Present: Wendy Layton, Chris Tamdjidi, Jane Ward, Corey Simpson, Mary Whetsell (chairperson)

Not Present: Susan Wagner, Francesca Nilo, Fernando Ayllon, Candia Ludy

Next Meetings: Tuesdays: May 18, June 1, June 15, June 29 - 9am Mountain, 10am Central, 11am Eastern, noon Atlantic, 4pm BST, 5pm CEST

1. Communication Issues: We discussed the relationship of and differences between review groups and working groups, noting that their seems to be some confusion about this across the Mandala. Mary shared that Connie Brock and Richard Reoch are looking in to how best to address this confusion; Wendy expressed interest in helping with this as well, and will contact them directly. Wendy also offered to see if there is a way to fund an upgrading of the services available at the Shambhala Congress website. Specifically, at present there is no way for each working group to post pertinent position papers, policies, etc. If Wendy cannot facilitate this through the Congress website, a member of our review group, Paul Belserene, has offered to do so through the Vancouver Shambhala Center’s website.

2. First Review Group Phone Conference: Saturday, May 8^th. All Working Group members invited to join in.

3.Working Group filled: With nine members from three continents we agreed that our group is “filled”, at least for now. Mary reported she was not successful in finding a member from New York City, having offered an invitation to three people from there to date. NYC Director Deborah Garrett has suggested we interview her in lieu of having someone from NYC on our working group.

4. Inviting Richard: We agreed that we would like to invite President Reoch to join one of our meetings a bit further down the road. We will offer an invitation once we have held some Review Group meetings and clarified for ourselves the pith issues.

5. Work Proposal Adopted: We decided that members of our working group would be responsible for the work products below. A unified method for approaching written reports was adopted and is described below. We also agreed on a due date of Friday, May 28. Work products will be sent to Mary, who will integrate them into one document. This document will be distributed to all in the working and review groups.

- Wendy Layton: A brief description of the background and history of how membership has evolved in North America. Many, many Shambhalians do not know this history, and it is crucial context for understanding the Membership policy issue.

- Jane Ward: description piece (see below) about membership in larger Centers in Europe, with "large" defined as Centers who have salaried administrators.

- Chris Tamdjidi or his designee: Description piece about membership in small to medium sized Shambhala Centers in Europe - full Center status but volunteer administrators only.

- Fernando Allyon: Description piece about membership in Shambhala Study Groups in Europe.

- Corey Simpson: Description piece about membership in larger Centers in North America, with "large" defined as Centers who have salaried administrators.

- Susan Wagner: description piece about membership in small to medium sized Shambhala Centers in North America - full Center status but volunteer administrators only.

- Candia Ludy: description piece about membership in Shambhala Study Groups in North America.

b. describe the range in size of membership across these groups. Do they have membership levels? Friends of the Center status, for example? What are the benefits and responsibilities of membership?

d. describe the range in size of non-members who are active in group activities across these group.

e. do they have a written membership policy? How is membership defined? How do new people learn about the possibility of membership?

6. Discussion of Membership View: This was an open, energetic and flowing discussion. The following report is probably leaving out exactly enough to offend just about everybody, but hopefully the chief trends and patterns will be mentioned. If anything major has been omitted, I will happily write an addendum. Please let me know.

MAIN THEMES:

I. WHO IS A MEMBER? A continuum of viewpoints were expressed regarding this question, ranging in quality from the loosest to the tightest. Most groups/centers seem to fall in viewpoint somewhere in the middle of this continuum. The view at the loosest, or most open end of the continuum is that anyone who wants to be a member can be a member. No commitment is required, but meditation practice, payment of dues, and volunteering at the Center is encouraged. Leadership is open to all. At this end of the continuum, membership is a self-selected category. The tighter end of the continuum is more similar to how membership was approached in the days of the Vidyadhara: dues and strict practice requirements, as well as volunteering. These activities were monitored, including the practice requirement, and people who did not meet the requirement were subject to losing their member status. Leadership at the “tighter” end of this continuum is typically linked to level of practice, with the most senior practitioners seen as the best candidates for leaders. At this extreme, membership is a privilege bestowed from without.

II. WHAT DO MEMBERS DO? This question was also discussed as a continuum of viewpoints. At the “looser” end of the viewpoints, members may or may not be committed to Shamatha/Vipassana practice. Their primary commitment could be to another contemplative discipline, such as ikebana, kyudo, elocution. Their primary teacher may be outside of the Shambhala-Buddhist lineage, or they may self-identify as members of other major mainstream religions. They may be considered members only because someone else in their family is a member (e.g.; a parent, a spouse), whether or not they participate in Center events. Emphasis is on inclusivity, warmth, and gentleness. Towards the “tighter” end of the continuum, a commitment to shamatha/vipassana is seen as the starting point for membership. Strong commitment to Shambhala Buddhist forms, practices, curriculum, and lineage is seen as what differentiates Shambhala culture from general culture. This differentiation is seen as necessary, positive and magnetizing. One is a Shambhala-Buddhist. Concern is expressed that we can’t be all things to all people without compromising the integrity of the teachings and the Path. Vajrayana/Shambhala tantra is the essential view, teaching and practice. Emphasis is on purity of approach, discipline and exertion.

III. Can we articulate an integrative view of membership that can accommodate the wisdom contained in seemingly opposing points of view? What would a membership view be like that is gentle and tough?

What is the relationship of membership view to community identity? Are they the same thing, or do we need to differentiate them? What are the skillful means for developing our members? Our community identity? How can we develop an atmosphere that is warm, inviting and open in which the forms and essential energetic quality of our tradition are neither diluted or democratized?

Many Centers have developed categories of membership to distinguish among natural levels of commitment which naturally evolve as students travel the path. Is this a skillful means or a way of creating an unnecessary and possibly harmful hierarchy? What do we know about how the “friends” category is working in our mandala? Is it a helpful way of distinguishing community from membership, or is this distinction not useful? What about the various donation categories some Center use - does that seem to be working? How has it effected group process? Finally, what do we know about non-members who come to events and programs? Why do they choose to be a non-member? Are we relating to this group skillfully?

VI. WE WANT EXAMPLES - LOTS OF THEM! The group agreed that gathering many, many examples of experiences and issues regarding membership at the Centers is crucial. We actively invite folks to share these experiences, beginning with ourselves and our review group.

Membership Policy Working Group

Meeting 3 - minutes

Method for description pieces

MAIN THEMES: