If you haven't read Waylon Lewis's post about whether Chogyam Trungpa was an alcoholic and sexually inappropriate, check it out.

Trungpa Rinpoche was, like an rock star or leader, incredibly charismatic and attractive to his students. There was, however, then, little sense of power-play. Example: he asked my mom, once, who was lovely and tall and fit, if she'd like to sleep with him....

Also, be sure to read the comments there. I have mixed feelings about all this, as I'm sure many other Nichiren practitioners do, too....
Boiling it down, it seems that Lewis is saying that whatever Trungpa did, he did it with an open heart -- besides, his books are so awesome, and the community he built is so awesome, that any bad behavior can be excused. Plus, Trungpa was not like ordinary people -- he was extraordinary, and we have to make allowances for that.

Now. Having first encountered Buddhism in an organization headed by a hypocritical, charismatic charlatan, I heard all these same things said in defense of "sensei."

I do think there's something different about Trungpa. His books are excellent, and unlike "sensei" he actually wrote them himself.

Also, it is said that Josei Toda had a terrible drinking problem and would often berate members when he was sauced. Yet being a drunk does not kill one's potential for buddhahood. Supposedly.

So what do you think? Are devoted disciples hard-wired or trained to make excuses for their gurus? Do gurus merit special consideration? Should we hold them to a different standard than we would, say, our ordinary dentist or doctor or school teacher?