Since Sangharakshita has not felt obliged to faithfully communicate what the Buddha taught, there has been plenty of room for Sangharakshita’s teaching to be influenced by his tastes and desires, to the point where it often takes leave of the Buddhist tradition altogether and cannot make any claim to be an expression of the Dharma.
There needn’t be a contradiction to hold in the first place if you see Triratna as a New Religious Movement, and a personality cult based on Sangharakshita’s ‘particular presentation’ rather than the actual Dharma.
Buddhism is about “awakening”: shortly after the Buddha experienced this for himself, that was how he described it: “I am awakened”. By this, any organisation which considers itself to be “Buddhist” must offer teachings and practices that lead to this goal. What has become clear is that Triratna cannot support true awakening, or “insight”, because true awakening is entirely different than the self-improvement scheme that Sangharakshita taught.
Triratna as a New Religious Movement (NRM) offering a very "particular" take on the Buddha's dharma
How Sangharakshita's particular sexual orientation influenced his particular presentation of the dharma
How direct experience of the Buddhist path shows that the particular presentation offered in Triranta is not in accord with the Buddha's vision.
What are the implications of Sangharakshita's ethical lapses for his understanding of the dharma?
To what extent does Triratna satisfy the definition of a cult?
(Warning: asking these questions may delay your ordination process)
Reflections on the dangers of charismatic authority in the FWBO sparked by the publication of Subhuti's book Women, Men & Angels, written by a former order member in the...