by tenpelSeptember 11, 20088:08 pm

Bodhisattva Centre Open Day – Review and Reply

GUEST POST

Small description of Information giving event at Bodhisattva Centre Open Day

We stood outside the Centre and gave visitors a handout explaining that the Buddhist tradition they were visiting organises protests against the Dalai Lama.

Within 10 minutes of our arrival, once visitors had reached the Centre with copies of our handout, the Icelandic Admin director was sent down to talk to us by the Resident teacher. He asked us to move to the other side of the road. We refused as we were not blocking the pavement or the entrance to the Centre. He tried to take photographs of us. We asked him not to.

He was reminded that he would need our permission to publish photos in the public arena and that I would also ask his permission before publishing any photo. He then stood beside us while we talked to members of the public.

Bodhisattva Centre then issued an interesting letter, on headed notepaper, signed by the Resident Teacher, saying:

*****************************************

‘You may be interested to visit the following websites for further information about our Centre, our tradition – the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT), the WSS: Bodhisattva Buddhist Centre website: http://www.meditateinbrighton.com NKT website: http://www.kadampa.org Western Shugden Society website: http://www.westernshugdensociety.org And http://www.newkadampatruth.org for information about the NKT and our side of the story!!

If you would like to speak about any of this, or if you have any concerns you are very welcome to contact me on 01273 732917

Kind regards,

Kelsang Nyingpo (Resident Teacher)’

*******************************************

When we gave a copy of our leaflet to visitors, the Admin Director of Bodhisattva Centre also gave them a copy of the letter from Kelsang Nyingpo.

One of the main reasons that we decided to inform the public was that the publicity for the centre’s open day did not mention the NKT or the NKT-IKBU and the main title on the publicity was ‘Buddhist Centre Open Day’. We felt this was misleading the public who would therefore not make any connection with the group of people protesting against the Dalai Lama.

The admin director said that the NKT weren’t the WSS. He was silent on this issue after I said that the teachers, students, etc of the NKT would not have done anything if Geshe Kelsang Gyatso hadn’t told them to.

The connection with the WSS is also obvious on this letter. We were so successful in giving away handouts that we needed to leave to make further copies.

The Centre sent down tea and cake for the Admin Director. We had tea and fruit from supporters who came to chat with us. Others stayed a while to share their stories; ex-students, ex-peers, old friends, new acquaintances.

One woman, deeply distressed, told us that she knew that something ‘was wrong’ with the NKT but she was so desperate to feel part of a community that she had continued attending classes and visiting the centre. She found it a great relief to share her difficulties and find the confidence to trust her own intuition.

She was the only person who read this letter and then did not go and visit the Centre.

Many people expressed surprise and sometimes shock that members of the Bodhisattva community could be protesting against the Dalai Lama. At first, several people thought that we were protesting against the Dalai Lama and that the Centre supported him.

There were some people who had told us that they no longer attended Bodhisattva Centre who were there at the Open Day, helping. Some came to talk to us, others could not even greet us, just came to look and leave.

Only one person was visibly angry with us – this young woman has suffered a deep personal tragedy due to her family’s intimacy with the NKT but she has maintained her own connection. She said ‘You are a member of that Survivor’s group, aren’t you?’ I replied that there were a lot of members. She looked directly at me, grabbed a handout and challenging me with her stare, ripped it in half, threw it on the pavement and hurriedly left.

I make a wish that our actions will create an opportunity for any perceived problems in the NKT itself to be more openly discussed and the lineage and actions of its practitioners be more known to the public before anyone makes any commitment to study or even just starts to rely on the benefits of an NKT community.

Once we have a commitment to a group of people, it is very easy for our emotional need to continue to be part of that community to completely silence our quiet inner voices of intuition or conscience that have valid worries or concerns about what we may be witnessing…

*****************************************

Reply to: Bodhisattva Refutations
September 9, 2008

The text of the leaflet is in blue. The ‘refutations’ from the NewKadampaTruth blog are in black. Replies to the ‘Refutations’ , created by a group of people, are in brown.

Recently at a Bodhisattva Centre (Brighton) Open Day, two people handed out leaflets to newcomers in order to dissuade them from attending the Centre’s Buddhist meditation classes. Many of their complaints stem from their dislike of the open opposition of many New Kadampa Tradition students to the Dalai Lama over his ban of one of their spiritual practices. It is understandable that some people might wish to protest in support of the Dalai Lama and it is their freedom to do so.

1. We were not protesting in support of the Dalai Lama and we were not trying to ‘dissuade’ newcomers. We handed out leaflets in support of freedom of information so that members of the public new to the NKT would be knowledgeable of the activities of its members and able to make an informed decision about the NKT. You may note that the only websites referred to on our handout belong to the NKT and the WSS. We have no affiliations to any particular religious or spiritual group. We are concerned citizens.

Moreover, the New Kadampa Tradition and Bodhisattva Centre have not claimed to be a faultless organizations. However, the information these two people were handing out was largely incorrect and misleading, so we need to address it here. Please let us know if you have any more questions about any of the issues raised below.

This leaflet has also been copied and pasted onto a couple of other websites.

Replies to: Information about Bodhisattva Centre
(We thought you might like to know)

The Buddhist Centre you are about to visit is one of the larger residential Centres of the New Kadampa Tradition.www.kadampa.org You may notice that the publicity for this Open Day does not mention the NKT or any Registered Charity information about the Centre.

This was not a deliberate omission. Bodhisattva Centre was not trying to hide the fact that it is a member of the New Kadampa Tradition or a registered British charity, and these facts are very clear from all the other Centre publicity.

2. The publicity was specifically aimed at visitors new to the centre, therefore not including the name of the organisation on the publicity was misleading.

If you commit to study with the NKT at Bodhisattva Centre you will only study the books of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. The original texts they are based on are also available in many other Buddhist traditions.

Geshe Kelsang’s books form the basis of the three NKT study programmes (the General Programme, Foundation Programme and Teacher Training Programme) but outside of their studies NKT students can and do read what they wish. Everyone has freedom to do as they choose. Please see New Kadampa Truth website for more information on this.

It is reasonable and consistent with other traditions of Buddhism to study only the books of that tradition — for example, you don’t study Zen texts in a Theravadin monastery. Geshe Kelsang’s books are based on Je Tsongkhapa’s commentaries to Buddha Shakyamuni’s teachings, which are mostly in Tibetan. Some translations are available but most are not. For example, Geshe Kelsang’s Tantric books have no precedent; such detailed instructions are not generally or easily available, even in the Tibetan tradition. Geshe Kelsang has received requests for Guide to Dakini Land, for instance, to be translated into Tibetan so that Tibetan practitioners can benefit from it.

Geshe Kelsang has never claimed that his books are his original work. In Buddhism there is no original work because the teachings should be able to be traced back in their entirety to the word of Buddha. In Joyful Path of Good Fortunefor example, Geshe Kelsang says in the Preface:
I received these teachings from my Spiritual Guide, Trijang Dorjechang, who was an emanation of Atisha; thus the explanations given in this book, Joyful Path of Good Fortune, actually come from him and not from myself.

Geshe Kelsang’s books are the most complete set of instructions on attaining enlightenment available in the West and have been highly regarded by people of varying traditions over many years. You can check the book reviews on Amazon to see for yourself some of the benefit people derive from these books.

3. If you study with other Tibetan organisations you will be reading books from several Tibetan traditions and certainly not just commentaries by one teacher. If there is nothing ‘original’ in Buddhism then what is the difference between a Zen and a Theravadan text? What then is the place of Je Tsongkhapa? How can Geshe Kelsang claim to have ‘designed three special spiritual programmes’ ‘especially suited to the modern world’ [one of which is designed for people to become ‘authentic’ spiritual teachers] without producing anything ‘original’? Are you also implying that you cannot become enlightened in the west without Geshe Kelsang’s books as his instructions are the ‘most complete’?

You will be taught to meditate on ‘absorbing the Guru’ ( who is manifest in this life as Geshe Kelsang Gyatso) into the depths of your mind and to reinforce this meditation with the protection of Dorje Shugden in the practice of Heart Jewel (daily) or Wishfulfilling Jewel (daily) and Kangso (monthly). This practice is the ‘essence of Kadampa Buddhism’ as taught by the New Kadampa Tradition.

It is your choice who your spiritual teacher is and no one can dictate this to you.

4. We are not trying to ‘dictate’ anything to anyone. We are giving information on the practices that you will be engaging in if you practice with the New Kadampa tradition.

The practice mentioned here, Heart Jewel and so on, is a traditional practice of the Gelug (Virtuous) tradition of Je Tsongkhapa, which is the tradition Kadampa Buddhists follow. This tradition has been followed for nearly 400 years by both Tibetans and Westerners.

5. Which ‘Westerner’ followed the tradition of Dorje Shugden nearly 400 years ago? When did the practice of Dorje Shugden as a ‘Buddha’ actually start? You say that the teachings should ‘be able to be traced back in their entirety to the word of the Buddha’ but he lived more than 2,000 years ago.

The Dalai Lama has requested, in order to maintain peace and harmony in the communities of all Tibetan Buddhist traditions, that practitioners of Dorje Shugden should not attend his teachings or view him as their Spiritual Guide. He has not banned the practice. This recommendation does not affect anyone in the NKT. The NKT has always emphasised its complete independence from Tibetan society even though the lineage of the teachings is given as Tibetan.

Without justification, the Dalai Lama has banned the centuries-old practice of Buddha Dorje Shugden that was practised by his own Teachers and, in doing so, has caused a schism in the Buddhist community that has destroyed peace and harmony rather than maintained it. Even though, when questioned by the Western media, the Dalai Lama has claimed not to have banned the practice, well over a thousand monks who refuse to give up their faith have been expelled from their monasteries and lay people are being ostracized and persecuted by their communities — which clearly indicates that it is much more than a “recommendation” or “request”. Please see this video for speeches he has made on the subject, or read what he has said in his own words on a website about this issue.

This “recommendation” or ban does in fact affect the NKT adversely because the Dalai Lama is using his fame and exposure in the West to spread the view that the practice of Dorje Shugden is cult-like and non-Buddhist — hence, practitioners of this traditional and popular Protector Buddha are being smeared with these associations both in the East and in the West, unjustifiably so.

The NKT recognizes that there is a difference between Tibetan society/politics and the Buddhism that came through Tibet, just as there is a difference between politics and religion in general. Buddhism started in India with the teachings of Buddha Shakyamuni and those teachings moved through Tibet and are now in the West. Consequently, although there are many lineage Teachers of Buddhism who are Tibetan, Buddhist teachings did not originate there and do not belong to Tibet or any other country. The NKT is a global Buddhist tradition that follows the traditional teachings of Buddha Shakyamuni as transmitted by both Indian and Tibetan Masters through to our present-day Teachers in different countries.

6. The NKT follows a tradition taught by one Buddhist master.

The NKT is not a Tibetan organization and is not bound by Tibetan feudal society or politics.

7. Long term practitioners, including people ordained and practising moral discipline in the NKT, can be made homeless and/or ostracised by their previous community if the Resident teacher finds their criticism inappropriate. What difference is there between the actions of particular Centres in the NKT and the actions in India? The difference is that the British government commits to looking after people who have to leave NKT Centres without anywhere to go. Therefore your complaint should be to the governmental authorities who do not support monks and nuns who have been asked to leave their monasteries. Your complaint is to the Dalai Lama’s function as a governmental leader, not as a Buddhist teacher.

However, members of the NKT, under the name of the Western Shugden Society (WSS) have organised and paid for frequent and persistent demonstrations all over the world against the Dalai Lama accusing him of not being a Buddhist, of lying and hypocrisy.

The WSS and the NKT are not the same.

8. The monks and nuns and senior teachers in the NKT who are demonstrating would not have done this if Geshe Kelsang Gyatso had not told them to do so. If any senior teachers do anything seriously against his wishes he would withdraw the ‘authority’ he has given them. Kelsang Pema, his personal assistant and the main spokesperson for the WSS, who came to Bodhisattva Centre to talk to the community to encourage them to engage in the protests, would not have done so without his permission. Also, the letter from Kelsang Nyingpo, the Resident teacher at Bodhisattva Centre, to visitors on the Open Day, written as a response to our leaflet, stated…”You may be interested to visit the following websites for further information about our Centre, our tradition – the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT), the WSS:’ This indicates that the WSS is congruent with the NKT. And if Geshe Kelsang is not appearing in the demonstrations, is this because it is against the Internal Rules of the NKT or because he does not see the need to engage in protest?

You can find out more about the WSS on Wikipedia. The WSS is independently funded. The WSS is an ad hoc coalition of Dorje Shugden practitioners from many different countries, including many Tibetan practitioners of Dorje Shugden. Its aims are fourfold:

To give freedom to practice Dorje Shugden to whoever wishes to rely upon this Deity.
To stop completely the discrimination between Shugden people and non-Shugden practitioners.
To allow all Shugden monks and nuns who have been expelled from their monasteries and nunneries to return to their monasteries and nunneries where they should receive the same material and spiritual rights as the non-Shugden practitioners.

9. If you live in a residential centre of the NKT you are also not allowed to engage in the religious practices of another tradition. For instance, you would not be allowed to have a picture of the Dalai Lama on your shrine. What difference is there in this and in the situation in India? The difference is that there is a wider culture of tolerance outside the religious institution.

That the Dalai Lama tell in writing to the Tibetan community throughout the world that they should practically apply the above three points.

The Dalai Lama has been requested to discuss this issue but no reply has ever been received, which is why the WSS has had no choice but to organise demonstrations to raise public awareness of this problem.

10. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso also does not answer many questions that are put to him in letters and emails from many students who may be under great distress when they write to him and in need of spiritual support. If there is any difficult experience or criticism of his teachers or his centres in these letters he does not generally reply at all. Would you say that this is proof that these, perhaps uncomfortable questions based on experience are therefore true? The FPMT has not replied to your comments about them on your site. You have assumed that this means that they are true. Are you saying that anyone who does not reply is automatically guilty? If so, then this would also apply to Geshe Kelsang.

Unfortunately, there is clear evidence that the Dalai Lama is lying and being hypocritical about this issue. For example he has said that there is no ban on Shugden practice (there is) and he talks constantly in public about religious freedom, love and tolerance while, under his orders, his people are being discriminated against and denied basic human rights if they refuse to give up the practice of this traditional Buddhist Deity.

See. No 9. above

The NKT is not allowed, under British Charity Law, to engage in political activities such as public protest. Some of the prominent members of the WSS who have been protesting are Gen Kelsang Khyenrab, Deputy Spiritual Director of the NKT, Kelsang Rabten, National Spiritual Director of NKT Australia, Kelsang Pema (the main public spokesperson) personal assistant to Geshe Kelsang Gyatso for more than 8 years, and the current resident teachers of Bodhisattva Centre and centres of the NKT in Bexhill, Huddersfield, Wales, London, etc as well as many residents of this NKT centre in Brighton.

The NKT has not engaged in any political activity. As mentioned, the WSS is an independent body that is not affiliated with the NKT. Even so, WSS demonstrations are not political but are spiritual actions to stop the pure spiritual tradition of Je Tsongkhapa from being destroyed by political interference by the Dalai Lama. The demonstrations are loud but peaceful.

11. It is reported that these loud but peaceful demonstrations have been so loud as to interrupt the teachings of the Dalai Lama. Was the intention to stop the teachings? Why continue with hours and hours of ‘loudness’ if the people you wish to reach are trying to listen to Dharma? Are you saying that no-one should listen to the Dalai Lama? That his teachings are so contaminated that you should interrupt them? Can you imagine the difficulties that this would create for the Dalai Lama himself, trying to maintain the peaceful minds of Tibetans who, understandably, are visibly upset when mostly western NKT Sangha interfere with his teachings, which they may have waited many years to receive, about a Tibetan issue which is minor compared to the problems they are having as a culture with the Chinese state authorities? It was often said that the practice of Dorje Shugden would shorten the life of the Dalai Lama. This recent tour seems to be proving that prediction to be correct as the Dalai Lama is now seriously exhausted.

Since many dedicated NKT practitioners naturally practice Dorje Shugden in accordance with tradition, of course as individuals they are supporting the aims of the WSS, along with a large number of non-NKT Dorje Shugden practitioners, inclding Tibetans. However, the NKT charity is not organizing any demonstrations.

12. As individuals, these people would not do any of this without Geshe Kelsang Gyatso’s instructions. Are you saying that without Geshe Kelsang, all these people, which include the majority of the ordained and non-ordained senior teachers of the NKT, would have organised a world tour to follow the Dalai Lama, with all the transport, food and accommodation costs that this entails, including feeding the’ chorus’ who can be chanting for up to twelve hours at a time? These people are absent from their communities and their commitments as teachers, etc for long periods of time. Can this be done without the support of the NKT? Many of these people receive NKT sponsorship to be teachers, admin directors, educational programme co-ordinators. Are they not receiving their usual stipends and food, transport and accommodation costs whilst they are protesting?

13. What does the word ‘naturally’ mean in this context?

In the last two years many high level teachers of the NKT have left under suspicion of sexual misconduct including Gen Samden Gyatso, the previous long term Deputy spiritual director of the NKT as well as at least two Resident Teachers of Bodhisattva Centre.

It is true that Samden and two Resident Teachers of Bodhisattva Centre have left due to an inability to keep their vows of celibacy, and this is deeply regretted. Bodhisattva Centre has indeed been far more adversely affected by this behaviour than other NKT Centres. Geshe Kelsang is aware of this and has appointed a new teacher who has good moral discipline.

14. The last three Resident teachers have left Bodhisattva Centre through problems with moral discipline. Geshe Kelsang appointed all of these teachers. Have the causes of this lack of moral discipline in very long term practitioners been addressed? The new Internal Rules require the educational programme co-ordinators to aid in creating an environment suitable for the teacher to be able to practice moral discipline. How is this implemented? Are there clear guidelines? Is it possible for a westerner to maintain moral discipline in a context where no criticism from their community is viewed as appropriate even when senior Sangha may be inappropriately developing intimacy? How can the Sangha be supported to keep their moral discipline, especially after many years of practice? Why not give training in management skills and charity law to your teams so that the centres are run within guidelines created in our society? Is moral discipline openly discussed in the NKT? What happens when a particular relationship between a student and a teacher breaks down? Are there other mentors who will support that person to keep their ordination vows?

15. Why the custom of asking nuns, often young, to be personal assistants to senior monks to help with their daily needs? Surely this method of reducing the sexism of Tibetan Buddhism, a worthy aim, is not working?

It is worth noting that, unlike many religious leaders, even within Tibetan Buddhism, Geshe Kelsang himself has never had any accusations of impropriety leveled against him in terms of his moral behavior. The overwhelming majority of the 700 monks and nuns in the NKT do keep good moral discipline, and “many high level teachers” is a large exaggeration. Please see the New Kadampa Truth website for more information.

16. You are also using the word ’many’…

17. Does Geshe Kelsang Gyatso have any duty of care towards the people he ordains? Is there sufficient support for teachers who may be asked to go abroad to teach in a culture radically different from their own? What systems do you have in place to support Sangha who may be physically or mentally ill or have just become elderly and may even have worked for the NKT for twenty years or more?

So why is the WSS protesting against the Dalai Lama’s advice at a time when Tibetans are being imprisoned, tortured and murdered for trying to preserve their own culture which includes these precious Buddhist teachings?

This is a different issue because Bodhisattva Center is not part of the WSS and the Tibetan problem has nothing to do with the WSS. While they have compassion for the plight of the Tibetan people, neither the NKT nor the WSS have any political affiliations. If the Dalai Lama is undermining his own and others’ attempts to preserve Tibetan culture by his illegal ban and persecution of his own people, that is not the fault of the WSS but of the Dalai Lama.

18. If Tibetan problems are nothing to do with the WSS then why are you protesting against the Tibetan political leader about his management of Tibetan monasteries? There is no ban on practising Dorje Shugden for NKT practitioners. Do you wish to have the approval of the Dalai Lama? Concern for the ‘Tibetan people’ is a ‘political’ cause but concern for Dorje Shugden practitioners is not?

19. You seem to be objecting more to the Dalai Lama’s function and actions as a leader of a country – with an obligation to provide social and material resources for his citizens – than as a religious leader. If a certain practice, or person, is creating a schism, then, as in NKT Centres, the dispute has to be solved by giving authority to certain persons and practices and not to others. These decisions are religious decisions generally made by the senior teachers, which in the case of the NKT, is Geshe Kelsang Gyatso and in the case of the Dalai Lama, after consideration with a group of Geshes and Lamas. As Geshe Kelsang seems to have no clear duty of care towards his Sangha he is not in the unfortunate position, as is the Dalai Lama, of having to expel Sangha from access to all economic benefits when making a religious decision. Therefore, decisions made by Geshe Kelsang are not seen to be removing ‘religious liberty’ as they do not remove all economic welfare. But those who leave or who are asked to leave NKT Centres have, until a recent change in the Internal Rules, been socially ostracised by the communities in those NKT Centres they have left, therefore on a social level, this is not so very different from the situation you describe in India.

It is not the WSS who is at fault; they are merely defending themselves against the Dalai Lama’s actions.

20. Since when has the Dalai Lama attacked the WSS?

The survival of the precious Buddhist teachings does not depend upon the survival of Tibetan culture. The WSS are principally concerned that the Dalai Lama’s politically motivated actions are destroying these teachings, and are therefore acting to stop him.

21. You are protesting that the Dorje Shugden practitioners are not economically and socially supported in the monasteries in India, when, say, a Nyimgma or Kaygu practitioner would certainly not be supported in an NKT Centre. Even practices taught by Je Tsonkhapa such as Guhyasamaja and Yamantaka, are not considered appropriate practices in the NKT. Any teacher in the NKT has made a commitment to engage in the practice of Heart Jewel, which includes the protection of Dorje Shugden, before each teaching they give, but even an ordained Dorje Shugden practitioner and NKT Dharma teacher would not be supported economically in an NKT Centre. You are using a western concept of ‘religious freedom’ to justify interfering in a situation when the institution you have committed to (the NKT) does not do what you are saying that the Dalai Lama does not do – support the welfare of practitioners of practices that are not approved of or considered valid and appropriate for the benefit of the whole community.

The Dalai Lama has brought the protests on himself by banning the practice of Dorje Shugden and refusing to engage in discussion about it. Since it is the Dalai Lama who refuses to engage in dialogue, the WSS has had no choice but to act by organizing demonstrations.

22. If the WSS is not the NKT and therefore nothing to do with Geshe Kelsang, then who would the Dalai Lama need to talk to about this? Kelsang Pema? There seems to be no address or charity registration on your websites. Who runs the WSS? Who writes the NewKadampaTruth blog?

Is the WSS creating difficulties for the Dalai Lama in the public arena in order to deflect public awareness of internal difficulties in the NKT under the pretence of protecting the practice of Dorje Shugden practitioners?

Not at all. As was said before, the WSS and NKT are different organizations. The WSS exists solely because of the actions of the Dalai Lama. There is no “pretence” because the practice of Dorje Shugden practitioners is being destroyed by the Dalai Lama and action has to be taken now. The Dalai Lama has brought these difficulties upon himself through his dictatorial and illegal actions. Once he has lifted the ban, all WSS activities will cease. For more information, please see http://www.aboutwss.org and http://www.wisdombuddhadorjeshugden

23. If this ‘ban’ was illegal then surely some government or human rights association would be backing your claims.

24. Just as the resident teachers of the NKT centres of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso promote peace and harmony in his communities by quietening criticism and doubt, the Dalai Lama has needed to reduce the conflicts surrounding Dorje Shugden practice by, in consultation with other senior practitioners, withdrawing support for practitioners. He is supporting a majority view. For many years, even though the practice was already ‘banned’, monks and nuns who practised Dorje Shugden were still living in these monasteries.

25. If this is about religious freedom and not a political issue, why can’t the NKT itself protest against the Dalai Lama? If it is a political issue then why are members of the NKT engaging in Tibetan politics when the NKT pertains to be non-political? If your protests really were about practising Dharma then wouldn’t you also protest about the lack of freedom to practise Dharma in Tibet, where your teacher originally trained before he came to teach you? If you say that the Dalai Lama should respect the lineage of teachings he was given, then are there really no teachers alive to which Geshe Kelsang pays his respects, even as a peer?

timetobehonest@ftml.net

33Comments

Add yours

1

Tenzin on September 12, 2008 at 12:14 pm
Reply

Thanks, Carol and others. It’s amazing to see again how NKT is able to deceive themselves and the public. That they try to deny their identity to win new members was also mentioned in Bluck’s research, British Buddhism.

After NKT members have taken control over Amazon reviews and Wikipedia – where they deleted criticism – to refer to them as reliable sources is a bit funny…

However, NKT can not control everybody and anything, as your and your friends brave actions show.

The criticism NKT is faced with is coming from long-term former members, including NKT teachers, not by HHDL. Until now, I’ve never read any statement by HHDL in criticism to NKT or WSS. Because NKT leadership put HHDL as the main target at their enemy list they are now a bit paranoid and see him behind all criticism.

If you’ve once chosen a respected being – who is seen by the majority of religious, political and worldly beings as upright, compassionate and wise – as your own main enemy and express your hostility and distorted projections against him, more aversion and more enemies will come soon.

At the moment they’ve set Prof. Thurman at their list, researcher Kay is already on their list. At the end there are only enemies and one feels persecuted by anybody as a result of the own hostility & pride to be so special and “pure”. My point of view is: delusion rules the NKT World and their perceptions respectively.
2

dorjeshugdentruth on September 12, 2008 at 3:32 pm
Reply

Hey Tenzin,

You said:

“I’ve never read any statement by HHDL in criticism to NKT or WSS.”

And I thought you were widely read! Surely you’ve read the Newsweek article that Bob Thurman is in trouble over now? If that doesn’t look like criticism, I don’t know what is!

Anyway, the Dalai Lama makes the rocks and other people throw them. He likes to distance himself from direct criticism so that he won’t be implicated. Maybe I should just censor this bit myself because you almost certainly will!

I know you won’t print this!

comment TP
Dear DStruth,
for you Robert Thurman is the Dalai Lama? For me they are two different individuals. Both are very intelligent.

You see rocks? Where are the rocks HHDL made?

If you look carefully you will recognize that he said nothing negative about WSS who attacks him much more and aggressive than the CCP nor did his representatives.

If you disagree – instead of mixing Robert Thurman with HHDL – give a statement/quote which disapproves my claim.

I searched for a long time to find something by HHDL about NKT, I found nothing.

Also if you read what he said about the accusations of WSS: he said, he is happy that they (WSS) enjoy freedom of expression.

Only one of his representative said to AFP or BBC: “it is not true what they say”. More than this rejection of the WSS claims wasn’t stated. Please stick to the facts. HHDL does not fuel the fire of WSS rage. I appreciate this wise deed.

If you think Robert Thurman spoke on behalf of HHDL, you may not understand that Robert Thurman is able to express his own opinion. As you can see from the ABC interview, HHDL is modest and does not “make rocks and other people throw them”, as you wrongly and misleading claim. Please, stick to the facts.

For the ABC interview and the modesty of HHDL, see: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/spiritofthings/stories/2008/2291097.htm

BTW, Robert Thurman’s statement was made more than 10 years ago. Because Dr. Thurman is able to read Tibetan he will hopefully proof his assertion he made in Newsweek. It may be time to reveal what hasn’t been translated until now into Western language. I guess NKT/WSS and some Shugden followers are in trouble when he publishes his sources into English 😉
Best Wishes, t
3

dorjeshugdentruth on September 12, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Reply

Dear Tenzin,

I’m not confusing the Dalai Lama with Robert Thurman. Thurman’s criticisms are at least attributed and clear whereas HHDL’s are less obvious and you have to look for them. You get the sense that he’s attacking but hiding behind others.

I think you need to look at some examples from the Newsweek article which was the first of many unjustified attacks from the Dalai Lama and those who follow his view:

“In the last year the Dalai Lama has retaliated, denouncing one Shugden order in particular as a hostile and crass, commercial cult -and providing what police suspect maybe the motive for brutal retaliation against His Holiness’s inner circle.”

NKT is hostile, crass, commercial, cult….and murderers too! (but cleverly, no direct attributable quote from HHDL, he could still deny it if challenged) Where did the Reporter get these ideas from? Actually, where did he get the idea to do the article from? Perhaps he was approached by TGIE? The whole tone of the article is negative, not neutral as actual investigative journalism would be. It’s full of carping, sniping remarks about NKT and Shugden practitioners.Where else would they have come from but the Dalai Lama and his agents?

Another example: “It (NKT) has also been denounced by the London press and the Dalai Lama as a cult that fleeces its own followers. “Nobody would pray to Buddha for better business, but they go to Shugden for such favors – and this is where it has become like spirit worship,” the Dalai Lama told NEWSWEEK. “This is a great pity-a tragedy.”

This is a downright lie by the Dalai Lama. NKT do not fleece its followers and do not pray to Shugden for better business. All this coming from the same Dalai Lama who used his celebrity to advertise Apple Computers and guest edit Vogue – who is concerned about cash?

Further:

The NKT soon flourished by promising spiritual rewards for cash-an unholy sales pitch that helped trigger confrontation with the Dalai Lama’s circle.

This is a lie too.

There are many other examples too. Why would the journalist write in this way unless he was given this view by someone else? He states the Dalai Lama’s views as if they are facts.

I rest my case.

All good wishes to you,
Lineageholder

comment TP
What to say. Because you can not find any statement by HHDL against WSS/NKT his non-existent “criticisms” is “less obvious and you have to look for them. You get the sense that he’s attacking but hiding behind others.” Sorry, but for me this sounds not that reasonable.

What Newsweek states is Newsweek’s sound and speech, there is no quote of HHDL’s speech. I agree that the whole tone of the article is negative, but this is not the fault of HHDL but Newsweek. The Dalai Lama is not Newsweek and Newsweek is not the Dalai Lama. If you ask where the reporter got his idea from you may have to ask also: if he took it (only) from TGIE, as you guess, why he didn’t take up the TGIE’s statement that the murder of Lobsang Gyatso are among Shugden fanatics – which is quite obvious?

Also your quote about HHDL from Newasweek does not make HHDL to shine in a nice light, does it? So the reporter was obviously negative with both sides and seem to have found the whole issue just strange or crude.

Of course, I guess, he received information from the TGIE, but how he uses and presents them and the tone he uses to address it, is his personal freedom and style. It is a mere unverified assumption of you that the statements – as they were put forward by the reporter – “come from but the Dalai Lama and his agents”. There is not a single quote. As I know from other instances how press works, it makes me not wonder that there are sometimes very negative and one-sided articles. Press is a business. So maybe you try to have a more broad perspective and not a narrow minded one? I don’t like this article either.

Regarding the second statement, again their is no quote. It is true that HHDL said Shugden worship and how it is practised by the majority of followers is like a cult, what is true if you look from the perspective how poor Tibetans used that practice – mainly for worldly concerns and business. It is not clear if he said it in that context or the context of NKT and the press mixed it up. The article doesn’t aim for precise and balanced information, this is clear for both sides, Shugden followers and HHDL’s. So why are you taking it so serious?

Why are you taking the most strange article to verify your claims? Why don’t you take serious neutral research? The only thing which I take serious is Prof. Thurman’s statements, because these are quotes of his speech.

BTW, also GKG expressed that Shugden helps to have material wealth and added ‘but we may not have success immediately’. Such a statement invite an understanding of that he helps for worldly success. Now this quote seems to have been removed from the NKT website.

Best Wishes, TP
4

Adam on September 12, 2008 at 10:43 pm
Reply

Dear Carol,

I’m so sorry that it has come to this. My only feeling is one of sorrow. Having read all of the above I now realize that I have very little to say will be of much benefit to you. Most of the things that I was thinking of saying, some of which I have already written on my lap-top, now seem hopelessly irrelevant and naieve.

In general – please excuse the lack of modesty – I am very good at helping people who have maybe a few issues with the NKT. Who are maybe unhappy with their teacher’s example in a few respects. Things like this. This ability, if I so describe it, is based upon my own experience of having plenty of problems and issues with resident teachers, the Centre I was living at, and the tradition as a whole; and having had to work hard to try to find answers to those issues.

To summarise massively, what I found was that most of my issues were to do with having expectations – such as the expectation that my teacher should set a perfect example – and the disappointment, confusion, and frustration experienced when those expectations weren’t met. The solution therefore was to learn to let go of those expectations by changing my way of thinking about things.

I also found it very helpful to refer to ideas outside of Buddhism, and in particular to psychology, including some of the main proponents of the “analytic” schools: Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and Karen Horney.

Of particular usefulness to me was an on-line book, almost like a one-man Wikipedia, written by an American psychologist called Clayton Tucker-Ladd which can be found at:

http://www.psychologicalselfhelp.org

What I found was that by massively reducing my expectations, and even by looking to other sources for ideas and concepts I felt I needed, I was better able to appreciate the unique qualities that Buddha’s teachings have to offer. I don’t see this as an NKT thing. It just so happens that my experience have occurred within NKT Centres.

I do not hate His Naugtiness the Dalai Lama. Much less do I deny the truth and beauty of at least some of what he has said over the years – I myself have been inspired by some of it. However, His Naughtiness has been acting like a naughty play-ground bully in his dealings with Tibetan Buddhism – not just Dorje Shugden he precipitated the Karmapa controversy too – and I think that for everyone’s sake he needs to be shown some boundries.

For this reason I support the activities of the Western Shugden Society.

Best Wishes,

Adam
5

Tenzin on September 13, 2008 at 11:38 am
Reply

Hey DorjeShugdenTruth,
if you look where Shugden led you: you have renounced the Vinaya, the Pratimoksha, the words of the Buddha; you have separated yourself from the (ordained) Sangha community. Your organisation is rooted in split and schism, slanders the wise and respected elder, and is still performing conflict, slander and schism…, denouncing the real Sangha, the monastic order, and their rights.

C’on is it this you’ve strived for? Who led you to this point?

You follow a controversial practice the Buddha has never taught. You think this practice – which the Buddha has never taught – is more important than the Vinaya and Pratimoksha, the Buddha has taught. You think the survival of the Dharma depends upon Shugden worship and that this practice is performed. What a mess and illusion!

The Buddha never said something about Shugden worship. Are you Buddhist?

The Buddha said:
“As long as the complete Vinaya, the supreme treasure, abides, The Lamp of Dharma shall abide.”

You and NKT slander the wise, the Sangha, you feel you know better and have more knowledge than them.

What proves else do you need to see there is something wrong with Shugden worship. It led NKT to be perceived as a successful cult – led by an autocrat – and to be completely separated from the mainstream Buddhist world.

I agree with HH the Dalai Lama: “This is a great pity-a tragedy.”

Wake up!
6

Adam on September 13, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Reply

Some words of beauty:

“Those who have taken the Precepts must never violate them, even at the cost of life and limb. Why is this? It is because the Precepts are the root which penetrates Enlightenment. They are the supreme of the non-defilements, the path which quickly leads to Nirvana. In truth, the merits of the Precepts are timeless and without parallel and the virtues of him who keeps them are timeless and beyond compare.

Just as the ocean is the great element of water in which dwell non-humans, turtles, sea-monsters, etc., the Precepts are the element in which dwell those many great beings who reside in the three Vehicles. And just as in the ocean there are to be found gold, silver, and many precious gems like lapiz-lazuli, so in the ocean of the Precepts there are to be found precious jewels such as the cause of impermanence, the thirty-seven dharmas which lead to Enlightenment, dhyana, and samadhi.

Why does the great ocean never overflow? Because the constant fires of hell cause it to evaporate. And just as the everflowing rivers never cause it to increase, so is the ocean of the Precepts never increased by knowledge not is it decreased through the perfection of virtue.

It should therefore be known that the virtues of him who keeps the Precepts are great indeed.”

From Sutra of the Wise and the Foolish translated by Stanley Frye.

For me this speaks of the importance of keeping, in particular and possibly because they are the only ones I can keep to any great extent, our most basic commitments such as those of our Refuge and in my case lay Pratimoksha vows. I love the way that Buddhism teacher us that moral discipline is a great and vast spiritual practice. So different from the worldly attitude that values only gain.

If everyone was doing this surely there would be no problem.

[Last passage deleted by blog owner. Reason: This blog doesn’t support wrong accusation against respected elder of the order.]
7

medibuddha on September 13, 2008 at 5:09 pm
Reply

Hello, Tenzin & DSTruth,
I appreciate the discussion here. I have been disturbed for some time over the fixation, for lack of a better word, on the statements in the Newsweek article, used by those inside the NKT and WSS.

When I first read the article I could detect nothing, let me repeat that, nothing, that related directly to the NKT. The journalism was shoddy, slanted and I didn’t infer anything except that there are many Shugden practitioners in the world, and some of them have faults, just like in every other group of people. It was easy to dismiss it entirely.

So when this all ignited again, and I raised concerns and started questioning some of what sounded like outrageous claims to me, my local NKT teacher told me to review this Newsweek article. I had to read it many, many times before I finally understood what was happening. Every time something was said about a ‘Shugden practitioner’ the mind of the NKT practitioner said, oh, he’s talking about me, my tradition – taking it very personally.

Given the article, sloppy work, etc., I didn’t read it this way. I read the meaning not to be about about my personal practice or the NKT, because I knew the characterizations were not true. It sounded most likely to me that multiple groups of practitioners were being referred to, and I took the interpretation, these claims are not about the NKT, but other Shugden groups.

Just for the fun of it, I gave the Newsweek article to someone that didn’t know anything about the history of all this, just vaguely familiar with the situation. After they read it, I asked, what did you think about the statements about the NKT in this article? I got a blank stare followed by the comment, “I didn’t see any statements about the NKT.”

First, it’s fascinating that we can read the same words and understand such different things, I appreciate this teaching very much. Second, I think it’s sad that so much strong negative rhetoric is pouring out as a result of an extremely flawed article. I feel like the NKT is really missing the boat here, this article should be dismissed as a journalistic mess, and a piece of history over a decade old. The meaning is vauge and you have to infer the worst intention in order to read it as demonstrating hostility specifically to the NKT. You have to be so self-invovled, in other words, that you have lost sight of the bigger picture. Focusing so much attention on it harms, rather than helps, the credibility of the NKT.

Last, if the NKT is going to hang onto this so tightly, then others will hold onto Geshe Kelsang’s statements tightly, too. How can anyone justify the demonstrations as being religious in nature, when just 6 years ago the statement was made that they were a matter of Tibetan politics? You cannot have it both ways. If you are insisting that someone be accountable for something they said a decade ago, then you, too, will be accountable for your past statements.

Thank you for providing a place to voice this. I don’t see myself as being on any side, but think it’s important to carefully consider the evidence, what is being said, and be ruthlessly honest and interpret things as they were intended. This is no guarantee of anything, disagreements will still occur. But evaluating the statement, context and source are all important. If we begin our argument from a faulty point, things can only get worse from there.
8

dorjeshugdentruth on September 13, 2008 at 6:01 pm
Reply

Dear Tenzin,

Firstly, thank you for not censoring my posts, I do appreciate it. I think it’s right to promote freedom of speech. If you choose to post on my blog I won’t censor you.

Secondly, Dorje Shugden has not led me or any other Kadampa practitioner to abandon the Vinaya or the Pratimoksha. Moral discipline is the foundation for all spiritual attainments. Do you think that the Vinaya sutra is the only place where Buddha taught and encouraged his disciples to practise moral discipline? Buddha also taught moral discipline in the Perfection of Wisdom Sutra (in fact, in all his teachings he advised us to carefully observe the law of karma, dependent relationship) and it is this that we follow.

We are not slandering the Dalai Lama or any other Elders, simply pointing out how his actions are not in accordance with Dharma and how they are causing suffering, admittedly in strong terms. It is the Dalai Lama who has caused a schism by separating the Shugden and non-Shugden monks and requiring Shugden monks to leave the monastery. What WSS is doing is entirely dependent upon the Dalai Lama. If he respected the practice of Dorje Shugden instead of slandering it and allowed the Sangha to follow tradition without political interference, WSS would have no need to exist and would disband. WSS exists only because of the Dalai Lama’s actions.

It’s also questionable whether, if the Dalai Lama wasn’t mixing Dharma and politics and trying to gain control over the individual traditions of Tibetan Buddhism whether the NKT would be a separate organization. It would probably be part of the Tibetan Gelugpa tradition as the FPMT is. Instead, because the Dalai Lama is causing the Dharma to degenerate through mixing with politics, NKT is completely independent of Tibetan Buddhism.

The only reason why the practice of Dorje Shugden is controversial is because the Dalai Lama has made it so in the minds of his followers. Trijang Rinpoche’s disciples don’t have a problem with it.

I don’t feel I have more knowledge than the Sangha, that’s completely untrue, but what I do wonder is if present day Sangha really understand the true meaning of ordination – it’s not simply just a list of rules from the Vinaya Sutra which is how some appear to view it.

The ASA has no valid reason for criticizing Kadampa ordination just because it is different from theirs. The motivation and vows taken are completely in accordance with the meaning and spirit of ordination as transmitted by Buddha. I have little understanding, but one thing I do understand is that Kadampa ordination is valid, no doubt whatsoever.

With all good wishes, your friend
Lineageholder

comment TP
As I criticized you, you have the right to reply or to defend your or WSS’s/NKT’s position. However I see your and WSS’s actions as slander and hypocrisy themselves. Firstly there is nothing of what NKT/WSS accuses HHDL they do not themselves, secondly, according to my investigation and understanding, the accusation against HHDL are based on ignorance, are mere projections and they are not based on facts.

When you’re open for other perspectives than those of WSS/NKT you may have noticed that the monasteries wished for that at their dwelling places Shugden is not worshipped. Many see the practice as polluting the place, including me. Never I would live and practice were Shugden worship is performed. HHDL’s position has the support of the majority of monks and nuns and the highest Tibetan Lamas and teachers. It was a democratic decision by the majority to remove Shugden worship from the monasteries. It is their right.

The Shugden monks were asked to stop their practice and before these events came up, it were they who forced the events. There is enough report about this at this blog and at my unlock page. That you see it differently or follow only one preferred perspective I accept, but I will promote no further space for your and other’s wrong and depreciating accusations against H.H. the Dalai Lama, a being which is cherished by the wise as supreme. (This is the last post of this kind I publish here.)

There is no need for Shugden worship, there are thousands of other protectors who are not involved in controversy. Especially there are the three protectors of Je Tsongkhapa. Shugden worship is a Tibetan created practice and it came into existence under very strange circumstances. After investigating its controversial background and sectarian nature it is appropriate to stop a further influence of something not taught by the Buddha, not taught by the Indian Pandits, not even taught by Je Tsongkhapa. Those who see this different can practice at their own dwelling places – as you and any NKT member can do and as the Shugden monks in India can do and actually do.

WSS exist due to GKG’s intention. The Shugden conflict exist since 400 years. It’s up to Tibetans to resolve this issue.

It is completely misleading to claim HHDL would try to gain control over all traditions, those who are not under the sole control of Geshe Kelsang or Kundeling lama don’t see that there is just one atom of truthfulness in this claim.

HHDL promotes understanding and peace among the traditions, Shugden worship split the traditions and was used against other schools, to promote Gelug exclusivism – to establish a special unique purity of Gelug school – and to control other schools. All this can be read in independent papers by academics. If you trace the present problem back, it was Pabongkha Rp. who broke his promise to the 13th Dalai Lama. So it is not incorrect to trace the present problems back to him. If he had kept his promise, there wouldn’t have been any problems with Shugden worship nowadays. All this has already been discussed. It is a narrow minded and limited view to trace all the problems to HH the 14th Dalai Lama, no academic and no one with some understanding of Tibetan history does that. Only the followers of GKG or Kundeling or some very narrow minded Shugdenpas do that.

You may think that “the Dalai Lama is causing the Dharma to degenerate through mixing with politics” but this is factual wrong. He reduces the influence of Shugden worship because it is seen by him and others as contradicting the teachings, the Dharma, and as being in nature sectarian. If you insist on posit your position that HHDL does this due to political reasons, then you have to accept that it is also possible to posit Shugden’s inception as political motivated. There is no difference in the arguments.

It is also very appropriate to accuse NKT of “causing the Dharma to degenerate through mixing with politics”, because they lack almost every teaching of the Buddha, expelled the Vinaya, have only one Sutra, only two texts by Indian pandits and almost no work of Je Tsongkhapa. The complete order and Vinaya is inactive, and they rely entirely on the presentation of one Geshe, who was expelled from his monastery, on top of that they mix the Dharma with GKG’s politics.

How can NKT be ‘completely independent’ from Tibetan Buddhism? Is there such a thing which is ‘completely independent’? If NKT is ‘completely independent’ they should give back all what is derived from Tibetan Buddhism and should check what’s left. Not even the name ‘Geshe Kelsang Gyatso’ or the name ‘New Kadampa’ NKT could keep.

How controversial Shugden worship is can be read in acknowledged academic researches and they proof what HHDL said, not due to bias but due to historical evidence. While NKT/WSS and some Shugden followers strongly reject and actively deny this, they have only one argument: Trijang Rinpoche taught it, therefore it must be valid. This is no Buddhist approach.

As you don’t know the Vinaya and rely entirely on an expelled monk who claims NKT ordination is valid and said things about the ordination which are incorrect you certainly will believe what he says. However, those learned monks and nuns outside of NKT, like ASA or recently also Geshe Tashi, disagree with yours and GKG’s position, they do this not based on political reason but spiritual understanding and knowledge of Buddhism and the scriptures.

Best wishes TP
9

Khedrup on September 13, 2008 at 8:38 pm
Reply

Dear Adam,

It is unfortunate you accuse HH Dalai Lama of playground bully-tactics but have resorted to referring to this respected leader as “His Naughtiness” in your posts. Is this type of name-calling not that of playground bullies?

You accusation of HHDL precipitating the Karmapa controversy is patently ridiculous, in fact, he mediated the dispute. The problem was in existence long before HHDL gave his input, which he gave in fact because the highest lamas of Kayu Buddhism asked him to.

Tai Situpa Rinpochey, Gyaltsab Rinpochey, (the third name I forget) – 3 out of the 4 “Heart Sons” asked HHDL to choose HH Urgyen Trinley Doje as Karmapa, with the support of many other high Kagyu and Nyingma Lamas like Mingyur Rinpochey, Ponlop Rinpoche, Khamtrul Rinpoche, Bokar Rinpoche – I could go on and on.

The only person who questioned the decision and who fielded the other candidate, of any note, is Shamar Rinpochey. It was a case of weighing the weight of 90% of the Kagyu lineage against 10%. The decision had already been made, HHDL just endorsed it and ordained HH UT as a monk. So please, stop trying to bring in this completely unrelated issue to discredit HHDL. If you have a problem with it, write letters to Gyaltsab and Tai Situ Rinpoches.

Finally, where does the cash HHDL raises go? – To feed thousands of monks, build orphanages and fund schools so the Tibetan language isn’t lost. Without his help, the Tibetans would be in far worse poverty than they are. Every single Tibetan I’ve met in India is grateful to HHDL for their education which they know comes largely through his efforts, positive image, and international travels.
10

Khedrup on September 13, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Reply

Medibuddha,

Your point is right on the money. Thanks so much for making it. As a relatively neutral poster, your words carry weight.
11

Khedrup on September 13, 2008 at 9:14 pm
Reply

I mean your point about the Newsweek article, not the Kadampa ordination. As someone who’s researched the different Vinayas, I have to disagree with that one from my POV.
12

Tenzin on September 13, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Reply

Dear mediBuddha, thank you very much for your balanced and thoughtful post!

Also thanks to all the other who participate in the discussion.

I didn’t intend this blog for discussing and it takes a lot of time. So I decided for a pause. Therefore until Wednesday Sept 17, 2008 I will read and approve no further comments.

Thank you for your understanding.
Best wishes and a nice pause to all. TP
13

Ron Cook on September 13, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Reply

Dear Tenzin,

Since you have taken it upon yourself or been asked to represent the views of the Dalai Lama, I wish to submit six important questions that hopefully you can provide clear replies to. Since you have gone to great lengths to accommodate the questions of a concerned citizen in Brighton, then in fairness please show the same willingness to address the questions below – they to come from a concerned citizen. If you are fair and open minded as the people visiting your blogs indicate, demonstrate these qualities by providing the appropriate answers. There is no valid reason not to post these questions and let your readers draw their own conclusions.

Sincerely,
Ron Cook

1) If it is appropriate for the Dalai Lama to decide what spiritual practices are appropriate, and seeing clearly that such a decision causes divisiveness, why are the reasons he cites for the ban on Dorje Shugden not being supported by the teachings of Buddha? What sutras specifically dictate the need for invoking spiritual bans? If the ban is not politically motivated there must be an authentic spiritual basis for this action. The teachings of Buddha address all possible delusions that sentient beings are capable of generating, therefore, please cite the sutras that necessitate imposing the ban on Dorje Shugden.

2) Why is the Dalai Lama consistently patient, apologetic, and conciliatory toward the Chinese and not Dorje Shugden practitioners? The Dalai Lama has never acknowledged any email, petition, fax, phone call, telegram, or verbal request, nor has he ever granted an audience to anyone wishing to try and solve the Shugden controversy. However, he makes effort to engage the Chinese at virtually every opportunity. Please explain this double standard of engagement.

3) The Dalai Lama says that Dorje Shugden practitioners are free to ignore his ‘advice’ and continue to practice their faith. How is this possible when his government, his siblings, his personal friends, and representatives of Buddhist traditions that he controls, at every opportunity, disparage and attack Dorje Shugden practitioners? What basis is there to believe that Shugden practitioners have freedom? The Dalai Lama has said:

“Everyone who is affiliated with the Tibetan society of the Ganden Phodrang government, should relinquish ties with Dhogyal. This is necessary since it poses danger to the religious and temporal situation of Tibet. As for foreigners, it makes no difference to us if they walk with their feet up and their head down. We have taught Dharma to them, not they to us…

‘Until now you have a very good job on this issue. Hereafter also, continue this policy in a clever way. We should do it in such a
way to ensure that in future generations not even the name of Dhogyal is remembered.”

(From a speech delivered July 14th 1996, in Caux Switzerland)

Since the Dalai Lama has expressed an intention to utterly destroy the practice of Dorje Shugden, please explain the nature and type of freedom such practitioners shall enjoy.

4) Johan Candelin, director of the World Evangelical Fellowship’s (WEF) Religious Liberty Commission, invited the Dalai Lama to meeting in Helsinki on June 20, 1998. One of the topics discussed was the persecution of Christians in Sri Lanka by Buddhists. The Dalai Lama said that any Buddhist who persecutes Christians “misunderstands the true nature of Buddhism.” Persecution is defined in the Random House College Dictionary (def. 3) to mean:

“A program or campaign to exterminate, drive away, or subjugate a people because of their religious or moral beliefs or practices.”

If persecution of Christians is inappropriate and contrary to the true nature of Buddhism, why is the persecution of Shugden practitioners been not only acceptable, but advocated by the Dalai Lama? How can any reasonable person not consider the Dalai Lama’s words and actions to be hypocrisy in the extreme? Please clarify that persecuting Shugden practitioners is not hypocrisy.

5) The Dalai Lama freely admits that previous to his ban he was a practitioner of Dorje Shugden. He also composed a prayer to the deity entitled, Melody of the Unceasing Vajra, which is subtitled: ‘A Propitiation of Mighty Gyalchen Dorje Shugden, Protector of Conqueror Manjushri Tsongkhapa’s Teachings, by the Supreme Victor, the Great 14th Dalai Lama.’ Since the Dalai Lama is considered to be infallible and a fully enlightened being, how can these completely opposite beliefs be reconciled? Should we understand that the Dalai Lama was a faulty being when he practiced this deity in the past? If so, how is it that he can be considered to be faultless now? Enlightened beings cannot become more enlightened with time, nor can their perfect state degenerate. Moreover, such a pure being is omniscient, and would know indubitably that such a reversal of belief would cause tremendous confusion and problems. A flawless being should be able to provide a coherent, logical, and plausible explanation for this contradiction. The Dalai Lama has yet to provide such an explanation. Please explain how the Dalai Lama’s reversal on Dorje Shugden can be considered anything other than the confused and mistaken action of an ordinary being.

6) For nearly four centuries the deity Dorje Shugden has supposedly caused harm to many people. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama claims that since the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Dorje Shugden has caused not only a consistent degeneration of Buddhism, but many other serious problems. If this is true, why is it not possible for any of the reincarnations of the Dalai Lama to subdue this being? It is claimed that each of the Dalai Lamas are successive manifestations of the Buddha of Compassion (Chenrezig). There are many accounts of high Lamas subduing malevolent spirits in Tibet, yet the succession of ten Dalai Lamas cannot accomplish a similar feat. Practitioners of Dorje Shugden claim that he is an enlightened being, and therefore impossible to subdue. Please explain the failure of these ten Dalai Lamas to subdue Dorje Shugden. Please explain the failure of thousands of high Lamas to do the same.
14

Adam on September 15, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Reply

Dear Khedrup,

I must confess that “His Naughtiness” was perhaps a bit naugty. It was just a bit of fun really, but since my advice to other WSS supporters is to keep it polite and friendly, I may have been breaking my own principles.

I must confess that my only knowledge of the Karmpa controversy is just a couple of letters written by Shamar Rinpochey, which appeared on the WSS blog. I did take a brief look at the Wikipedia entry. I guess I’m not really qualified to comment. You clearly know a lot more about it than I do.

As for your comments about the Dalai Lama’s fund raising activities I don’t really know what to say. I certainly don’t begrudge the Tibetans monks or orphans who benefit in this way. No one is complaining about this sort of thing are they? However, we can’t agree that it negates injustice against Shugden followers.

Someone who I do think is a lovely fellow is Karma Hardy the director of Tibet Foundation who I met in August after a video and questions in Brighton. They accept Chinese children into the Tibetan schools. I thought this was so sweet! How ironic also – little Chinese girls going to a school in Chinese controlled Tibet where they learn Tibetan!

Best Wishes,

Adam
15

Tenzin on September 16, 2008 at 10:40 am
Reply

Answer to Ron Cook

you wrote:
»Dear Tenzin,

Since you have taken it upon yourself or been asked to represent the views of the Dalai Lama, I wish to submit six important questions that hopefully you can provide clear replies to.«

You start your post with an incorrect assumption, neither did I take it upon myself nor was I asked to represent the views of HHDL. My blog clearly states its purpose: “This site aims to correct and balance the misinformation campaign of the Western Shugden Society.” For me, it would be very arrogant to think or to assume, I could represent the views of HH the Dalai Lama. I am a newbie in Buddhism and an ordinary being.

The first part of your sentence doesn’t invite me to answer because you start your post with and incorrect claim. Also you do not (willingly or unwillingly) understand the purpose of my Blog. Both lead me to ignore the rest of your post. That I continue and try to answer is because someone suggested it to me. Personally I do not feel a need to do so.

you wrote:
»Since you have gone to great lengths to accommodate the questions of a concerned citizen in Brighton, then in fairness please show the same willingness to address the questions below – they to come from a concerned citizen.«

As my blog aim states “This site aims to correct and balance the misinformation campaign of the Western Shugden Society.” The publication of the thoughts of the Brighton people, EX-NKT, are suited to be published, aren’t it?

As you are a supporter of the WSS – this conclusion I derive from other comments you’ve sent to me and that you are the author of the text “Six Principal Reasons why the Dalai Lama is not a Buddhist” which the official WSS website published – you are clearly not a potential candidate I will support on my Blog. As a WSS follower or supporter, if your post includes no misinformation there is no reason to publish it, because it includes no misinformation which needs to be corrected. And if it includes misinformation there is also no reason to publish it, because the site aims to correct and balance the misinformation of the WSS.

If you would understand the purpose of my blog and if you would respect the rules of communication there is no need for you to post here, besides you wish to correct the misinformation of WSS.

OK, my fault may be that I allowed discussion, which wasn’t an intention when creating this blog. This fault of me may have invited you to post as well.

you wrote:
»If you are fair and open minded as the people visiting your blogs indicate, demonstrate these qualities by providing the appropriate answers. There is no valid reason not to post these questions and let your readers draw their own
conclusions.

Sincerely,
Ron Cook«

This is a sentence which doesn’t invite me to read even one line more because it blackmails or manipulates my free decisions. The underlying meaning of your sentence is: “If you are this you have to do this, if you don’t do, you deserve not these attitudes.” You use a certain quality you or others see, to blackmail me to answer you.

On top of that you claim “there is no valid reason not to post these questions”. There are valid reasons:

1. I don’t like to be manipulated or to be blackmailed what I should do or shouldn’t do;
2. your post is not suited according to the aim of the blog to be published (see above);
3. it is my personal decision what I approve and what not; e.g. if I wish to save my time for better purpose than to discuss with you, then also this is a valid reason to unapproved your post and saving my time by not responding to it.

If you wish to communicate with others you should base communication on sensibility and compassion – the ability to feel what your verbal action provokes in the other person – and not on blackmailing which leaves the other no space.

This kind of blackmailing is a manipulative and inappropriate attitude which I identified also in WSS against Robert Thurman:

“If you, Robert Thurman, are not yourself lying, then you must show your evidence to prove your public statements: that Shugden people are sectarian, “the Buddhist Taliban” as you named them; and that the Western Shugden Society is working for the Chinese. You should show your evidence publicly through the internet before 25th October 2008. If your evidence does not appear by this date then we will conclude that you have lied publicly and are misleading people.” (see WSS site)

and WSS against the Dalai Lama:

“To reverse the expulsion of the six monks and allow them to return to Sera Monastery where they should receive the same spiritual and material rights as the other monks who do not follow Shugden. If you do not accept the first point, we will immediately organise worldwide public demonstrations directly against the Dalai lama whenever he visits any country. If you have some wisdom you should understand how important the Dalai Lama´s reputation is—this is now in your hands. We need your answer by the 22nd April 2008″ (see WSS broshure)

To respond to blackmailing is in general stupid, the more as if the person hasn’t done (from his perspective) anything wrong. So if you or WSS get no answers, whose fault is it?

I think this answers already another point you bring up in your post.

you wrote:
»1) If it is appropriate for the Dalai Lama to decide what spiritual practices are appropriate, and seeing clearly that such a decision causes divisiveness, why are the reasons he cites for the ban on Dorje Shugden not being supported by the teachings of Buddha? What sutras specifically dictate the need for invoking spiritual bans? If the ban is not politically motivated there must be an authentic spiritual basis for this action. The teachings of Buddha address all possible delusions that sentient beings are capable of generating, therefore, please cite the sutras that necessitate imposing the ban on Dorje Shugden.«

You start your first point by contorting the facts. This again leads me to not reading a single line more of your post but to ignore it. Your first sentence is full of claims ignoring the facts. So I feel not inclined to read one single sentence more.

To have a fair discussion you need a basis, by establishing a one-sided basis which ignores the facts or at least the other point of view, there is no basis for discussion. To make it clear, from my and others’ understanding HHDL gave his advice regarding Shugden. People are free to adopt it or not. If someone doesn’t adopt it, this is his business. But who wishes to have a student-relationship with him, this person should stop Shugden worship. You imply further that his decision is divisive and ignore that he and others see the Shugden worship as divisive, and that there are reasons for seeing Shugden worship as divisive. Then there is no “ban” in general – although due to recent developments one could say Shugden worship is banned in the Gelug monasteries by decision of majority, according to monastic principles.

Your first question is already full of DS follower point of views completely ignoring the point of view of the other side, but communication is based on trying to understand the other side. You repeat that pattern of unwillingness to understand the point of view of the other person in the next rhetorical questions in the same paragraph. You ask also question which have already been answered: Critics and HHDL see Shugden worship as sectarian and sectarianism contradicts the teachings, sectarianism is based on mind poison and is an object of abandonment not an object of cultivation. For more about sectarianism you may read this teaching by Ven. Dechung Rinpoche: http://quietmountain.org/links/teachings/nonsect.htm

If you do not understand this, then you cannot understand HHDL but whose fault is this, the Dalai Lama’s?

you wrote:
»2) Why is the Dalai Lama consistently patient, apologetic, and conciliatory toward the Chinese and not Dorje Shugden practitioners? The Dalai Lama has never acknowledged any email, petition, fax, phone call, telegram, or verbal request, nor has he ever granted an audience to anyone wishing to try and solve the Shugden controversy. However, he makes effort to engage the Chinese at virtually every opportunity. Please explain this double standard of engagement.«

Do you think he is not patient, apologetic and conciliatory towards Shugden practitioners?

I don’t know if he is not patient, apologetic and conciliatory towards Shugden practitioners, this is your position. I am not in the position to answer this. Maybe your assertion is wrong, maybe correct, maybe only a half-truth or you are ignoring facts and certain events which lead to a situation which seems to be like this but are the process of a long-term development of different causes and conditions?

Hearing such a claim I ask myself: “Didn’t he appoint an abbot in Sera who was able to balance the DS followers needs and the needs of those rejecting Shugden, maintaining harmony for a long period? Doesn’t this show his patience and conciliatory nature? Why weren’t the Shugden monks satisfied and why did they force the escalation of events in Sera?”

Regarding unanswered petitions: Petitions which are use the techniques of intimidation or blackmail (we’ll publicly call you a liar if you don’t answer), contort the facts or which are hostile and one-sided I would also not answer but ignore.

That HHDL does not give up trying to work with some of the stubborn CCP leadership may be due to the importance of this issue for the majority of Tibetans and Chinese. Shugden is not that important. Everyone has to balance his time and effort.

Why should I “explain the double standard of engagement”. I am not in the position or able to explain HHDL’s position nor do I see a double standard. I see clearly that for you and some Shugden followers this issue is of maximum highest importance. Who gave this importance to Shugden worship? Is this importance realistic?

The controversy has been solved so far, for those able to deal with it. Those able to let go, have let go Shugden worship. Those unable do it privately. Those who wish to practice publicly worship Shugden publicy e.g. the expelled monks debate and pray seperately, but keep their monastic buildings. Geshe Kelsang and a few Tibetans do not accept this, but this is their problem. The majority is ok with this issue. Why aren’t you ok with it?

you wrote:
»3) The Dalai Lama says that Dorje Shugden practitioners are free to ignore his ‘advice’ and continue to practice their faith. How is this possible when his government, his siblings, his personal friends, and representatives of Buddhist traditions that he controls, at every opportunity, disparage and attack Dorje Shugden practitioners? What basis is there to believe that Shugden practitioners have freedom? The Dalai Lama has said:

“Everyone who is affiliated with the Tibetan society of the Ganden Phodrang government, should relinquish ties with Dhogyal. This is necessary since it poses danger to the religious and temporal situation of Tibet. As for foreigners, it makes no difference to us if they walk with their feet up and their head down. We have taught Dharma to them, not they to us…

‘Until now you have a very good job on this issue. Hereafter also, continue this policy in a clever way. We should do it in such a way to ensure that in future generations not even the name of Dhogyal is remembered.”

(From a speech delivered July 14th 1996, in Caux Switzerland)

Since the Dalai Lama has expressed an intention to utterly destroy the practice of Dorje Shugden, please explain the nature and type of freedom such practitioners shall enjoy.«

If this statement is true then it expresses that those working with him, the TGIE, should not practice Dhogyal. This is a wish also from the Nyingmas and Kagyupas, who feel Shugden is a dangerous ghost. According to research I read, the Nyingmapas refused to work for the TGIE due to the Dolgyal issue. The TGIE should work for the welfare of the majority not a particular, specialized branch of conservative Gelugpas. Keeping in mind the sectarian nature and how Shugden worship was misused against other schools and to establish Gelug exclusivism, to express the wish that no one wishing to work with HHDL for the benefit of the majority should practice Shugden makes sense to me. As far as I know he expressed this wish, and those who disagree work elsewhere – India is a large country. I think every politician stresses certain points and asks for certain policies which should be followed.

But maybe I know too little about this to add more reasonable points. Probably you know it better. If you know it better you have to check if you know really all perspectives or just one perspective. Have you interviewed both sides, in Tibetan, in India for example? Knowing only one perspective doesn’t help to understand.

The claim of HHDL“utterly destroying the Gelug tradition” is again a mere claim. Until recently the practice could also be practised in the Gelug monasteries, the circumstance which led to the ban – in that case it is correct to speak of restrictions – in the monasteries are manifold and by far not one-sided as the narrow minded perspective of some radical Shugden followers suggest.

Check out your own freedom to practice. You have freedom. Check out the freedom of Tibetans to practice, they have freedom. There is enough information about this at my blog and elsewhere.

you wrote:
»4) Johan Candelin, director of the World Evangelical Fellowship’s (WEF) Religious Liberty Commission, invited the Dalai Lama to meeting in Helsinki on June 20, 1998. One of the topics discussed was the persecution of Christians in Sri Lanka by Buddhists. The Dalai Lama said that any Buddhist who persecutes Christians “misunderstands the true nature of Buddhism.” Persecution is defined in the Random House College Dictionary (def. 3) to mean:

“A program or campaign to exterminate, drive away, or subjugate a people because of their religious or moral beliefs or practices.”

If persecution of Christians is inappropriate and contrary to the true nature of Buddhism, why is the persecution of Shugden practitioners been not only acceptable, but advocated by the Dalai Lama? How can any reasonable person not consider the Dalai Lama’s words and actions to be hypocrisy in the extreme? Please clarify that persecuting Shugden practitioners is not hypocrisy.«

According to my understanding there is no “persecution” of Shugden followers. I said enough about this. If you posit such a claim please prove with unbiased evidence from a neutral source. Persecution is a very strong and serious charge.

To stop a harmful practice which is seen as supporting exclusivism, elite-thinking, pride, hostility towards other schools and sectarianism, which on top of that is not suited to be considered as a Buddhist practice one can take refuge in, is no hypocrisy, this is actual protecting others from receiving harm or being misled.

Although one can disagree with the view if Shugden is a spirit or a demon, if one accepts that others see this practice as harmful one can understand that stopping the influence of that practice is from their point of view a way to protect others from receiving harm. (How much harm it brings, NKT/GKG may be sadly a good example to illustrate this, at least for those who know what’s going on there.)

By holding the view Shugden is a Buddha, it follows one will disagree with the point of view that he is a spirit or demon and based on the own view, that he is a Buddha, defend their own position. If you portray the act of holding a different position than yours and the actions of those who act based on that view (that he is a harmful spirit) as hypocrisy (or even lying, as WSS do) then also seeing Shugden as a Buddha and defending Shugden worship can be portrayed as hypocrisy (or lying) you can use the same kind of argument you apply against HHDL to apply it against your and WSS’s position: ‘those beings seeing Shugden as a Buddha pretend to be Buddhists but actual take refuge in a spirit’; you can add: ‘by claiming Shugden is a Buddha they do lie, because Shugden had to be controlled by tantric powers (see History of Shugden) but no Buddha is controlled by tantric powers’, therefore using the same kind of argument you apply against HHDL can be applied as well against you and WSS: “You are hypocrites, you are liars, you pretend to be Buddhists but in fact you are not!”, “What a hypocrisy!” “Stop lying!”.

So when you apply the term “hypocrisy” (or “liar”) in such a deluded way you have to accept these words may also be used to describe your and Shugden followers’ views and actions, they can be portrayed also as hypocrisy and lies.

But in fact, as far as I can see it, none of this is hypocrisy or are lies. To judge something correctly as hypocrisy or lying this needs much more reasoning and investigation (see: https://thedorjeshugdengroup.wordpress.com/2008/07/14/western-shudgen-society-violates-buddhist-ethics/ ). Holding different views is just holding different views. If a mother loves her child and sees how the child out of ignorance corrupts his live with taking drugs, the mother stops forcefully the child to take drugs, is this hypocrisy? Of course a very selfish child will accuse and emotionally blackmail the mother: “You don’t love me. I suffer so much. You are a real bad and cruel and evil mother.” But is such an ignorant and selfish child correct with his perception and claims?

you wrote:
»5) The Dalai Lama freely admits that previous to his ban he was a practitioner of Dorje Shugden. He also composed a prayer to the deity entitled, Melody of the Unceasing Vajra, which is subtitled: ‘A Propitiation of Mighty Gyalchen Dorje Shugden, Protector of Conqueror Manjushri Tsongkhapa’s Teachings, by the Supreme Victor, the Great 14th Dalai Lama.’ Since the Dalai Lama is considered to be infallible and a fully enlightened being, how can these completely opposite beliefs be reconciled? Should we understand that the Dalai Lama was a faulty being when he practiced this deity in the past? If so, how is it that he can be considered to be faultless now? Enlightened beings cannot become more enlightened with time, nor can their perfect state degenerate. Moreover, such a pure being is omniscient, and would know indubitably that such a reversal of belief would cause tremendous confusion and problems. A flawless being should be able to provide a coherent, logical, and plausible explanation for this contradiction. The Dalai Lama has yet to provide such an explanation. Please explain how the Dalai Lama’s reversal on Dorje Shugden can be considered anything other than the confused and mistaken action of an ordinary being.«

HHDL said different times he practised Shugden out of his own ignorance. He didn’t blame anybody other than his own mind. How he came to see it differently he has extensively explained. Have you ever read his explanations? I did, for me it is clear and correct what he did. He gave a good example of a Buddhist and Mahayana/Vajrayana practitioner.

You mix in your own views and assertions here, mainly the Shugden follower belief that spiritual teachers are all really actually Buddhas without any faults. A view which is taught literally in NKT and among some fanatical Shugden followers and which contradicts facts and common sense. I wrote on this issue already here: http://info-buddhism.com/Western_Shugden_Society_unlocked.html#fund

How you can reconcile this? Become more realistic: not every master is fully enlightened, many masters made faults and were corrected by either their students or later masters. see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kelsang_Gyatso#POV_.22One_of_the_strongest_tenants_of_Buddhism_is_to_never_forsake_your_teachers_teachings..22

It is the ability of a great master to see his own faults, to acknowledge them and to correct them. What do you expect more?

Your assertion “A flawless being should be able to provide a coherent, logical, and plausible explanation for this contradiction.” is wrong, even the Buddha gave advice which is contradictory. He gave it in accordance to the time and the ability of his students. You mix your own confusion and misunderstandings about Buddhism in this issue. This is the basis of your confusion not of HHDL’s.

You may read the provided two links than you will probably understand what I say here. If you don’t understand don’t accuse me, please.

I think, you have the typical problems I witnessed among NKT followers and some Shugden lamas and their students. They hold doctrinal beliefs which take the teachings literally – especially that the teacher is a Buddha. For a correct Buddhist view on the teacher see:

http://www.berzinarchives.com/web/en/archives/e-books/published_books/spiritual_teacher/pt2/spiritual_teacher_11.html

[To add it: Another misunderstood and abused issue is that of the “Root Guru”(s). NKT and fanatical Shugden followers exploit it also against the Dalai Lama and to support their narrow minded doctrinal view of the Dharma. For a discussion of the root guru topic see:
http://community.beliefnet.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12371&page=2 (page two and the following pages offer proper information about this).]

you wrote:
»6) For nearly four centuries the deity Dorje Shugden has supposedly caused harm to many people. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama claims that since the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Dorje Shugden has caused not only a consistent degeneration of Buddhism, but many other serious problems. If this is true, why is it not possible for any of the reincarnations of the Dalai Lama to subdue this being? It is claimed that each of the Dalai Lamas are successive manifestations of the Buddha of Compassion (Chenrezig). There are many accounts of high Lamas subduing malevolent spirits in Tibet, yet the succession of ten Dalai Lamas cannot accomplish a similar feat. Practitioners of Dorje Shugden claim that he is an enlightened being, and therefore impossible to subdue. Please explain the failure of these ten Dalai Lamas to subdue Dorje Shugden. Please explain the failure of thousands of high Lamas to do the same.«

This question you should ask HHDL not me. I am not the Dalai Lama. I know a Nyingma Lama who can help people to get disconnected from the D. spirit – sorry so the majority views him – he said D. is very powerful. Also Nyingmas tried to subdue him but weren’t successful. It musn’t necessarily be a weakness of those lamas but that we lack the merit or have the negative Karma to be faced with such a force. I think there is some space to bring up such questions and to speculate. I will be hard to understand it fully.

Best Wishes, TP

@All WSS/NKT followers:
Thank you for your comments. As this blog aims to “to correct and balance the misinformation campaign of the Western Shugden Society.” it wasn’t initially intended for discussion nor do I have the time to moderate discussion, especially not in such a tricky issue and while having a lot of Buddhist studies to do, and plenitude of other duties towards my monastery and spiritual friends.

Please try to understand that I do not approve all comments, especially not those where I feel I have to add a further comment because they do not support the purpose of this blog or provoke a comment. The answer to Ron Cook took some hours. I lack an office and stuff members like the “Truth” offices of WSS/NKT. Thank you for considering this. All the best. TP
16

Khedrup on September 16, 2008 at 12:25 pm
Reply

Hi there Adam,

I think that as you delve further into the controversy, you will become less and less certain of Shamar Rinpochey’s behaviour being correct. If you read the other websites of his high ranking KAGYU opponents, look at his several failed lawsuits against several diffferent religious figures, and examine the behaviour in the West of his major Western disciple Lama Ole Nydahl, I think more and more questions will arise in your mind.
Even though it may seem to help the case of the WSS in the beginning, I feel by mentioning Shamar Rinpoche’s name, they align themselves with a controversial figure, (who the vast majority Karma Kagyus have distanced themselves from) and his Western student who has recently had several allegations of impropriety against him. It will not benefit WSS or NKT in any way to get involved or align themselves with his party in the dispute.
The reason I mentioned that HHDL’s money funds so many schools, monasteries and clinics is that in Ron Cook’s recent article he maligns HHDL for allowing his face to appear recently in an ad campaign. My point it that all that money went to fund charitable projects, some of them very urgent. For example, I remember during that time several of the major monasteries had a shortfall in their donations and were experiencing a food crisis, so went to HHDL for help.Other Lamas do not have as vast a responsibility as HH and I think the average Geshe or Lama in the West is so well supported they have no idea what weight is on HIs Holiness’s shoulders in terms of who goes to him to feed the hungry, help the sick and save monasteries sinking into disrepair.
Thanks for your reasoned and open participation on here Adam.
17

Adam on September 17, 2008 at 5:41 pm
Reply

Hi Khedrup,

thanks for the further details about the Karmapa controversy. I don’t think I’ll bother pursuing the point further.

In general it’s difficult to know how to “play it” as it were. “A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still” is a phrase I try to remember. And furthermore, I need to ask myself the question “What am I trying to achieve?” But let me ask you something:

Is it completely inconceivable to you that the Dalai Lama may be something other than an embodiment of the Buddha of Compassion? And if so on what basis do you make that judgement? (i.e. that he is Avalokiteshvara.)

Best Wishes,

Adam
18

Khedrup on September 17, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Reply

Yes, the controversy was a mess and the Kagyu lamas went to HHDL as a last resort to help sort it out. It was a mess many years before he was consulted about the issue. The mess started with the 4 Sons of the Kagyu lineage, the Karmapa’s main disciples.

I can’t explain HHDL’s qualities better than lama Zopa Rinpoche, so you should check out his essay first:
http://www.lamayeshe.com/lamazopa/hhdl_compassion.shtml

It is inconceivable to me that HH the Dalai Lama is something other than Chenrezig (Avalokiteshvara) or at least a Bodhisattva of the highest ground (bhumi) for the following reasons.

-My first is personal experience. I observed HHDL at several teaching events over several years, and met him in India personally before I took Highest Yoga Tantra initiations from him. He has all the qualities of a Spiritual Guide according to the Lam Rim Chenmo and Lamai Zhalug (Words of my perfect teacher).

-I spoke to many monks who are close with His Holiness and they explained to me his special qualities and the role he has to play regarding Buddhism in the modern world.

-His teachings on Lam Rim and Tantra are exceptionally clear and easy to understand. He teaches without rest for hours a day, even at an advanced age – during Losar time the teachings go for 2-3 weeks where he teaches from the throne for 6-8 hours every day, I have not seen another Lama with such stamina for continuous teaching. Few are able to quote liberally from the texts without consulting a pecha.

-HHDL has exceptional links with sentient beings of this world. His image is the reason Western monks and nuns are recognized as Buddhist Monastics and accorded respect. No one has done so much to raise the profile of Buddhism in such an international way.

-I have several Tibetan friends who I knew were very sick, went to receive blessings from HHDL, and afterwards the sickness was gone. In one case, a woman had cancer and after receiving blessings and reciting some mantras HH recommended, she was completely cured.

-It is in large part due to HHDL’s awareness raising and fundraising activities that the three Great Monastic seats (Sera, Drepung and Ganden) were re-established in India with a complete study program after the PRC invasion of Tibet. In addition, His Holiness has sponsored completely or in part, the reconstruction of monasteries, nunneries, schools and temples of all 4 traditions of Tibetan Buddhism.

-Not just Gelug Lamas, but Lamas from all schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon regard HHDL with the highest respect. These great beings greatly outnumber his detractors. No other Lama inspires such widespread respect and devotion across sectarian lines apart from HHDL.

-HHDL is one of the few lamas able to understand and effectively explain various systems of Buddhist thought, not just his own tradition. I have heard him or listened to MP3s of him discussing the Gelug tradition, Milarepa’s Songs, Dzogchen, Chan Buddhism (in dialogue with master Sheng Yen) and the Theravada Vinaya with complete ease and understanding. Although I have met many other great teachers from all 3 Yanas of Buddhism, none has had as wide an understanding as His Holiness.

-HHDL gives the handicapped and the heads of state equal attention. I have seen him express concern and recite prayers for the poorest handicapped or peasant person while important VIPs (in one case Barbra Walters, in the other case a high ranking INdian MP) wait.

-HHDL is able to establish affinities with people from all walks of life,and I have seen his compassion melt the heart of even the most hardened politician, fundamentalist Christian or Hindu opponent, or skeptical Scientist. I haven’t seen any other Lama capable of having such a wide variety of dialogues with such a wide variety of people.

-HHDL’s books are the most popular and widely read books on Buddhism in the world, introducing countless people to the Dharma, when previously such books were not widely available.

-HHDL initiations, especially the Kalachakra initiations, are full of wondrous events beheld by a variety of people, be they Buddhist or Hindu. Such blessings often change people’s lives and cause them to embrace Buddhism or at least, compassion and morality.

-I have spoken to several lamas with high practice who are able to see HHDL in a bodhisattva or Sambhogakaya aspect when they meet him.

-Because of HHDL’s stance on non-violence, in the 50 years of occupation there have been only a tiny number of incidents of violence against the occupiers. Compare this to the situations of occupation in Palestine/Isreal, Kurdistan or East Timor for example.

-HHDL is able to bridge the gap between modern science and Buddhism, as can be seen in the book “The Universe in a Single Atom”

-HHDL lives very simply in Dharamsala despite his high status and security around him. (I have seen this first hand, or consult also Laird’s book).

-HHDL appears to countless people, Buddhist and non-Buddhist, in dreams to guide them in their life. The Head of the Tibet Society in london receives hundreds of letters about such dreams, mostly from non-Buddhists.

-HHDL has ordained a huge number of bhikshus to keep the Sangha strong in the Tibetan exile community. He has also ordained a huge number of nuns.

-At a funeral I chanted at on the weekend, the person who passed away, a Chinese woman, had met HHDL briefly about 20 years ago in Malaysia. In 2004 at the Kalachakra, he walked out of the crowd and greeted this woman warmly, remembering her name, despite the fact they had spoken only for a few short moments.

-HHDL pushed to have the Geshe studies available for women despite resistance from more traditional lamas.

-After receiving teachings and initiations from HHDL on a number of topics and practices, that I had received before from other teachers but wasn’t able to understand, I was able to make sense of things that had previously left me dumbfounded.

-Despite his high status, HHDL has not tried to single-handedly change Vinaya rules or teachings, and always insists on consulation with a wide variety of lamas on such issues. In the case of vinaya disputes, he said that changing the essential rules requires an agreement between all Yanas of Buddhism.

-HHDL has stayed patient with the Chinese despite all the difficulties – see the film “Unwinking Gaze”

-HHDL has spread the blessings and teachings of Tantra to many who otherwise would not have received them, including Buddhist monastics from other traditions. He has greatly helped to dispel many of the misunderstandings about tantra.

-HHDL has acted as the Guru for so many wonderful and highly respected teachers of Tibetan Buddhism in the world. More than any other teacher.

-Shall I continue or is that enough?
19

Khedrup on September 17, 2008 at 10:04 pm
Reply

“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still” is a phrase I try to remember”

Could this statement not be just as easily referring to either party in this dispute?
20

Khedrup on September 17, 2008 at 10:08 pm
Reply

Finally, Adam, it might be good to ask yourself this question. If HHDL had not led the refugees out of Tibet and into India after the PLA invasion, would you have met your teacher Geshe Kelsang?
21

shaza on September 18, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Reply

“-Shall I continue or is that enough?”

a joy to read, you ought to continue ^^
22

Adam on September 18, 2008 at 8:31 pm
Reply

Dear Khedrup,

yes, thank you, that was quite inspiring, and even quite touching in a sense.

“A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still” is a completely neutral comment that simply makes the point that it isn’t always worthwhile to try to win at all costs where arguments are concerned if the other party isn’t going to accept your self-declared “victory” anyway – what do you achieve?

However, I have some doubts about the idea of DL supporting non-violence over the past fifty years. My understanding is that he decided to support non-violence only when the CIA withdrew their support for the Tibetan Resistance in the 1970s.

You know it really is the saddest thing to be protesting against the Dalai Lama, in a sense. As you’ve pointed out he inspires faith of a sort in so many people, and stands for them as a symbol of kindliness and goodness. I think that for me this was one of the most painful things about demonstrating – to feel like I was stamping on the faith of people who were maybe not that interested in Buddhism even, but still wanted to hear him speak in order to receive a little inspiration – very sad.

However, I can also reconcile this with a belief that the demonstrations were still justified and served a valuable purpose, and that it would have been “wrong compassion” to have not supported them on account of this.

However, anyone who wants to stop this activity, (and I guess it will stop anyway if DL doesn’t travel any more) is welcome to follow the excellent example of the five delegates of the European Tibet Support group in travelling all the way to Dharamsala in order to call for a resolution of the conflict (see Wisdom Buddha Dorje Shugden blog for details).

Best Wishes,

Adam
23

Khedrup on September 19, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Reply

Hi Adam,

What you say about the CIA may lead readers to believe this relationship was HHDL’s idea. This is not true:
“Two of the Dalai Lama’s elder brothers, Gyalo Thondup and Takster Rinpoche went into exile in India and the United States after 1950. The developed covert relations with the Central Intelligence Agency… The Dalai Lama did not know of these developments with the CIA until years later.
“The Story of Tibet” Laird 321
“The CIA’s covert actions made the Dalai Lama’s attempts to reach an accomodation with the Chinese more difficult.” “The US support for Tibet in the 1950s,” the Dalai Lama told me “was not out of moral principle or sympathy but because of its worldwide anti-communist policies.”
In fact, during the height of the CIA covert activity in Tibet (which was by all accounts paltry at best) HHDL could not even meet with his brother Thondup because the Indians prevented it, not wanting HHDL to meet with the man involved in CIA operations.
Let’s also not forget how young HHDL was when all this happened, how part of the reason he was in this situation was because the Regency completely ignored all of the 13th Dalai Lama’s reforms, and maybe have some compassion for his situation?

The Wisdom Buddha Shugden blog doesn’t give a full account of what happened with the delegates. I tried to post some additional information (very neutral and respectfully stated) but, of course, it wasn’t posted.

The delegates were asking the Tibetans to resolve the conflict amongst themselves but didn’t side with either party in the dispute. I am rue to accept the Society’s “quoted statement” as they have misquoted a number of other statements (I have proof of two of these if you would like me to email them to you).

Also, the Shugden Society said the delay in the court case was a sign HHDL and the TGIE were trying to put off the inevitable. I don’t believe this is the case at all. I believe that major discussion on this issue is about to take place. You see, the court date they requested happens right after a major conference, unprecedented in TGIE history, begins.

This emergency meeting you can read about here:
http://www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=22807&article=Tibet+Emergency+Meeting+In+November. It will start on November 17th giving delegates a full two days to discuss Shugden before the meeting between the lawyers in the Delhi high court.

I am confident that they will be able to reach a settlement. I think the Shugden people should be kept seperate from the rest of the monastery, as a democratic vote according to Vinaya decided the deity shouldn’t be propitiated. However, I think it would be perfectly fine to draft some resolutions making sure Shugden people are allowed free access to shops to buy essentials, and that the deeds of their seperate house buildings within the monastic complex could be signed over, for example.

For a court case to go through, unpleasant accusations being traded between both parties would only tarnish the image of Buddhism in the minds of everyone. This dispute is almost inconceivable to modern people – Shugden seems like a remnant of medieval culture and world coverage of this dispute doesn’t help either side – it only serves to tarnish the image of world Buddhism.

Even with a victory in court, the image of these Buddhists arguing over a sword-weilding image on a snow lion will hurt the image of all those wearing the maroon robe and the people who follow them.

JK
24

Adam on September 20, 2008 at 5:25 am
Reply

Hi Khedrup,

thank you for your reply. You are certainly well informed and I appreciate your efforts in giving me this information.

I really don’t know whether DL knew about the activities of the guerilla fighters. Would you agree that it would be a blatant contradiction of Buddhist moral discipline if he did, and didn’t take steps to try to stop it?

Is a kind mother living being any less a kind mother living being if it happens to be wearing the uniform of the Red Guards? (A Challenging question perhaps.)

Your post is on the Wisdom Buddha blog. I read it just before coming here. Check it out again.

I also hope some agreement is reached. Your suggestions sound reasonable, even if they aren’t ideal from our point of view. I’m sure that if you were in charge none of this would have happened.

I respect you more than I do DL, and it seems to me that many other basically decent people are being misled by this man. But perhaps this will mean that they can be part of the solution, as their only wish, no doubt, is “peace” and end to the disharmony.

(As to whether it is ever right to pursue “peace” at the expense of liberties and respect for others’ rights, that’s a separate discussion.)

Your final comments remind me of a comment by my dad, who is non-religious but likes to collect the odd religious artifact. He pointed to a plaster image he has of one of the catholic saints, and said “Well, I’m sorry to say this but Dorje Shugden has the status of that plaster saint!”

Of course – we’re not so out of touch with reality as to not be aware of this. We’re not trying to convert anyone else to faith in Dorje Shugden. We’re simply trying to protect the freedom of worship for those who wish to rely upon him. This is really very simple.

Besides, very many things about Buddhism would seem strange to ordinary people, including the teachings on emptiness. On this basis we could probably just reject the whole of Buddhism.

In any case – genuine thanks for your contribution to the discussion. Let’s agree to try to keep treading the path of peace and understanding.

Best Wishes,

Adam

comment TP
Adam you have freedom, of worship. There is also freedom of worship in India. The monks can practice Shugden, don’t fool us or the readers, please. It’s more complex than Shugdenpas suggest.

There is also freedom of putting restrictions on that what is seen by the great masters and the majority as being harmful. So there is freedom and there are restrictions. This is nothing new.

Freedom is a relative thing and the different interests have to been balanced. Also Je Tsongkhapa put restrictions on worship, e.g. one of his protector deities was not allowed to enter the temple or that there was a statue of it.
25

shaza on September 20, 2008 at 10:18 am
Reply

from Wall Street Journal. FYI

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122005956740185361.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#

Revolt of the Monks
How a Secret CIA Campaign Against China
50 Years Ago Continues to Fester;
A Role for Dalai Lama’s Brother
By PETER WONACOTT

DARJEELING, India — Chodak, an 83-year-old former monk, fled Tibet in the wake of a bloody Chinese invasion more than 50 years ago. Today, he spends his days trimming wool carpets at a refugee center perched above the tranquil tea plantations of this Indian hill town. The plight of Tibetan exiles like Chodak, and their Buddhist message of nonviolence, has drawn world-wide sympathy to their cause.

Tibet’s history of resistance
But Chodak’s story has a twist. He’s one of the last surviving guerrilla fighters who took up arms against the Chinese during a little-known chapter in Tibet’s history. His life has been one of war, not peace.

Starting in the late 1950s, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency trained scores of Tibetans, many of them monks, and then air dropped them back to their country with weapons and wireless radios. The linchpin of the operation was an older brother of the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader of 2.7 million Tibetans and today a Nobel Prize-winning symbol of peaceful resistance.

“We were fighting to protect Buddhism from those who wanted to harm it,” said Chodak in an interview, his eyes now clouded with cataracts.

These days, armed with little more than his message of peace and the occasional chortle at Beijing’s expense, the 73-year-old Dalai Lama enjoys the upper hand in an international public-relations war. He inspires protests that embarrass the Chinese government around the world, including during the recently concluded Beijing Olympics. He also provokes over-the-top denunciations from Chinese officials. During the unrest in March, Tibet’s Communist Party Secretary, Zhang Qingli, accused the Dalai Lama of sabotaging the region’s stability and described the Buddhist leader as a “a wolf in monk’s clothes, a devil with a human face.”

The Dalai Lama deflects such accusations with dry humor, saying repeatedly that if Tibet’s freedom movement ever became violent, he’d step away from politics. “Please investigate,” he said of the charges that he inflamed Tibetan protests in March. “If we are really the instigator, we are awaiting punishment.”

He has said that he wasn’t aware of the 1950s-era armed resistance in the beginning, and that upon learning about it, he didn’t encourage Tibetans to join it. He also disavows any plan to see Tibet become independent, pressing merely for China to allow Tibetans more local autonomy to preserve their customs and language.

But the history of the resistance movement — and the Dalai Lama’s close family connection to it — remains very much a part of the ongoing tensions with China. It helps explain why even rudimentary reconciliation talks — the next round is expected in October — have gone nowhere.

* * *
John Kenneth Knaus, a retired CIA officer who led a covert Tibet command center from New Delhi in the 1960s, remembers the Dalai Lama as torn — personally sympathetic to his brave compatriots but unwilling publicly to support a bloody rebellion that ran counter to his Buddhist belief in protecting life.

“The Dalai Lama knew everything that was going on, but he couldn’t give his blessing,” says Mr. Knaus, author of the 1999 book “Orphans of the Cold War: America and the Tibetan Struggle for Survival.”

Gyalo Thondup, one of the Dalai Lama’s brothers and the former resistance leader, declined to be interviewed for this story. “It’s a very sensitive and inopportune time to talk, from the points of view of many different parties,” said one of his sons, Tempa Thondup, in a message conveyed from the elder Mr. Thondup. People who answered the door at Gyalo Thondup’s residences in New Delhi and Kalimpong, India, said the 80-year-old wasn’t at home.

Stories recounted by Tibetan resistance fighters, including six surviving guerrillas, demonstrate the deep involvement of Mr. Thondup in the CIA-backed operation.

Mr. Thondup came to the resistance movement with rare qualities for Tibetans of his generation — a fluency in Mandarin and an understanding of China’s history. In 1949, he was studying in the wartime capital of Nanjing when the People’s Liberation Army vanquished the Nationalist forces. Mr. Thondup and his Chinese wife, the daughter of a Nationalist general, eventually settled in Darjeeling, near the Indian border with Nepal.

When the CIA made contact with him in the early 1950s, Mr. Thondup had been organizing escape routes for Tibetans fleeing Chinese rule. His wife, Nancy Chu, helped establish the center where refugees learned handicrafts so they could make a living on Indian soil.

A spokesman for the CIA declined to comment on the Tibetan operation.

The refugees arrived with tales of misery and horror. Tsering Dakpa, a Tibetan farmer, says in 1954 he watched Chinese soldiers drag suspected rebels outside a village and force them to dig a trench filled with freezing water. The men were stripped, thrown into the trench and — when they didn’t answer questions satisfactorily — shot, according to Mr. Dakpa.

“My heart stopped,” the 77-year-old says of the execution. “I decided then I’d join the resistance.”

That same year, the Dalai Lama had gone to Beijing to meet with China’s leaders, including Mao Zedong, in hopes of securing more religious and political autonomy for Tibet. But back home, in the Tibetan region of Kham, an anti-China resistance had already taken root.

The Battle at Litang
It was in Kham, in 1956, that one of the most violent clashes occurred, a days-long battle at the Litang Monastery. One of the Litang monks was Chodak, who now works at the refugee center in Darjeeling. He recalls a meeting in which a Chinese general urged them to abandon their weapons. The monks carried weapons to defend themselves from bandits. Chodak says the general threatened to burn down the monastery if they didn’t comply.

“The Chinese said they were protecting us, and that there was no need to carry weapons,” says Nawang Datha, another monk. “We refused.”

Instead, the Litang monks sneaked up at night and attacked a nearby Chinese camp, according to Mr. Datha and Chodak.

The Chinese army responded by charging the monastery in a pre-dawn raid. The Tibetans fought back with homemade pistols, antique rifles, axes and knives.

“Everybody was rushing here and there,” says Chodak. “We didn’t know who we were killing.”

Mr. Datha’s younger brother, Tenlay Tenzing, managed to flee the monastery earlier on the family’s black horse. Chinese troops shot the horse, but the monk kept running. Coming upon the horse carcass later, Mr. Datha feared his younger brother had been killed — only to be reunited later at their parents’ home. When bombs from Chinese airplanes were dropped on the monastery, Chodak fled to Tibet’s capital, Lhasa, a weeks-long walk, but far from the fighting in Kham.

China’s official history of the fighting at Litang says the monks reacted violently to Chinese efforts to abolish a “feudal serf system” and “slavery,” according to the Web site of the Ganzi Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture People’s Government, a part of Sichuan province that includes Litang. The government accused Tibetan rebels in the area of attacking military and government officials, damaging roads and bridges as well as raping, looting and killing. As a result, the Communist Party of China extended “important orders for the suppression of unrest,” the Web site says, calling it a “war of liberation.”

The events at Litang inflamed passions across Tibet and helped fuel the resistance movement. Many monks, left without a monastery, shed their robes to fight the Chinese. Warring Tibetan clans set aside grievances to unite in battle. The CIA later would gain several recruits from Litang, who wanted to match China’s soldiers with modern firepower and military training of their own.

Flight to Darjeeling
One of the Litang monks, who went by the name Lhotse and was the older brother of Messrs. Datha and Tenzing, fled to Darjeeling, posing as a trader. When he arrived, he knocked on the door of Mr. Thondup.

The brother of the 14th Dalai Lama, Mr. Thondup was already a prominent figure among Tibetans and his political sympathies were well known. After listening to Lhotse recount the failed uprising, Mr. Thondup responded with a proposition.

“If you want to go for training,” he said, “I may have a place to send you.”

The monk agreed to the secret mission, according to interviews with his two surviving brothers, whom he later told about the conversation.

In addition to Lhotse, Mr. Thondup recruited five Tibetan fighters and sent them in early 1957 for training with CIA instructors on the Pacific island of Saipan. The Tibetans learned how to operate a radio transmitter, fire modern weapons and set up ambushes.

The Dalai Lama’s oldest brother, Thubten Jigme Norbu, served as a translator on Saipan. Mr. Norbu, a retired professor of Tibetan studies at Indiana University, is now in poor health and unable to respond to comment, according to his youngest brother, Tendzin Choegyal.

After six months in Saipan, Lhotse and a monk named Athar parachuted back into Tibet. Traveling with other rebels, the pair relayed radio requests for weapons and supplies and kept the CIA apprised of the resistance inside Tibet.

Arms Deliveries
Mr. Knaus, the former CIA officer, testified in writing to the U.S. Congress in 1999 that the CIA made two arms drops into Tibet in July 1958 and Feb. 1959. These included 403 Lee Enfield rifles, 60 hand grenades, 20 machine guns and 26,000 rounds of ammunition. By the late 1960s, Mr. Knaus estimates, the CIA had dropped 700,000 pounds of supplies to the rebels.

China’s attempts to quell unrest around Lhasa worsened tensions. In March 1959, the Dalai Lama sneaked out of the city’s Potala Palace and headed for India on horseback. The CIA-trained rebels hooked up with the Dalai Lama, sending radio updates on his whereabouts to Washington.

As Tibet’s spiritual leader was about to cross safely into India, the rebels cheered and waved. The Dalai Lama waved back.

Chodak interpreted the wave as “a long-distance blessing,” he says. “Then we went back to fighting.”

The Dalai Lama’s aides say that at the time the Tibetan leader didn’t have a good grasp of the resistance, or of how the CIA was involved. “His brother really kept him in the dark — for his own sake,” says Tempa Tsering, the Dalai Lama’s representative in New Delhi.

Secret Training
As Mr. Thondup filled out the ranks of the CIA-backed resistance, Mr. Datha and his brother Mr. Tenzing also enlisted. Mr. Tenzing recalls arriving in 1959 at a secluded training base in the Colorado Rockies called Camp Hale. He gazed at the pine forests and snow-covered peaks. “I felt I was back in Tibet,” he says. Tibetans would train secretly in Colorado until 1964, according to Mr. Knaus’s written testimony to Congress.

Mr. Thondup traveled extensively to publicize Tibet’s plight, recruit fighters and forge links with foreign intelligence agencies, according to another of his sons, Khedroob Thondup, who acted as his private secretary.

During Mr. Thondup’s rare breaks at home, the family went on picnics in the misty hills of Darjeeling. The children practiced shooting Mr. Thondup’s old Winchester rifle. He also taught them how to prune his prize roses.

But inside Tibet, the resistance was wilting. China’s superior radio communications allowed it to outmaneuver fighters. Its air power crushed Tibetan fighters. Most of the agents the CIA sent into Tibet were captured or killed.

In disarray, the rebels retreated to a mountainous base known as Mustang just beyond southern Tibet inside Nepal. Fighters at Mustang say Mr. Thondup showed up periodically to rally spirits. “You don’t have to worry about food and supplies. We have sponsors that will take care of that,” Mr. Thondup said, according to Nyima Namgyal, one of the rebels who heard the Dalai Lama’s brother speak at Mustang.

“We had an idea it was America,” added Mr. Namgyal, now 65 years old and living in a retirement home in Dharmsala.

So many arrived at Mustang that supplies were stretched thin. Chodak says he sold his sword and charm box — an amulet he wore around his neck — to buy provisions. The rebels raided farms inside Tibet for sheep that would provide food and wool to fend off the cold.

Infighting posed as grave a threat to the Mustang operation as the Chinese army. Several of the Tibetan fighters complained that the commander was pocketing funds, according to Mr. Tenzing. In 1968, disgusted with what had become of the resistance, Mr. Tenzing returned to Darjeeling and opened a dumpling restaurant.

For the Americans in the late 1960s, the operation was reaching the end of its usefulness. The CIA had closed training camps years earlier and was winding down supply runs. Mired in Vietnam, the U.S. government worried about getting drawn deeper into another Asian conflict. In 1972, President Nixon met with Chinese leader Mao Zedong, ushering in a new era of the U.S. and China relationship.

For the Dalai Lama, a new stance toward China would take shape, too. In the early 1970s, he sought to disband the rebels and end the bloodshed. Chodak says he concluded his war with the Chinese after a tearful 1972 meeting with the Dalai Lama in Dharmsala.

Not everyone agreed to leave Mustang. Some fighters shot themselves or slit their own throats rather than disobey the Dalai Lama’s orders, according to his spokesman Tenzin Taklha.

By then, the fighting with China was essentially over. In 1974, the Dalai Lama huddled with aides in a sunlit meeting room at his residence. “We made up our minds that, sooner or later, we would have to talk with the Chinese government,” he said in a recent interview. “Independence was no longer relevant.”

The man who would serve as the go-between with the Chinese government was someone both sides knew well. He was the Dalai Lama’s older brother, Gyalo Thondup.
26

Khedrup on September 20, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Reply

Dear Adam,

I don’t see these things in such a black and white manner. From reading the passages above, we can see that HHDL had no direct knowledge of the rebels activities, in part due to the protection of his brother who kept him uninvolved, I would assume to help him protect his monastic vows. HHDL never ordered anyone to kill, and couldn’t give his support. The deep sadness of his situation is summed up in a poignant moment in the film Kundun. At this time, HHDL was a teenager, with no real political training or power, but an important figurehead uniting his people in a time of danger.

“Where are your people from, Pagpa?”
“Kham, Holiness”
“Warriors”
“Yes Holiness”
“The Dalai Lama does not believe in war”
“They fight for you, Holiness, Are they wrong?”
Tears stream down my cheeks every time I watch this movie (I’ve seen it 5 times I guess). I challenge any sensitive person to view the film and not feel pity for how HHDL was trapped between a rock and hard place.

If you criticize HHDL for waving to the rebels as he left India, I ask you this, would it have been better for him to condemn them, knowing their heart was in the right place, trying to defend their country and the special dharma that existed there? Would that have been the action of a bodhisattva? Should he have stopped them from trying to protect the regular Tibetans who were being killed, raped, whose crops were being stolen, by the PLA? Is the complexity and heartache of such a situation even fathomable for those of us who have grown up in the cushy and safe environment Western countries provide?

As long as HHDL wasn’t issuing orders to the rebels or using his money to fund them, I don’t see how anyone could fault him for his behaviour in this regard. That he did eventually take steps to disband them, and that this was very painful, is a testament to his commitment to peace. Many in the WSS seem to believe that every single decision in Tibetan politics has the Dalai Lama’s approval and knowledge. This is not only inaccurate, with cursory examination it is obviously impossible

Others in Tibetan history have actually transgressed their monastic vows, and are heroes, such as the monk who killed Langdarma to revive the Sangha in Tibet. This monk is lauded by hero, especially by Shugden followers. Is this not hypocritical? In another blog a former NKT member talked about how their teacher taught that sometimes great Bodhisattvas kill to save the dharma or the great number of beings, in relation to the above story. Have you never heard this story during your time in NKT classes?

Finally, you say you feel HHDL has misled people. I don’t think I have been misled and I am not easily duped. I have lived in many spiritual communities and know how to evaluate a teacher. That doesn’t mean I agree with every single statement HHDL has ever made (nor do I have to, if you follow Guru devotion as Lama Tsongkhapa taught it), but can see him as a great and holy being, guiding countless people to better lives, and visualize him during the Guru yoga portion of my self-generation recitations. Him being the greatest exponent of Buddhism on the planet I think is beyond question.

If you respect me, who has no qualities and an ordinary being, more than HHDL, who has immeasurable qualities and is a Bodhisattva, i would venture to say you should research HHDL’s teachings and activities more.

Finally, I don’t think it is entirely accurate to say that you and other NKT members aren’t trying to convert people to Shugden worship. Many people with direct experience of your organization speak of being introduced to the practice at the very beginning of their studies, and not being informed of its controversial history. Introducing new students to protector practices is very unconventional, and I haven’t heard of it happening in any other Vajrayana organizations on such a large sale. Even during Phabongkhapa’s time, the practice was not nearly as widely propagated among laypeople as it is through the NKT. Fortunately, as more of Phabongkhapa’s statements on the issue become translated, people will have access to more material before making their decision.

That being said, NKT definitely has the right to decide on its own spiritual policies. But I think many people would be grateful for more material to research before deciding to rely on Shugden as a Buddha.

In India, the Shugden practices are continuing, within the same khangtsens (house groups), in the same buildings. The communities have seperated, but monks who have strong devotion can and do still worship in public pujas. To force the other monks to mix and share requisites with those who go against the referendum decided policies of the majority of the monks, I think, is more harmful to the Sangha than peaceful, but seperate co-existence. I think this is the solution, and that, as I said, buildings should be signed over to the Shugden houses and their access to essentials should be secured. Should the 4,000 monks at Sera, for example, who don’t worship Shugden, be forced to debate and pray with the 120 who still do, who they believe are contravening their refuge vows?

And finally, Adam, I think it is important for Shugden followers to know about and aknowledge the sectarian activities of many who propagated the Shugden practice. Because without that knowledge, they can never work to address and rectify those attitudes that some within their fold still carry. (Many whom I know have confirmed these attitudes. I spoke with several Shugden monks at Sera when I was there. When I return to India in late October, I hope to continue my research).
27

Khedrup on September 20, 2008 at 10:13 pm
Reply

“Not everyone agreed to leave Mustang. Some fighters shot themselves or slit their own throats rather than disobey the Dalai Lama’s orders, according to his spokesman Tenzin Taklha.”

Taking this into account, could HHDL not have held off trying to disband them immediately, knowing that those orders too, could result in a death by suicide? You see, there are so many complexities here…
28

Adam on September 21, 2008 at 8:18 pm
Reply

Dear Khedrup,

thank you for your lengthy response. If you read the Jataka tales, as I’m sure you may well have done, you will find many instances of stories in which the bodhisattva chose not to retaliate to harm, even when his own wife and children were in danger. It seems to me that these tales are trying to teach us an important message – that doing right is about doing what is right according to our highest principles and understanding, and not just doing what feels right.

I believe that if teachings on karma and the patience of non-retaliation are correct, then they must apply universally. The tragedy that befell Tibet and Tibetans is worthy of our compassion, but no more so than the tragedies experienced by other groups around the world – the Palestinians, the people of Darfur, etc. etc. Furthermore, as I understand it the Chinese are no worse to Tibetans than to other minority groups within China, whose plight receives no such international coverage.

I’m not trying to belittle the plight of Tibtans or the suffering they’ve endured, just to place it in context.

I’ve certainly heard the stories of Bodhisattvas who kill out of compassion, but this is the killing of an single individual carried out by someone with clairvoyance, wisdom, and compassion.

I have compassion for the Tibetan fighters but I regard their actions as having been completely misguided, as I do the military actions of both the Israeli army and those of Hamas.

As regards Shugden practise within the NKT, it’s simply the case that Wishfulfilling Jewel pujas are held at a certain time each day and people are welcome to attend them if they wish. If they wanted to they could also have a look at the commentary in Heart Jewel. You may see this as some sort of negligence, but since we don’t accept the notion of the Dorje Shugden practice being harmful we don’t feel morally obliged to make a big deal about its “controversial” nature – it is only regarded as controversial by some due to DL’s statements about it, which we regard as wrong and untruthful.

I’ve read a translation of one of Phabongkhapa’s statements on the blogs, and I found it funny because it did indeed make Dorje Shugden practice look incredibly bad! Even in our prayers there are statements that could be seen to be “sectarian.” However, these things have to be understood in perspective, and within a particular cultural and historical context (in the case of Phabongkhapa).

DL’s personal rejection of Dorje Shugden practice makes perfect sense as it contains the advice to follow one tradition without mixing it with teachings from other traditions – advice that he rejects. Whether it is right for him to hold this belief it is indisputable that he has the right to think and believe as he wishes. We only ask that he respect the right of others’ to hold differing views and beliefs to his own.

I’m still hopeful that you can be a force for moderation and am grateful that you disapprove of some of the things that have taken place. I will be interested in learning about your experiences when you go back to India, and I guess I’ll get to learn about them through the site at some point.

Best Wishes,

Adam
29

Khedrup on September 22, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Reply

Dear Adam,

Wanted to respond to a couple of points:

You compared the situation in Tibet to the situation in Palestine/Isreal for example. When one looks at the length of time of the conflicts (similar) and compares how they have panned out, the conflict in Tibet has been overwhelmingly non-violent in comparison. The primary reason for this is His Holiness’ stance against violence. I believe, along with many Tibetans I have spoken to in both Dharamsala and the Lugsam Settlement (South India, where Sera is located), that what has prevented violence has largely been the voice of HHDL. In fact, if you remember, when protests in Lhasa got ugly recently, HHDL said he would resign if any violence continued. And things calmed down. Even after years of occupation, the Tibetans in Tibet still look up to HHDL.

This is one aspect of the NKT’s campaign I found particularly disturbing. The used CCTV (PRC state television) footage of the protests, calling the people acting violent “followers of the Dalai lama” and, in fact, helping to spread CTTV propaganda from the web. I have seen pictures from Amdo of killing that took place before the incidents, and indeed at the time I was taking initations and teachings in NZ with a lama from Amdo, and because I was one of the few who spoke Tibetan, helped the lama’s attendant to call his family in their village. The stories, which I won’t go into, were horrifying. That is why I was so shocked that the NKT used the one-sided PRC footage in order to “defend” itself against the ASA statement. I e-mailed them about this, that it hurt millions of Tibetans who had nothing to do with their Shugden issue, but of course, no response to my concerns.

The plight of the Tibetans has gained international coverage. As has that of Darfur. Because they have been in exile for SO LONG, perhaps that is the reason? The Palestinians are terribly mistreated I agree, but at least there are talks towards giving them independent forms of government, and they pretty much run their own affairs in Gaza and the West Bank. The East Timorese already have an independent government. As do the Mongolians. How long have the Tibetans waited?

It seems to me from your statements (and please correct me if I’m wrong) that you feel no special connection or gratitude to the Tibetans. I think this is very sad. The Tibetans preserved a very unique and complete form of Lord Buddha’s teachings while such teachings were being wiped out in India and Indonesia, among other places. They translated the entire canon from sanskrit (not an easy task) and preserved the texts, as well as making the practices come alive through sincere cultivation, which led to many spiritual masters. Without their efforts, would we have access to these precious teachings? The answer is of course no. Only in Tibet do we find the complete corpus of Vajrayana (Shingon in Japan only preserves one class of tantra), along with pithy Mahayana instructions like the Lojong.

To say that DS practice is only regarded as controversial because of HHDL’s statements about it is also completely inaccurate. What about the statements of HH Sakya Trizin? HH Minling Trichen Rinpoche? HH Tai Situ Rinpoche? As for historical figures, what about the Panchen Rinpoche Losang Chokyi Gyaltsen? Once again WSS seems to be blaming HH Dalai lama for all and any misgivings people have against Shugden practice. This shows a lack of understanding about the history of Tibetan Buddhism and why the practice is controversial. Fortunately, now passages relevant to this controversy previously available only in Tibetan are being translated into English so people can make a more informed choice.

Your statement about Shugden practice and the seemingly sectarian aspects of it needing to be placed in context, are the exact reason i think newcomers should have access to reliable historical records about the history behind the practice and the Lamas involved in it. As I said, I don’t think we have to view a Lamas every action as perfect in order to benefit from some of their teachings. But I think we should have access to an honest history of everything so we can avoid those bits that are linked to problems.

The bit about HHDL letting people hold views different to his own seems a little odd to me considering the recent post of Ven. Jampa on this forum, which seems to indicate the NKT doesn’t tolerate much disagreement either. An argument could be made that while HHDL has allowed Shugden monks to stay in his monasteries, because of seeing another teacher (who transmitted ordination to him) Jampa was kicked out of his home (an NKT centre), and forced to live with his mother.

As I said above, the two sides are going to meet in a Delhi court so I see the protests as completely unnecessary, just a method to “rally the troops” in a way. Before recruiting its members to engage in such protests (whether as part of an ad-hoc group or not, the majority are NKT), the New Kadampa Tradition should have examined its own history honestly to see whether or not they have turned people away from their homes for having their own beliefs.

I believe Ven. Jampa’s account, I don’t think he has any reason to exaggerate and he seems sincere. Of course, if there is evidence this didn’t happen (rather than conjecture) I would welcome it.

Kaley Shug,

Khedrup
30

Tenzin on September 22, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Reply

Dear Khedrub & Adam, that close followers were asked not to go to other teachers was reported different times – also in NKS.

This policy was either established by indirect means (fearing to pollute the “pure lineage”) and using facial expressing or verbal expressions of disagreement if somebody did it or by direct order of GKG.

What happens and what means are applied depends mainly upon the NKT center and how deep the student is involved in NKT. Loose members are treated more relaxed so that they came back again.

In Manjushri Institute the policies were much more strict as far as I heard. At one time it was even not acceptable for GKG when residents had books on their shelf of other authors.

Caroline, now a follower of Gangchen Lama and once resident at Manjushri Institute, said when she left NKT they even organized demonstrations against her when she was granting empowerments with the permission of Lama Gangchen. She wanted to tell me the whole story but at that time it was to much for me to be faced with so many “bad news”. So I refused to listen to her.

A former NKT monk reported this:

“Again in 2002, Ven Lama Zopa was planning on giving teachings in Leads all of the community of Madhyamaka center was summoned to the Gompa. Our western teacher had an e-mail from Geshe Kelsang stating that we were free to attend; however, if we did he could not accept this and that he would no longer be our teacher. I was stunned at festivals we are told that we live in a free society and that we have freedom of choice this is what Geshe Kelsang always says to us. However, on this occasion he was telling us the exact opposite.” http://nktworld.org/bullet.html

He was a resident of Manjushri Center. As the Manjushir Institute serves as the role model for NKT policies it is important for understanding NKT to understand what policies they have implemented there.

I remember an Email by GKG were he expressed his disagreement that his students buy Buddha images painted by Andy Weber in Weber’s Ulverston shop. He said they should not do this and indicated Andy Weber would have no proper motivation for selling them there. So, when even shopping of Buddha images is controlled by the NKT leadership what else has to been said? Andy Weber was the main Thanka / image painter of NKT and a Manjushri resident there as well, he left some years ago.

In our center it was an unspoken rule that never ever a devoted follower, especially no NKT monk or nun or NKT teacher goes to non NKT teachers. This policy derives just directly from the policy of keeping the “pure tradition” purely and “not mixing it”. As a result even Kundeling lama was not allowed when he visited our center in 1998 to use the throne or to teach something, because he was no “Kadampa” and had not “our lineage”.

Dechen received this ‘purity policies’ from Gen Thubten, GKG’s successor, who visited many NKT centers in about 1994/95 to remove all non-NKT stuff and members who were ‘mixing the tradition’ or ‘not keeping the pure tradition’ “purely”. Many left NKT quite frustrated the other followed the ‘purity policies’. I was no witness of that process but former members I met told this to me.

I came 1995/1996 to NKT. Me was directly told by my Resident Teacher Dechen that “we only read pure Dharma books”. Then GKG’s books were introduced to me as “being pure Dharmabooks”. Later, when hearing from Gen Thubten’s ‘purity tour’ I could understand why me was told what “pure Dharmabooks” are… another member had at another place similar experiences but the policy was introduced more subtle, like ‘Why we need other books? Geshe-las’s books include the complete path to enlightenment. We should try to understand first these pure texts…”

Later when Dechen was expelled and the new Foundation Programm Teacher suggested a non-NKT book to read – additional to GKG’s text – one week later she was removed from her position as a NKT teacher and replaced by a devoted NKT monk. One person who followed the advice bought the non-NKT book and brought it to the FP Class, him was told that this book is not welcomed there… For me, also this speaks volumes.

Removal or installation of NKT teachers who are more devoted to NKT policies is another mean to make followers more conform. The latest instances are Lucy James, Björn Clausen etc.

So you have at least these three methods: 1. unspoken indirect rules, 2. direct orders by NKT leadership (GKG) behind the scene – which are not brought to the public eye 3. arbitrary removal or installation of NKT teachers.

The Lam Rim Chen Mo was not acceptable as a reliable source because it is dedicated to HHDL’s long life and Pabongkha Rinpoche’s Lam Rim it was said includes faults. Of course if only one set of book is pure and all the others have faults or are not acceptable then you let go the idea to “mix the pure traditon” with impure and questionable texts by other authors…

May be some can add their experiences of this here for a better understanding. Of course the experience are manifold and depend on the place and local NKT teachers.

Best wishes, Tenzin
31

Adam on September 22, 2008 at 5:02 pm
Reply

Dear Khedrup and Tenzin,

I don’t have to defend the actions of the NKT in this context and I chose not to do so. As far as I’m concerned this is a separte discussion. I’m extremely pleased that the New Kadampa Truth site has said that people are welcome to register complaints if they have any, and that they will receive replies, and I’ve even requested that they make this point a bit more clearly.

So that’s my bit as far as that’s concerned.

Khedrup:

I must frankly confess to you that my compassionate concern for the Palestinians is greater that that for Tibetans. From what I can make out their plight is infinitely worse than that of the Tibetans. I found your statement about the Gaza strip incredible. Have you read any reports about conditions in the Gaza strip over the past year?

(I hope this doesn’t sound too harsh – I’m just asking.)

Having attended a talk by Karma Hardy the director of the Tibet Foundation, I’m convinced that their non-political approach is the right one. I would heartily recommend watching the video about their activities in Tibet if you ever get the chance. However, the most touching part for me was about the Chinese school girls who were being looked after. They were orphans. I thought it was wonderful that a Tibetan school accepted them. It would be nice to think of them growing up to be peace-makers between Tibetans and Chinese.

I have strong reservations about all forms of nationalism including Tibetan nationalism. I don’t think DL helps the cause of Tibetans in Tibet at all, except perhaps in so far as his status gets people donating to Tibet Foundation. From where I stand it seems like he helps to keep people clinging to an impossible dream, rather than allowing them to swim with the tide and make the most of changed circumstances – i.e. by learning Chinese and so on.

Tibet as an independent nation is a completely lost cause. Buddha’s taught us to accept the inevitability of impermanence, not to try to fight the inevitable.

Gratitude to past Tibetan masters is besides the point. The way to repay their kindness is to put the teachings into practice and attain enlightenment for the sake of all living beings – this is what they would wish of us.

Best Wishes,

Adam
32

Khedrup on September 22, 2008 at 6:42 pm
Reply

Dear Adam,

Sorry if the statement sounded uninformed, I am indeed no expert on this issue. What I was saying was, at least the international community has worked with the Conservative Isrealis in order to give some form of self-government to the Palestinians in the West Bank and the Palestianians have at least some friends in the UN (several of the Arab countries and others). The Tibetans on the other hand, have no one who will stick up for them in the UN and no voice through official political channels. It is mostly HH the Dalai Lama who brings attention to their plight. This being said, I have never visited Isreal, the occupied territories, or the Gaza settlements, so I can’t speak with the authority of experience on the issue. I have, however, had extensive experience over several years with Tibetans in India and also in the commuity here in Canada. I have seen their battle scars and heard their stories.
However, to diverge entensively to the Palestinian issue on this blog I think detracts from its purpose, so perhaps we should leave it here.
HH Dalai Lama, contrary to you assertion above, has encouraged the Tibetans to learn CHinese. EVen in exile, for example, there are Chinese classes available at several of the larger monasteries. HHDL tells those monks who know Chinese to continue to study it because it is a very important language. HHDL has also contributed to a modern Chinese translation of the Lam Rim Chenmo, for example (the current one uses classical Chinese and is outdated). Also, in the film Unwinking Gaze HHDL repeatedly says he is willing to work for autonomy and not independence, and try to be a good Chinese citizen while protecting his culture. His stance is far more moderate than many of the young Tibetans who wish to attempt to take their country by force, and his middle-way approach has contributed greatly to the lack of violence in regard to this situation.
If you don’t think HHDL helps the Tibetans in Tibet at all, I recommend you view the film “What Remains Of Us” , where a Tibetan-Canadian woman went into Tibet with a recorded message from HHDL and then recorded the reactions of the Tibetans. It is clear that his presence inspires tremendous hope in these people trying to preserve at least some part of their culture. Also, if you go to Dharamsala, you will see that HHDL has many programs funneling money and support to many charitable projects in Tibet, and has also arranged for other foundations like FPMT to provide medical care in Tibet, for example through the Amdo Eye Centre.
In addition, many lamas who are students of HHDL have taken his advice to help Tibet directly and built monasteries and schools in the country, focusing on modern education, and teaching Tibetan and Chinese side by side. One of my friends runs a school in Kham that does this, and received substantial donations through the office of HHDL.
So, your statement that HHDL does little for the Tibetans in Tibet can be proven inaccurate by visiting India and seeing what types of projects are in the works. Also don’t forget that through HHDL’s monasteries, thousand of monks complete a proper traditional monastic education, and many of these return to Tibet and their communities where they can teach a complete form of the dharma, unhindered by the rigid controls of the PLA government.
Thanks for your input,

Khedrup
33

Adam on September 23, 2008 at 9:17 pm
Reply

Dear Khedrup,

thanks for your information. With regards to the Palestinian issue I would certainly recommend Jimmy Carter’s book Palestine Peace not Appartheid, which gives clear insight into the issue, and is all the more powerful for its complete even-handedness. I think if you learn a bit more you will realize that the Palestinians are a lot worse off than you seem to think.

Thanks also for the information about DL sponsered programmes in Tibet. I must admit that my statement was to some extent made in ignorance. I did really enjoy the Tibet Foundation film though as I’ve said repeatedly.

I think this particular discussion may have run its course for me so I think I’ll bow out now. No doubt we’ll talk again on another thread. I’ve given up on the idea of moving away from the site in general, as I think this sort of discussion serves a purpose.

Best Wishes,

Adam

	Lena on Karmapa Agrees to Multimillion…
	Lena on Karmapa Agrees to Multimillion…
	Lena on Karmapa Agrees to Multimillion…
	Carol McQuire on The Clear Light of Kelsang Gya…
	Bruno on Karmapa Agrees to Multimillion…
	Carol McQuire on The Clear Light of Kelsang Gya…
	Carol McQuire on The Clear Light of Kelsang Gya…
	tenpel on The Clear Light of Kelsang Gya…

Small description of Information giving event at Bodhisattva Centre Open Day

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Related