mind teacher, someone who knows you well and who knew about our relationship.  He was kind and sympathetic.  But then he made a remark that helped me connect with one of the last blind spots I had not yet faced into.  When I told him of my disappointment in you, he shrugged and said, as if to explain your behavior, “he’s a monk”.  I nodded in wistful agreement but, as the words sunk in, I began to reject them like a failed transplant.  Then, within days, I found release from one of my most stubbornly held delusions: that everyone, including me, should make exceptions for your spiritual genius and emotional naiveté.  I think, by the way, that you probably share the same delusion, which is why you’ve been unable to meet me face-to-face like another human being. 

That was the beginning of the undoing of the last strands of hope.  I was inspired to rekindle my campaign for a grievance process.  You know the rest. 

At the retreat where I first met you, you said the door to practice should carry a sign above it warning students who cross its threshold: “abandon hope all ye who enter here”, Dante’s inscription above the portal to hell. 

It’s been hell, Ken.  Thanks for the warning.

23 comments:

  1. "In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart."- Anne Frank

    Abuse as I have experienced it was hell, Patricia. Yet Anne Frank's words resonate in me because that belief she postulates is what has helped heal me. No matter what was done, the human that I am knows that those that harm are in pain also. For if I believed as I did for many years that evil was in the hearts of many, then my life would have remained gnarled and bitter. Instead i felt the pain and let it go.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ellen,

      My own experience, both as a therapist and as someone who has gone through the experiences reported here, is that you can have compassion for your aggressor and still denounce his actions as "wrong".

      Delete
    2. Moral transgressions are hell Patricia and a person's actions can be wrong. But then what? You and I have been talking for years and so this situation was not new to me. My post had more to do with the actions of healing and that is my desire for you.

      Jack Kornfield says:."Sometimes suffering comes through clinging to certain emotional pain or certain stories; sometimes through not recognizing emptiness, the evanescence of life, that nothing can be claimed as I or mine. The point of dharma practice is to pay attention to where there is suffering, see the clinging and identification, and release it to find a freedom of heart."

      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. (Sorry, I cut and pasted something in twice and caught a typo too, so I am re-posting my reply)

      Ellen,

      In terms of how to find release from the pain of abuse, a lot of people (Buddhists in particular) see "clinging" to emotions as the cause of suffering which is, of course, absurd. The wound is the cause of suffering.

      My own experience is that letting go and forgiveness are the fruits of healing, not the other way around.

      Healing is a natural process. Like any wound, it bleeds and then coagulates. Depending on the size of the wound, it can bleed for a long time. Most wounds heal by themselves. The larger ones may need sutures. The uglier ones may need to be kept open and drained to prevent infection before they are closed. (see Erik's comment below)

      In the case of psychological wounds, some people mistake the bandage for closure. It is called the "flight into health" and it just delays deep healing.

      Delete
    5. Patricia, my question to you is simple: if your relationship had carried forward, as in, if you were with Ken now, would you still have a strong sense of boundary violation, unethical behavior etc.?

      Delete
    6. Hello "Anonymous",

      The issue is not whether a teacher enters or “carries forward” a romantic relationship with a student, but how he handles the teacher-student boundary, and how he manages his power when the boundary is transgressed.

      Because of the trust placed in a teacher (therapist, doctor, priest, coach or other person in a fiduciary relationship), a teacher cannot just switch roles and become a client’s lover or friend. His power does not disappear just because he decides it does; it has deep psychological hooks whose release is the fruit of a long process, a kind of waking up of its own which often requires the help of a therapist. (If Ken McLeod did not know this before meeting me, he knows it now.)

      There is a lot of research confirming this, which is why there are strict laws governing most professional boundaries, and strict sanctions for their violations. Since “Buddhist teachers” are not required to be members of a professional organization, many ignore the importance of maintaining professional boundaries (and so do many of their students).

      While Buddhist teachers may not be always be held legally accountable for their professional boundaries, violating them still has profound psychological consequences on the student.

      So, to answer your question: whether or not Ken McLeod “carried forward” his romantic intentions, he did violate a professional boundary and demonstrated a total lack of responsibility for the consequences of that.

      Delete
    7. p.s. If a relationship had "carried forward", I am pretty sure Ken's lack of personal accountability would have also "carried forward", and that my opinion of him would be the same as it is today.

      Delete
  2. ellen,
    you comment is utterly un-empathic and patronizing. share what comes up, not some bullshit spiritual cliche.

    patricia,
    i'm just finding out about this 'scandal'. i was a podcast devotee of ken's for a few years. all it really did was make me feel like i would never be as wise as him. however, i felt i had to keep listening because everything he said sounded like some sort of epiphany. i just got tired and gave up. what i've always known in my gut and what nagged me all through my attempts at buddhist practices was that those who are 'awake' (what ever that means) are the ones who leave or don't even go to sangha in the first place. this blog is a wake up blog. more power to you.
    C

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi C. Thanks for your comment.

      Until quite recently I thought that having a teacher was necessary to waking up, and that trust was a normal and healthy part of that process. Now, although I still think trust is normal and healthy, I think that, for the purposes of waking up, "healthy student" is an oxymoron.

      More power to you too!

      Delete
  3. It is Ken McLeod who called Patricia "evil", not the other way around.
    Seems to me that Ms. Ivan is simply trying to get some aknowledgement of transgressions before she can "let it go", so that it may not happen to other students.
    Perhaps this is a different level of abuse than what you experienced, Ellen, but it is still an abuse of power and we should be united in not propogating it. Glad you have found the strenght to heal, and I wish it for all.
    If Mr. McLeod would only "wake up" to this mess, perhaps he too could heal instead of hiding under the covers with the bed sheets pulled up over his eyes wanting the Boogey-woman to go away (but that is something Sir Kenneth should already know).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. That’s rights, Sheilagh, I never called Ken “evil”. It was his lawyer (Robert Conrad) that called me, for publishing my story, “evil”.

      The exact quote is:

      “My definition of "evil" is intentionally causing harm. There is no other way to put what you are now and have been doing.” (Robert Conrad, personal email to me, 09/17/12)

      I think perhaps you are right that the evil “Boogey woman” projection onto a grievant is a way to avoid facing the misconduct that has been publicly exposed. I tried to explore this subject with Ken online in response to his Tricycle commentary of the 37 Practices of a Bodhisattva, verse 15:

      15.
      Even if someone humiliates you and denounces you
      In front of a crowd of people,
      Think of this person as your teacher
      And humbly honor him—this is the practice of a bodhisattva.

      The online exchange was not very fruitful since Ken imputes the cause of shame to the person "inflicting" it, say by public exposure, rather than to the shameful behaviours themselves. It is the very same projection underlying his lawyer’s ascribing evil intentions to me.


      Delete
  4. Dear Patricia,

    Your blunt and honest statement of the devastating impact of McLeod’s manipulation of your spiritual aspirations is made especially powerful by your willingness to expose how much you were hurt and betrayed. I have great respect for your transparency and refusal to be silenced or bullied.

    It would be painful to do, but more information on how McLeod worked with women in the name of raising "spiritual" energy would further expose some of the tricks of the trade in guru, rinpoche, and master circles. I doubt that the exploiter gains any "spiritual" energy for himself. He does, perhaps, satisfy some adolescent power-over-women/masturbation/fantasy cycle. And for older men, there is always the ticking of the virility clock: think Clinton, Petraus, et al.

    I’m always reminded of Occam’s razor, when we hear that the guru has special “spiritual” energy that explains or even justifies exploitation. The simpler explanation is a mix of good old fashioned charisma, self-seeking, and sociopathy.

    After my teacher’s behavior was exposed, a nurse from our community commented in a meeting designed to promote healing that a wound has to be lanced, drained, and debrided. Only then can healing begin. I have yet to see genuine healing in Buddhist communities.

    Your story is a powerful warning to seekers. I think all of us, and especially “spiritual” teachers, have a duty to warn – to tell the truth.

    I hope you've now gone through the most painful part and can now begin to heal.

    Erik Storlie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Erik for your comment and support.

      I appreciate the nurse's metaphor. We sometimes think that we have to hasten the healing by suturing and bandaging the wound when, as you say, it might be better to have it “lanced, drained and debrided” to prevent infection before it is closed.

      In terms of spiritual energy practices, the “tricks of the trade in guru, rinpoche and master circles”, these are practices intended to “circulate” bodily energy without discharging it, the purpose being to “power” higher states of awareness. We have all experienced the build-up of energy before a sneeze or orgasm. When energy centers are excited and discharge is withheld, a feeling of bright light and bliss is released. The practices can involve visualization where you imagine taking energy up into the various parts of your body, or they can involve a live partner who stimulates those centers directly, for example, genitally, to build up orgasmic energy. But genital contact is not always necessary. I cannot tell you much more because I did not experience them myself in any depth.

      I do agree about the teacher's charisma influences the "energy" others may pick up around him, as well as hypnotic suggestion, projections, transference all those other UFOs flying under the radar of awareness.

      You may be right that the guru's own energy rush may be due more to a power trip than any real energy in the body. But the practices do tend to make an older man feel younger and more virile. They don't call them long-life practices for nothing.

      Delete
  5. It is sad that U.M. is protecting the wrong person. Mr. McLeod should be held accountable in front of a proper grievance committee and Patricia Ivan for his actions against her and other students whom he may have seduced under the guise of spiritual leadership. It appears quite cowardly to not do so.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Patricia,

    An important question here is embedded in your description of spiritual energy "practices intended to “circulate” bodily energy without discharging it, the purpose being to “power” higher states of awareness."

    Are these states of awareness indeed "higher"? What in the world does that mean? An NFL superstar is vastly better at throwing a football than I am, a concert violinist is a vastly superior player than I am, but are either in a "higher" state of awareness?

    I will start a seven-day silent zen retreat tomorrow, but I don't expect to emerge in any "special" or "higher" state. Of course, as a much younger man, I did sit endlessly in meditation anticipating some sort of future "gain." And I thought that gain might depend upon a teacher. Now,I look forward to seven days that will include some honest struggle with my ratty old self, as well as some blossoming into freedom. A fusion of effort and effortlessness. Of whole-hearted Being.

    After a long sesshin at Tassajara with Suzuki Roshi, my friend Loring Palmer and I asked him how we could "maintain" our "sesshin consciousness." He said, "Don't worry. It will go away soon." It's risky to conflate the amazing feats of a juggler, whether the work is with the hands or the mind, with "wisdom" or anything "higher" than just what it is.

    Ironically, "spiritual" delusions seem to be harder to banish than ordinary ones - especially when they confer power on particular persons within an organization.

    Warmly, Erik F. Storlie

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Erik,

      good points. i might ask, why meditate then? i do it strictly as an aesthetic practice and a concentration practice. as you allude to, higher states etc. is all meaningless. it may seem ironic that delusions persist, but if your just sitting in your own stew, then it's gonna happen. a corrective is needed. the corrective is definitely not a transmitted teacher that is somehow more attained. even the most self aware people get sucked into the teacher and organization. be careful on your retreat.

      C

      Delete
  7. Hi Erik,

    Thanks for your comment.

    I agree that to classify awareness into "higher" and "lower" states is, in the grand scheme of things, utterly vain. We're all going to die and any claim to attainment of a noble state exudes, like gas, "the stench of Zen".

    Though I am no expert on energy states, I think "higher" may just be referring to having more energy in the body. The same thing happens during sesshin, does it not? Among other things, the body becomes very warm.

    Just a p.s. to what I wrote: when I was instructed to visualize energy in my body, I was not going for any particular "state". It was a bit like someone passing you a joint and saying "here, try it", and you do, to see what happens.

    ReplyDelete
  8. To Vacant Horizon,

    Why sit? Because I know from almost fifty years of sitting that my old suffering gets moist and at times dissolves. What remains? Maybe indeed an Open Horizon? I tell my students it's the meditation of no assignment. No project. Neither concentration nor aestheticism. As for danger - I'd already left the organization, a black sheep, decades ago and never became a Buddhist in the first place (my memoir goes into detail). I no longer expect anyone else or any community to be able to fix me.

    I have seen an inverse ratio between explicit and implicit claims of a "master's" perfection and his or her wisdom and compassion - two qualities that are in theory at the bottom of Buddhist experience.

    And to Patricia,

    Yes, after the sesshin my mind will have opened a bit - and in other ways become less flexible. I won't be as fluid in interpersonal relations in the world, for example. I have to give some presentations the following week about meditation, and, ironically, I know I'll have bring my mind back to words and audiences.

    Interesting; actually, i've been chilled in sesshins.

    And yes, there are states: a joint, 250 micrograms of LSD, sex, a great novel, a great movie, a great concert, a day alone in wilderness - heavens and hells, depending. All valuable. And all transitory. Who remains?

    But for me the sitting meditation is not to gain some future state. But to enjoy the utter sufficiency of this consciousness when there is no assignment, the gift of simply having consciousness, of being alive and awake on this earth.

    It's wonderful to be able to discuss all this.

    Warmly,
    Erik F. Storlie

    ReplyDelete
  9. I remember Ken saying, in a retreat I attended several years ago, something about bringing the practice to your whole life, and how the scandals in the Buddhist community were good examples of how dangerous it can be to practice in a less than wholehearted way. The Tibetan tradition stresses faith and absolute trust in the lama to such a great degree that a betrayal of that relationship should be enough to send a failed teacher to a cave for a few decades, if in fact that teacher has any actual love for the dharma or his lineage.


    Thank you for telling your story.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Patricia, my question to you is simple: if your relationship had carried forward, as in, if you were with Ken now, would you still have a strong sense of boundary violation, unethical behavior etc.?

    ReplyDelete
  11. What KM did as a teacher was an unethical boundary violation. No doubt. The hope is that the board will take steps to prevent further lapses.

    But it was a mistake when you allowed the boundary violation to progress into a love relationship. As a therapist you surely had enough experience in detecting a violation when it occurred. The greater burden of responsibility of course is with the teacher. But the lines get blurry when a student goes along.

    I guess I was asking why the sense of outrage on the boundary violation emerged only after things got sour. You welcomed it when you had other hopes.

    None of the above takes away from the fact that the teacher behaved badly. That a lot of your pain could have been eased by an apology and admission of fact.

    Note: I used the wrong thread for my earlier post. So reposted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was naïve to trust Ken with my boundaries and allow the student-teacher relationship to progress into a love relationship. That is different from “going along with” my own violation.

      Protecting the boundary of this relationship was not my job. It was Ken’s. I paid Ken, champion of the "Buddhist-teacher-as-professional" model, to accept a fiduciary responsibility as my teacher. As I have documented elsewhere, I even asked Ken to help me when boundaries began to blur. Instead of clarifying or reinforcing them, he erased them altogether.

      Sometimes a professional and client fall in love. While this may violate a professional boundary, it need not violate the client. The transgression and transition into another kind of relationship can be worked out responsibly and maturely when power differentials are corrected, conflicts or wounds redressed and balance restored. That would be the responsible thing to do, and that is the whole point.

      Delete