Dorje Shugden Controversy: Protests Against The Dalai Lama – An Interview With Tibetologist Thierry Dodin & A New Statetment By The Kashag

There is a new and up-to-date interview with Thierry Dodin – a Tibetologist – about the Shugden conflict, the different Shugden groups, the role of the New Kadampa Tradition, and about the assertions and allegations of the Western Shugden protesters, that follow the Dalai Lama since 2008 all over the world and protest against him almost where ever the Dalai Lama appears in the West.

Is the Shugden group in fact fighting against religious oppression and persecution and for religious freedom, as they claim? Their campaign insinuates that they are being subjected to massive, overwhelming persecution.
Well, let’s look at it logically; let’s look at the facts: the Dalai Lama advises against a cult that he views as a misguided development within his own Gelugpa School. He does not call for wiping out the group’s adherents or destroying their monasteries, but instead simply calls for a clear-cut separation within the monastic context. The Dalai Lama has distanced himself from the Shugden group, and the Shugden group has dissociated itself from him. Thus, in point of fact, there are no longer any overlaps, no more interfering in the affairs of one by the other. Hence, there can be no oppression either – all the less so when the Shugden group, as for example the International Shugden Community, claims in its flyers that this Dalai Lama isn’t even the right one! Why should they let a “false Dalai Lama” whom they do not recognise forbid – or permit – them anything at all? It just doesn’t make sense!

What we are seeing here is an attempt to dismantle the Dalai Lama’s reputation as a proponent of human rights, tolerance and peace, one that is being carried out with especially fanatical zeal by more recent western adherents of the cult. The question is: cui bono (“To whose benefit”)?

26Comments

Add yours

1

Clara Luz on May 12, 2014 at 12:35 am
Reply

The problem is that the Dalai Lama is mixing religión and politics. The explanation given here does not explain why officials working in health departments were forced to resign. I have the original documents that show this kind of discrimination. If the division is only in the monasteries, why are Shugden practioners clearly on video refused entry into shops?
Also, this article fails to mention anything about why the Dalai Lama is abandoning a practice that his Guru passed on to him in no uncertain terms.
- 2
  
  tenpel on May 12, 2014 at 9:54 am
  Reply
  
  If you want to say so. The Dalai Lama makes both religions and politics and yes, they mingle at times. If you consider this as wrong you must also admit that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso and NKT are mixing religión and politics too (and are therefore wrong) because 1) that the Shugden issue is politics has been affirmed by Kelsang Gyatso when he wrote to the Washington Post:
  
  “in October 1998 we decided to completely stop being involved in this Shugden issue because we realized that in reality this is a Tibetan political problem and not the problem of Buddhism in general or the NKT. We made our decision public at this time — everyone knows the NKT and myself completely stopped being involved in this Shugden issue at all levels.”
  
  2) the protests by the NKT are therefore even in the eyes of Geshe Kelsang political and the NKT/Geshe Kelsang do nothing else than mixing religion with politics. So on that level they are the same 😉
  
  The explanation given here does not explain why officials working in health departments were forced to resign. I have the original documents that show this kind of discrimination.
  
  Please send these documents and their translation to me. I can forward them to academic experts. What NKT has presented so far are mainly distorted and exaggerated claims that have no ground in reality. The tactic is: to take events from here and there, mix them with some theory, add exaggerations, add semi-truths and untruths and to make out of that cocktail accusations against the Dalai Lama. But if checked carefully all those accusation do finally not withstand reality if properly checked. Just as one of the many examples: The Shugden groups (including the Delhi based Shugden Society) claim that the CTA would have spread posters in 1998 of the ‘Ten Most Hated Enemies of the Dalai Lama and Tibet’ insinuating and also directly claiming there would be a wiping out campaign and even a call to murder the persons on the list. Also TV stations have accepted this wrong claim, like Swiss TV, but as a matter of fact, as the Swiss TV says in a self-correction (after protests by Tibetans and academics):
  
  … this list was made after the killings of Gen Lobsang Gyatso and two of his students and the Home Minister of the TGIE, Tashi Wangdi, states that this list of ten people was a “research report”, classified as an “internal document” with the remark “at the top: Only for internal use!”. According to Wangdi, the parliament had ask the government to do this research in order to know “who these people are.” Wangdi says that a parliament member from Bylakuppe passed on this information, “and maybe in that way they became public …”.
  
  So and here we go, this pattern of misinformation, de-contextualization, of manipulation and distortions repeats endlessly in the propaganda of the NKT and the campaigning Shugden groups. It would be endless to address all and it would give that propaganda also too much weight. Usually scientists tend to ignore conspiracy theories or propaganda of this type. I hope they will contribute more in the future to clarify these matters in detail.
  
  If the division is only in the monasteries, why are Shugden practioners clearly on video refused entry into shops?
  
  If a shop owner refuses entry to a Shugden practitioner to his shop (a thing I also don’t like) it is his personal decision, and you cannot blame the Dalai Lama for it or even wrongly claim that the CTA would have commanded that or installed a policy to do that. You have to discriminate those things more carefully if you want to make a sober judgement.
  
  Also, this article fails to mention anything about why the Dalai Lama is abandoning a practice that his Guru passed on to him in no uncertain terms.
  
  This might be a failure in your eyes because you seem to see this as a huge fault but from another perspective this is the freedom of the individual to abandon things judged as destructive and even the Tantra texts and the scriptures recommend to give up what is not in line with the teachings etc. (And to kill people, make them sick or to punish them violently if they practice non-gelug teachings is in my eyes contrary to the Dharma, to common sense and desctructive.)
3

Dorje on May 12, 2014 at 12:48 am
Reply

I just read the interview with Thierry Dodin and must confess to being a little bemused. A number of claims and statements as well as omissions seem not to accurately reflect the truth. Just a few that stuck out:
The description of the Fifth Dalai Lama seems to completely leave out mention of the oppression of the Kagyu and Jonangpa traditions by the Fifth Dalai Lama and the emerging Gelug state. The Jonangpa never recovered. Genuinely tolerant?

“Following the death of the Fifth Dalai Lama in 1682, the cult spread rapidly and broadly within the Gelugpa School, particularly among those in political positions” – did it really, or was it just a minor Sakya protector for centuries until Pabongkha spread it widely at the start of the last century?

A lot is made of this protector cult in SE Asia, particularly Singapore and Malaysia, including photographs, but there is no mention of why or who is behind it, ie. no mention of Tsem Tulku and his Kechara cult. Surely, with all his websites, comic books, jewellery and pro-protector propaganda, he is worth a mention?

There are several more factually questionable points made in the interview like “Between the various schools of Tibetan Buddhism there are no significant differences in terms of teachings.” I’m also not keen on words like “crass” being thrown about carelessly. Anyway, I just thought it was a bit odd.
- 4
  
  tenpel on May 12, 2014 at 8:06 am
  Reply
  
  You find a similar judgement about the 5th Dalai Lama by other scientists such as Prof Paul Williams in his entry in the Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements. Scientists tend towards to judge and see things in an over all perspective and in the framework of a given time and their standards. Paul Williams states about the 5th Dalai Lama in Clarke, P. B., Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements
  (New York: Routledge, 2006), p. 136:
  
  For centuries the Buddhist monasteries in Tibet had been involved with political power. Faced with a military alliance aimed at destroying his Geluk school of Buddhism, the ‘Great Fifth’ Dalai Lama (1617-82) appealed for support from his Mongol devotees. These were led by the powerful Gushri Khan. He defeated the main rivals to Geluk hegemony and in 1642 gave control of Tibet over to the Dalai Lama. By most accounts the Dalai Lama was by the standards of his age a reasonably tolerant and benevolent ruler.
  
  Another quote from an academic publication:
  
  The 5th Dalai Lama, known to Tibetan history simply as the ›Great Fifth,‹ is renowned as the leader under whom Tibet was unified in 1642 in the wake of bitter civil war. The era of the 5th Dalai Lama—roughly the period from his enthronement as leader of Tibet in 1642 to the dawn of the 18th century, when his government began to lose control—was the formative moment in the creation of a Tibetan national identity, an identity centered in large part upon the Dalai Lama, the Potala Palace of the Dalai Lamas, and the holy temples of Lhasa. During this era the Dalai Lama was transformed from an ordinary incarnation among the many associated with particular Buddhist schools into the protector of the country. In 1646 one writer could say that, due to the good works of the 5th Dalai Lama, the whole of Tibet was now centered under a white parasol of benevolent protection. And in 1698 another writer could say that the Dalai Lama’s government serves Tibet just as a bodhisattva—that saintly hero of Mahayana Buddhism—serves all of humanity. – Kurtis R. Schaeffer, »The Fifth Dalai Lama Ngawang Lopsang Gyatso«, in The Dalai Lamas: A Visual History, Serinda Publications, Edited by Martin Brauen, 2005, p. 65«
  
  And about his rule Prof. John Powers writes (note Powers’ quote of Snellgrove & Richardson):
  
  The fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Losang Gyatso (1617-1682), popularly referred to as ›The Great Fifth,‹ was the most dynamic and influential of the early Dalai Lamas. He was a great teacher, an accomplished tantric yogin, and a prodigious writer. His literary output surpasses the combined total of all the other Dalai Lamas. In addition to his scholastic achievements, he proved to be an able statesman, and he united the three provinces of Tibet (the Central, South, and West) for the first time since the assassination of king Lang Darma in the mid-ninth century.
  
  Although he was rather heavy-handed with the Jonangpas and the Karmapas, his treatment of other orders was often generous. He was particularly supportive of Nyingma, and he himself was an ardent practitioner of several Nyingma tantric lineages. Snellgrove and Richardson contend that on the whole his actions proved to be beneficial and stabilizing, despite the obvious hard feelings they engendered among his opponents:
  
  »The older orders may preserve some bitter memories of the fifth Dalai Lama, for no one likes a diminution of wealth and power, but there is no doubt that without his moderating and controlling hand, their lot might have been very much worse. It must also be said that at that time, despite their new political interests and responsibilities, the dGe-lugs-pas remained the freshest and most zealous of the Tibetan religious orders.« (Snellgrove & Richardson, A Cultural History of Tibet, p.197)
  
  –John Powers, »Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism«, Snow Lion Publications, 1995, pp. 145,146-47)
  
  Judgements of being tolerant or not tolerant must be seen from the perspective of the standards of a given time and not from our 21st century standards projecting it back 500 years ago.
  
  With respect to the rapid spread of Shugden after the death of the 5th, there seem to be differing opinions. While Dreyfus stresses that the Shugden cult was mainly spread by Pabongkha and pin points him as the main source of its modern propagation not all scientists seem to agree with this. Thierry Dodin is among those who disagree. I assume for Tsem Tulku there are no verifiable sources, that’s why he might not be mentioned.
  
  Again, with the claim that there are no major differences between the schools, if you focus on the subtle points of emptiness explanations there are differences but from an over all perspective: they all base their practice on great compassion, bodhichitta, the six perfections and the vajrayana and they have the same aim. I think it is save to say there there are no major differences (a fact also stressed by Patrul Rinpoche and other masters, when I remember correctly some of their writings.)
  
  Thank you for your comment! I will forward it!
- 5
  
  tenpel on May 16, 2014 at 12:44 pm
  Reply
  
  Hi Dorje,
  Thierry Dodin is going to answer your posts. I lack time and expertise to do that.
  - 6
    
    Dorje on June 22, 2015 at 1:27 am
    Reply
    
    I just noticed you reposted a link to Thierry Dodin’s article on the WNTTAS Facebook page. The article still includes the dubious claim about the Fifth Dalai Lama, “But in religious terms he was genuinely tolerant: in fact, a few of his most important teachers belonged to other schools.” Despite your answer above I still haven’t seen a reply from Thierry, and that was over a year ago. It would be interesting to see what he thinks…
7

Dorje on May 12, 2014 at 3:11 pm
Reply

Thanks for your reply, Tenzin. I suppose the point about no major differences has some bearing on the supposed genuine tolerance of the Great Fifth. A difference in teachings existed between the Shentongpas and non-shentongpas and the fact that some non-shentongpas, such as Rendawa, objected so strongly to the Shentong position of the Jonangpas led to the Jonangpas’ virtual destruction. I’ve no doubt that the Kagyu and Jonang relationship with the house of Tsang was a major reason for their suppression by the Mongol supported Fifth Dalai Lama, but the Kagyupas survived and built good relations with the Gelug hegemony after a while, the Jonang didn’t.

BTW, when people mention the nonsectarian tolerance of the Great Fifth, what they are really talking about is the fact that he was a Nyingmpa terton as well as a Gelugpa lama. It is his example, and that of the Great Thirteenth, that HH Dalai Lama Tenzin Gyatso drew his initial nonsectarian inspiration from. But it doesn’t make one genuinely tolerant if you also use your power to destroy the fifth major Tibetan Buddhist tradition so now we only talk about four main traditions. The polar extremes in Tibetan Buddhism of the clerical approach of a Gelug geshe and the shamanic approach of a Nyingma terton, and how these are either reconciled or kept apart is at the heart of this protector despute. It’s not about a general sectarian versus inclusive approach but about how Gelugpa clerics view their long haired neighbours.

Regarding the spread of the protector, to imply it was always a Gelug cult and not shared by others like the Sakyapas is not correct. If there is evidence of widespread worship by Gelugpas prior to Pabongkha, I’d like to see it. Pabongkha was responsible for this worldly gyalpo spirit’s apotheosis. As Sakyapa academic TG Dongtong says,
“It must be pointed out that it was Phawong Khapa who founded the doctrine that elevates Dolgyal to king of the guardians of the Gaden tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. Furthermore, it was also Phawong Khapa who defined Shugden’s specific role as the one who punishes those Gadenpas who develop faith in the Nyingma (ancient) tradition of Tibetan Buddhism.”
Earth Shaking Thunder of True Word p5
http://tbrc.org/#!rid=W00EGS1016955
8

Dorje on May 12, 2014 at 3:44 pm
Reply

“no one likes a diminution of wealth and power, but there is no doubt that without his moderating and controlling hand, their lot might have been very much worse.”
The Jonangpas were totally destroyed in central and western Tibet. There monasteries were converted and their texts, especially those of Dolpopa were banned for centuries only recently being rediscovered and taught. Exactly how much worse could it have been? Just a political motive?

Gelug academic Guy Newland explains
“Tsong-ka-pa and his successors have been especially vehement in their objections to the views of [Dolpopa] Shay-rap-gyel-tsen, (shes rab rgyal mthsan, 1292-1361) and his followers. Shay-rap-gyel-tsen, an abbot of Jo-mo-nang, formulated his view in Ocean of Definitive Meaning (nges don rgya mtsho) and other writings; his followers are called Jo-nang-bas. As Ge-luk political power reached its apogee under the Fifth Dalai Lama in the seventeenth century, the Jo-nang-bas were proscribed and their monasteries and other property were completely confiscated and converted to Ge-luk use. Tibet’s intersectarian conflicts were almost always driven by motives more political than “purely philosophical”, indeed, the Jo-nang-bas were allies of the king of Tsang (gtsang), the main political and military adversary of Ge-luk in the first half of the seventeenth century. On the other hand, for more than two hundred years before they destroyed the Jo-nang-ba order the Ge-luk-bas had been denouncing Shay-rap-gyel-tsen’s philosophy as something utterly beyond the pale of Mahāyāna Buddhism…While the immediate occasion for the persecution of Jo-nang was its defeat in a power struggle, proscription suggested itself as a penalty in the context of a long history of substantial and deeply felt philosophical differences. This hostility is reflected in the banning of Shay-rap-gyel-tsen’s major books from the premises of Ge-luk monasteries more than 150 years prior to his order’s extinction.”
The Two Truths: in the Mādhyamika Philosophy of the Ge-luk-ba Order of Tibetan Buddhism p30-31
http://www.shambhala.com/the-two-truths-1.html
- 9
  
  tenpel on May 12, 2014 at 11:09 pm
  Reply
  
  Dear Dorje,
  an answer will come …
  - 10
    
    Dorje on June 22, 2015 at 1:27 am
    Reply
    
    I’m still waiting, over a year later.
    - 11
      
      tenpel on June 22, 2015 at 2:10 pm
      Reply
      
      Thank you Dorje. It got lost I assume. I just wrote to him and asked Thierry to reply. Let’s see …
12

No name on May 12, 2014 at 5:45 pm
Reply

I see former NKT head honcho gen la Khyenrab gives his contact details on Facebook as ‘meditate in Singapore.com’ what a strange coincidence
13

Khedrup on May 12, 2014 at 7:22 pm
Reply

I posted to the Dalai Lama Truth facebook page about people being fired from NKT for not supporting the Anti-DL protests. People said they had no idea what I was talking about, so I posted the letter where KG fires Lucy James and states it is because of lack of support for the protests. Now I have been banned from the facebook page.
- 14
  
  john6747 on May 13, 2014 at 8:47 am
  Reply
  
  Not surprised by that one.
  
  The New Kadampa Truth is an oxymoron. To recall a biblical event, I can hear a cock crowing at every denial.
  
  The mushroom technique comes to mind. Keep everyone in the dark and throw shit at them every so often.
15

Joanne on May 13, 2014 at 9:55 am
Reply

Dorje, I think if you had a room full of scholars specializing in Tibetan history, you would have a room full of different opinions about the Great Fifth! One distinctive feature of the Shugden viewpoint that I’ve noticed is that they don’t take this into account. They view Tibetan history through one narrow dialogue, without seeing the complex, multi-dimensional, broad reality of the cultural, religious, geographical and historical context. Like the Chinese, rewriting history to suit their needs.
- 16
  
  Dorje on May 14, 2014 at 7:23 pm
  Reply
  
  Indeed, Joanne, I just felt that the interview was a little simplistic and didn’t take the complexity into account. I think just portraying the issue as tolerant/inclusive vs sectarian/bigoted misses the issues like the role of the Sakyas in the protector or Pabongkha’s propagation of other Sakya practices. How the Nyingma are viewed in the minds of high Gelug clerics is also very significant in the protector dispute. Its role developed into punishing Gelugpas who develop faith in the Nyingma tradition. This was explicit in Pabongkha, Trijang and Dzemey’s teachings and it all blew up just as HH Dalai Lama was following his Fifth and Thirteenth predecessors by doing just that. Of course, everyone is entitled to hold whatever opinion they like but I think scholars should be able to back them up and take any glaring contradictions into account rather than just omitting to mention them.
  
  BTW, I’ve got nothing against the Great Fifth and cannot begin to comprehend the activities of great bodhisattvas. I just don’t think we should ignore aspects of his activity that don’t fit in with our theories.
17

john6747 on May 13, 2014 at 10:02 am
Reply

Just read this.
http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/why-so-vulgar/

My reply.

‘the Tibetan leadership is always right, and their opinion overrides everyone else’s’

Sounds like the NKT.

‘When the Tibetans fled into exile in the 1950s, they carried this attitude with them and over the years, little has changed. Although they have since been exposed to various cultures, ideologies and beliefs, they have also discovered that not everyone agrees with their views about religion and politics, and that their views on religion, if compared to democratic countries, are quite archaic and outdated. Unused to dealing with a difference of opinions, many have resorted to reacting the only way they know how’.

‘This language reflects the violent tendencies of the Tibetan people….’

Hang on, I thought the majority of Dorje Shugden practitioners were Tibetan?

‘that their views on religion, if compared to democratic countries, are quite archaic and outdated’.

I thought you were protesting against a so called ban on a tradition dating back hundreds of years.

‘When Dorje Shugden devotees try to raise awareness about the lack of religious freedom and how they cannot practice their beliefs without discrimination, Tibetans react with vulgarities and threats.’

‘Tibetans react with vulgarities and threats’.

‘This language reflects the violent tendencies of the Tibetan people….’

‘….. their views about religion and politics, and that their views on religion, if compared to democratic countries, are quite archaic and outdated.’

Ouch!

If the above are really your views on the Tibetan people and they are based on truth then how would you expect them to behave any differently?

Your comments here invalidate anything which follows.
18

Khedrup on May 13, 2014 at 11:27 am
Reply

This is just racism pure and simple. Goading and provoking the Tibetans, and then when they respond playing the frightened white victim, afraid of the “violent” person of colour.
19

Joanne on May 13, 2014 at 2:29 pm
Reply

Yes, Khedrup, I’ve seen a lot of racism in these discussions. It’s very disturbing.
20

Sam Hoff on May 13, 2014 at 5:51 pm
Reply

Tenpel,

Can you explain to the NKT that the Dalai Lama does not control the government of India?

They don’t seem to understand such a simple point.
- 21
  
  tenpel on May 13, 2014 at 7:31 pm
  Reply
  
  If you follow a type of conspiracy theory, it is hard to see things in a more realistic light … this is just how it is. For some people conspiracy theories are important from different perspectives:
  
  … where events are interpreted from the viewpoint of the occult, and groups are identified as “secret societies.”
  
  According to Geoffrey Cubitt, “A conspiracy myth tells the supposedly true and supposedly historical story of a conspiracy and of the events and disastrous effects to which it has given rise.” Daniel Pipes observes that “a conspiracy theory is the fear of a non-existent conspiracy. The German term Verschwörungsmythos (‘myth of conspiracy’) serves better than the English conspiracy theory, for it points more directly to the imaginary nature of the content.”
  
  Conspiracy myths arise in times of radical social upheaval and sustained agitation. In this situation of insecurity and problems of orientation, conspiracy myths are a method of mastering crises and a simple cognitive tool, which “makes it easier to reduce dissonant perceptions, and allows one to reduce complexity,” and there is a great “power of attraction resulting from the unburdening and reducing function in a dualist view of the world.” Even though the act of revelation itself does not contain actual blueprints for solutions, it is an unburdening. Thus in an effort to give a comprehensible explanation of the threatening situation of the rise to power of Hitler and National Socialism, the pivotal emotional experience of a superpower, and the need to exonerate one’s own failure, Hitler and the Nazi ruling elite are demonized—since one is powerless against demons.
  
  However, the mysterious and secret nature of the alleged activities is one of the reasons for the attraction and power of conspiracy myths. The characteristic features of conspiracy myths are a dualistic world view and occultism: nothing is accidental and appearances deceive. Conspiracists adopt the role of champions of a duped public. “Any conspiracy theory involves a claim to provide access to a reality which is by its nature, hidden” and there is an occult force operating behind the seemingly real outward forms of political life.
  
  The image of a “The False Dalai Lama” see www. falsedalailama. com or “The true Dalai Lama” see www. truedalailama. com, which the NKT creates, has in my taste a strong touch of conspiracy theory: an omnipotent evil ruler that is the cause of all suffering, and who has duped the world. The conspiracy theorists, as any felt elite group, must now educate the world about “the truth”:
  
  A Great Deception
  
  A courageous revelation of the truth about the Dalai Lamas, past and present.
  
  So much for Shangri-la and a “holy” political leader. A Great Deception is a compelling account of Tibetan history and the activities of the current 14th Dalai Lama that stand in shocking contrast to popular perceptions.
  
  The aims of this book are religious – to end the Dalai Lama’s illegal ban on a mainstream Buddhist practice. However, to get to the heart of this human rights issue and to gain the support of those who can help resolve it, A Great Deception follows knotted threads of political ambitions, hypocrisy, subterfuge and betrayal to unravel the popular mythology that surrounds the iconic Dalai Lama of Tibet.
  
  Read the book. Check the facts. Stop being fooled.
  
  What they don’t see is, that the Dalai Lama doesn’t have the power they project, he doesn’t even have ANY power over the protesters, the person who has power over the protesters is their “root guru”, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso.
  - 22
    
    tenpel on May 13, 2014 at 7:59 pm
    Reply
    
    Oh Buddha, how ugly and nasty. Just for the sake of this post I googled their website name and captured a menu item at the true dalai lama site about self-immolations and got this piece of a lie:
    
    For example, in 1998, a Tibetan man named Thupten Ngodup burned himself alive in New Delhi, initiating the chain of suicides that continues to this day. The Dalai Lama visited Ngodup in the hospital, showing approval and support for his actions. If that wasn’t enough, after Ngodup’s death the Dalai Lama built a statue of him in Dharamsala. People continue to visit and worship this statue. He has been made a hero and saint to all of the Dalai Lama’s followers.
    
    In reality, the Dalai Lama stopped the hunger strike (that preceded the self immolation of Ngodup). The Dalai Lama personally wrote to each of the eight hunger-strikers, urging them to give up their hunger strike. And the self immolation of Thubten Ngodup (but not during his dying process!), was also criticized by the Dalai Lama. He also didn’t build or ordered to build this statue, this was done by Tibetans on their own free will. The Dalai Lama said:
    
    “Als Buddhist bin ich zwar gegen Aktionen wie diesen Hungerstreik und diese Selbstverbrennung, doch wie kann ich sie verhindern? Wenn so etwas Schule macht, kann das eines Tages zu wirklicher Gewalt führen …” (Tibet Forum 1/98)
    
    As a Buddhist, I am indeed against actions such as this hunger strike and this self-immolation, but how can I prevent it? If this becomes the accepted thing than this may lead one day to real violence … (Tibet Forum 1/98)
    
    And then the Dalai Lama draws (as usual) fine distinctions (which are not in the realm of religious extremists’ ways of thinking), when he says:
    
    Although I disagree with their method, I do admire the motivation and determination of these Tibetans. They were prepared to die not for their selfish ends, but for the rights of six million Tibetans and the survival of their culture.
    - 23
      
      Joanne on May 13, 2014 at 10:25 pm
      Reply
      
      Exactly, Tenzin– that’s just how it works. According to the NKT/Shugdenpas, every action done by a Tibetan has been initiated, endorsed, funded and ordered by the Dalai Lama. They truly believe he’s a living Buddha, able to manifest in infinite ways!
      
      But how quickly and easily a harmful lie can spread–!
24

john6747 on May 21, 2014 at 6:05 pm
Reply

‘To formulate eugenics policies it is necessary, first to label certain physical or mental traits and social behaviours as aberrant and then to assume that they are transmitted biologically from parents to their children. Such beliefs can easily be exploited for ideological and political ends. An extreme example is the invention of drapetomania, an hereditary mental disease, said to be prevalent among black slaves in the south, which manifests itself as an irresistible urge to run away from their masters.’
25

john6747 on May 21, 2014 at 6:09 pm
Reply

The above is in the book Exploding the Gene Myth Hubbard & Wald 1990.
It is descriptive of a view regarding the African slave in America.
26

In February 2008 900 Buddhist Shugden monks were made homeless by the Dalai Lama? | Tibetan Buddhism :: Struggling With Diffi·Cult Issues on September 26, 2014 at 11:21 pm
Reply

[…] Dorje Shugden Controversy: Protests Against The Dalai Lama – An Interview With Tibetologist Thierr… 2014/05/11 […]

	Stardust on Whitewashing, Dishonesty &…
	tenpel on Whitewashing, Dishonesty &…
	anonymous on Whitewashing, Dishonesty &…
	Alan J.W. on Whitewashing, Dishonesty &…
	tenpel on Karmapa Agrees to Multimillion…
	anonymous on Whitewashing, Dishonesty &…
	Tim on Whitewashing, Dishonesty &…
	Stardust on Karmapa Agrees to Multimillion…

Rate this:

Share this:

Like this:

Related