home

Criticism of the FWBO

The FWBO considers itself a genuine Buddhist movement, which accepts the Buddhist tradition as a whole as its primary source of guidance, inspiration and instruction. In harmony with other Buddhists, the FWBO simply aims to practise and make available the Buddha’s teaching in ways that are relevant and accessible today.

The FWBO is consciously involved in reconsidering how Buddhist practice is lived, fully, in the modern world. This is an inevitably contentious decision and the FWBO has attracted its share of criticism — much of it valid and useful. You can find out about how the FWBO sess itself in relation to the rest of the Buddhist world in How the FWBO Presents itself by Vishvapani. In another article, Vishvapani tackles the Perceptions of the FWBO in British Buddhism.

The FWBO from within

The development of a movement like the FWBO is not without trial and tribulation. Its members have sometimes made mistakes — and some of those mistakes have been quite serious, like those made at the Croydon Buddhist Centre in the late 1980s.

You can find out more about the difficulties experienced by people from within the FWBO by visiting the FWBO Discussion website, where we would particularly recommend Growing Pains: an inside view of change in the FWBO. For an alternative perspective, see The FWBO — a Community in Transition by Nagabodhi.

The FWBO from without

You can find a list of critical writing about the FWBO in the FWBO Academic Bibliography. (This bibliography lists texts which deal wholly or in part with the FWBO and excludes treatments by FWBO writers in non-academic contexts.)

The FWBO-Files

Despite attempting to convey the impression of painstaking, careful work, The FWBO-Files is poorly researched, with most of its allegations based on rumour, gossip and distortion. Its aim would seem to be to damage the good name and work of Sangharakshita and the FWBO.

Members of the FWBO consider the The FWBO-Files unfair, unjust and unpleasant. It is an anonymous document, originally circulated in 1998, and still available on the Internet. It is long, detailed and its accusations against the FWBO are manifold. Given the persistence of its proponents, we refer you to the detailed reply to The FWBO-Files’ allegations still available in The FWBO-Files: a Response.