Thank you Chris!
For me there are quite some profound differences:
1) Shimano relates the pain of the students to his own faults while Sogyal’s letter mainly says the NEWS have created pain
2) Shimano is able to speak of his own faults while Sogyal seems not to be able to even admit he has faults, rather he stresses the purity of motivation (being selfless or not selfishly driven) – he is even so assertive to claim that he has “never, ever, acted towards anyone with a motive of selfish gain or harmful intent. This is unthinkable for me.” Oops, a man with ALWAYS a good motivation? Quite an incredible man isn’t it? Very modest too, isn’t it? This claim also implies an indirect attack on his critics who see bad motivations in him. So, he declares himself to basically pure in motivation and therefore also in action. It follows his critics erred by seeing faults in him.
3) A sentence like this “have expressed feelings of hurt and distrust from their experience of following me as a teacher” can keep up the myth that he is a great master of “crazy wisdom” with only good motives for his students at heart because the phrasing of the sentence can be understood: while he had only good motives, these poor guys or girls (the victims or critics) didn’t get it and its their fault if they made bad experiences and not his because they are not able to take his pure love motivated wonderful sexual and violent means as a genuine help on their path. These poor students, didn’t get it!
The same applies to this phrase “At the same time, I need to hear and acknowledge the experiences that some of my students have spoken of” – basically it can be read also that THEY are in charge of the experiences they made, its not really his fault. What a difference to Shimano!
4) No acknowledgement that he has done wrong, no regret, no apology. Where is a sentence similar to this by Shimano “Please accept my heartfelt apology.”?