Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Dorje Shugden controversy - was: Re: Retraction: <-- Re: Want a buddhist monk penpal?

Expand Messages
  • ken
    The discussion on wikipedia on Dorje Shugden (link is provided in my previous email below) is a good place to start to understand this issue. The essential
    Message 1 of 10 , Jun 24, 2010
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      The discussion on wikipedia on Dorje Shugden (link is provided in my
      previous email below) is a good place to start to understand this issue.
      The essential controversy is over Dorje Shugden, who is a protector of
      the Gelug tradition and whose "protecting" is seen as divisive and
      threatening to members of other traditions, e.g., the Nyingmapa. The
      Dalai Lama, himself of the Gelug tradition, but dedicated to
      rapprochement among peoples, especially among those of the various
      buddhist traditions, has asked buddhists not to propitiate Dorje
      Shugden. Despite this request, some groups continue as followers of
      Dorje Shugden. (And a major question is: Why?)

      For me, this is the origin and essence of the controversy. I've avoided
      much of the more strident language contained in the wikipedia article,
      this because we're undoubtedly receiving information that has been
      translated from languages quite different from English and that,
      somewhat familiar with the difficulties of translating, that it isn't an
      exact science, and so that, e.g., what one person might translate as
      "request" could be translated by another as "ban" or another as
      "insist". Not understanding the original languages carrying the
      discussion, I don't want to overstate anyone's case.

      Also, the above encapsulation doesn't go into what I consider to be
      derivative issues. For example, Shugden followers state that the Dalai
      Lama himself was earlier trained in the very practices he is now asking
      buddhists to avoid and so this exhibits a contradiction on the Dalai
      Lama's part. I don't see this as a contradiction: I was raised to eat
      meat; in my family's house it was considered quite normal and nothing
      was thought to be wrong with it. Since then, I've come to have health
      and ethical issues with that practice and so have an entirely different
      opinion from what I was led to believe in my younger days. I don't see
      my change in view as a contradiction. All of us, I'd think, change
      views on many issues in the course of our lives. It would be strange if
      we didn't. Indeed, it would be strange for the Dalai Lama to make any
      kind of judgment about Shugden if he'd never studied Shugden and so knew
      nothing about it.

      There are many other derivative issues. Some of them might be worth
      discussion, others probably not. The origin of the controversy would be
      where the controversy would mostly likely be resolved, so, I believe,
      what would merit the most discussion. (But I can't, so won't try to,
      control what people talk about.) What I sought to provide here is an
      overview of the primary controversy as explained in more detail in the
      wikipedia article, this just to make reading that article a bit easier.
      For everyone's sake, I hope I've accomplished that small bit.


      On 06/23/2010 05:43 PM wry wrote:
      >
      >
      > thank you for posting this retraction. i have not gone to the link
      > yet....but it is a complex issue. maybe we can enquire into it a little
      > bit, if anyone is interested, though i am not sure if this list is the
      > appropriate place to do so in too great a depth, but maybe just look at it a
      > little. in any case, people's minds can become quite easily impressed, and,
      > especially, by email, which is an eletro-magnetic medium, certain energetic
      > qualities carry, so maybe it would be a good idea for people to investigate
      > different schools of buddhism before becoming too deeply engaged in dialogue
      > with one person from a particular school or approach. of course, re
      > buddhism, we can find the common ground, such as the four noble truths, and
      > certain basic principles, and then begin to enquire from there....i would
      > appreciate to hear more enquiry on this list. it is amazing how generative
      > and healing the potential in approaching in a state of question and then
      > trying to in a simple way investigate. it all brings people together. did
      > you ever see two children looking at a fascinating leaf, bug or animal
      > getting in a fight? no, they fight over toys. wry.
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "ken" <gebser@... <mailto:gebser%40mousecar.com>>
      > To: <neo-buddhists@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:neo-buddhists%40yahoogroups.com>>; <Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:Buddhism_101%40yahoogroups.com>>;
      > "Tibetan Book of the Dead" <bardo-thodol@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:bardo-thodol%40yahoogroups.com>>; "Buddhism &
      > Depression" <buddhism-depression@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:buddhism-depression%40yahoogroups.com>>
      > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2010 1:49 PM
      > Subject: [buddhism-depression] Retraction: Re: [neo-buddhists] Re: Want a
      > buddhist monk penpal?
      >
      >> Abby and others,
      >>
      >> Since posting my message about the buddhist monk penpals, it's come to
      >> my attention that the monastery where the invitation to me came from,
      >> Shar Gaden, is the home of a group of monks who have taken up beliefs
      >> contrary to currently accepted buddhist practices and so who no longer
      >> have the support of the Dalai Lama. So I'm retracting my offer to be a
      >> penpal with them and recommend others do the same.
      >>
      >> Find more information about this issue, including links to primary and
      >> secondary sources on both sides of the issue, at:
      >>
      >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorje_Shugden_controversy>
      >>
      >>
      >> Sorry for any inconvenience.
      >>
      >> ken, list-owner of
      >> Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Buddhism_101%40yahoogroups.com>
      >> Tibetan Book of the Dead <bardo-thodol@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:bardo-thodol%40yahoogroups.com>>
      >> and neo-buddhists@yahoogroups.com <mailto:neo-buddhists%40yahoogroups.com>
      >>
      >>
      >> On 06/22/2010 07:30 PM Abby wrote:
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > Hi there! I am very interested in having a buddhist monk penpal! I sent
      >> > an email to the address you gave but haven't heard anything...do you
      >> > know how long it usually takes?
      >> >
      >> > Thanks!
      >> > Abby
      >> >
      >> > --- In neo-buddhists@yahoogroups.com
      > <mailto:neo-buddhists%40yahoogroups.com>
      >> > <mailto:neo-buddhists%40yahoogroups.com>, ken <gebser@...> wrote:
      >> >>
      >> >> If you would like a buddhist monk penpal, then contact
      >> >> <shargadenpenpalclub@...>. All the monks (as far as I know) are
      >> >> currently living in India. There is no cost for this. (The organizer,
      >> >> however, would like an occasional correspondence delivered by regular
      >> >> mail, so there would be a small cost associated with that. I'm
      >> >> imagining that most of the correspondence will happen via email.) The
      >> >> monks have been studying English and are hoping to improve their
      >> >> language skills. So you will be helping them (that's good karma,
      >> >> right?) and perhaps you will learn something new about buddhism
      > directly
      >> >> from an ordained monk.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> Open the floodgates of good karma!!
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> Best to all,
      >> >> ken
      >> >>
      >> >> --
      >> >> Find research and analysis on US healthcare, health insurance,
      >> >> and health policy at: <http://healthpolicydaily.blogspot.com/>
      >> >>
      >> >
      >> >
      >>
      >>
      >> ------------------------------------
      >>
      >> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
    • Sal Becker
      Wow, this so much sounds much like the rift which separated the Protestant Church from the Catholic Church. NOT a separation of Ideology, but of dogma. I have
      Message 2 of 10 , Jun 24, 2010
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Wow, this so much sounds much like the rift which separated the Protestant Church from the Catholic Church. NOT a separation of Ideology, but of dogma. I have not read into this, but in my eyes, if this group has not taught an ideology contrary to the fundamental teachings of Buddha, I am not speaking of the dogmas ascribed to Buddhism by followers no matter how enlightened, then this is an issue of dogmas as all beliefs administered by men's ego go. Not making a claim, just an observation based on an outside perspective.
         
        Namaste
         
        Sal
         
        Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
        At they feet, oh,  I do bow
        Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
         
        In the Forest Thou art Green.
        In the Mountain Thou art High,
        In the River Thou art Restless,
        In the Ocean Thou art Grave.
         
        To the Serviceful Thou art Service,
        To the Lover Thou art Love,
        To the Sorrowful Thou art Sympathy,
        To the Yogi Thou art Bliss.
         
        Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
        At they feet , oh, I do bow
        Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
      • Ellis Nelson
        The controversy brought Luther to mind for me also. My personal feeling is that all paths have validity. This may be more of a political distinction. The
        Message 3 of 10 , Jun 24, 2010
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          The controversy brought Luther to mind for me also. My personal feeling is that all paths have validity. This may be more of a 'political' distinction. The monks are still Buddhists and there are lots of Buddhist paths (and usually tolerance is favored in viewing these situations).
          Laura

          --- On Thu, 6/24/10, Sal Becker <salbecker@...> wrote:

          From: Sal Becker <salbecker@...>
          Subject: [Buddhism_101] Dorje Shugden controversy - was: Re: Retraction: <-- Re: Want a buddhist monk penpal?
          To: Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Thursday, June 24, 2010, 12:23 PM

           
          Wow, this so much sounds much like the rift which separated the Protestant Church from the Catholic Church. NOT a separation of Ideology, but of dogma. I have not read into this, but in my eyes, if this group has not taught an ideology contrary to the fundamental teachings of Buddha, I am not speaking of the dogmas ascribed to Buddhism by followers no matter how enlightened, then this is an issue of dogmas as all beliefs administered by men's ego go. Not making a claim, just an observation based on an outside perspective.
           
          Namaste
           
          Sal
           

        • peace_tara531
          Ken has given a very good reply to this complex subject. [Personally I find it distasteful, but believe people deserve an answer]. Here is a thorough well
          Message 4 of 10 , Jun 26, 2010
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            Ken has given a very good reply to this complex subject.

            [Personally I find it distasteful, but believe people deserve an answer].
            Here is a thorough well documented essay from Georges Dreyfus, whom I met in the 70's at Kopan monasstery. He has long been a monk and a scholar. I believe he is on staff at a USA University. Can't remember which one.

            http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/ganden-tripa/the-shugden-affair-i

            This is from the website of HH Dalai Lama. There is a 2nd articler if one is really interested.

            Sarva mangalam,
            Tara




            --- In Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com, ken <gebser@...> wrote:
            >
            > The discussion on wikipedia on Dorje Shugden (link is provided in my
            > previous email below) is a good place to start to understand this issue.
            > The essential controversy is over Dorje Shugden, who is a protector of
            > the Gelug tradition and whose "protecting" is seen as divisive and
            > threatening to members of other traditions, e.g., the Nyingmapa. The
            > Dalai Lama, himself of the Gelug tradition, but dedicated to
            > rapprochement among peoples,
          • peace_tara531
            Here is info about Georges: He is a contributor to the Mind Life Institute where HH DalaiLama frequently participates.
            Message 5 of 10 , Jun 26, 2010
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment

              Here is info about Georges:

              He is a contributor to the Mind Life Institute where HH DalaiLama frequently participates.

              http://www.mindandlife.org/mission.org_section.html

              http://www.mindandlife.org/bios/dreyfus.html

              "Georges Dreyfus (Ph.D., University of Virginia) spent fifteen years in Buddhist monasteries before receiving in 1985 the title of Geshe, the highest degree conferred by Tibetan monastic universities. He then entered the University of Virginia where he received an M.A. and Ph.D. in the History of Religions program. He is currently Professor of Religion of the Department of Religion at Williams College.
              He has published 5 books, including Recognizing Reality: Dharmakirti and his Tibetan Interpreters (1997) and The Sound of Two Hands Clapping: the Education of a Tibetan Buddhist Monk (2002), and many articles on various aspects of Buddhist philosophy and Tibetan culture. He has been chair of the Religion department at Williams College and chair of the Tibetan and Himalayan Religions group of the American Academy of Religion. He is the recipient of various awards such as a National Endowment for the Humanities. "

              ----------------------------------

              --- In Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com, "peace_tara531" <skydancr@...> wrote:
              >
              > Ken has given a very good reply to this complex subject.
              >
              > [Personally I find it distasteful, but believe people deserve an answer].
              > Here is a thorough well documented essay from Georges Dreyfus, whom I met in the 70's at Kopan monasstery. He has long been a monk and a scholar. I believe he is on staff at a USA University. Can't remember which one.
              >
              > http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/ganden-tripa/the-shugden-affair-i
              >
              > This is from the website of HH Dalai Lama. There is a 2nd articler if one is really interested.
              >
              > Sarva mangalam,
              > Tara
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > --- In Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com, ken gebser@ wrote:
              > >
              > > The discussion on wikipedia on Dorje Shugden (link is provided in my
              > > previous email below) is a good place to start to understand this issue.
              > > The essential controversy is over Dorje Shugden, who is a protector of
              > > the Gelug tradition and whose "protecting" is seen as divisive and
              > > threatening to members of other traditions, e.g., the Nyingmapa. The
              > > Dalai Lama, himself of the Gelug tradition, but dedicated to
              > > rapprochement among peoples,
              >

            • Sal Becker
              I have read your discourse. I have to say, as an outsider looking in, this is but a battle of dogmas and egos. Funny that what drives most westerners to
              Message 6 of 10 , Jun 26, 2010
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                I have read your discourse. I have to say, as an outsider looking in, this is but a battle of dogmas and egos. Funny that what drives most westerners to Buddhism is the perceived lack of dogmas and ego, but alas when you encourage one, the other feels slighted and surrenders to a bruised ego. An inherent necessity for survival is mans drive to be superior and stronger. This is innate. It is built into the primal brain for survival. It is that part of us that is part of everything, that battles this primitive survival tool. This is the seat of the ego, that part which must be overcome to achieve enlightenment. As seen in this situation, the primal still exerts so much control over the mind, enlightenment for most of us is still so far off.
                 
                 
                Namaste
                 
                Sal
                 
                Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                At they feet, oh,  I do bow
                Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                 
                In the Forest Thou art Green.
                In the Mountain Thou art High,
                In the River Thou art Restless,
                In the Ocean Thou art Grave.
                 
                To the Serviceful Thou art Service,
                To the Lover Thou art Love,
                To the Sorrowful Thou art Sympathy,
                To the Yogi Thou art Bliss.
                 
                Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                At they feet , oh, I do bow
                Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
              • ken
                Sal, How does this controversy become a battle of egos? Whose egos? It sounds as if you re saying that there s really no substance at all to this
                Message 7 of 10 , Jun 27, 2010
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Sal,

                  How does this controversy become a battle of egos? Whose egos? It
                  sounds as if you're saying that "there's really no substance at all to
                  this controversy... the Dalai Lama and others are just being egotistical
                  and trying to exert power over others." If you don't mean this (and I
                  would seriously hope that you don't), whose egos-- specifically-- are
                  you talking about? I'd also wonder how it's possible to say this or
                  that person is simply being egotistical, in effect reading the
                  intentions within their minds without having ever seeing, much less
                  actually knowing them.

                  Also, I'd say that it doesn't really help to generalize the questions
                  surrounding Dorje Shugden to "dogma". After making such an assertion,
                  we are still left with the issue of Dorje Shugden, but without
                  understanding that issue any better. Yes, the issue is a little
                  difficult to understand, but this shouldn't lead us stand outside of it,
                  giving up trying to understand it, and then simply call it "dogma".
                  Rather, we should actually focus on, read about, and try to understand
                  issue before making judgments.


                  On 06/27/2010 01:19 AM Sal Becker wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > /I have read your discourse. I have to say, as an outsider looking in,
                  > this is but a battle of dogmas and egos. Funny that what drives most
                  > westerners to Buddhism is the perceived lack of dogmas and ego, but alas
                  > when you encourage one, the other feels slighted and surrenders to a
                  > bruised ego. An inherent necessity for survival is mans drive to be
                  > superior and stronger. This is innate. It is built into the primal brain
                  > for survival. It is that part of us that is part of everything, that
                  > battles this primitive survival tool. This is the seat of the ego, that
                  > part which must be overcome to achieve enlightenment. As seen in this
                  > situation, the primal still exerts so much control over the mind,
                  > enlightenment for most of us is still so far off./
                  > //
                  >
                  > /Namaste/
                  >
                  > /Sal/
                  >
                  > /Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                  > At they feet, oh, I do bow
                  > Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful/
                  >
                  > /In the Forest Thou art Green.
                  > In the Mountain Thou art High,
                  > In the River Thou art Restless,
                  > In the Ocean Thou art Grave./
                  >
                  > /To the Serviceful Thou art Service,
                  > To the Lover Thou art Love,
                  > To the Sorrowful Thou art Sympathy,
                  > To the Yogi Thou art Bliss./
                  >
                  > /Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                  > At they feet , oh, I do bow
                  > Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful/
                  >
                • Sal Becker
                  Ken, Yes I do see all this as a matter of dogma and ego. I apologize if this offends your senses, but maybe they need to be offended for you to be awakened.
                  Message 8 of 10 , Jun 27, 2010
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Ken,
                     
                    Yes I do see all this as a matter of dogma and ego. I apologize if this offends your senses, but maybe they need to be offended for you to be awakened. With these conflicts you do a great disservice to the teachings of Buddha. Rather than removing suffering from this world, such conflicts bring more suffering. This is why I say it is of the ego. As far as being dogma, well we are talking about issues contrived of man for man are we not?
                     
                    If these thoughts offend you, then maybe you need to seek how far from the truth and the simple premise Buddha gave.... To remove suffering.... That is it, nothing more. As with the teachings of Jesus, man has made a mountain out of the mole hill of simplicity truth of what these two  enlightened beings brought to us.
                    Namaste
                     
                    Sal
                     
                    Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                    At they feet, oh,  I do bow
                    Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                     
                    In the Forest Thou art Green.
                    In the Mountain Thou art High,
                    In the River Thou art Restless,
                    In the Ocean Thou art Grave.
                     
                    To the Serviceful Thou art Service,
                    To the Lover Thou art Love,
                    To the Sorrowful Thou art Sympathy,
                    To the Yogi Thou art Bliss.
                     
                    Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                    At they feet , oh, I do bow
                    Oh God beautiful, oh God beautiful
                  • ken
                    Dear Tara, Thank you very much for the compliment. I wrote what I did because I felt responsible for bringing the topic to this list in the first place. That
                    Message 9 of 10 , Jul 1, 2010
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Dear Tara,

                      Thank you very much for the compliment. I wrote what I did because I
                      felt responsible for bringing the topic to this list in the first place.
                      That is, I /thought/ it would be nice for people to be able to be
                      penpals with an actual buddhist monk, only to have it pointed out to me
                      that these monks are of the Shar Gaden monastery, a monastery which was
                      founded by monks who insist on propitiating Shugden. Well, sometimes we
                      try to do a good thing and, from lack of wisdom, it turns out to be not
                      so good. So I'm trying to amend what I did. Perhaps it's good in that
                      this issue will receive some exposure, more people will learn and become
                      a wiser than I was about it.

                      Thanks, too, Tara, for the link to the essay by George Dreyfus (link in
                      previous email below). It is a quite scholarly and balanced work,
                      delving mostly into the historical origins of the Shugden issue.
                      Discussing as it does murky events from long ago which on the whole
                      weren't well documented, and bringing up names and places quite distant
                      and foreign, it was not an easy read for me, not if my goal was to
                      understand the essay's every word. Despite these difficulties, the
                      Dreyfus essay is quite informative. I'd just like to sit down with the
                      good Mr. (Dr.?) Dreyfus and have an extended conversation with him on
                      the topics he brought up.

                      One such topic is his reference to people's actions taken for
                      "political" reasons, the people in question being of course Tibetan
                      buddhists. An important implication in the use of the term "political"
                      is that the action performed was devoid of any spiritual grounding. As
                      buddhists, however, we understand that /all/ of our actions have
                      spiritual (karmic) consequences which is why we consult the dharma and
                      draw upon our own buddha nature and perhaps other spiritual resources to
                      inform and shape our actions. I would expect that the buddhists whom
                      Dreyfus mentions would understand this as well-- at least I wouldn't
                      assume that they didn't... not without considerable evidence to support
                      that assumption.

                      Yes, this could well appear to be the trivial mincing of a word. But if
                      we look to contemporary politics (at least as it's been practiced in the
                      US lately) it's readily apparent that words and their subtle
                      implications are enormously important. It's not for no reason that our
                      political discussions are so often injected with "spin", i.e., with
                      terms meant to cloak or diffuse or divert the actual meaning of a
                      situation. Political campaigns and corporate PR departments pay
                      so-called spinmeisters-- people talented in the use of words-- enormous
                      amounts of money to craft just the right words into just the right story
                      to achieve the political ends they seek. This isn't at all to say that
                      Dreyfus had this intent in his essay, but only that words are powerful,
                      often more powerful than we commonly realize. To realize their power we
                      need only recall the last time we said something, something which seemed
                      totally innocent and innocuous as the words came out of the mouth, but
                      which a half breath later we knew were wrong-- totally wrong. But then
                      it was too late. We couldn't take the words back. In such moments we
                      notice the power of words. The first paragraph of this email describes
                      a moment like that: I wrote an email, one which I thought would be
                      helpful to people, but then discovered a half day later that it would
                      have been so much better if that email were never sent. Dreyfus may
                      well have thought much the same, but only after his work was published,
                      and so too late to change it.

                      There is more that I could say on this point, but I think most people
                      understand it already. And there are other small points of disagreement
                      I have with the Dreyfus essay which, taken together, set the essay's
                      overall tone and so the way events are portrayed. As said above,
                      though, there is a lot of historical background that Dreyfus covers, so
                      we can enjoy the essay for that alone.



                      On 06/26/2010 08:38 PM peace_tara531 wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > Ken has given a very good reply to this complex subject.
                      >
                      > [Personally I find it distasteful, but believe people deserve an answer].
                      > Here is a thorough well documented essay from Georges Dreyfus, whom I
                      > met in the 70's at Kopan monasstery. He has long been a monk and a
                      > scholar. I believe he is on staff at a USA University. Can't remember
                      > which one.
                      >
                      > http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/ganden-tripa/the-shugden-affair-i
                      >
                      > This is from the website of HH Dalai Lama. There is a 2nd articler if
                      > one is really interested.
                      >
                      > Sarva mangalam,
                      > Tara
                      >
                      > --- In Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com
                      > <mailto:Buddhism_101%40yahoogroups.com>, ken <gebser@...> wrote:
                      >>
                      >> The discussion on wikipedia on Dorje Shugden (link is provided in my
                      >> previous email below) is a good place to start to understand this issue.
                      >> The essential controversy is over Dorje Shugden, who is a protector of
                      >> the Gelug tradition and whose "protecting" is seen as divisive and
                      >> threatening to members of other traditions, e.g., the Nyingmapa. The
                      >> Dalai Lama, himself of the Gelug tradition, but dedicated to
                      >> rapprochement among peoples,
                      >
                      >
                    • peace_tara531
                      Dear Ken, I believe you could contact Dr Dreyfus by email thru his Univ if you are really interested. If you look around in the info I gave on him you should
                      Message 10 of 10 , Jul 3, 2010
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dear Ken,

                        I believe you could contact Dr Dreyfus by email thru his Univ if you are
                        really interested. If you look around in the info I gave on him you
                        should find.

                        Sarva mangalam,

                        Tara


                        --- In Buddhism_101@yahoogroups.com, ken <gebser@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Dear Tara,
                        >
                        > Thank you very much for the compliment. I wrote what I did because I
                        > felt responsible for bringing the topic to this list in the first
                        place.
                        > ... < snip>

                        . I'd just like to sit down with the
                        > good Mr. (Dr.?) Dreyfus and have an extended conversation with him on
                        > the topics he brought up.
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.