New Kadampa Tradition / Kadampa Buddhism & Western Shugden Society

Shedding Light on NKT‐IKBU, WSS and Shugden

Resource Blog – Overview

leave a comment »

800px-blue_sky_prayer_flags_tibet

New Kadampa Tradition (NKT-IKBU) aka Kadampa Buddhism

Western Shugden Society (WSS)

Dorje Shugden Controversy

Religious Persecution?

The XIVth Dalai Lama

Mixed Topics

Written by tenpel

January 7, 2011 at 7:52 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition, Religion

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

The Shugden Dispute Represents a Battleground of Views on What is Meant by Religious and Cultural Freedom. (Mills)

with one comment

The Dalai Lama is trying to modernize the Tibetans’ political vision and trying to undermine the factionalism. He has the dilemma of the liberal: do you tolerate the intolerant? Paul Williams [1]

At the moment the anonymous Western Shugden Society (WSS) with no legal office has started a Worldwide Press and Internet Campaign against the Dalai Lama. One may wonder who is behind that group and what are the facts?

Until now no investigative press article has explored this issue thoroughly. Most of the media just report what the Press speaker, Kelsang Pema, close disciple of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, founder of the British-based New Kadampa Tradition, states to them. It may be that the Press are overstrained with the complex spiritual issues involved and possibly they are a bit surprised, as many others are too.

Here are some well informed and interesting websites and articles which unlock the secrets of the WSS.

Two scholarly papers on the Dorje Shugden Controversy:

Three articles by the Dzogchen Community Italy on the Shugden Controversy:

Two articles about the first Worldwide Media Campaign of the New Kadampa Tradition (1996-1998) against the Dalai Lama:

Although these Western followers of Dorje Shugden try to give the impression that the Tibetans support them, and they blog and post under Tibetan names in the Internet, it can be doubted if the picture they draw is in any way correct. The situation of the present ‘misinformation campaign’ is not very different from that which started 12 years ago under the label Shugden Supporters Community (SSC), another front-group of the New Kadampa Tradition. The Independent wrote: “The view from inside the Shugden Supporters Community was almost a photographic negative of everything the outside world believes about Tibet and the Dalai Lama.”[2] Regarding the facts SSC (NKT) spread, the Independent said: “It was a powerful indictment, flawed only by the fact that almost everything I was told in the Lister house was untrue.”[2]

The Tibetan Deepak Thapa wrote the following article and it seems to be the perfect mirror of the actual situation as well:

  • It’s Dalai Lama vs Shugden by Deepak Thapa (Sept 1996) – PDF-copy

Gareth Sparham, a former Buddhist monk and now Lecturer at the University of Michigan explained in 1996

Cross-Cultural Confusion

According to Press speaker Kelsang Pema, Dorje Shugden ‘practice’ “is a simple prayer that encourages people to develop pure minds of love, peace and compassion.”[3]

But according to researcher Mills: “in defence of the deity’s efficacy as a protector, [the Yellow Book] named 23 government officials and high lamas that had been assassinated using the deity’s powers”[4], and researcher Mumford states, Dorje Shugden is “extremely popular, but held in awe and feared among Tibetans because he is highly punitive.”[5]

Moreover at the peak of the conflict in exile, in February 1997, three Tibetan Buddhist monks, opponents of the Shugden practice, including the Dalai Lama’s close friend and confidant, seventy-year-old Lobsang Gyatso (the principal of the Institute of Buddhist Dialectics), were brutally murdered in Dharamsala, India, the Tibetan capital in exile. The murdered monks were repeatedly stabbed and cut up in a manner resembling a ritual exorcism. The Indian police believe the murders were carried out by monks loyal to Shugden, and that the perpetrators are now under the protection of the Chinese government. The Indian police have accused Lobsang Chodak, 36, and Tenzin Chozin, 40, of stabbing Lobsang Gyatso and two of his students. In 2007 Interpol has issued wanted notices for Lobsang Chodak and Tenzin Chozin. According to a disciple of Geshe Lobsang Gyatso, before he was killed, Lobsang Gyatso had to face many death threats, but refused any personal security.

for more see:

There is a lot the Western Shugden Society do not tell to the public. Why?

Researcher Makransky states about the cross-cultural confusion in the Dorje Shugden issue:

A stunning recent example of this: some Tibetan monks who now introduce Westerners to practices centred on a native Tibetan deity, without informing them that one of its primary functions has been to assert hegemony over rival sects! The current Dalai Lama, seeking to combat the ancient, virulent sectarianisms operative in such quarters, has strongly discouraged the worship of the “protector” deity known as Dorje Shugden, because one of its functions has been to force conformity to the dGe lugs pa sect (with which the Dalai Lama himself is most closely associated) and to assert power over competing sects. Western followers of a few dGe lugs pa monks who worship that deity, lacking any critical awareness of its sectarian functions in Tibet, have recently followed the Dalai Lama to his speaking engagements to protest his strong stance (for non-sectarianism) in the name of their “religious freedom” to promulgate, now in the West, an embodiment of Tibetan sectarianism. If it were not so harmful to persons and traditions, this would surely be one of the funniest examples of the cross-cultural confusion that lack of critical reflection continues to create.[6]

According to Thubten Jigme Norbu, the Dalai Lama’s brother:

The worship of Dorje Shugden is not a religion at all. It is a cult.[7]

According to Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, founder of the New Kadampa Tradition:

We believe that Dorje Shugden is a Buddha who is also a dharmapala. Problems have arisen because of someone’s view.[8]

Check it out yourself!

Notes

[1] The Guardian, London, 6 July 1996, Shadow boxing on the path to Nirvana by Madeleine Bunting (PDF-Archive)
[2] The Independent, London, 15 July 1996, Battle of the Buddhists by Andrew Brown, (PDF-Archive)
[3] BBC.co.uk, 27 May 2008, Protest at Dalai Lama prayer ban
[4] Mills, Martin (2003) “This turbulent Priest – Contesting religious rights and the state in the Tibetan Shugden Controversy”, p. 65, Routledge
[5] Mumford 1989: 125-126
[6] Makransky, John J. (2000). “Buddhist Theology: Critical Reflections by Contemporary Buddhist Scholars”, p. 20, Routledge
[7] Lopez 1998a, p. 67
[8] Lopez 1998: An Interview With Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, Tricycle, Spring 1998

last update: Dec 23, 2009
(broken links were corrected or PDF archives were added)

Written by tenpel

June 18, 2008 at 10:09 am

Posted in Fundamentalism, Western Shugden Society - News

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Australian Sangha Association Statement

with 3 comments

Australian Sangha Association statement regarding protests at the teachings of HH the Dalai Lama

The ASA wishes to express its dismay at the conduct of robed members of the New Kadampa Tradition, Western Shugden Society and associated organizations during the teachings given by HH the Dalai Lama on 11-15 June 2008 at Olympic Stadium, Sydney, Australia.

The Dalai Lama’s teachings were attended by over 6000 people who came to be inspired by the peaceful and harmonious message of Buddhism. Instead they were met by a large, organized group of protesters dressed in monastic robes shouting slogans. Noisy public demonstrations such as these are not appropriate behaviour for monks or nuns and have brought Buddhism in this country into disrepute.

The ASA recognizes there is a difference of opinion with the Dalai Lama on various issues. It is the right of NKT and WSS members to disagree with the Dalai Lama’s opinions but their disagreement should be expressed in a peaceful, respectful and reasonable manner.

Therefore, in the spirit of Dharma and in accordance with Buddhist principles the ASA would encourage the NKT and WSS protesters to request forgiveness from the Dalai Lama for their behaviour and in future to conduct themselves with humility and restraint.

For details see: Australian Sangha Association Statement by ASA

Written by tenpel

July 21, 2008 at 11:11 pm

Posted in Buddhism

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Academic Research regarding Shugden Controversy & New Kadampa Tradition

with 12 comments

To promote understanding, the following is a list of published scholarly papers and academic research about the Dorje Shugden Controversy and the New Kadampa Tradition, listed in order of pertinence and importance:

The Dorje Shugden Controversy

  • “The Shuk-Den Affair: Origins of a Controversy” (1998) by Georges Dreyfus, Professor of Religion at Williams College, published in Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies(Vol., 21, no. 2 [Fall 1998]:227-270)
    • This continues to be the most foundational and influential work written on Dorje Shugden to date, having been cited by nearly every work of scholarship to discuss the deity or the NKT since it was published. This article is so influential that it has itself become the center of some controversy, being used on multiple sides of the Shugden debate to either buttress or dispute competing claims. For instance, opponents of Shugden practice—including the Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama—cite Dreyfus’s article to support their position that Dorje Shugden (Dolgyal) is a worldly spirit. Proponents of the deity, meanwhile, suggest that Dreyfus is being biased and attempt to discredit his arguments via ad hominem attacks. Dreyfus himself has refrained from entering into the controversy. Very few have focused solely on the merits of Dreyfus’s arguments, and so an earnest reevaluation of his article and its historical propriety is still underway.
  • “rDo rje shugs ldan” ([1956] 2002) by Réne de Nebesky-Wojkowitz, in Oracles and Demons of Tibet: The Cult and Iconography of the Tibetan Protective Deities, published by Paljor Publications, 134-144.
    • This is the first prolonged discussion of Dorje Shugden in a Western scholarly source.  Since it was written in the 1950s, its material predates the contemporary controversy.
  • “Monastic Politics and the Local State in China: Authority and Autonomy in an Ethnically Tibetan Prefecture” (2005) by Ben Hillman, in China Journal, no. 54, 29-51.
    • This is an anthropological analysis of the tensions surrounding Dorje Shugden practice at an unnamed Tibetan monastery.
  • “Politics of Religion: The Worship of Shugden Among the Tibetans” (2002) by R.P. Mitra, in Indian Anthropologist(Vol. 32, nos. 1 and 2:47-58).
    • Explores the practice of Shugden worship among Tibetans in India, as well as the effects of the Dalai Lama’s ban.
  • Rigumi, Wokar Tso. 2010. “He Who Shall Not Be Named: the Shugden Taboo and Tibetan National Identity in Exile.” In New Views of Tibetan Culture. David Templeman, ed. Caulfield: Monash University Press, pp.93-102.
    • This is perhaps one of the least useful articles published on Shugden in recent years; it is included here only for the sake of comprehensiveness. First, half of the article simply rehashes the claims made in Dreyfus 1998 without really adding anything or reflecting on the material. The other half provides an interesting but otherwise poorly developed model of Shugden as an example of cultural memory. Second, throughout the article it’s clear that Rigumi either does not read Tibetan or chooses not to for her research. Nor does she appear to be well-versed in Tibetan history. This is most obvious when she consistently makes the rather egregious mistake of confusing Drakpa Gyeltsen (1619-1656) with the Third Panchen Lama (Penden Yeshe, 1738-1780) (see her pp.95-96). I [Christopher Paul Bell] suspect that this comes from a basic misreading of a line in Dreyfus 1998 (p.229): “…Drak-pa Gyel-tsen, who was designated…as the third reincarnation of Pan-chen So-nam-drak-ba”—the later referring to the famed early 16th-century Geluk master who had served at various times as abbot of all three major Gelukpa monasteries. Presumably Rigumi does not realize that “Panchen” is a reverential title also found outside the lineage of the Panchen Lamas. Finally, while it is at most a minor annoyance, it would have been nice had Rigumi actually explained at some point that her article’s title is a not-so-veiled reference to Voldemort, the main villain in the Harry Potter book series. This is all the more confused by the fact that she spends almost a page discussing how many Tibetan refugees living in India refer to Shugden as “Gabbar Singh,” a well-known Bollywood villain (p.98). This is an amusing aside, but not much more than that. Overall, this is a poor piece of scholarship and it offers very little to advance the discourse on Shugden.
  • 西藏多麥區域研究凶天小組 [Dolgyal Research Committee of the Central Tibetan Administration]. 2010. 護法神vs厲鬼: 西藏護法神的探究 [Dharma Protector vs. Malicious Spirit: Investigation of a Tibetan Dharma Protector.]. 見悲靑增格西等 [Geshe Jampal Chozin], trans. Taipei: 雪域出版社 [Snowland Publishers].
    • This book is a Chinese translation of the Tibetan text, Dol rgyal gyi byung rim dang rnyog gleng la dpyad pa g.ya’ sel me long (The Mirror that Clears Away Dirt: an Investigation into the History and Controversy of Dolgyal) published by the Dolgyal Research Committee of the Central Tibetan Administration in Dharamsala, 2006. This text purports to be a comprehensive monograph of the Committee’s position on the Shugden issue. This Chinese edition was translated by Geshe Jampal Chozin, a head teacher of the Tibet Religious Foundation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama (達賴喇嘛西藏宗教基金會) based in Taipei, Taiwan.  As you can see, the original title is not maintained in the Chinese translation, which opted for a more provocative one.  It’s also interesting to note that the Chinese translation for Dolgyal (凶天, xiongtian) is not exact, but is a rather generic expression meaning “fierce deity.” This book was published in Taiwan but is also available in Hong Kong, and likely elsewhere in East Asia.  This indicates that such translated materials on the Shugden issue are becoming more available to a wider East Asian audience.

Brief mentions:

In 1998 CESNUR suggested:

“for the background of this controversy, a good starting point is the scholarly paper by David Kay, “The New Kadampa Tradition and the Continuity of Tibetan Buddhism in Transition“, Journal of Contemporary Religion 12:3 (October 1997), 277-293. Essential for understanding the controversy is vol. VII, n. 3 (Spring 1998) of Tricycle The Buddhist Review, including a scheme of the principal players on the controversy (p. 59), the article by Stephen Batchelor “Letting Daylight into Magic: The Life and Times of Dorje Shugden” (pp. 60-66) and “Two Sides of the Same God” by Donald S. Lopez, Jr. (pp. 67-69), introducing Lopez’s interviews of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (pp. 70-76) and of Thubten Jigme Norbu, the elder brother of the Dalai Lama (pp. 77-82). Also recommended is Donald S. Lopez, Jr.’s book “Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West”, Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1998 (see pages 188-196 on Dorje Shugden).”

“Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West” by Lopez is reviewed by Tsering Shakya and in 2005 Dreyfus responded in an essay, “Are We Prisoners of Shangri-la? Orientalism, Nationalism, and the Study of Tibet” to it. Dreyfus’ essay “examines the consequences of Said’s critique of orientalism for Tibetan studies, particularly in relation to Lopez’s claim that we are all ‘prisoners of Shangri-la.’” Lopez’ “controversial work” “has been refuted by Tsering Shakya and by Germano, who points out Lopez’ latent conservative interpretation of Tibetan culture and history and instead points to the dialectic of autochthonous creativity and inculturation of exogenous ideas so typical of Tibet’s cultural history.” (Dodin, Räther 2001:410)

Martin Brauen‘s book “The Dalai Lamas: A Visual History” (2005) – reviewed by Jose Cabezon (PDF) – includes an essay by Georges Dreyfus, pp. 172-79, analysing the stance of the XIV. Dalai Lama towards modernity and Buddhism in relation to the propitiation of the protective deity Dorje Shugden: “From Protective Deities to International Stardom: An Analysis of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s Stance towards Modernity and Buddhism“.

In 2007 Lindsay McCune completed her master’s thesis at Florida State University “TALES OF INTRIGUE FROM TIBET’S HOLY CITY: THE HISTORICAL UNDERPINNINGS OF A MODERN BUDDHIST CRISIS”. According to McCune: “Dreyfus’s work [The Shuk-Den Affair: Origins of a Controversy] has been the most thorough. It asks the most insightful questions and employs many diverse means of answering these queries…”. However, the main aim of McCune’s thesis is to critique Dreyfus’s assessment of the 17th-century history regarding Drakpa Gyeltsen and her conclusion is that it has little historical foundation. The essay by Dreyfus is used in different academic research and it is also listed in bibliographies of reputable scholars. Prof. Geoffrey Samuel also referred to it in his expert testimony: The Recognition of Incarnate Lamas in Tibetan Buddhism and the Role of the Dalai Lama (*.DOC) for a court case.

Furthermore there is a short piece by Prof. Paul Williams: A quick note on Dorje Shugden (rDo rje shugs ldan) (1996) and a thesis by Michael Nau (Miami University) ‘Killing for the Dharma: An Analysis of the Shugden Deity and Violence in Tibetan Buddhism’ (2007).

At the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion in November 2009 Christopher Paul Bell, University of Virginia, presented a paper Dorjé Shukden: The Conflicting Narratives and Constructed Histories of a Tibetan Protector Deity in the context of the ‘Tibetan and Himalayan Religions Group‘. Bell has already explored Dorje Shugden in relation to the section on oracles in his master’s thesis (Florida State University, 2006) Tsiu Marpo The Career of a Tibetan Protector Deity (PDF). However, his mention of Shugden is incredibly brief, only citing Nebesky-Wojkowitz’s description of a Shukden oracle to discuss Tibetan oracles in general. In Dec. 2009 Klaus Löhrer, a student of Tibetology at the University of Kopenhagen, wrote a paper on the democratic implications of the Shugden controversy called Pluralism the Hard Way: Governance Implications of the Dorje Shugden Controversy and the Democracy- and Rights Rhetoric Pertaining to It.

Other scholarly sources covering range of Dorje Shugden Controversy or the nature and function of Dorje Shugden include:

  • ‘Himalayan Dialogue : Tibetan Lamas and Gurung Shamans in Nepal’, 1989, by Stan Royal Mumford, pages 125-130, 261-264
  • ‘Civilized Shamans: Buddhism in Tibetan Societies’, 1993, by Geoffrey Samuel, pages 545-548, 550, 605
  • ‘Oracles and Demons of Tibet – The Cult and Iconography of the Tibetan Protective Deities’, 1996, by Rene De Nebesky-Wojkowitz, pages 4, 20, 134-144, 318, 343, 414, 418, 421, 432-439, 442, 445, 528
  • The Bhutan Abbot of Ngor: Stubborn Idealist with a Grudge against Shugs-ldan by David Jackson, published by Amnye Machen Institute, 2001 in Lungta #14, Review by Mark Turin (excerpt see Tricycle Blog comment # 891)
  • ‘Tibet’ (1981) by Chime Radha Rinpoche, in Oracles and Divination by Michael Loewe, Carmen Blacker, Lama Chime Radha, London: George Allen & Unwin, 3-37

See also

New Kadampa Tradition

David N. Kay’s research “Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation – The New Kadampa Tradition (NKT), and the Order of Buddhist Contemplatives (OBC)” (2004) was reviewed by

There is a Book Synopsis and Book Extract available.

In 1995 Prof. Geoffrey Samuel published Tibetan Buddhism as a World Religion: Global Networking and its Consequences curtly discussing NKT’s split from FPMT (see The Problem of Stability).

The Guardian article of Bunting, Madeleine (1996), Shadow boxing on the path to Nirvana, is also used in Bluck’s, Kay’s, Lopez’s and other’s academic research.

In 2006 Routledge Curzon published Prof. Robert Bluck‘s “British Buddhism” which includes some pages about the NKT. In general his interviewees denied or rejected the criticism NKT is faced with. Bluck suggested a number of different angles from which the NKT can be viewed:

  • The NKT could be viewed from outside as a movement aiming at what Titmus (1999: 91) called ‘conversion and empire-building’, with a dogmatic and superior viewpoint, ‘narrow-minded claims to historical significance’, intolerance of other traditions and ‘strong identification with the leader or a book’.
  • A more scholarly external view might emphasize instead the enthusiasm, firm beliefs, urgent message and ‘charismatic leadership’ which Barker (1999: 20) saw as characteristic of many NRMs.
  • An alternative picture from inside the movement would include a wish to bring inner peace to more people, based on a pure lineage of teaching and practice, with faith and confidence in an authentic spiritual guide.

About the possible ways how to picture the NKT, Bluck said: “Our choice of interpretation may depend on how we engage with the other viewpoint, as well as the evidence itself, and until recently the NKT’s supporters and critics have largely ignored each other.”

Some non-academic sources

Other Sources

Pico Iyer discusses the Shugden issue and some details in his book The Open Road: The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama (pages 135-139)—Iyer’s book was reviewed by Robert Barnett and Patrick French. Jeff Watt from the Sakya Resource Guide explains the point of view of the Sakya Tradition: Do Sakyas rely upon Dorje Shugden?

As researcher Mills puts it: “The Shugden dispute represents a battleground of views on what is meant by religious and cultural freedom.” The point of view of the Dalai Lama can be found here and the point of view of Shugden followers can be found here. There is also an Essay “Exiled from Exile” by Bernis, however it is neither used in any academic research nor has it been published by an academic publisher or newspaper, but can be found at the website of the Dorje Shugden Devotee’s Charitable & Religious Society, Majnu Ka Tilla, Delhi 54, India.

A book by investigative journalist Raimondo Bultrini ‘IL DEMONE E IL DALAI LAMA’ (2008) includes details about the political and ideological background of the Dorje Shugden Controversy and the main players of that controversy; the book is written from an investigative perspective. An unpublished English translation ‘Under the Sway of the Demon’ exists. A summary of Bultrini’s investigation can be read in A Spirit of the XVII Century. One academic asked to mention Trinley Kalsang’s website Dorje Shugden History. The Department of Religion & Culture of the Central Tibetan Administration (TGIE) published in 1989 a work called A Brief Opposition to Shugden.

UK journalist Isabel Hilton wrote in The Search for the Panchen Lama (p. 297-298):

“It was not only inside Tibet, however, that the Dalai Lama’s religious status came under attack. He also had a number of serious difficulties in the exile world, which began, for the first time, to threaten to tarnish his image.

As far as the outside world was concerned, the trouble came to light through the activities of a Gelugpa dissident, Geshe Kelsang, who had left India to live in the UK. After a controversial passage he gained control of a spiritual centre in Cumbria in the north of England, from where he launched a campaign that appeared to be aimed at destroying the reputation and authority of the Dalai Lama.

The substance of the campaign was the right to worship a particular deity called Dorje Shugden. Dorje Shugden was a popular deity for many Tibetans. He had the reputation of being able to impart enormous good fortune to his devotees but also of being extremely vindictive and jealous. One of the Dalai Lama’s tutors had encouraged the Dalai Lama himself to worship Dorje Shugden, but the Dalai Lama had decided, as a result of several dreams, that the deity was harmful. He gave up the practice himself, then banned it in all institutions that were connected with his person. This included Gelugpa monasteries and, of course, the government in exile.

There was some resistance to this edict in the monasteries in India, but the most visible and virulent campaign against it was conducted in exile on the direction of the Cumbrian centre. From Cumbria came a stream of anti-Dalai Lama invective which accused him of violating the religious freedoms of Dorje Shugden followers. It was a damaging charge against the man who had spent forty years pleading his country and his religion’s case.

The origins of the Dorje Shugden dispute lie deep in Gelugpa politics and the controversy is too complicated to explore here. But the significance of it pertains to sectarianism in Tibetan Buddhism: the defenders of Dorje Shugden are characterized as Gelugpa fundamentalists who regard the Dalai Lama’s association with other Buddhist sects – an association greatly strengthened in exile – as a betrayal of the Gelugpa. By insisting on worshipping the deity, they attack the Dalai Lama’s authority as a true Gelugpa leader.

It was a controversy that the Chinese, of course, were happy to publicize inside Tibet, and although no direct connection between the Dorje Shugden campaign and the Chinese government can be proved, there is no doubt that it served Beijing’s purposes well. In February 1997, for instance, the magazine China’s Tibet published a two-page article in which the Dalai Lama was ridiculed as a ‘self-styled believer in religious freedom’ and attached for his rejection of what the author described as an ‘innocent guardian of Tibetan Buddhist doctrine’. The Dalai Lama had, the article claimed, ’declared a virtual war against a holy spirit of the Gelug sect’.”

Last edited on May 23, 2011
(Some of the content, annotations, and the order of the list was added or modified by Christopher Bell.)

Written by tenpel

July 24, 2008 at 1:48 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Western Shugden Society – Review and Present Situation

with 10 comments

The New Kadampa Tradition started in the midst of April 2008 a highly professional world wide media campaign under the guise of the front group Western Shugden Society, which has “no leader nor registered office”. The activities are “against the Dalai Lama” and have the aim “to stop his evil actions” of “inflicting terrible human rights abuses on his own people and interfering with the religious freedom of thousands and thousands of people around the world.”. WSS/NKT portray the Dalai Lama as a “liar”, “hypocrite”, and “21st Century Dictator” who is “cruel and evil”. Accusing him of being ‘The Saffron Robed Muslim´ who has throughout his life “pretended to be a Buddhist holy being giving Buddhist teachings” while having “stolen” the teachings “from Trijang Rinpoche.” (see The Tibetan Situation Today)

WSS/NKT demands:

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

WSS state many points which from their point of view are proof of a systematic “religious persecution” by the Dalai Lama.

These points include that six Shugden monks were expelled from their monasteries. According to WSS this has been done “to fulfil the Dalai Lama’s wish”. According to a monk from Sera, Shugden monks forced events and their actions led to different disputes, which couldn’t be solved. Finally the monastery decided to expell the Shugden monks after they recognized that the preceding Sera administration’s “live and let live approach” failed.

According to WSS “The true creator of all these problems is the Dalai Lama” and they demand:

  1. “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.
  2. 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″

Obviously HH the Dalai Lama didn’t fulfil these wishes. So the protests of WSS started 22nd April 2008 at Colgate University, USA.

To find out the dynamics of the conflicts, what happened exactly, and to get the complete picture of events will take a lot of time and effort to thoroughly investigate the events in India. Although there are some records and eye witness reports from both sides, they are still one perspective.

According to WSS:

Using his people like an army, the Dalai Lama has destroyed all Shugden Temples and shrines, caused millions of people to experience inhumane situations and unbearable feelings of pain, and expelled all Shugden practitioners from the Tibetan community. He has separated innocent people from their families, friends and community. As a result of these actions, thousands of Shugden practitioners have been forced to become refugees for the second time in their life as they try to escape such inhumane actions that exist in this modern world by seeking exile in other countries. Now, as recently as 8th February 2008, the Dalai Lama has expelled 900 monks from their monasteries. On January 9th 2008 he was invited to inaugurate a Prayer Hall for a large monastic community in South India. At this spiritual event he publicly announced a “Referendum on the practice of Dolgyal (Shugden)” and proposed a collection of votes on this issue with a deadline on 8th February 2008. Since when did the action of prayer become an object for political vote? And since when did voting become a “yes” or “no” game with colored sticks with no middle/neutral option for abstaining? Well, this is precisely the nature of the referendum held by the Dalai Lama and the direct cause for these 900 innocent monks being expelled from their monasteries in recent days.

According to a Bhikshuni:

“During the recent teachings in Drepung by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, His Holiness mentioned the issue of Shugden a number of times, and this time there was much more concern around the issue. His Holiness the Dalai Lama said (Geshe Dorje Damdrul was translating):

‘The government of China is funding lamas who support Shugden in order to create difficulties for me, especially they (the Chinese government) give financial support to these lamas if they cultivate Shugden. China is very critical of me and the Indian government is being pushed against me by saying that His Holiness the Dalai Lama is restricting religious freedom by saying you cannot practice Shugden. It is my duty to warn people, and then it is up to the individual to decide, so I am not restricting religious freedom.’

His Holiness spoke a lot about the issue and as in the past explained His reasons for taking this stand.

His Holiness has asked for a referendum among the Tibetans regarding 2 questions:

1. Do you want to practice Shugden?
2. Do you want to be a part of a community sharing facilities, materials, doing Dharma activity together where some of the community practice Shugden? (This a concern especially in the monasteries where some monks still practice)

If the vote is more than 60% yes on both, then His Holiness the Dalai Lama said He will not even speak one word on the subject again!”

I feel that the actions taken at Sera were probably a result of what HH said, and it was not HH himself who was behind them. I cannot imagine that HH would ask people to sign statements vowing that they would never practice Shugden, or ask that monks be expelled if they do the practice. It seems he expressed his concerns, and perhaps the monks at Sera took these actions.

According to a Bhikshu:

I then travelled to Sera, where I stayed for a further four weeks. After less than a week of the teachings having ended in Drepung, all Sera monks were summoned to the monastery and those outside the monastery had to return within one month. The day after my arrival in Sera, Je and Me monks were signing the declaration [see above]. This is not just filling in a form, but each monk has to stand up in front of the entire Sera Je or Me assembly and declare that they won’t practice DS and then sign the declaration. This was done in accordance with the practices as outlined in the vinaya (the code of conduct for monks as set forth by Lord Buddha). Those that refuse to sign the declaration will be expelled (Drepung and Ganden had already expelled monks). Sera Je only has 4 monks who are practising and all are in Switzerland (Gonsar Rinpoche etc.), but for Sera Me, it is a much more serious issue as they have a few hundred monks who do the practice.

The day I left Sera, in mid-February, Me was conducting the final declarations, including those of the two kamptsen’s that have monks that do this practice. As DS practitioners have a reputation, there was a large presence of Indian policemen who were searching all the monks before they entered the Dukang. Sera Me’s gekyö (the disciplinarian who was named in the letter by the Western Shugden Society) had reportedly visited the chief of police in Mysore, and given him a list of names of people who should be investigated in case he was murdered (fortunately I am not aware that there has been any violence). But it is a very sad state of affairs when the police feel that they need to come into a monastery and that one of the most senior administrator’s fears that a fellow monk may murder him. Maybe it is time for a decisive conclusion!

Now some months later, Gonsar Rinpoche and his three geshes have been expelled by Je and 300 Me monks have been expelled. Unfortunately the difficulty in Me is continuing as these monks refuse to leave the monastery.

Life has at least returned to some normality. Whilst I was in Sera sojong (the monk’s purification ceremony) wasn’t performed, Me didn’t hold evening debate (there was less than a week’s classes between the end of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s teachings and the start of the Losar holidays), and all other joint activities were cancelled and the Lachi premises were closed. Sojong was only performed for the first time, two weeks ago!

Because all conflicts are solved in monasteries based on the Vinaya, and from the perspective of the welfare of the majority, it will be hard to judge the events without knowing that background. The way to solve conflicts in Tibetan monasteries is well explained by the previous (100th) Ganden Tripa, the Head of the Gelugpas, Lobsang Nyingma Rinpoche:

The Mahayana teachings advocate an altruistic attitude of sacrificing few for the sake of many. Thus why is it not possible for one, who acclaims oneself to be a Mahayana, to stop worshipping these dubious gods and deities for the sake and benefit of the Tibetans in whole and for the well-being of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. In the Vinaya [Buddhist code of discipline], it is held that since a controversial issue is settled by picking the mandatory twig by “accepting the voice of many by the few” the resolution should be accepted by all. As it has been supported by ninety five percent it would be wise and advisable for the remaining five percent to stop worshipping the deity keeping in mind that there exists provisions such as the four Severe Punishments [Nan tur bzhi], the seven Expulsions [Gnas dbyung bdun] and the four Convictions [Grangs gzhug bzhi] in the Vinaya [Code of Discipline].(see Statement Ganden Tripa)

To avoid conflicts and to protect lay people from losing faith in monks and nuns, the Buddha set up different rules which – when kept – avoid disputes and turmoil:

  1. Not Causing a Division within the Sangha (monastic order)
  2. Not Siding with a schismatic (e.g. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso)
  3. Not Causing lay people to lose faith in the Sangha
  4. Heeding advice about one’s offences

It is obvious that these rules are not kept by those few Tibetan monks who support now the WSS/NKT protests. The Vinaya is very different from worldly perspectives. Mixed with a Western context and values a clash, confusion and a loss of faith in Buddhism will be a natural outcome. Buddhists don’t appreciate the harsh abusive language and noisy aggressive public protests of WSS. There are to many points contradicting Buddhist principles and Buddhist ethics.

On the other hand The Time Magazine is of course correct when stating:

What pushes the current allegations into a potential human rights matter is the contention that those who won’t take the oaths are denied monastery I.D. cards that the Tibetan Government in Exile allegedly requires to process visa requests through to the Indian government.[1] (Most of the Tibetan diaspora lives in India.) “Families are being torn apart,” reads Shugden literature.

One week before starting the series of protests at Colgate University until now WSS/NKT has set up a considerable quantity of anonymous websites, the main one in 11 languages, issuing a great number of press releases, “sending out glossy leaflets to selected Buddhists, publicising protests on various websites, giving interviews, and sending letters to Buddhist organisations” (TripleGem), and printing and spreading brochures (e.g. “The Tibetan Situation Today“). A number of YouTube Videos were produced, and in every suited forum the message of WSS has been published. The campaign included also to remove critical information from Wikipedia, using sockpuppets and blocking strategies, removing academic sources from related Wikiepdia articles while adding sources of anonymous websites.

Recently the NKT secretary has set up a new anonymous website, New Kadampa Truth, attacking some Buddhist masters and some Buddhist individuals – who disagree with them – including the ASA and researcher David N. Kay whose academic paper about NKT is portrayed as being “heavily biased” and “who had his own disgruntled history with the NKT”. After NKT members removed the History of NKT, based on Kay’s research, from the NKT-Wikipedia article, the NKT secretary offers now their own understanding of The Emergence of NKT in Britain.

A Buddhist, who is no former member of NKT, concerned about the present development and viewing NKT as a cult, has set up the anonymous website Buddhism under assault. According to him this is his respond to NKT’s “ugly attacks on esteemed Tibetan teachers of Buddhism – The Dalai Lama, Lama Yeshe (died 1984), Lama Zopa, Lama Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche – and 5 other individuals.” A group of former NKT members set up the Blog New Kadampa Truths.

The former Wikepdia articles which were published before April, 15, 2008 have been saved on a separate website. Those interested can see the differences by comparing the articles, reading the talk pages and screening the history of the respective articles.

The Dalai Lama’s or his representatives’ responses to the accusations are:

In a BBC interview, “the Dalai Lama said he had not advocated a ban, but he had stopped the worship of the spirit because it was not Buddhist in nature. The protesters said they wanted to discuss the issue with the Dalai Lama. The exiled Tibetan leader said people were free to protest and it was up to individuals to decide.”

Tsering Tashi, the Dalai Lama’s representative in London, told AFP later that they respected the Shugden Buddhists’ right to protest but said their allegations were untrue. He added, “the group had not made any formal request to meet the Dalai Lama or his representatives.”

The NYT quoted the Dalai Lama: “This is just spirit worship,” he said. “After I read more about it, I realized my mistake and dropped my practice.”, “I think 99 percent of Tibetans follow my practice. Some small portion worship this spirit. I am committed to freedom of speech, freedom of talk. So I say to them, enjoy freedom of talk.”

According to Kasur Tashi Wangdi, the Dalai Lama’s representative in America:

“There’s no suppression! His Holiness made it very clear that according to his own observations over many years—in fact, he himself used to worship Shugden—and over many years of his own experience and observation and investigation, he found that this practice is not according to Buddhist practice. That practice is also bringing in divisions within the Buddhist traditions. The practitioners are attaching more importance than the basic Buddhist practice, and therefore he felt that it’s a practice that he would not approve of and therefore he advised people to not engage in it. But he made it very clear right from the beginning it was up to the individuals. He has a responsibility to explain the negative aspects of it and then it’s up to the individuals to decide on their own. Officially there has never been any repression or denial of rights to practitioners. But after His Holiness’ advice many monastic orders adopted rules and regulations that would not accept practitioners of Shugden worship in their monastic order. The followers have set up their own groups and they are free to function. But it’s in the right of institutions to make their own decisions.” and “There’s some misunderstanding that groups taking their own actions is the policy of the Tibetan government, but it’s not. Institutions take advice and it is within their right to say they do not want Shugden worship. But now if a group of people say they want to set up their own institution because they are different practitioners, which is within their right.” (see Interview with Tashi Wangdi)

According to The Time Magazine:

“Shugden practitioners deny that they are fundamentalist, purist or violent, and have renewed their complaints in light of an intensifying crackdown by the Dalai Lama. He — or people acting in his perceived interests — has expanded the loyalty demand from abbots to monks and even laypeople as far afield as France. In a nod to the Tibetan Government in Exile’s self-definition as a democracy, each monastery has been taking a referendum on Shugden. When the “anti” faction inevitably wins, the monks pledge to renounce Shugden and deny spiritual or material aid to those who hold out. In transcripts that Shugdenpas allege record the Dalai Lama’s comments, he sounds atypically (to the Western ear) authoritarian. “Shugden devotees are growing in your monastery,” he is quoted as snapping at one abbot. “If you are this inept, you had better resign.”

[...]

The problem is that in Tibet most people shun those whom they think the Dalai Lama wants them to shun. The protesters display photos of signs they say have gone up recently in Tibet urging shopkeepers not to do business with tainted monks. They could be written by anybody, but most people assume they know the ultimate author of the signs.

Experts seem to think that there is something to the Shugden allegations. “There is considerable anecdotal evidence to support what they say,” Stephen Batchelor, co-founder of the Sharpham College for Buddhist Studies and Contemporary Enquiry, wrote in an email to TIME, although, he adds, “I have yet to see any hard evidence.” Wrote Donald Lopez of the University of Michigan, “Buddhist monks who apply for an Identity Certificates must also submit a letter form their abbot. I was told that there may have been cases in which, contrary to the policy of the Government-in-Exile, monks who worship Shugden have not been provided with such a letter.”

A witness from Sera and TibetInfoNet portrayed the situation in India from the perspective of what happened in Sera and what lamas and how the PR of China are involved.

The Australian Sangha Association (ASA) issued an official statement, suggesting to the protesters: “Therefore, in the spirit of Dharma and in accordance with Buddhist principles the ASA would encourage the NKT and WSS protesters to request forgiveness from the Dalai Lama for their behaviour and in future to conduct themselves with humility and restraint.” Regarding the status of NKT monks and nuns whether being authentic Buddhist monks and nuns or not, the Australian Sangha Association expressed their opinion “that for NKT members to represent themselves to the public as authentic Buddhist monks and nuns is wrong and misleading.”

NKT published 24 hours later their point of view “NKT monks and nuns are authentic and try to show a good and practical example of service, celibacy and humility for our modern world. Buddha Shakyamuni himself said that the Vinaya should be practiced in accordance with what is most acceptable for society. The NKT is following this advice from Buddha.”. According to NKT ASA is “delivering a misleading and injurious statement”; “Nowadays, in Tibetan Buddhism, …in practice many of these are broken from the day the vows are taken. We should appreciate that the NKT is acting honestly, in accordance with this reality, following the truth. They are not pretending to be lofty or important simply by collecting a large number of vows that are subsequently not possible for a modern-day practitioner to keep.” The statement of ASA is felt as being led by “bias” and “a mixture of religion and politics”. (see also How important is the Vinaya?)

With the same claim, mixing Dharma with politics, Geshe Kelsang expressed in the past his discontentment with the Buddhist approach of Lama Yeshe – who invited him in 1977 to England in his main center (Manjushri Institute, Ulverston) – the Dalai Lama, the Gelug school and the Tibetan diaspora. Finally this claim and different radical views and policies of Geshe Kelsang, as well as his growing insularity, led to a schism with Lama Yeshe and his organisation (FPMT) and his breakaway and isolation from the Gelug school,Tibetan Buddhism and the monasteries and ordained Sangha. As a result, since its inception in 1991, NKT is isolated from the Buddhist world and Tibetan Buddhism.

Although NKT acknowledges that “mistakes have been made” and NKT states “we are genuinely sorry for those mistakes and trying honestly to learn from them”, as long as NKT leadership repeats the same old narrow-minded habits using extremely skilful defence and attack means (we are pure and good persons “acting honestly” while concerned Buddhist lack proper motivation, are hostile or “pretending to be lofty or important”), there seem to be less hope for a positive change in NKT. Just some new Internal Rules will not end, what inwardly, in the heart, has gone wrong.

Annotation

Due to a lack of information and inconsistent information, it is difficult to give a clear picture of the actual situation in India – the situation for the monasteries and for the expelled monks.

According to a Bhikshu, who received this information from a Sera Geshe: “Sera Me has expelled 180 monks – 80 from Nepal and 100 from the same area in Tibet that the former Zong Rinpoche came from. They have left the monastery and have formed their own monastery just outside Sera. They are being supported financially by the usual lot from Europe and the Chinese government.” According to a Getsul closely related to Sera, only few monks have been expelled “they had to issue warnings to about a hundred monks but ended up having to expel only a handful!” he added: “Even during the initial ‘stick’ referendum the supporters of HH Dalai Lama won by a large margin.”

Latest News

August 12, 2008

Sera Monastery (India): Situation for the Expelled Monks and the Monks abiding in Sera

According to a monk from Sera Monastery:

During the worst of crisis, Mey was almost closed by the police and a Sojong at Lachi was delayed for +4 hours by the police, some in riot geat. The Pomra’s wanted to come and had called the police to help. Anyhow, it’s done now but it was a SERIOUS crisis that lasted many months. Those who have not pledged still live in Sera but have “established” a monastery, separate to Sera Mey. They do their own debates, prayers, food and school. They kept the buildings of the old Kangsten and the new one being built, plus, well, almost everything…! We don’t care and, we don’t need to go anymore to those horrible night prayers that went well into the night. We may have less pocket money but what we have is clean. Could not be more happy.

see also:

[1] The problem with this suggestion, made by the Time Magazine, is that Tibet scholar Robert Barnett of Columbia University clearly stated to Time Magazine, that “ID cards are not given out by the exile administration, but by the Indian authorities”.  (see TibetanReview.net) Another problem which should be taken into consideration is that China favours monks practising Shugden by mainly giving them permission to undertake studies in India. (see: Hillman, Ben, 2005, Monastic Politics and the Local State in China: Authority and Autonomy in an Ethnically Tibetan Prefecture, The China Journal, No. 54, July 2005, p. 38) The more Shugden monks arrive in India and enter the monasteries for studies, the more tensions there will be. For China such policies are a perfect means to undermine the unity of the Tibetans and to sow discord. A Western monk who lived in Sera Je, India, and speaks fluently colloquial Tibetan reported to me that monks in the Tibetan Buddhist monasteries in India assume strongly that the Chinese secret service is sponsoring Shugden pujas in the Gelug monasteries to provoke more schism and quarrel. A Tibetan doctor reported to me that Kundeling Rinpoche (Nga-Lama), who has close ties and a lot of sympathy for China’s presence in Tibet (see France 24 TV), offered money to local Indian people nearby Sera Je if they start protests against ‘the Dalai Lama’s religious intolerance’—however, the Indians refused to do this saying that it is better to have good long-term relations with the monasteries than accepting short term benefit by getting some money.

Written by tenpel

July 24, 2008 at 11:47 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, Western Shugden Society - News

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Mixing Dharma with Politics

with 16 comments

The Mahaparinirvana Sutra states:

When a society comes together and makes decisions in harmony, when it respects its most noble traditions, cares for its most vulnerable members, treats its forests and lands with respect, then it will prosper and not decline…

HH the Dalai Lama:

I believe we must consciously develop a greater sense of universal responsibility. We must learn to work not just for our own individual self, family or nation but for the benefit of mankind.[1]

Western Shugden Society prepares next Anti-Dalai-Lama-Protests in Nantes, France

While the NKT/WSS is actually celebrating the NKT annual Buddhist Summer Festival at Manjushri Institute (Ulverston, Cumbria), led by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, they are also preparing the coming protests, His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s visit and teachings in France which will start August 15, 2008 in Nantes.

A witness reported at the New Kadampa Survivor Forum about the present situation at NKT’s head center in Ulverston. Here is an extract:

I went to the festival or should I say political extremism gone mad. There were posters everywhere you looked, recruiting for the French demo against His Holiness. They were on all doors 2 a time inside and out. In all rooms, hallways. On mobile cooking points, walls and outbuildings. Even on the temple wall. The chapel was used as a meeting point. Even more posters! The walls were covered as were the doors and tables! Mein Gott! K.G. called it a Spiritual holiday to practise dharma. It felt like a BNP political rally. Not National Front.[..]
The ordained, although they have not taken ordination vows were sitting round tables watching videos of themselves at the demos! Attachment? Some told me they were prepared to use violence. Hatred? Why? Geshe-la wants us to win at all costs. Confusion? They have truly been poisoned. [..] I found the whole thing quite perverse. G.K giving an empowerment of Avalokiteshvara while before and after festival gathering and organising his Stormtroopers to attack the Living Embodiment of Avalokiteshvara? For an individual to use such an important time in peoples lives to suit his own ignorance I found quite disturbing and sad. With His Holiness at least we have hope for the future.

Another person confirmed this

Yes, they are gathering forces for their all expenses paid trip to France. Not with my money, they aint! I’ve seen people going to demos (quite new to Dharma) with a literal string of criminal convictions to call HHDL a hypocrite and a liar. Who are the hypocrites? The NKT does nothing else for wider society: this is their whole raison d’etre to keep DS practise alive. This, folks, is their real ‘hidden’ agenda. Shameful.

The NKT nun Kelsang N. stated at her blog:

Of the demonstrations against the Dalai Lama – Not surprisingly, mixed feelings abound, but overall people are feeling very positive about what’s happening. The vast majority of people I talked to had gotten to attend at least one demonstration, and most of them had very positive, meaningful experiences, echoing what my own Sangha buddies had said. But naturally, not everyone is so happy about what’s happening. What I did not hear was anyone who thought that the Dalai Lama’s actions are ethical or in the right. But what I did hear are people who are unsure if this is the correct response, and, disturbingly, I also heard stories of people feeling “pushed” by their local Resident Teacher to participate in the demonstrations. (see HappyNKTer’s webblog – PDF file)

She confirmed further at her happynkter webblog that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso is the initiator of the protests and views himself as the only remaining representative of Trijang Rinpoche. He also seems to be thinking about suing some critics. She wrote:

Of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso – I always find it interesting to hear stories about what Geshe Kelsang is up to behind the scenes. Rumours always abound, especially at Festivals. So take these stories with a grain of salt!

Geshe-la had a monk read to him all the personal criticism against him that is around on the internet. Apparently it took two hours to read through everything. While the monk read, Geshe-la listened with closed eyes, occasionally saying the word, “Compassion.”

During the annual meeting with the Resident Teachers, he told them what led up to his decision to begin organizing opposition to the Dalai Lama. First, he was invited by some monks to India to see the discrimination that was happening. Upon arriving, he found that the situation had really deteriorated. He talked to many forlorn monks, and ended up giving them a good deal of food and money (food because most vendors will not sell to them, and they cannot buy food within their monasteries). When he returned to England, he spent many sleepless nights and thought to himself, “Perhaps it is the Dalai Lama’s karma to be able to destroy Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition, and it is too late.” But he felt that he was his Guru Trijang Rinpoche’s only remaining representative, and as a representative of his teacher, he had to speak out. He felt he could not sit by and do nothing. One morning he awoke feeling very clear about what to do, and we started down this road of demonstrations.

And watch out — it looks like he may also begin some legal proceedings against some different entities and individuals over all of this.

Mixing Dharma with Politics

In general Geshe Kelsang Gyatso and NKT put much emphasis on the concept of ‘not mixing dharma with politics’. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso made use if this concept to criticize his fellow student Lama Thubten Yeshe and finally to split from him and FPMT. Lama Thubten Yeshe invited Geshe Kelsang in 1977 from Indian exile to England to teach the ‘General Programme’ of Buddhist studies at his centre Manjushri Institute in Ulverston, Cumbria. Two years later Lama Yeshe installed Geshe Jampa Tegchok there to teach the more advanced ‘Geshe Study Programme’. According to the “Sera expulsion letter” finally Geshe Kelsang Gyatso “usurped the FPMT centre and made it his own NKT”. According to researcher David Kay “in 1991, through the successful exploitation of a legal loophole, the assets of Manjushri Institute finally fell under the sole control of the Priory Group” (the close disciples of Geshe Kelsang). (Kay 2004 : 78) Kay states that Geshe Kelsang’s criticism of Lama Yeshe and FPMT “would often be couched in terms of the destruction of the ‘purity’ of the Dharma.” Geshe Kelsang claimed in the NKT publication “Eradicating wrong views”: the creation of the central governing organisation of the FMPT by Lama Yeshe had ‘mixed the Dharma with politics’ and thereby destroyed it. (Kay 2004 : 66)

More than 20 years after the schism at Manjushri Institute, the students of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso use the same concept and logic to criticise the Dalai Lama of ‘mixing dharma with politics’ and to have “caused one of greatest divisions in Buddhism since its inception.” (see e.g. Six Reasons…) In the heat of their world wide protests and media campaign it seems that they don’t recognise that they actually do those actions they accuse others of doing. Many former NKT members see WSS/NKT’s accusations against the Dalai Lama of being a “hypocrite”, a “liar” and “oppressor of religious freedom” or of “mixing dharma with politics” and creating “divisions” as dishonest and wrong. It may not be unfair and far more close to the facts to say, NKT/WSS can apply all these accusations to portray their own actions.

Regarding political acts, Tibetans in general don’t see politics as something dirty or bad. Their view is mainly if politics are good or bad depends upon the motivation, politic is not bad from its own side. In fact also the Jatakamala about Buddha’s former lives (before he became fully enlightened) show that many times he was a Bodhisattva king who ruled a country for the benefit of the people, thereby helping them to do good actions of patience, tolerance and especially ethics, and creating a karmic link to them. Later when the Bodhisattva became finally the Buddha, 2500 years ago, the Buddha gave also advice to kings, as some centuries later Arya Nagarjuna did as well. (One king even consulted the Buddha when he wished to go to war.)

If NKT uses this concept of ‘mixing dharma with politics’ to point out something very bad and NKT members think it is a valid concept they should apply it also to the Buddha. If they do, it follows that even the Bodhisattva who became the Buddha of our age had ‘mixed dharma with politics’.

What HH the Dalai Lama does, who is seen at least as a high Bodhisattva, ruling a country or a community based on Buddhist (ethical) principles, the Buddha has done too in his former lives as a Bodhisattva. This approach was not only a way to help sentient beings but to accumulate the merit (good karma) to finally get fully enlightened.

HH the Dalai Lama and Tibetans hold the view politics can help others and there is a need for politics so that communities can function in a good way. Someone must do this job, so why not make good politics and choose a person of the highest integrity who actions are based on compassion and wisdom for that? What is wrong with this?

The view of HH the Dalai Lama is:

“If we serve sentient beings by engaging in political activities with a spiritual orientation, we are actually following the Bodhisattva’s way of life.” (Gems of the Heart by the Dalai Lama, booklet)

“We share the view that religion and politics do mix and both agree that it is the clear duty of religion to serve humanity, that it must not ignore reality. It is not sufficient for religious people to be involved in prayer. Rather, they are morally obliged to contribute all they can to solving the world’s problems. [..] Politicians [with the aim to serve people through politics] need religion even more than a hermit on retreat. If a hermit acts out of bad motivation, he harms no one but himself. But if someone who can directly influence the whole of society acts with bad motivation, then a great number of people will adversely effected. I find no contradiction at all between politics and religion. For what is religion? As far as I am concerned, any deed done with good motivation is a religious act. On the other hand, a gathering of people in a temple or church who do not have good motivation are not performing a religious act when they prey together.[2]

The actions of WSS/NKT against the Dalai Lama also reflect other stories from the Jatakamala. There are some stories which show that the Bodhisattva, who finally became the Buddha of this present age, also had an adversary in Devadatta. Devadatta’s actions against the Bodhisattva are portrayed in different stories of the Jatakamala to be similar to a fox competing with a lion or a jackal competing with an elephant. Devadatta was extremely jealous of the Bodhisattva and thought in his deluded pride he would be wiser than the future Buddha. When the Bodhisattva became finally the Buddha, more than 2500 years ago, it was Devadatta who split the Monastic Order (Sangha) by creating his own monastic rules and criticizing the Buddha.

Regarding political acts, it is also true that Buddhist masters advised against political activities. It is said that Nagarjuna prayed not be a politician in all his future lives.[3] In general for religious people politics can be damaging distraction undermining their own practice and inner development; or politics can be caught up in the self-centred attitude into longing for gain, honour and praise, finally leading one towards committing many destructive actions. However, from the Buddhist point of view, if ‘political actions’ are harmful, beneficial or neutral will depend upon the motivation and understanding (wisdom) of the doer. Therefore there are Buddhist teachers who hold e.g. the view: “Spirituality and politics aren’t different. People think they are, but they are the same.” (see Rebecca Novick: The Dharma of Politics: Adventures in Interdependence, Mandala Aug/Sept 2008), and there are Buddhist teachers who are completely restrained of engaging in politics. There are also Buddhist teachers or practitioners practising duplicity by claiming not to practice politics while being actively engaged.

Conclusion

Buddhism is a way to come closer to reality and is much more subtle, vast and deep than many of the oversimplified NKT or Shugden follower’s conceptions suggest. Moreover it appears that NKT and some Shugden followers, like “Mahalama” Lobsang Yeshi (Kundeling Lama) or Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, are far more involved in politics than even they seem to think. The question is now to judge to what extent their politics are based on integrity, compassion and wisdom.

[1] The Political Philosophy of His Holiness the XIVth Dalai Lama, Editor: A.A. Shiromany, Tibetan Parliamentary and Policy Research Centre and Friedrich-Naumann-Stiftung, 1998, p XV, ISBN: 81-86230-20-3

[2] Freedom in Exile: Autobiography of the Dalai Lama by Dalai Lama XIV, p 202-3

[3] This claim is made by NKT but until now I have not seen any stanza or text by Nagarjuna which can approve this claim.

last edits: Dec 31, 2009

Written by tenpel

August 13, 2008 at 4:11 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

A Report from Sera and Some Advice

with 8 comments

An American woman offered this report from Sera Monastery India:

You are probably more interested in the Dorje Shukden (sp?) fiasco. What a stupid thing. I just can’t get over the fact that they are tearing the monastery apart about something that doesn’t exist… The thin veneer of Buddhism cracks to show what superstitious people they really are.Yes, there was a lot of angst and problems. I’m afraid all I could do was laugh about the whole thing. One morning the place was absolutely teeming with Indian police from Bangalore. I counted at least 60 officers swarming around Sera Mey temple. Khen Rinpoche had sent for them. Apparently the local and Mysore police are in the hands of the Shukden party, as it is called. They receive bribes, as do local people in the surrounding villages. It is alleged that the Shukden people are very rich, being financed by the Chinese who are absolutely ecstatic to see the monks at each other’s throats. Khen Rinpoche decreed that every Sera Mey monk must come to the temple and swear not to uphold the ghost. Of course, the Shukden practitioners didn’t come. Rinpoche threatened to resign if they didn’t come, but nothing happened. In the end every monk in the place now has a photo identity card in order to enter the temple. The Indian police are checking. That went on for a couple of weeks and there were notices up all over the place telling that worship of a ghost wouldn’t be allowed, but it went on anyway. As a lot of the activity took place in the early morning, I didn’t see much of it. I was frightened a few times by the police, as I didn’t have a PAP, despite having applied for it 5 months previously. When it finally did come, it was for a few days that had already passed. I never did like Sera very much, having gone there by mistake in 2001 thiking it was a Kagyu monastery.

Geshe Jamphel from Nalanda Monastery France offered the following advise regarding those Westerners who took a spiritual teacher too quickly:

If someone, perhaps when they were new to Dharma, took a teacher who later turned out is against His Holiness the Dalai Lama, which would not be the view of an enlightened being, you would be wise to disassociate yourself from such a person. However, despite him having turned out wrong, you still received a lot of benefit from him.

Now that you have faith in His Holiness, focus on him and see him as encompassing all of one’s teachers, see all your lamas dissolving into His Holiness. Now you can cut the connection with the first teacher, but you don’t have to destroy the faith you had in him, but rather place it in His Holiness.

In a situation where you rely on someone as your teacher, you will feel that he is a Buddhist, take refuge, see him as a Buddha and study with him. Later if you find out he is not a Buddhist, because he is taking refuge in false gods, there would be no fault if you turned away from him. It would not be that you were breaking your samayas with this person. (Full article Nalanda Newsletter)

Geshe Tashi, Jamyang center London, about the NKT ordination:

Recently I was informed that in a website which related to ex NKT students, it was stated that as an FPMT Geshe I approve NKT ordination. I would like to clarify that I never made such a statement. Within FPMT, as in all other Tibetan Buddhist traditions, in the mula-saravastivada system, novices hold 36 vows. This is the system I uphold. (Jamyang Newsletter August 2008)

Sakya Pandita:

Examination of Bad Conduct

Deceivers , well-mannered and smooth talking;
Should not be trusted until scrutinized.
Peacocks have lovely forms and pleasing calls,
But their food is extremely poisonous.

• Commentary: The beautiful, well-groomed appearance of those who deceive others is pleasing simply to behold. One is enchanted upon hearing their suave words.

But they are not to be trusted until they have been thoroughly investigated; they must be identified as cunning, bad-natured people, always sizing up others.

The peacock possesses a beautiful rainbow-hued body and a very sweet voice, but its food is a powerful poison found in dangerous, precipitous places.

Verse 152 • Ordinary Wisdom • Sakya Pandita’s Treasury of Good Advice • Translated by John T. Davenport • Foreword by His Holiness Sakya Trizin • Wisdom Publications • 2000 • Boston

Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltsen Pal Zangpo wrote in his “Dom gsum rab dbye”:

“I have love for all beings
and I do not speak ill of anyone.

If, perchance, I have lost my composure
and disparaged another, I renounce and confess that misdeed.

Whether the Noble Doctrine
has been misunderstood or correctly understood
is a theme that affects our long-term future destinations,
so if someone calls the positive and negative assessment
of these ‘hostility’, he is himself at fault.

Does one label as ‘hostily’
all the refutations of all false doctrines -
held by non-Buddhists and Buddhists alike -
that were made by all the wise men such Nagarjuna,
Vasubandhu, Dignaga and Dharmakirti?

Were all the Fully Enlightened Ones
merely jealous when they refuted
demons and non-Buddhist sectarians?

The wise are guides for blind fools,
and if you call it ‘hostily’ to lead them
well in matters of correct or mistaken teachings,
how, then, is Buddhism to be henceforth preserved?

A guide holds back the blind
from stepping over precipices
and leads them along a safe path.
Is that jealousy? If so, then how else
are the blind to be led?

If you say that it is due to a physician’s hostility
or jealousy that he urges,
‘Stop eating the foods that hurt your body
and eat only those that help’
then how else are the ill to be healed?

If to distinguish between true
and false teachings is to be called
‘hostility’ and ‘jealousy’, then just how else are beings
to be rescued from the ocean of Samsara?”

For those seeking balanced information see also Jigme Duntak’s Blog: Western Shugden Society.

Written by tenpel

August 23, 2008 at 11:19 am

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

How Buddhists view the protests of NKT/WSS

with 11 comments

Loud is the noise that ordinary men make. Nobody thinks himself a fool, when divisions arise in the Sangha, nor do they ever value another person higher than themselves. – The Buddha, Mahavagga

Since the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT-IKBU) – via Western Shugden Society – are quite noisy on the streets and very dominant on the internet with their world wide media campaign against the Dalai Lama, the idea came up to collect some views from Buddhist monks and nuns, Buddhist masters, elected members of the Buddhist Communities or just simple Buddhists which counter the claims and perceptions of the Western Shugden Society / NKT. Here is a small collection of statements:

Buddhist monks and nuns:

The Australian Sangha Association (ASA):

“The ASA wishes to express its dismay at the conduct of robed members of the New Kadampa Tradition, Western Shugden Society and associated organizations during the teachings given by HH the Dalai Lama on 11-15 June 2008 at Olympic Stadium, Sydney, Australia. [..] Noisy public demonstrations such as these are not appropriate behaviour for monks or nuns and have brought Buddhism in this country into disrepute. [..] Therefore, in the spirit of Dharma and in accordance with Buddhist principles the ASA would encourage the NKT and WSS protesters to request forgiveness from the Dalai Lama for their behaviour and in future to conduct themselves with humility and restraint.” [1]

HH the 14th Dalai Lama:

In a BBC interview, the Dalai Lama said he had not advocated a ban, but he had stopped the worship of the spirit because it was not Buddhist in nature. The exiled Tibetan leader said people were free to protest and it was up to individuals to decide. [2]

Other Buddhists:

Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche said in 2005:

“The Dalai Lama never said that he forbade them to do this practice; he simply advised them that it is not good. Everybody can give advice, why not? So when the Dalai Lama went to America, at the two or three different places he visited there were small groups with some Tibetan Gelugpa lamas and their western followers who protested saying: “The Dalai Lama denies us the right to free religion”. Of course the Chinese gave them a lot of support because they like it very much when Tibetans have disagreements among themselves. So you have to be careful because now even in the western world these groups are trying to influence people saying they are spreading dharma teachings. You are always free to decide for yourselves, but you can receive negativities.” [3]

Vajramala, Head Chairwoman of the German Buddhist Union (DBU):

“For a Western Buddhist, this practice appears to me like a relic from old times when – in European Middle Ages – we also had battles for the predominance of a certain religious group. However, such battles are not in accordance with what the Buddha taught.” [4]

Commentator of a video published by a Buddhist Pagode in Germany:

“The aggressive manner with which the “ordained” Shugden followers express their disagreement with the Dalai Lama is not in accordance with the Buddhist behavioural regulations for monks and nuns (Vinaya).” [4]

Thich Thien Son, Former Head Chairman of the German Vinaya Sangha:

“It is also very questionable what this is supposed to accomplish. Here we see two sides. One side is this demonstration, and on the other side are the Chinese who are shouting the same slogans. Therefore, one has to really ask what connection they have. And, since we also come from Asia and have lived under Communist rule, we know how propaganda and brain-washing happens. [..] Actually, it is a real pity to see that for creating peace we have to work together. And, instead the demonstrations and provocations are being staged here. Nevertheless, we hope that eventually these people will absorb Buddha’s guidance and Buddha’s loving kindness. Instead of shouting they should turn inside for meditation. It brings much, much more to settle inside and to have this inner reflection.” [4]

Chris Ward:

“The WSS website gives the impression of a hate filled and vituperative personal campaign against the Dalai Lama, rather than  a compassionate and careful marshalling of evidence and argument. It does not demonstrate Buddhist virtues and it loses the moral high ground.

Precepts and actions are important. Harsh, abusive and divisive words generate anger, fear, and associated negative emotions. That is why there is so much guidance given in Buddhism about being careful with speech and words” [5]

Some East-German witnesses:

“I would like to say how primitive this shouting is. You know, we come from the East. We have lived under a dictatorship for decades. We know how dictatorships feel like. So, you can imagine where our sympathies lay.” [4]

Kamma, a Tibetan living in the West:

“Shugden movement is actually of no interest at all in Europe. This is a topic for ourselves, for Tibetans. This subject is simply critically dangerous for Tibetan affairs and for Buddhism.” [4]

Barbara O’Brien, a Zen Buddhist:

“At a time when Buddhism is still being introduced to the West, it is damaging to all schools of Buddhism to be confused with spirit worship.

Tibetan Buddhism is being systematically flushed out of Tibet by the government of China. As Tibetan Buddhism scatters, disembodied, around the globe, His Holiness the Dalai Lama is struggling to maintain some cohesion and integrity within it. The Shugden controversy clearly is weakening that effort.” [6]

Anonymous Buddhist:

“To those watching the news or attending a precious speaking engagement of The Dalai Lama, this is what they see. NKT militants raising their fists and yelling about their selfishly egocentric and ugly unilateral dominance-seeking war with The Dalai Lama. Armed with web sites, press releases, protest caravans, and its ultra ego, the Western Shugden Society, NKT’s multi-media power-hungry PR machine ‘chants’ that The Dalai Lama is evil and a liar. For its ego gratification NKT is defiling Buddhism with its worldwide assault.” [7]

Bino Tulku to BBC:

“This demonstration isn’t damaging for the Dalai Lama, but it’s damaging for Tibet because it detracts from the argument over our independence.” [8]

Tibetan refugee Diki Dolma:

“That’s nonsense! We know the Tibetan exile community and we know it’s just not true. Very, very few follow this practice. I feel sorry for these protesters. I think they don’t know much about Buddhism. They make out they are monks, but, look they don’t even know how to wear their robes properly!” [9]

Academics

George D. Chryssides:*

“While Buddhists have occasionally engaged in active protests about actions and policies which they regarded as serious contraventions of Buddhist teaching (such as the Vietnam war in the 1960s), a demonstration against fellow Buddhists, and particularly against such a respected leader as the Dalai Lama was surprising, to say the least.” [10]

John Makransky:

“Western followers of a few dGe lugs pa monks who worship that deity, lacking any critical awareness of its sectarian functions in Tibet, have recently followed the Dalai Lama to his speaking engagements to protest his strong stance (for non-sectarianism) in the name of their “religious freedom” to promulgate, now in the West, an embodiment of Tibetan sectarianism. If it were not so harmful to persons and traditions, this would surely be one of the funniest examples of the cross-cultural confusion that lack of critical reflection continues to create.” [11]

Robert Barnett:*

“I also made it clear that the Western Shugden group’s allegations are problematic: they are akin to attacking the Pope because some lay Catholics somewhere abuse non-believers or heretics. The Western Shugden Group is severely lacking in credibility, since its form of spirit-worship is heterodox, provocative and highly sectarian in Buddhist terms and so more than likely to be banned from mainstream monasteries – while its claimed concerns about cases of discrimination in India should be addressed by working within the Tibetan community instead of opportunistically attacking the Dalai Lama in order to provoke misinformed publicity for their sect.”[12]

According to Indian Authorities in Dharamsala

“it can not be excluded that such groups are supported by the Chinese Government in order to significantly weaken the XIV Dalai Lama’s powerful influence.” [4]

for more details see:

Related Links (chronological order)

Videos

Academic Research

[1] Australian Sangha Association Statement by ASA (22 July 2008)

[2] BBC (Nottingham) (27 May 2008)

[3] Provocations of the Gyalpo by Chögyal Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche (2005)

[4] The Shugden Group by Pagode Path Hue (Aug 2008)

[5] Spirit Worship is not Buddhist by TripleGem (12 June 08) (see PDF-copy)

[6] Destroying Tibetan Buddhism in Order to Save It? by Barbara O’Brien (2008)

[7] Buddhism under Assault (2008)

[8] BBC: Peace and placards greet Dalai Lama (May 22, 2008)

[9] Buddhist at Loggerheads by New Internationalist, Vanessa Baird (May 30, 2008)

[10] Chryssides, George D. (1999) ‘The Dorje Shugden Controversy‘ in “Exploring New Religions“, Continuum International Publishing Group, 235

[11] Makransky, John J. (2000). “Buddhist Theology: Critical Reflections by Contemporary Buddhist Scholars”, p. 20, Routledge

[12] Barnett, Robert (2008). “Tibet scholar denies making Time magazine Shugden comment” by TibetanReview.net

* Chryssides and Barnett are probably not Buddhists but two of very few academics who give a type of judgement in this context.

last update: March 31, 2010

Written by tenpel

August 31, 2008 at 10:07 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

(Un) Holy Truth's

with 23 comments

The following thoughts have been posted by Buddhism under Assault.

(Un)Holy Truths

The polemic of the NKT and WSS has, in recent weeks, become more aggressive and unkind. In attempting to use shock journalism in order to dictate the spiritual policies of the monasteries in exile, the WSS is undermining the Tibetan community in the only country where they can dictate the policies of their own monasteries – India.

The presentation of the “facts” given by the WSS is aimed at creating negative publicity at any cost using the techniques of shock journalism. Inaccurate parallels are drawn between the conflict in India and the holocaust and segregation. While the situations are completely different from both an anthropological and historical perspective, the techniques are as effective with the uninformed public as they are dishonest.

In addition, skewed and self-serving “eyewitness accounts” from South India are being published on their websites, which often distort realities in such a marked way the events they describe are unrecognizable to the communities they are writing about. While it is not appropriate for laypeople to be turned away from shops and this should be addressed, monasteries must protect the rule of law and community decisions in their compounds. When one ordains as a monk, one agrees to rule of the majority according to monastic principles.

By trying to contravene a rule decided upon by voting according to Vinaya principles, the Shugden devotees went against monastic law. To allow such people to continue as part of the assembly would have been detrimental to the unity of the monastery. But far from kicking them out, both Sera and Ganden monasteries allowed the houses concerned to keep all of their khangtsen buildings, kitchens and dormitories. From reading WSS accounts, however, one would be inclined to believe that these Shugden devotees are homeless – which is clearly not the case. Merely, the two communities are functioning separately in order to protect communal harmony and avoid the disputes. By all accounts things are now more peaceful.

A deep contradiction is evident here to those familiar with the history of the NKT, which, unfortunately the public is not. In 2002 there were two high-profile teaching visits by FPMT lamas, Zopa Rinpoche and Geshe Tegchok. Kelsang Gyatso sent letters to Manjushri and Madhyamaka Centres, stating that people were free to go if they chose, however they would no longer be his students. From all accounts, no longer being a student of Geshe Kelsang would make living in an NKT centre uncomfortable and nearly impossible. So, in effect, the NKT itself also limits the practices of its members. Except in this case, no referendum was held, it was simply an autocratic decision by the NKT leadership.

Another startling aspect of this campaign is the fits of exaggeration in the literature of the Western Shugden Society. If one watches their website the reports change from day-to-day on the number of protestors for example. In France the number was at first “nearly 500″, then “over 500″ finally, “700″. The photos of the protests show no noticeable change in the numbers in the crowd.

Kelsang Pema, spokesperson for the WSS, also made patent exaggerations in her case to reporters which would be immediately obvious to anyone following Gelugpa scriptures. During the protests in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, she told reporters that the Dalai Lama was teaching “Texts are commentaries to this (the Shugden) prayer. So he is making money from teaching the commentaries to the practice, but denying the prayer.” This interview is proudly posted on the WSS website, seemingly because they believe the uneducated public will not be able to point out such contradictions. The Lam Rim Chenmo, on which the Dalai Lama was teaching, was coined hundreds of years before the practice of Shugden. There is no mention at all of Shugden in the text, so to claim it was a commentary to the practice is an outright fabrication.

Photographs of walls at the monasteries become proof of “holocaust” tactics to ghettoize minority communities. But the fact is that many walls of similar height have existed in these monasteries to keep out livestock, noise and thieves – serving purposes no different than the walls around the houses of Indian farmers in the same area.. Photographs of monks using a hose to bring water to their room through a window becomes proof that Dalai Lama supporters are denying these monks water. In actual fact, many of the houses don’t have separate taps and the reality of life in India is that most people have to take water into their rooms through a hose shared with the rest of the compound.

In closing, while monasteries must have the right to set religious policies for their members, it is unfortunate that some Tibetans in the lay community have become overzealous and turned Shugden supporters away from shops. With negotiation, this problem could likely easily be solved. However, through its widespread distortion and exaggeration of the facts, the WSS only serves to further the reputation of the Shugden monks as being untrustworthy agitators.

One really wonders who benefits the most from this campaign in the end. The Shugden devotees in India, or the NKT who seek to discredit the other Buddhists who critique their spiritual practices?

For more see: “ESSAYS from readers…”

Annotation:

In France there were between 250-350 protesters.

Written by tenpel

September 1, 2008 at 7:07 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Religious Fundamentalism in Buddhism

with 27 comments

The protests of the Western Shugden Society (WSS) / New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) and Kundeling Lama’s[1] lawsuit against the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government in Exile[1], India, invite reflection on the issue of fundamentalism in Buddhism.

Fundamentalism is a term which may be a battlefield for different interpretations as the terms “cult” or “religious freedom” can be said to be.

The editors of the Wikipedia article on Fundamentalism came to agreement to offer this definition:

Fundamentalism refers to a “deep and totalistic commitment” to a belief in, and strict adherence to a set of basic principles (often religious in nature), away from doctrinal compromises with modern social and political life.[2][3][4][5]

The term fundamentalism was originally coined to describe a narrowly defined set of beliefs that developed into a movement within the Protestant community of the United States in the early part of the 20th century, and that had its roots in the Fundamentalist-Modernist Controversy of that time. Until 1950, there was no entry for fundamentalism in the Oxford English Dictionary;[6] the derivative fundamentalist was added only in its second 1989 edition.[7]

The term fundamentalist has since been generalized to mean strong adherence to any set of beliefs in the face of criticism or unpopularity, but has by and large retained religious connotations.[7] The collective use of the term fundamentalist to describe non-Christian movements has offended some Christians who desire to retain the original definition.

Fundamentalism is often used as a pejorative term, particularly when combined with other epithets (as in the phrase “Muslim fundamentalists” and “right-wing fundamentalists”).[8][9] Richard Dawkins used the term to characterise religious advocates as clinging to a stubborn, entrenched position that defies reasoned argument or contradictory evidence.[10]

Regarding doctrinal beliefs or fundamentalist concepts which appear to underlie the Dorje Shugden controversy, the website Western Shugden Society – unlocked has already offered a short analysis. Whatever point of view or understanding is followed, a radical and narrow minded attitude and clinging to specific concepts can be posited to form the basis for the ongoing dispute.

The issue of religious fundamentalism has been addressed also in an interview with the Dalai Lama by journalist Raimundo Bultrini. In this interview H.H. the Dalai Lama addressed the Shugden controversy indirectly:

HH. “But if we analyse the problem we can see that the limits of the fundamentalists lie in their inability to tolerate even the idea of dialogue, there is proof in their attempts to be invisible when they carry out their actions. Among the Imans there are different interpretations of the Koran but the final understanding is left to the individual. This is why there are extremists and black sheep, as there are in any religion”.

RB. Even in Buddhism?
HH. “Certainly even in Buddhism. In 1997 a group claiming to be from my same religious school were strongly suspected of having killed a lama who was very dear to me, the director of the School of Tibetan Dialectics in Dharamsala, and two monks, translators who were playing an important role in interpreting with the Chinese. These same people have beaten up and threatened other Tibetans in the name of their vision, which I would define as Buddhist integralism. They consider a certain protecting spirit, that I used to pray to and that I now distrust to be as important as the Buddha himself. In order to assert this, they went on to damage those round them instead of respecting them and understanding them, in line with the teachings of the man who spread the principles of universal compassion five centuries before Jesus Christ. From this point of view our experience is no different from that of Christianity, or of Hinduism”.

The overwhelming missionary media campaign by the Western Shugden Society, and also four recent articles[11] for “The Faith Column” in New Statesman were written by a close follower of the controversial Kundeling lama[1]. These actions have provoked different activities of Buddhists, e.g. the publication of the site Buddhism under assault, and an endless debate in different forums and news outlets.

The section of the Wikipedia article on Fundamentalism regarding Buddhism has been repeatedly deleted – probably by followers of the NKT – however the quotes and material are based on reliable sources and the section is balanced. It states (or stated):

Buddhism

H.H. the Dalai Lama has agreed that extremists and fundamentalists also exist in Buddhism,[12] arguing that fundamentalists are not even able to pick up the idea of a possible dialogue.[12]

The Japanese Nichiren sect of Buddhism, which believes that other forms of Buddhism are heretical, is also sometimes labelled fundamentalist. However, Nichiren Buddhism contains influences from Shintō and a strongly nationalistic streak.

At the height of the Dorje Shugden Controversy Robert Thurman claimed: “It would not be unfair to call Shugdens the Taliban of Tibetan Buddhism” referring to the Muslim extremists of Afghanistan, who believe in swift and brutal justice.[13] A statement which was rejected by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, founder of the New Kadampa Tradition (aka NKT), arguing: “This really is a false accusation against innocent people. We have never done anything wrong. We simply practise our own religion, as passed down through many generations.”[14]

David N. Kay argued in his doctoral research that the NKT fit into the criteria of Robert Lifton’s definition of the fundamentalist self.[15] Inken Prohl stated: “Kay’s argument shows that, due to the NKT’s homogenous organisational structure, its attempts to establish a uniformity of belief and practice within the organization, and an emphasis on following one tradition coupled with a critical attitude toward other traditions, the NKT fits into Lifton’s category of “fundamentalism”. Kay describes how struggles for control of NKT’s institutional sites and NKT’s repressed memory of its institutional conflicts both contribute to NKT’s later ‘fundamentalist’ identity.”[16] However Prohl states also: “Although this observation presents a convincing and challenging observation of a mechanism at work in Buddhist organizations in the West, I would hesitate to characterize, as Kay does, such organisations as ‘fundamentalist’ due to the vague and, at the same time, extremely political implications of this term.”[16]

A monk sent these thoughts about fundamentalism in Buddhism to the Editorial staff of New Statesman:

»The scourge of fundamentalism is not merely a problem in the monotheistic faiths based on the god of Abraham. As with other world faiths, Buddhism has had in its fold members who believe unequivocally that they hold the ultimate truth, and that their detractors are dangerously mistaken and must be corrected. It is out of the energy of such fundamentalism that Dorje Shugden was promoted from Dolgyal, the spirit of Dol – a minor regional guardian; to a fully enlightened Buddha-protector by the conservative establishment within the Gelugpa tradition of Tibetan Buddhism.

The Gelugpa tradition’s beginnings are the teachings of Lama Tzongkhapa, the ultimate non-sectarian lama, who based his writings on a combination of Indian treatises, Mahayana Sutras, and teachings he received from masters of the Nyingma, Sakya and Kagyu traditions. His approach was essentially non-sectarian and firmly rooted in a close adherence to the Indian texts.

How strange then, that those who claim they are “protecting the purity” of Tsongkhapa’s teachings from the non-sectarian approach of the Dalai Lama, have taken up as the banner of their cause, Dorje Shugden, a deity of dubious origins. Not found in any of the classical Indian texts which Tzongkhapa taught his followers should be the ultimate authority, or in any of the extensive writings of Tsongkhapa himself, Shugden in fact is a worldly deity who has become the banner of the fundamentalists.

Pabongkha Rinpoche, the root guru of Trijiang Rinpoche and founding lama of the Shugden movement, never gave clear reasons why he felt Shugden was a Buddha. The 13th Dalai Lama questioned his reliance on such a mundane protector, and in a letter responding to the Dalai Lama asking that he stop Shugden worship, Pabongkha promised to do so, and said that his reason for Shugden propitiation was because “my mother told me that Shugden is the deity of my maternal lineage.”

Despite this promise, after the death of the 13th Dalai Lama, Pabongkha once again began the transmission of Shugden practice to his students. Without scriptural references or historical precedents, his students believed Shugden to be a Buddha based on their faith in Pabongkhapa alone. Georges Dreyfus, noted Buddhist scholar, says:Pa-bong-ka suggests that he (Shugden) is the protector of the Ge-luk tradition, replacing the protectors appointed by Tzongkhapa (Gelug’s founder) himself.

In modern times, Shugden became the enforcer of the purity of Gelugpa doctrine. Zemey Tulku released a document called the “Yellow Book“. This book outlines stories of misfortunes that befall Gelug Shugden devotees who read and practice the texts of the other Tibetan lineages, especially the Nyingma tradition. Those who “mix” traditions are seen as enemies of the lineage, as can be seen from this excerpt from a propitiation ritual included in Zemey’s book:

Praise to you, violent god of the Yellow Hat teachings,
Who reduces to particles of dust
Great beings, high officials and ordinary people
Who pollute and corrupt the Geluk doctrine.

Thus, Shugden’s purpose is clear and well-known in both Gelug and non-Gelug circles. It is for this reason that high Kagyu Lamas such as Tai Situpa Rinpochey say they “utter Shugden’s name with fear” and the late head of the Nyingma tradition, Minling Trichen Rinpoche, referred to Shugden as a “ghost”. The head of the Sakya tradition, His Holiness Sakya Trizin, says that while some in his lineage made offerings to Shugden, he was always regarded as a mundane protector on the lowest level of the pantheon.

Due to this widespread fear and the sectarian flavour it gave modern Gelug practice, the Dalai Lama began speaking about the dangers of Shugden at his teaching events, eventually requesting Shugden devotees not to take teachings and initiations from him. The majority of Gelugpas understood and followed his reasoning, because it was after all based on the teachings of the fountainhead of the Gelugpa tradition, Lama Tzongkhapa.

Those most loyal to Pabongkha’s lineage, however, resisted, stepping up Shugden worship in monasteries, commissioning new statues, and printing Shugden texts that were dutifully thrust into the laps of monks in their houses who had doubts about the practice. Then, Lobsang Gyatso, head of the dialectics institute in Dharamsala, an opponent of Shugden who had written voluminously on the subject along with two attendants, was murdered in his home. Interpol eventually released arrest warrants for two chief suspects in his murder, confirmed by Indian police to be Shugden activists who subsequently fled to Chinese controlled Tibet. The suspects were never apprehended, and so never went to trial.

It was after this murder that HH Dalai Lama began to speak more actively against Shugden, including in a meeting with the abbots of all the major Gelug monasteries. As promotion of the deity continued, in 2007, the Dalai Lama recommended the matter be put to a vote. In all three Gelug monastic universities; Sera; Drepung and Ganden, the Shugden opponents won by a landslide. In the tradition of the original spirit of monastic law, vote sticks were drawn. In the spirit of the majority (on which monastic law is based, according to the Vinaya scriptures of early Buddhism), it was decided those who practiced Shugden could no longer participate in the monastic rituals. This was all done according to Buddhist law, with many precedents including votes held during schisms for various reasons in many other Buddhist countries such as Burma, Thailand and Sri Lanka.

The Shugden activists refused to leave, so all monks were asked to take an oath to abandon Shugden and all those who refused were turned away from public pujas and debates. In effect, they were banished from monastery functions for not following monastic principles- rule of majority and abiding by vote results, common procedures in all Buddhist monastic communities. Rather than being banished from monastery grounds, however, Shugden worshipers were allowed to keep all their residential buildings and temples, essentially becoming a separate community within the monastery.

Without an understanding of the basics of monastic law and the Tibetan history of Shugden practice, it is easy to misunderstand this controversy. However, when one digs a little deeper, the picture becomes far more complex, and far less incriminating (for the Buddhist monastic communities) than Shugden activists would have us believe.

Sincerely, [...], Buddhist Monk«

(The name of the monk is kept private due to threats he received. His teacher was threatened with death many times.)

In general one can say, according to Buddhist understanding, fundamentalism – “a ‘deep and totalistic commitment’ to a belief” – is based on ignorance and clinging. The ignorance in that context is mainly referring to a lack of knowledge, therefore offering more knowledge about the disputed issue and its related vocabulary (concepts) can help for those open to differentiate their understanding to overcome fundamentalism. That’s why more understanding about Buddhism – especially the rectification of terms like devotion, faith, belief, Guru or root Guru, Breach of Guru Devotion, reliance to a Guru, seeing the teacher as a Buddha and so on – and the disputed issue – in this context the Shugden Controversy – could help some individuals to overcome fundamentalist attitudes.

However such a process of refining one’s understanding is impossible if one lacks the defining characteristics of a proper student of the Mahayana or prefers to read only texts written by their own school of thought. Sadly, NKT has a totally self-referential system and students are discouraged to read non-NKT Dharma-books, because this could confuse them and they could lose “faith”. NKT literature lacks a lot of Buddhist teachings and was written only by one author, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, which makes followers completely dependent on his views and thoughts.

Statements by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso which probably invite a narrow-minded perspective and blind faith include:

“Experience shows that realizations come from deep, unchanging faith, and that this faith comes as a result of following one tradition purely – relying upon one Teacher, practising only his teachings, and following his Dharma Protector. If we mix traditions many obstacles arise and it takes a long time for us to attain realizations.”[17]

According to Geshe Kelsang spiritual success is based on

“unwavering faith and confidence” and “it is essential to eliminate those doubts that interfere with the development of pure faith.”[18] Faith he explains is “a naturally virtuous mind that functions mainly to oppose the perception of faults in its observed object.”[19] “In particular, our ability to rely completely upon our spiritual guide depends upon having faith based on conviction that our spiritual guide is a buddha.”[20] and “We should be like a wise blind person who relies totally upon one trusted guide instead of attempting to follow a number of people at once.”[21]

Regarding sectarianism he states:

“It is mixing different religious traditions that causes sectarianism”[22] , and he discourages the reader of doing so, stating “studying non-religious subjects is less of an obstacle to our spiritual progress than studying religions of different traditions.”[22] “The practices taught by one teacher will differ from those taught by another, and if we try to combine them we will become confused, develop doubts, and lose direction.”[23] “The ugly, unfortunate result of not understanding pure Dharma and of following misleading teachings that pretend to be pure Dharma is sectarianism. This is one of the greatest hindrances to the flourishing of Dharma, especially in the West. Anything that gives rise to such an evil, destructive mind should be eliminated as quickly and as thoroughly as possible.”[24]

Je Tsongkhapa explains the defining characteristics of a student of the Mahayana in this way:

The defining characteristics of the student who relies upon the teacher

Aryadeva states in his Four Hundred Stanzas (Catuh-sataka):

“It is said that one who is non-partisan, intelligent, and diligent
Is a vessel for listening to the teachings.
The good qualities of the instructor do not appear otherwise
Nor do those of fellow listeners.”

Aryadeva says that one who is endowed with the three qualities is suitable to listen to the teachings. He also says that if you have all these qualities, the good qualities of one who instructs you in the teachings will appear as good qualities, not as faults. In addition, he says that to such a fully qualified person the good qualities of fellow listeners will also appear as good qualities and not as faults.

It is stated in Candrakirti’s commentary that if you, the listener, do not have all these defining characteristics of a suitable recipient of the teachings, then the influence of your own faults will cause even an extremely pure teacher who instructs you in the teachings to appear to have faults. Furthermore, you will consider the faults of the one who explains the teachings to be good qualities. Therefore, although you might find a teacher who has all the defining characteristics, it may be difficult to recognize their presence.

Thus, it is necessary for the disciple to have these three characteristics in their entirety in order to recognize that the teacher has all the defining characteristics and in order then to rely on that teacher.

With respect to these three characteristics, “nonpartisan” means not to take sides. If you are partisan, you will be obstructed by your bias and will not recognize good qualities. Because of this, you will not discover the meaning of good teachings. As Bhavaviveka states in his Heart of the Middle Way (Madhyamaka-hrdaya):

“Through taking sides the mind is distressed, Whereby you will never know peace.”

“Taking sides” is to have attachment for your own religious system and hostility toward others’. Look for it in your own mind and then discard it, for it says in the Bodhisattva Vows of Liberation (Bodhi-sattva-pratimoksa):

“After giving up your own assertions, respect and abide in the texts of the abbot and master.”

Question: Is just that one characteristic enough?
Reply: Though non-partisan, if you do not have the mental force to distinguish between correct paths of good explanation and counterfeit paths of false explanation, you are not fit to listen to the teachings. Therefore, you must have the intelligence that understands both of these. By this account you will give up what is unproductive, and then adopt what is productive.

Question: Are just these two enough?
Reply: Though having both of these, if, like a drawing of a person who is listening to the teachings, you are inactive, you are not fit to listen to the teachings. Therefore, you must have great diligence. Candrakirti’s commentary says “After adding the three qualities of the student to the two qualities of being focused and having respect for the teaching and its instructor, there are a total of five qualities.”

Then, these five qualities can be reduced to four:
(1) striving very diligently at the teaching,
(2) focusing the mind well when listening to the teaching,
(3) having great respect for the teaching and its instructor, and
(4) discarding bad explanations and retaining good explanations.

Having intelligence is the favourable condition that gives rise to these. Being non-partisan gets rid of the unfavourable condition of taking sides.

Investigate whether these attributes that make you suitable to be led by a guru are complete; if they are complete, cultivate delight. If they are incomplete, you must make an effort to obtain the causes that will complete them before your next life. Therefore, know these qualities of a listener. If you do not know their defining characteristics, you will not engage in an investigation to see whether they are complete, and will thereby ruin your great purpose.

(Lam Rim Chen Mo, p 75ff, Snow Lion Publications)

Buddhism is much about common sense and seeing things as they are. Students are encouraged to think for themselves and the Buddha and his genuine successors have repeatedly pointed out to not accept claims which contradict common sense or the spirit of the Dharma teachings. A genuine follower should have the ability to discriminate between what is constructive, what is not constructive and he should base his judgement on an unbiased investigation rather then following traditions.

Clash of Concepts

Because a main argument in the conflict on the side of the Shugden followers is that their Gurus, e.g. Pabongkha Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche, revealed the Shugden practice and gave commitments for it, then, one has to follow it. Alternatively the Shugden opponents in the Gelug school cite Buddha in the Kalama Sutra and Je Tsongkhapa, the Gelug founder, who said one should not follow “if it is an improper and irreligious command”, which is based on the following from the Vinaya Sutra: “If someone suggests something which is not consistent with the Dharma, avoid it.”[25] Shugden opponents refer to the sectarian nature of the Shugden practice which is seen by them as a contradiction to Buddhist ethics and one can also sum up the conflict as the religious scientist Michael von Brück (LM University, Munich) has done:

“We can conclude that the present controversy reveals the contradiction between the imperative of critically establishing the validity of (one’s own) opinions and the obedience towards the Lama (Guru)”[26]

Alexander Berzin pointed out as the central elements of the present conflict:

There are commitments on the levels of friendship, allegiance, loyalty, and bondings, both from student to teacher as well as from the student to their group. These life-long commitments are established through tantric empowerments. With respect to this there is a significant difference between Shugden followers and (almost) all other Tibetan Buddhists: followers of the ‘Shugden cult’, who receive the initiation, are told that this ‘protector’ or this ‘practice’ may never be given up again. However, according to an old instruction of the master Ashvaghosha, it’s the case that one may end the teacher-student-relationship even when having received an empowerment. There can be different reasons for ending such a relationship: if one has failed to sufficiently investigate one’s teacher beforehand or if one has critically distanced oneself from him and his methods. It’s said, that one may then respectfully distance oneself from such a teacher but that one should avoid speaking harsh words about him and his practice.[27]

Is there a Solution?

In general as previously stated, fundamentalism is based on non-knowledge so offering more understanding is suggested as one way to address fundamentalism. However, as long as a more narrow-minded person can refuse to broaden their understanding or to relax their views, and because one cannot force others to think about their point of view, this method has limitations.

Dialogue with fundamentalists is almost impossible. A Hindu master puts it this way: “It is impossible to discuss with a fundamentalist, without becoming a fundamentalist yourself.”

Fundamentalism is a challenging issue for each society, religion and mankind. Because the difficulties of fundamentalism lie in the mind and a mind can not be changed by force there seems to be only the challenging solution H.H. the Dalai Lama suggests in the interview by Raimundo Bultrini:

RB. What can the West or westerners do in a concrete way at this point?
HH. “Listen. Listen to their complaints and their reasons. They are unhappy and we should share their unhappiness.”
RB. Your Holiness, you have to admit that is a bit difficult.


[1] Tactics of Shugden Activists (perspective of the TGIE), Kundeling Tagtsa Jetung Rimpoche (perspective of Kundeling lama), Sowing dissent and undermining the Dalai Lama (perspective of TibetInfoNet), Vested interest group up in arms against the Dalai Lama (perspective of World Tibet Network News), The Dalai Lama’s demon (perspectives of France 24 TV), Writ Against the Dalai Lama

[2] Beit-Hallahmi, Benjamin. “Fundamentalism”, Global Policy Forum (with “consultative status at the UN”), May 2000, Accessed 14-05-2008.

[3] thefreedictionary.com: “Fundamentalism”, Accessed 14-05-2008.

[4] Google define:fundamentalism

[5] Marsden, George M. “Fundamentalism and American Culture”, Oxford University Press US (1980/rev.2006)

[6] Giddens, Anthony (1994). Beyond left and right: the future of radical politics. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 6. ISBN 0-8047-2451-2. OCLC 32371646.

[7] Oxford English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, 2nd edition, 1989

[8] Harris, Harriet (2008). Fundamentalism and Evangelicals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-953253-2. OCLC 182663241.

[9] Boer, Roland (2005). “Fundamentalism”. New keywords: a revised vocabulary of culture and society. Ed. Tony Bennett, Lawrence Grossberg, Meaghan Morris and Raymond Williams. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing. 134–137. ISBN 0-631-22568-4. OCLC 230674627 57357498. Retrieved on 2008-07-27.

[10] Dawkins, Richard (2006-10-02). The God Delusion. Bantam Press. ISBN 978-0593055489.

[11] Meindert Groter: Why did the Dalai Lama ban Dorje Shugden?, Will the Dalai Lama return to Tibet?, The deity banned by Dalai Lama, Are the Dalai Lama’s critics backed by China?

[12] a b Tibet und Buddhismus, No. 79, April/2006, page 14

[13] Newsweek, April 28 1997, http://www.cesnur.org/press/Newsweek.htm

[14] Reply to Newsweek, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, 1997, http://www.cesnur.org/testi/fr99/gkg.htm

[15] Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation by David N. Kay, London and New York, p 110, ISBN 0-415-29765-6

[16] a b Inken Prohl, Free University of Berlin, Book Review on “Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain…”

[17] Kelsang Gyatso: Great Treasury of Merit: A Commentary to the Practice of Offering to the Spiritual Guide, 1992, p 31

[18] Kelsang Gyatso: Understanding the Mind, 1993, p 75

[19] Kelsang Gyatso: Joyful Path of Good Fortune, 1990, p 107

[20] Kelsang Gyatso: Joyful Path of Good Fortune, 1990, p 106

[21] Kelsang Gyatso: Guide to Dakini Land: The Highest Yoga Tantra Practice of Buddha Vajrayogini, 1996: p 18

[22] Kelsang Gyatso, Understanding the Mind, 1993, p 167

[23] Kelsang Gyatso, Understanding the Mind, 1993, p 166

[24] Kelsang, Clear Light of Bliss, 1982, p 154

[25] The Fulfillment of All Hopes: Guru Devotion in Tibetan Buddhism, Wisdom Publications, ISBN 0-86171-153-X, page 64

[26] Michael von Brück: Religion und Politik im Tibetischen Buddhismus. Kösel Verlag, München 1999, ISBN 3-466-20445-3, page 209, 210

[27] Austria Buddhist magazine “Ursache und Wirkung”, July 2006, page 73

Written by tenpel

September 5, 2008 at 5:28 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, Fundamentalism

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

A forgotten perspective – Who is persecuted?

with 34 comments

Who is persecuted and whose human rights are being violated?

The Western Shugden Society (WSS), a front group of the controversial[1] New Kadampa Tradition (NKT), and some Shugden followers stress accusations against the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government in Exile, are performing “religious persecution” against them in a world wide media campaign. It seems to be forgotten however, that the actual persecution and injustice occurs in Tibet – occupied by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) – and not in India.

Some information to balance the claims of WSS/NKT or Kundeling Lama and his followers.

The PRC is very interested to use this conflict to undermine the unity of the Tibetans and their faith towards the Dalai Lama. So for example when the official Xinhua news agency said 17 Tibetans destroyed a pair of statues at Lhasa’s Ganden Monastery on 14 March 2006 depicting the deity Dorje Shugden, the mayor of Lhasa blamed the destruction on followers of the Dalai Lama. Alternatively, according to the BBC, analysts accused China of exploiting any dispute for political ends. The BBC reported “…some analysts have accused China of exploiting the apparent unrest for political gain in an effort to discredit the Dalai Lama. Tibet analyst Theirry Dodin said China had encouraged division among the Tibetans by promoting followers of the Dorje Shugden sect to key positions of authority. ‘There is a fault line in Tibetan Buddhism and its traditions itself, but it is also exploited for political purposes’…”[2]

The anonymous website dorjeshugden.com presents the Chinese fake Panchen Lama in front of a Shugden thanka and suggests indirectly he may be an emanation of the real Panchen Lama by stating:

“Whether we accept this as the authentic Panchen Lama or not is not the issue here. The Panchen Lama may have many emanations of we are to follow the scriptures.”

The Panchen Lama is traditionally one of the senior teachers for a young Dalai Lama and helps to identify an incarnation of a Dalai Lama.[3] Only a Dalai Lama can certify a Panchen Lama.[3] The present Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso, recognized Gedhun Choekyi Nyima as the XIth Panchen Lama.[3] Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was arrested by the Chinese government in 1995 and as of 2008 has not been seen in public.[4] The Chinese government imposed their own candidate Qoigyijabu.

It is obvious that the Chinese government will make every effort to support Shugden monasteries and Shugden lamas wherever they can and wherever someone accepts their financial support.

The New Kadampa Truth site, which was set up by the Secretary of the New Kadampa Tradition, reports about being accused of being sponsored by the Chinese government. NKT rejects this claim and states:

This is not true, and not a shred of evidence has been produced to support this repeated claim. In the Internal Rules (§3) it says:

The New Kadampa Tradition shall always be an entirely independent Buddhist tradition and the NKT-IKBU shall have no political affiliations.

The NKT has never had, and never will have, any political affiliations with the Chinese or Tibetan Governments. This is because mixing religion and politics is the cause of many problems, such as those evidenced by the Dalai Lama’s political interference in the four schools of Tibetan Buddhism. It is common for critics of the Dalai Lama to be labelled “Chinese sympathizers” (or usually far worse epithets) or to be accused of being on the payroll of the Chinese Government but, in the case of the NKT-IKBU, this is an entirely false accusation.

If one reads this statement carefully, it does not reject that NKT is financially supported by the PRC, it only states that NKT “never had, and never will have, any political affiliations”. Of course such a statement doesn’t prove that NKT or their front group, Western Shudgen Society, is financially supported by the PRC either. However, the statement sounds fuzzy and invites more doubts.

According to France TV 24[5]:

Behind this Shugden witch-hunt lies the fear of Chinese infiltration in the ranks of the Tibetan refugees. In the northern Indian city of Dharamsala, home of the Dalai Lama and the exiled Tibetan government, Shugden followers, with their open Chinese sympathies are considered a political threat.

“The Shugden and the Chinese are obviously allies,” says the Tibetan Prime Minister, Professor Samdhong Rinpoche. “Their cults all over the world are financed by the Chinese”. He adds that “people are afraid of Shugden violence. They are like terrorists, they will stop at nothing, everyone knows this.” To prove his point, he shows our reporters the photo of the murder of a leading Buddhist monk and two of his disciples in 1997. Tibetans are certain the Shugden are behind the murder.

A leading Shugden figure, Mahalama Losbang Yechi, defends his links with the Chinese community: “I approve the Chinese presence in Tibet. What we are living with the Dalai Lama today shows how authoritarian his theocratic regime must have been in the past. It was much more violent than what Tibetans are living today under Chinese rule.”

Yechi has filed a lawsuit against the Dalai Lama in an Indian high court for religious persecution. He denies acting on the orders of Chinese authorities.

Shugden followers, willingly or not, have become the symbol of a schism that threatens the struggle for Tibetan autonomy. For that, thousands of refugees have begun to pay a price.

France 24 TV also reports about what they portray as “Apartheid in Buddhist land” stating:

Photos of Shugden leaders are posted on city walls, branding them as traitors. Signs at the entrance of stores and hospitals forbid Shugden followers from entry. It’s apartheid, in Buddhist land.

Our reporters followed an ostracized Buddhist monk as he tried to affront the fellow villagers who have banned him. “We’re not violating Buddha’s teachings, and we’re excluded from everywhere just because of our religion” he complains.

“Aren’t you ashamed of betraying the Dalai Lama? You’re a monk! He is our only pillar, the only person we can count on,” he is asked.

In India, Shugden followers are forced to go into hiding. “I fled my house three days ago” says an old woman taken in by a family 300 kilometers away from her home. “I was the only Shugden in my village. Every day I grew more afraid of attacks.I had to block my door with stones for people not to break into my house”.

France 24 TV tries to balance their report but seem to have fallen under the influence of the exaggerated claims of some Shudgen followers. While it is certainly the case that injustice acts were performed by some Tibetans against Shugden followers, it is also the case that fanatical Shudgen followers forced the events. The claim of France TV Shugden worship is “a religion” and that 4 million Tibetans (from 6 million) would practice Shugden worship is incorrect and an exaggeration. It is far more an exaggeration to label the events in India “Apartheid in Buddhist land”.

The claims of the Western Shugden Society and some few Tibetan Shugden followers about “religious persecution” and violation of “human rights” are still unproven and seem to be heavily exaggerated. None of the independent human right groups have ever confirmed these claims. The controversial New Kadampa Tradition had already performed an Anti-Dalai Lama campaign under the guise of another front group, the Shugden Supporter Community (SSC), twelve years ago:

In 1996 Geshe Kelsang and his disciples started to denounce the Dalai Lama in public of being a “ruthless dictator” and “oppressor of religious freedom”,[6] they organised demonstrations against the Dalai Lama in the UK (later also in the USA, Swiss and Germany) with slogans like “Your smiles charm Your actions harm”.[7] Geshe Kelsang and the NKT accused the Dalai Lama of impinging on their religious freedom and of intolerance,[8] and further they accused the Dalai Lama “of selling out Tibet by promoting its autonomy within China rather than outright independence, of expelling their followers from jobs in Tibetan establishments in India, and of denying them humanitarian aid pouring in from Western countries.”[9] (see The Conflict in the West)

After investigating these claims carefully Amnesty International stated:

Amnesty International (AI) has received and studied a large amount of material alleging human rights abuses against worshippers of the Tibetan Buddhist deity Dorje Shugden. These alleged abuses are reported to have happened largely in Tibetan settlements in India. None of the material AI has received contains evidence of abuses which fall within AI’s mandate for action – such as grave violations of fundamental human rights including torture, the death penalty, extra-judicial executions, arbitrary detention or imprisonment, or unfair trials. While recognizing that spiritual debate can be contentious. Amnesty International cannot become involved in debate on spiritual issues. AI campaigns on the grave violations of human rights in Tibet, as well as the rest of the People’s Republic of China. In 1997 a widespread crackdown on Tibetan nationalists and religious groups continued. At least 96 Tibetans, most of them Buddhist monks and nuns, were reported to have been detained during the year for peacefully exercising fundamental freedoms. A continuing ‘patriotic re-education campaign’ in monasteries and nunneries has led to expulsions and arrests. Prison conditions remain harsh in Tibet and prisoners are often ill-treated for minor infringements of prison regulations. (AI Index: ASA 17/14/98, June 1998) [10]

Amnesty International focuses on the places where real persecution and violation of human rights take place, e.g. in Tibet. Neither AI nor any other independent human right group confirmed the claims of the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) or their front groups “Western Shugden Society” (WSS), 2008-??, and “Shugden Supporters Community” (SSC), 1996-1998, respectively.

If the Western Shugden Society/NKT, Kundeling Lama and his followers are financially supported by the PRC or not has to be proven as well, however it is clear that their world wide media campaign and actions against the Dalai Lama under the guise of “religious freedom” clearly support the Chinese Government’s aim to significantly weaken the XIV Dalai Lama’s powerful influence. Also their verbal attacks against the Dalai Lama have the same aggressive sound as those of the Chinese government. e.g. the PRC named the Dalai Lama a ‘wolf in monk’s robes’, the Western Shugden Society named him a ‘saffron robed Muslim’ who is ‘evil and cruel’.

Persecution

What independent human right groups report about religious persecution is very different from what WSS or Kundeling Lama report. Here is an example by Human Rights Watch:[11]

Opposition to Worship of Dorje Shugden

Chinese authorities also used an esoteric religious dispute over Dorje Shugden, a Tibetan Buddhist protector deity, to attack Tenzin Delek, equating his active support for the Dalai Lama’s anti-Shugden stance with opposition to Chinese policy. Although the debate, which has waxed and waned for more than two decades, has no specific political aspect, support for the Dalai Lama on the issue seems to have been viewed as tantamount to “splittism.”

Dorje Shugden is considered a powerful magical being who can help propitiators acquire worldly goods and other powers and benefits. The deity is also seen by some as a protector of the Gelugpa sect of Tibetan Buddhism. In addition, the deity is regarded as being able to inflict harm on those who stop propitiating it or on those who belong to other sects of Tibetan Buddhism.

In 1976, the Dalai Lama stopped worshipping Shugden and began to teach that such worship could be harmful to individuals who offended the deity. He advised that Dorje Shugden was harmful to him and to the cause of Tibetan independence. He said that genuine deities think in terms of liberating people from suffering, not in terms of harming them. He saw it as his duty to bring the issue to the attention of Tibetan Buddhists, but to leave it to each individual to decide whether to follow his advice.

In 1996, the Dalai Lama went further, banning Shugden worship for those who wished to be his immediate followers or to take teaching from him. At that point, well-organized Shugden supporters in the Tibetan diaspora mounted active opposition to the Dalai Lama’s position, going so far as to accuse him of denying religious freedom to Shugden supporters. The seemingly narrow issue of whether Dorje Shugden was a beneficial or harmful deity masked other issues within and among the four sects that comprise Tibetan Buddhism. It also became a deeply divisive issue within the Gelugpa school, which the Dalai Lama leads, between ultra-conservatives who continued to worship the deity and a larger grouping which followed the Dalai Lama’s approach.

According to some accounts, Chinese government officials even promoted Shugden worship in Tibetan communities.[153] Their goals, it appeared, were to dampen the Dalai Lama’s moral authority within the Tibetan and international communities and to use theological differences to exacerbate divisions within the Tibetan community.

Southern Kham is where support for the deity in the region has traditionally been strongest. Tenzin Delek joined the campaign against Shugden worship as early as 1979 when he brought evidence of the practice at Lithang Gonchen monastery to the attention of the 10th Panchen Lama. When Tenzin Delek returned from India in 1987, he again resisted pressure to join in Shugden worship and again preached against the practice to the general public, to monks at Lithang Gonchen monastery, and to village elders. He even announced he would not set foot in Lithang Gonchen monastery until the practice there stopped.[154] His doing so reportedly resulted in some monks leaving Lithang Gonchen, the major religious facility in the area, and taking up residence at Orthok monastery.[155] Such defections, coupled with others attributable to the availability of new permanent facilities at Orthok monastery and Tenzin Delek’s presence there, might have been regarded as evidence of his rising prominence and have led to anxiety over competition for resources.

The controversy continued to simmer and occasionally to flare. In 1999, several non-Shugden worshipping Lithang Gonchen monks were briefly detained.[156] Two years later, not long before Tenzin Delek was arrested and after an influential lama at Lithang Gonchen monastery decided he would not longer propitiate the deity, Shugden worship there all but disappeared. Monks came from “everywhere” to participate in a ceremony marking the change.[157]

Chinese officials continue to call for Dorje Shugden worship. As noted at the outset of this report, they also claim that one or two of the bombings to which Tenzin Delek and Lobsang Dondrup allegedly confessed occurred in close proximity to a senior monk who had supported Shugden worship.[158]

Other highly respected Buddhist leaders in Kardze Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture have suffered because of their support for the Dalai Lama as a religious figure and because of the respect and loyalty they engender from within local monastic and lay communities. Although the stories differ in the details, a common theme runs throughout, starting with concern on the part of Chinese authorities that these popular and charismatic figures make it difficult for the government to eliminate the veneration of the Dalai Lama and to dampen enthusiasm for religion. Chinese leaders fear that belief in Tibetan Buddhism, entwined as it is with Tibetan identity, will continue to support popular yearning for an independent Tibet.

Two cases of particular concern in Kardze are those of Sonam Phuntsog, serving out a five-year sentence for splittism, and the situation at Larung Gar, a monastic community formerly headed by Khenpo Jigme Phuntsog, which has been forced to drastically curtail its operations.

153 Isabel Hilton, “1. The Dalai Lama,” Independent, September 22, 1999; David Van Biema, “Monks vs. Monks,” Time Magazine, vol. 151, no. 18, May 11, 1998.

154 Human Rights Watch interviews with KR and ZB, September 5, 2003, and with HM, August 7, 2003.

155 Human Rights Watch interview with HM, August 7, 2003.

156 Human Rights Watch interview with KR, September 22, 2003.

157 Human Rights Watch interview with KR, December 14, 2002.

158 Human Rights Watch interview with DQ, April 4, 2003. See also Appendix II, “Interview with Kardze Court Judge.”

Also the report about the expulsion of monks who refused Shugden worship in Lama Gangchen’s monastery in Tibet invite more doubts about the honesty of the protesters who present their claims as an issue of “human rights” and “religious freedom”:

Gangchen Lama visited the monastery again on 3 December 1999, and instructed the monks to worship shugden deity (Shugden is a spirit which the Dalai Lama discourages to propitiate). He claimed himself as the re-incarnation of Panchen Sang Tashi, the founder of Gangchen Monastery, and called the monks to respect and worship him. He distributed booklets to the monks that had detailed explanation about his re-incarnation. However, no monks accepted him at the time.

Later, Gangchen Lama called 10 officials from the County Religious Department and PSB to instruct the monks to worship shugden and to respect him. A meeting was held in the monastery that very same day where the officials threatened the monks with arrest, detention and imprisonment if they oppose Gangchen Lama. Furthermore, refusal on the monk’s part would be deemed political and they would be investigated for crime against the nation. Since the beginning of 1999, Gangchen Lama had started building a new monastery of his own on the northen valley of Gangchen Monastery. The officials of County Religious Department and PSB forcefully evacuated the monks of Gangchen Monastery to the new monastery on 27 December 1999. Two new statues of the shugden deity placed in the prayer hall by Gangchen Monastery were met with protest by the monks. The statues were later taken by the monks who hid them in a nearby cave, which was used for meditation. There has been no history of shugden worship by the monks of Gangchen Monastery.

Owing to constant pressure to worship the deity and orders to carry out the instructions of Gangchen Lama, seven monks fled the monastery. Sonam fled from his monastery on January 1999, and stayed in Shigatse for two months. He escaped to Nepal in a group of eight Tibetans by paying 1800 yuan to a guide. He wishes to join a monastery in India. (see TCHRD report)

[1] Peter Bernard Clarke, a theology professor at Oxford, has characterised the NKT as a “controversial Tibetan Buddhist New Religious Movement (NRM)” see: Clarke, Peter Bernard. New Religions in Global Perspective, page 92, ISBN 0-415-25748-4, Routledge 2006

[2] BBC NEWS, Dalai Lama ‘behind Lhasa unrest’, May 10, 2006

[3] Laird, Thomas, The Story of Tibet, pages 148, 374

[4] Chinese view of Dalai Lama bodes ill for its Tibet policy, a March 29, 2008 article from the International Herald Tribune

[5] The Dalai Lama’s demon by France 24, Friday 08 August 2008

[6] Bunting, The Guardian, 1996, on July 6

[7] Bunting, The Guardian, 1996, on July 6; Lopez 1998:193

[8] Lopez 1998:193

[9] The Sydney Morning Herald, 2002, by Umarah Jamali in New Delhi November 16 2002

[10] Mills, Martin A, Human Rights in Global Perspective, Routledge, ISBN 0-415-30410-5, page 56, 57; Document – China: AI’s position on alleged abuses against worshippers of Tibetan deity Dorje Shugden, AI Index: ASA 17/14/98, June 1998

[11] Trials of a Tibetan Monk: The Case of Tenzin Delek: VII. Tenzin Delek’s Life and Work Prior to His April 2002 Arrest

Written by tenpel

September 9, 2008 at 11:00 am

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy

Tagged with , , , , , , , , , ,

Information about the New Kadampa Tradition

with 43 comments

Author: EKC – a member of the New Kadampa Survivors.

A growing number of people are leaving the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) and sharing their reasons for doing so. We hope this information can help you come to an informed decision about the kind of Buddhist organization you would be comfortable committing to.

  1. NKT students study only books written by one person, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, a Tibetan monk expelled by his Tibetan monastery. Although students are not forbidden to read other books they are strongly discouraged from doing so.
  2. NKT’s main daily prayers are to a controversial deity known as Dorje Shugden. The Dalai Lama strongly discourages Shugden practices as divisive. Indeed the current protests against him by the WSS (Western Shugden Society), many members of which are high profile NKT teachers, are proving divisive and ugly, as are NKT techniques of swamping online Buddhist chat rooms and message boards with pro-Shugden and anti Dalai Lama propaganda.
  3. Two high profile members of the NKT, both serving long term as Deputy Spiritual Director at different times – Neil E. (Gen Thubten) and Steve W. (Gen Samden) – had to be removed due to sexual misconduct committed with several nuns and lay women. Both had vows of celibacy and were either deliberately misusing or misinterpreting higher tantric teachings to justify sexual exploitation of their followers.
  4. NKT has never given clear information about the two ex-deputy spiritual directors and NKT members find out through rumour and gossip, mainly at NKT festivals. They are told not to let it disturb their minds.
  5. Many other high level NKT teachers have also been involved in sexual misconduct, showing that they are poorly supported within the tradition, and many have misconceptions about what a vow of celibacy actually covers.
  6. Ex-residents of NKT Dharma centres report having been required to sign away their rights as tenants, illegally. Many were told that the centres had the right to evict them without notice, for example.
  7. It is commonly reported amongst past and present NKT members that many people who move into NKT centres give up their paid jobs to go on benefits. They then work unpaid for the centres while deceiving the welfare/benefits agencies of their status. Monks and nuns are told not to wear their robes to the Job Centre when they sign on.
  8. NKT monks and nuns are not actually ordained as monks and nuns according to a vital Buddhist text known as Vinaya. Fully ordained monks and nuns under the Vinaya have over two hundred specific vows, while NKT monks and nuns have 10 vows, several of which are very vague. Many Buddhist schools do not accept NKT ordination as valid.

Ex NKT members strongly suggest that potential new members do their own research before considering a commitment to this New Religious Movement.

Those seeking independent information can contact the British-based research group INFORM.

Appendix:

Statements by Buddhists:

Related Topics:

Critical Newspaper Articles about the New Kadampa Tradition:

Video

Open Letters by Kelsang Gyatso:

Written by tenpel

September 18, 2008 at 5:00 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

A Biased Historical Narrative Does Not History Make

with 35 comments

Author: Thubten Lobsang*

A Biased Historical Narrative Does Not History Make

The Western Shugden Society (WSS) has recently carried a poorly researched essay titled “The Lama Policy: Freedom from the Drug” without cited sources, only a vague claim that the “paper” is based on a “collection of Tibetan books”. The essay seeks to undermine the institution of the Dalai Lamas and the Ganden Phodrang, rather than address specific concerns about the Shugden issue. The WSS has crossed yet another line in its deluded propaganda war – it has made evident that no longer is it campaigning just about the Shugden issue, its aim has expanded to include discrediting the TGIE, HH Dalai Lama, and anyone who dares support him.

The essay mentions the 5th Dalai Lama as the inventor of the system in Tibet that united spiritual and secular rule, but this is patently incorrect. In fact, the first religious rulers to also hold political power in Tibet were Sakyas. It was also Sakya Lamas who first established a priest-patron relationship with the Mongols as outlined here by the Sapan Foundation (A Sakya Charity in India):

“During Sakya Pandita’s and Chogyal Phagpa’s time, the Sakya Tradition reached its zenith in terms of religious and temporal importance. In 1252, Chogyal Phagpa was invited to the court of Emperor Kublai Khan who was converted to Buddhism. They developed a patron-priest relationship. The Emperor received teachings from Chogyal Phagpa for many years and he was given the title of several generations.”

The Sakyas continued to hold political power throughout both the 13th and 14th centuries, according to the website of HH Sakya Trizin, current holder of the lineage.

The essay then goes on to categorically claim that the Great 5th Dalai Lama was behind the murder of Dragpa Gyaltsen (with legend claims arose later as the wrathful spirit Shugden). However, this “fact” is also hotly disputed, and there are several conflicting historical accounts. In his essay “The Shuk-Den Affair” Prof. Georges Dreyfus. In these accounts explanations of Dragpa Gyaltsen’s death range from suicide, to illness, to stress, to a suicide specifically tied to a vow to arise as a Gelug protector with a mission to protect Tsongkhapa’s doctrine from being corrupted by Nyingma influences. A recent Tibetan work (Dol rgyal zhib ‘jug tshogs chung) argues that Dragpa Gyaltsen’s main opponents were actually related to a family dispute, between his family, the Ge-Kha-Sas and Sonam Choephel. Clearly, the WSS account is one sided, biased and lacks a measured weighing of the evidence.

In addition, the essay “Lama Policy: Freedom from the Drug” seeks to portray the 5th Dalai Lama as being vengeful against his opponent the King of Tsang, and murderously seeking the help of the Mongols. The article “Schisms, Murders and Hungry Ghosts in Shangri-la” argues that in fact the Great 5th showed tremendous restraint and sought a conciliatory approach, through ecclesiastical integration of the Nyingma teachings:

“At the time the Great Fifth gained power there were both secular and sectarian rivalries. In addition to various schools of Tibetan Buddhism, the old Bon religion was reviving its bid for supremacy in Tibet. Rather than use his power to crush the Nyingma sect, which he easily could have done through his alliance with the Mongols, the Great Fifth deliberately incorporated Nyingmapa teachings and practices into his ecclesiastical court (Norbu, 248-49). Some Gelugpa purists objected.”

So, ironically, it was the Gelugpa purists, who the WSS seeks to portray as non-political, who objected the the non-sectarian policies of the Great Fifth Dalai Lama, aimed at creating a more harmonious and unified Tibetan society.

The essay then goes on to repeat the same tired claim that HH the 14th Dalai Lama’s policies are aimed at destroying the integrity of the various orders of Tibetan Buddhism and making himself the head of a hodgepodge unified Tibetan church. In fact, a clear examination of the current Dalai Lama’s actions reveals a policy aimed at giving the Kagyus, Nyingmas and Sakyas a voice in the Phodrang government, that for years had been dominated almost entirely by Gelugpas. The essay neglects to mention the creation of a seat for the leader of each of the major lineages in the ministry in charge of religious affairs, and a policy aimed at recruiting government ministers in the TGIE from a variety of sects to reflect the religious diversity of Tibetan people.

WSS’s paper also neglects to mention that it is through the current Dalai Lama’s reforms that the TGIE has elected representatives, an elected Prime Minister and an essentially democratic system that even uses modern devices like the internet to register Tibetans overseas who want to vote in TGIE elections. While no one would argue the exile government doesn’t have its problems, the pace of change towards democratization is remarkable, especially considering the current plight of Tibetan refugees.

*Thubten Lobsang is the pseudonym of the author who wants to be anonymous.

Annotation
Williams states about the 5th Dalai Lama:

By most accounts the Dalai Lama was by the standards of his age a reasonably tolerant and benevolent ruler.[1]

[1] Clarke, Peter B. (ed.), Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements, London & New York: Routledge, 2006, page 136

Written by tenpel

September 24, 2008 at 2:32 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, Western Shugden Society - News

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Western Shugden Society: Sowing Dissent Through Baseless Allegations

with 38 comments

Author: Anonymous, revised article

Today, the 29th of September 2008 will be remembered by most people as the day that the Wall Street bailout bill failed to pass in the US Senate. However, for Buddhists, it will be remembered as the day that the Western Shugden Society officially began its campaign to overthrow HH the 14th Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government in Exile. Of course, the timing very unfortunate, as talks between the TGIE envoys and the Chinese government are at a crucial juncture. One wonders what the publication from this article accomplishes, apart from maintaining press coverage and the morale of WSS advocates.

The article, does not list any text or other reliable sources, apart from one book, an Ocean of Truth, but doesn’t cite the author or publication date of this apparent source. It doesn’t even say who the author of this latest WSS article is, perhaps preferring anonymity to forthrightness. It simply says at the beginning: “The following information has been compiled from various sources.” Those who wonder what these sources are, of course, are missing the point. Why? Well, really, an accurate or balanced account isn’t the point. It seems that the Tibetan organizations were correct in their summation of the Shugden campaign that was dismissed by the WSS as hateful and libelous rhetoric. But in fact, as we can now see plainly, WSS and its supporters are trying to “Sow dissent and undermine the Dalai Lama”.

Whoever wrote this article didn’t consider very carefully the implications it would have even for the Shugden camp. If it were true that the current Dalai Lama in an impostor, this would indicate two things:

  1. That Trijang Rinpoche, an omniscient Buddha and party to the background of the current Dalai Lama, kept secret something he knew to be a lie.
  2. That Dorje Shugden, at the time of the selection of the 14th Dalai Lama, failed once again in his “duty” to “protect” the Ganden tradition.

But surely, though Trijang Rinpoche may have been mistaken about Shugden, as a monk and by most accounts compassionate person he would not have allowed an impostor Dalai Lama to continue on the throne. The mystifying contradictions only go to once again further the conclusion reached by Tibetans in India a long time ago, that the WSS is “sowing dissent and undermining the Dalai Lama.”

In addition, the latest attempt by WSS reveals another ill-founded and un-Buddhist tactic – manipulation of Islamophobia. After using the headline “Saffron-robed Muslim” in their “information” booklet “The Tibetan Situation Today”, once again the thinly veiled anti-Muslim rhetoric appears in this article, “Taktser was a Muslim village”, and of course the unverified statements (no witnesses, no documents) that Buddhists had to pay Muslim officials bribes “in order to release” His Holiness the Dalai Lama from the Muslim community. Increasingly the prejudices of some in the WSS members, or at the very least the authors of their publications, are beginning to show. Though they claim the contrary, the label fundamentalist is becoming increasingly appropriate for the WSS.

Not content to merely undermine His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s selection by a litany of highly realized lamas as well as the Tibetan government, the latest propaganda aims to manipulate the deaths of two elderly but venerated lamas. Though HH Ling Rinpoche lived until the ripe old age of 80, we are told that his death was the fault of the Dalai Lama encouraging Gelugs to investigate the Nyingma tradition. Trijang Rinpoche, who also died at the mature and venerable age of 80, died because the Dalai Lama decided to give up Shugden.
One wonders how the WSS can claim that HH Dalai Lama and Tibetans who follow him are superstitious when they make such bold, unsubstantiated and superstitious claims themselves.

Clearly, the cause of Tibet, the work of HH Dalai Lama, the stability of the Three Great Monasteries is no concern of the WSS. Only the undermining of the institution of the Dalai Lama and the faith of his followers. It is very apparent that the political aspect of this campaign has shifted into high gear.

Clearly the WSS would have us believe that Serkong Rinpoche, Serkong Dorjechang, Ling Rinpoche, Trijang Rinpoche, Reting Rinpoche, the Ganden Tripa, HH Sakya Trizing, HH Karmapa, Penor Rinpoche, Phakchog Rinpoche and the countless others lamas who support HH Tenzin Gyatso as the 14th Dalai Lama are misleading the public. WSS alone can be counted to tell the “truth” about all Tibetan issues.
Perhaps one good thing can come out of this latest attack: nobody will believe ever again that the WSS is non-political.

For an accurate account of the enthronement of the Dalai Lama, verified by countless venerable lamas including WSS favourite Trijang Rinpoche, see this work:

  • Wangdu, Khemey Sonam (2000). “Discovery of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama. An Eyewitness Account.” In: Discovery, Recognition and Enthronement of the 14th Dalai Lama. Dharamsala: Library of Tibetan Works and Archives, pp. 1-52

Annotation by blog owner:

This is the author’s reply to the WSS article Reting Lama – How he chose the false Dalai Lama. The author wished to be anonymous.

For more about the Dalai Lamas see:

  • The Open Road: The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama by Pico Iyer
  • Freedom in Exile: Autobiography of the Dalai Lama by Dalai Lama XIV*
  • Fourteen Dalai Lamas: A Sacred Legacy of Reincarnation by Glenn H. Mullin

For more about Tibet’s history:

  • The Story of Tibet: Conversations with the Dalai Lama by Thomas Laird
  • The Dragon in the Land of Snows: A History of Modern Tibet Since 1947 by Tsering Shakya
  • In Exile from the Land of Snows: The Definitive Account of the Dalai Lama and Tibet Since the Chinese Conquest by John Avedon
  • A History of Modern Tibet, 1913-1951: The Demise of the Lamaist State by Melvyn C. Goldstein

* recommended by Paul Williams in Encyclopedia of New Religious Movements (edited by Clarke, Routledge, 2005), p. 137

Written by tenpel

September 29, 2008 at 8:56 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

Sectarian Rivalry – The Yellow Book by Zimey Rinpoche

with 17 comments

Researcher David Kay states in his paper[1]

The young Fourteenth Dalai Lama was introduced to the practice of Dorje Shugden reliance by Trijang Rinpoche prior to the exile of the Tibetan Buddhist community in 1959. After some years in Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama became aware that his practice was in conflict, first with the state protector Pehar[2], and later with the main protective goddess of the Gelug tradition and Tibetan people Palden Lhamo (dPal Idan lha mo), who, as a ‘jig rten las ‘das pa’i srung ma (an enlightened protector), objected strongly to Dorje Shugden’s pretensions.[3] He did not, however, voice his doubts about the merits of Dorje Shugden reliance until 1978 following the publication of a sectarian text by the Gelug lama Zimey Rinpoche (1927-96). This text, which is variously known as The Yellow Book or The Oral Transmission of the intelligent Father,[4] enumerates a series of stones that Zimey Rinpoche had heard informally from Trijang Rinpoche about ‘the many Ge-luk lamas whose lives are supposed to have been shortened by Shuk-den’s displeasure at their practicing Nying-ma teachings’ (Dreyfus 1998: 256). The text asserts the pre-eminence of the Gelug school which is symbolised and safeguarded by Dorje Shugden, and presents a stern warning to those within the Gelug whose eclectic tendencies would compromise its purity. This publication provoked angry reactions from members of non-Gelug traditions, setting in motion a bitter literary exchange that drew on ‘all aspects of sectarian rivalry’ (Kapstein 1989: 231).[5]

Matthew T. Kapstein states:

There has been a great deal of sectarian dispute among Tibetan refugees in India. Much of this has its roots in the works of Pha-bong-kha-pa Bde-chen snying-po [Pabongkha Dechen Nyingpo](1878-1937), whose visions of the Dge-lugs-pa [Gelugpa] protective deity Rdo-rje shugs-ldan [Dorje Shugden] seem to have entailed a commitment to oppose actively the other schools of Tibetan Buddhism and the Bon-po. While the status of the protective deity was the ostensive topic of debate initially, all aspects of sectarian rivalry have since been brought into play. The first cannonade was the Dge-lugs-pa [Gelugpa] partisan Dze-smad sprul-sku’s [Zemed Tulku's] Bstan-srung byung-brjod. This was answered, on behalf of the other sects, in T. G. Dhongthog’s Dus-kyi sbrang-char.* The Dge-lugs-pa [Gelugpa] response came not from Dze-smad [Zemed Tulku], but from a disciple: Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho’s [Yönten Gyamtso's] Gdong-lan. At least two counter attacks then appeared: T. G. Dhongthog’s Dus-kyi me-lce, and Bya-bral Sangs-rgyas-rdo-rje’s [Chatral Sangye Dorje's] Rdo-rje me-char.* Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho [Yönten Gyamtso] responded in turn with his Brgal-lan kun-khyab ‘brug-sgra. While these disputes were unfolding, H. H. the Dalai Lama disavowed the opinions of Dze-smad [Zemed Tulku] and his followers in a privately distributed mimeographed statement, published later by the government of Bhutan: Skyabs-mgon bka ‘slob. The Tibetan government in exile in Dharamsala has also published a statement of the Dalai Lama’s official position on these matters, Dol-rgyalskor gsal-bshad, and a collection of his pertinent speeches, Chos-skyong bka’-slob. [..]

The Dge-lugs-pa [Gelugpa] sect, both in India and Tibet, has become deeply fissured over the Shugs-ldan [Shugden] issue. During the past several years, the dispute has also become an international cause célèbre , particularly following the gruesome slaying in February 1997 of the principal of the Buddhist dialectical college in Dharamsala, a crime that has been widely blamed on adherents of the Shugs-ldan [Shugden] cult. The controversy has as a result been widely discussed in the press, and on several websites. In November 1997, a special panel was convened to discuss it at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Religion. These developments are conveniently and accurately surveyed in Lopez 1998, pp. 188-196. See now also Dreyfus 1998.)[6]

Paul Williams states in A quick note on Dorje Shugden (rDo rje shugs ldan):

The problem is that Pabongkhapa was renowned for being—or at least held by followers of other schools of Tibetan Buddhism as being—extremely sectarian and intolerant of other schools. The practice of Dorje Shugden was considered at least by other traditions as having been developed as a form of Gelug triumphalism and aimed at bringing into play a Dharma protector for the (magical) suppression of the other schools, or at least their marginalisation. In particular it was considered that the practice of Dorje Shugden was aimed at the Nyingma pa tradition. In the later 1970s and early 1980s there was fierce controversy among certain Gelug, Sakya and Nyingma Lamas in India over Dorje Shugden and his status, which the Dalai Lama attempted to cool down. The material has been published and is available in Tibetan.

The following is an excerpt of the Yellow Book. The Tibetan Youth Congress (TYC) translated this excerpt into English, added an introduction, and published it in 1996. The Yellow Book, Thunder of stirring Black cloud or The Oral Transmission of the intelligent Father, was originally published in 1974 by Tagdrag Uze and Choephel Legden who published also the Collected Works of Lama Pabongkhapa.[7] The Labrang (dwelling) of Trijang Rinpoche ordered 500 copies of that book.[7]

Introduction by TYC

We have been observing the Shugden Controversy more patiently than many people. Basically we find two reasons for it. On the first place it is politically motivated and the second reason is lack of proper knowledge. We are therefore, sending these statements with a pure motivation to help all the parties in the game. Since a great deal of garbage is being trashed out for public consumption, we hope to balance up the record. The practice of propitiating Dholgyal Shugden is a religious activity in our society. So a brief reference to the basic principles of Buddhism should be useful. The Buddha has taught the four noble truths – the suffering, its cause, the path and the state of liberation. In line with this the law of Karma is very basic. So the main message is that you are the creator of your own destiny. You suffer because of your evil actions. The other side of the coin is that you gain peace and full Enlightenment as results of your positive actions. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is our supreme leader and has a dual role, political and spiritual. He wants the best for his people and therefore explained the demerits of propitiating Dholgyal during some of his religious sermons. Dholgyal’s historical tie with the Tibetan government has been negative. So when you worship Dholgyal it brings some negative influence on the common Tibetan cause. In the long-run the practitioner too faces misfortune. We take refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha. But those who worship Dholgyal Shugden fully entrust in him and see him as the ultimate refuge. Dholgyal is at best a worldly spirit. The followers of Dholgyal barely have much respect to the Buddha. From a Buddhist perspective this is a fundamental mistake.

We must also recall that His Holiness the Dalai Lama attaches great importance for religious tolerance and understanding. Personally he had teachings from all the four major traditional schools of Tibetan Buddhism. His respect for other religions is also well documented. Some of his best friends are Christians and Jews. Under the circumstances, do you really find any ground for all these hue and cry of religious intolerance and suppression of religious freedom? Let us be very honest. Therefore we can see the political motive behind the controversy. His Holiness gave his instructions very clearly and openly. There was no coercion or force and you are left to make your own decision. We all expect His Holiness to guide us on the right path. Naturally you are not supposed to blame him for doing his job. We did some research about Shugden and its followers. The late Venerable Zeme Rinpoche was one of the most celebrated scholars of our time. We truly have much respect for his scholastic credentials. But unfortunately he was almost one-sided when it came to Shugden worship. His praise to Shugden sadly contains a great deal of sectarian feelings. His writings naturally influenced his students.

We are producing a few extractions from his works which do not need any elaboration. We leave it upto the readers to make their own judgement.

In these accounts narrated by Rinpoche, you will find that all those who did not follow Gelug tradition and sought teachings from other schools like Nyingma, they were punished by Dholgyal Shugden. Many of them had very short life. If Dholgyal really had such power, why did he allow Lhatsun Rinpoche to live so long? There were many other masters who practiced and taught Nyingma, Sakya and Kyagyu doctrine and enjoyed long life. We have met some old people who knew Lhatsun Rinpoche when he was in his eighties. This Rinpoche, the master, was in a matter of argument the boss and his disciples like Tatsak Rinpoche only followed him. If you really can hurt you hit at the root.

There are many more arguments to disprove what the late Zeme Rinpoche had written. Regardless of religious persuasions human beings all over the world believe in fate. And in Buddhism we term it the law of karma. A popular English saying, “What you sow, so shall you reap”. In a nut shell all those people mentioned in Rinpoche’s writing faced the result of their past actions. And Dholgyal’s role sounds whimsical and imaginary. As a Buddhist, when you forget the Buddha and take refuge in the Triple Jewel no evil spirit can harm you. But when you forget the Buddha and take refuge in a worldly spirit then the coming days will tell you the whole story.

We would like to appeal to all parties to practice patience and understanding. Our nation is facing a very critical time. Religious bigotry has served no purpose in any part of the world. The need of the hour is communal harmony and true feeling of loving kindness.

Excerpt of the Yellow Book by Zemey Rinpoche

Full Title: Account of the Protective Deity Dorje Shugden, Chief Guardian of the Gelug Sect, and of the Punishments meted out to Religious and Lay Leaders who incurred His Wrath

Published: 1973[4]

BQ4890.R37 D93 00
DZE SMAD BLO BZANG DPAL LDAN, 1927-

MTHU DANG STOBS KYIS CHE’BA’I BSTAN SRUNG CHEN PO RDO RJE SHUG
LDAN RTZAL GYI BYUNG BA BRJOD PA PHA RGOD BLA MA’I ZHAL GYI
DBUD RTZI ‘I CHU KHUR BRTZEGS SHING ‘JIGS RUNG GLOG ZHAGS ‘GYU
BA’I SPRIN NAG ‘KHRUGS PA’I NGA RO ZHES BYA BA BZHUGS SO /

[DZESMAD SPRUL MING PA BLO BZANG DPAL LDAN BSTAN 'DZIN YAR RGYAS
SU 'BOD PAS SBYAR].
DELHI : 1973

COVER TITLE: BSTAN SRUNG RDO RJE SHUGS LDAN RTZAL GYI BYUNG BA
BRJOD PA PHA RGOD BLA MA’I ZHAL GYI BDUD RTZI BZHUGS.

A CONTINUATION OF THE RDO RJE SHUGS LDAN GYI RTOGS BRJOD BY KHRI
BYANG BLO BZANG YE SHES BSTAN ‘DZIN RGYA MTSO.

Praise to you, the protector of the Yellow Hat tradition, you destroy like a pile of dust; Great adepts, high officials and ordinary people; who defile and corrupt the Gelug order.

With this quotation from the praise to Dorje Shugden, Kyabje Yongzin Trijang Dorjeechang told me some highly interesting accounts which he had not written for publication. As is clear from the above mentioned praise, the protector has punished those who corrupted the Gelug order. The symptoms were clear with various episodes of punishments from the king, entanglement with the law and untimely death for many powerful lama regents, incarnate tulkus, highly adept scholars, high officials and rich and powerful people. While being followers of Lama Tsongkhapa tradition, they have corrupted it with other tenets and traditions. Since Kyabje Rinpoche told me about these with great compassion it is very precious for me. With these accounts as the basis, I compiled other reliable material and added to the Ocean of Praise to the Protector.

THE PANCHEN LAMAS

All knowing Losang Palden Choekyi Dakpa was the lord of the Doctrine and from a very young age proved himself as an eminent scholar. He thus had great potential to serve the Dharma and sentient beings. But he did not make the flawless and well established teachings of the Dharma Raja Lama Tsongkhapa as his principal practice. But instead he studied many treasure texts of Nyingma order and did meditation on those teachings. These were mentioned in his autobiography. Dorjee Shugden repeatedly asked him not to do that. He got annoyed with the deity and performed a wrathful and despicable ritual to burn it. Along with other ingredients he put a thanka of deity in the fire. But the fire could not consume the thanka. Then he took out the thanka and put it under the steps of his door in Tashi Lhunpo. Because of those actions, the Panchen Rinpoche became ill and eventually passed away in the water-sheep year of the 15th rapjung when he was only thirty years of age. In this way the Panchen Rinpoche was unsuccessful in his Dharma propagation deeds.

His successor, Panchen losang Thubten Choekyi Nyima Gelek Namgyal too faced a great deal of problems (as a consequence). Because of misunderstanding between his monastery and the Tibetan Government, he had to escape to Mongolia. Later he wished to come back to U- Tsang, but there were unsurmountable hurdles and he could not succeed. At the age of fifty five, in the year fire-ox, he passed away in Kyigudo. A year before he passed away, Je Phaphongkha Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo came to pay his respects. During that meeting, the Panchen Rinpoche told Phaphongkha Rinpoche that since Phaphongkha Rinpoche was the incarnation of Lodo Balpa, the Tashi Lhunpo monastery naturally had respect and faith in him The Panchen Rinpoche asked him to give teachings and also asked him to take out the thanka of Shugden deity which was buried by the previous Panchen Rinpoche. In accordance with the instructions of the Panchen Rinpoche, Je phaphongkha went to Tashi Lhunpo monastery in the year of iron-dragon of the 16th rapjung. There he gave many religious sermons including the lamrim teachings. He also took out the thanka of the Shugden deity and put it in a shrine in the Tashi Lhunpo and worshipped it.

Phaphongkha Rinpoche composed a text which was a kind of agreement and understanding between the monastery and the deity.

The next Panchen Rinpoche, Panchen Losang Thinley Lhundup Choekyi Gyaltsen was born in Amdo. He displayed various remarkable deeds which were clear signals of his greatness. When he came to U-Tsang, certain impediments delayed his enthronement. Soon after his arrival to Tashi Lhunpo, he composed a prayer to Dorjee Shugden which helped creating harmony between the deity and the Panchen Rinpoche. However, later things changed. There was a statue of Shugden in a shrine in the palace. When it was seen by the spiritual tutor of the Panchen Rinpoche, Yongzin Kachen Ang Nyima, he told one of the attendants to take out the devil’s statue from there. When it was referred to the Panchen Rinpoche, he told the attendant to keep it where the teacher could not see. The tutor disliked Shugden and often told the Panchen Rinpoche that they practice pure kadampa tradition and that if he sought many deities, it could ruin him. The tutor banned the usual practice of propitiating Gyalchen Shugden at Tashi Lhunpo and the oracle karma, too, was banned from invoking the deity. The special invocation during the new year was also banned. Since then many bad omen occurred one after the other. A battle broke between the Shikatse soldiers and the Tashi Lhunpo subjects. The Tutor Ang Nyima himself fell from his horse two times. Several ominous incidents happened during the opening ceremony of the new palace, Dechen Phodrang. Because of these, they had to restore the practice of worshipping Gyalchen Shugden. On the invitation of China, the Panchen Rinpoche left for China in the wood-horse year.

Soon after the Panchen Rinpoche had departed from Tsang, unprecedented flood rushed from Gyaltse. The flooding totally washed away Kunkyobling, the main residential complex for many Panchen Lamas. Yongzin Ang Nyima could not return home and finally succumbed to an insect bite. Because the Panchen Rinpoche did not practice a pure philosophical tenet, unending disasters followed one after the other.

TEHOR ZIG-GYAB RINPOCHE

Tehor Zig-gyab Rinpoche worshipped Dorjee Shugden as the Chief of all deities. He completed his Dharma education at Tashi Lhunpo and earned the coveted Kachen degree. Then he went to Kham and propagated the Dharma and became very popular there. He again came back to Tashi Lhunpo and paid his respect to Panchen Losang Thubten Choekyi Nyima. The Panchen Lama became very fond of this scholar and asked him to be the abbot of Kunkyobling. Later the Panchen Lama gave his text of Nyingmapa teachings and some rituals tools. Due to that reason, he studied various Nyingmapa teachings. During that time a Nyingmapa tantric practitioner called Kyungtul came to see him. This visiter told him that if he learned Nyingma teachings he could become famous like the 5th Dalai Lama. So Zig-gyab Rinpoche decided to get teachings on Rinchen Terzod from the tantric master.

Dorjee Shugden on several occasions asked him not to study and meditate on Nyingmapa teachings. And if he did not heed to the deity’s advice, the Rinpoche would suffer from many hardships and could even shorten his life span. But Zig-gyab Rinpoche did not pay any attention. One day Dorjee Shugden was greatly annoyed and told the Rinpoche that, “I may not pierce you with my deadly claws, but if I did, I cannot take them out.” In this way the deity persuaded the Rinpoche to uphold a pure Gelug tradition. But the latter did not pay any heed and said that he has to abide but the instructions of his Lama. Ziggyab Rinpoche rented a house near Lhasa and received many Nyingma teachings and transmissions from the tantric master, Kyungtul. Gyalchen Shugden created a variety of miracles in their presence. So they decided to do a retreat. During that time Prime Minister Sheta Paljor Dorjee suddenly became very ill. So he requested for Zig-gyab Rinpoche to bestow an initiation for him. When the Rinpoche returned home after giving the initiation, he became very ill and after one day he passed away. If Zig-gyab Rinpoche did not practice Nyingmapa teachings and remained a proper practitioner of pure-gold like Gelug tradition, he could have a long life and his meritorious deeds could have spread far and wide. Kyabje Trijang Dorjeechang told me these accounts who in turn has heard from Tehor Losang Gyatso, an attendant of Zig-gyab Rinpoche until his last days.

PHAGPA LHA

Phagpa Lha Losang Thubten Mepham Tsultrim Gyaltsen was a great scholar and as such he should have upheld and propagated pure Gelugpa tradition. But he corrupted his philosophical stand and moral conduct and consequently lost his monk’s vow. He thus had to face the punishment by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso; and he was deprived of his religious and political powers. Later he lived in his house in Chamdo. One day while he was on his way to the toilet, he fell down and a broken bicycle piece pierced near his male organ and no amount of medication was of any help. After a long illness he succumbed to the injury. He had to face these difficulties, because he annoyed the deity Dorjee Shugden. When Je Phaphongkha was on his tour of the Kham area, he stayed over night at Phagpa Lha’s house. During the night he had a very ominous dream in relation to his host. Je Phaphongkha told about the dream to his secretary, Dema Losang Dorjee. All these accounts were told to my ever kind teacher, Kyabje Yongzin Trijang Dorjeechang by Chamdo Gyara Rinpoche.

THE RETING RINPOCHE

Regent Reting Rinpoche had to suffer punishment with the king’s order. The misfortune was caused by the miraculous power of the Dharma protector great Dorjee Shugden. Let me explain. The fourth Reting Rinpoche, Ngawang Yeshi Tenpai Gyaltsen, offered the entire possession of Reting Ladang to the Tibetan Government and requested His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso, not to search for the future Reting reincarnation. But His Holiness Thubten Gyatso returned everything back to the Ladang and asked them to search for the reincarnation. Accordingly the search party found the reincarnation in a simple family in Dakpo. This Rinpoche had made his foot prints on rocks. I saw one in the Reting monastery. One day while his mother was away the soup started boiling and overflowed from the earthen pot. So he closed the pot with his shoe lace. He displayed such miraculous powers while he was only a child. On the advice of His Holiness Thubten Gyatso, he was recognized as the 5th Reting Rinpoche and named Thubten Jampel Yeshi Gyaltsen.

He was admitted to Sera Je College where he completed his religious education. When H.H. Thubten Gyatso visited the Reting monastery in the water- monkey year, it seemed that he left some instructions to Reting Rinpoche concerning the governance of the nation.

His Holiness the Thirteenth Dalai Lama passed away in the water-bird year. For about two months the Prime Minister and the Kashag held the responsibility of the Government. After that the General Assembly nominated the Reting Rinpoche, Gaden throne Holder Yeshi Palden and Yongzin Phurchok Jamgon Rinpoche for the regency. The Reting Rinpoche’s name was confirmed with traditional tests were done in front of Lord Avaloketeshvara in the Potala Palace. Accordingly he was enthroned as the Regent on the 10th day of the first month of the wood-dog year.

Thus he held the responsibility to head the Gaden Phodrang, the Tibetan Government. He took particular interest in the construction of the tomb of the thirteenth Dalai Lama and the search for the next reincarnation. He personally went to the precious lake and saw the visions which gave clear signals of the reincarnation. He then recognized and enthroned the right reincarnation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

Those were indeed some of his wonderful deeds.

On the fourth day of the tenth month of the earth-hare year, the Reting Rinpoche did the hair cutting ceremony of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. In the last month of that year, he resigned from the post of regency after seven years of service. He had the traditional responsibility to uphold pure Kadampa tradition. His own monastery was the seat of Dromton Gyalpai Jungne. Moreover since the first Reting Rinpoche, Trichen Ngawang Chokden, tutor of His Holiness Kelsang Gyatso, the subsequent reincarnations preserved and propagated pure Gelug tradition. Many illustrious Gelug masters including Je Phaphongka exhorted and persuaded him to maintain and promote the stainless tradition of the great Lama Tsongkhapa. But the Reting Rinpoche did not pay any heed and he sought a number of hidden-treasure teachings of the Nyingma order from Tsenyi Tulku of Chamdo. He also received full transmission on Dzongchen from Sangya Dorjee. Thus the Reting Rinpoche departed from the tradition of his masters.

The final misfortune began to show up when the Reting Rinpoche had disagreement with the then Regent, Tadak. The government found evidence that the Reting Rinpoche had plotted against the life of the Regent Tadak. So, Kalon Surkhang Wangchen Gelek and Kalon Lhalu Gyurme Tsewang Dorjee went to the Reting monastery along with their force and arrested the Reting Rinpoche. Headed by Tsenyi Tulku, many monks from the Sera Je college revolted against the Tibetan government with arms. As the tension grew between the Sera Je College and the government, the latter increased its force and an intense fighting continued for days. Under the command of Kalsang Tsultrim, the government army fired at the Reting monastery and cause much destruction.

When the Reting Rinpoche and his friend Khardo Tulku was interrogated by the General Assembly, the latter confessed that they were guilty. The Reting Rinpoche also acknowledged his mistakes and pleaded for a chance to confess to the Regent himself. The appeal was sent through the Kashag with the endorsement of the General Assembly. But the appeal was rejected. The Reting Rinpoche was kept in Sharchen Chog under tight security with the officials, Lhungshar Orgyen Namdol and Rupon Kalsang Damdul in command. While he was in confinement, he suddenly passed away in the night on the 17th of the third month. No outsider had any knowledge of the cause of his death.

KHARDO TULKU

A similar case can be narrated about Khardo Tulku Kelsang Thubten Nyendak. Initially he sought teachings from Je Phaphongkha. But later, he corrupted his philosophical view and practice. He received many Nyingma teachings from Tsenyi Tulku along with the Reting Rinpoche. He was arrested with the Reting Rinpoche on the charges of plotting against the life of the then Regent Tadak. Later he was imprisoned in a dark cell with his legs in chains. After four years in jail, he was released during the amnesty announced when His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama was enthroned. After that he was free to live according to his wish, but soon he was passed away. So in short, all his deeds were unsuccessful which was purely due to the miraculous power of Dorje Shugden.

TATSAK RINPOCHE

In accordance with the prophecy of the deities and lamas, Kundeling Tatsak Rinpoche Losang Thupten Jigme Gyaltsen was recognized as the reincarnation of his predecessor. He completed his religious education from the Gomang College of Drepung monastery. He had the traditional responsibilities to practice and promote a pure Gelug order. But he departed far away from the stainless system of Gelug practice and received treasure text teachings from Lhatsun Rinpoche and received certain corrupted initiations known as the father’s experience and the mother’s dream which originated from Mongolia. These activities greatly annoyed the king of Gelug Dharma protectors, Dorjee Shugden, and as such Tatsak Rinpoche was accordingly punished. One day he suffered an acute pain in his chest. After consulting many deities and lama, he was told that it was caused by Dorjee Shugden. So, the oracle of the deity was invited and with invocation, he confessed his mistakes with the support of Lhatsun Rinpoche. It was of no help and in that place Lhatsun Rinpoche was scolded for his impure practice. Tatsak Rinpoche’s illness was more serious and he in much pain. So he sent Kundeling Oser Gyaltsen to invite Kyabje Trijang Dorjeechang. Another appeal was made via Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche. I personally witnessed the event. During that time the great Dorjee Shugden said that since he had committed himself to protect the Gelug doctrine, there wasn’t much he could do. However, when such evolved Gelug master is supporting, he would see what could be done. But mainly the whole thing depended on how Tatsak Rinpoche behaved. The deity then asked Tatsak Rinpoche, “What will you do in the future ?” Tatsak Rinpoche wept bitterly and replied that he confessed his past mistakes and promised that henceforth he will stop the practice of Nyingma teachings. After that he recovered to some extent. Because he did not keep his promise, his health deteriorated again. Tatsak Rinpoche then left for India for medical treatment and as well as for the purpose of pilgrimage. He went to a big hospital in Calcutta for treatment. Even that was of no avail and he passed away.

JE PHAPHONGKHA

Our very kind and exalted master Phaphongkha Dechen Nyingpo, the holder of the vajra, too, received transmission on the secret Hayagriva and the Great Exposition on Pure Vision by the Dalai Lama from Dagri Rinpoche Thinley Pema Kunsang Chogyal, great mahasidhi Ose Thekchog Dorjee,Gungtul Rinpoche Khenrap Palden Tanpai Nyima, Menyak Rekhu Rinpoche Lobsang Chodak Gyatso and others during his early life. Moreover he received initiation on Dupthap Dojoi Bhum-sang from Gungtul Rinpoche. Later Je Phaphongkha received many transmissions and teaching from Nyingma tradition. In those days he used to have strange dreams. Sometimes he saw in his dreams bearded monks and at other times grandly robed monks showing unhappy moods. One night he slept on the bed which was on the east of the room, but when he woke up he found himself on the bed which was on the west side of the room. One night when he was not able to sleep he heard some strange and ominous voices of a woman and another person shouting alternately around mid-night. The noise seemed to be coming from a distant place coming closer to his home, finally he saw a red hand sticking through the curtain. He thought it was due to the miraculous power of Dorjee Shugden. He confessed and asked to be forgiven and the noise returned the way it came. In the water-mouse year, when the Chinese troops had already entered Tibet, the Tibetan Government decided to do some religious service for the peace and safety of the nation. With the instruction from His Holiness the Dalai Lama, JePhaphongkha gave the transmission Kagyur in the Gaden Hall. Soon after that teaching, he was so seriously ill that he almost passed away. The sickness was due to certain poison. When he recovered, his whole body had become bluish. Dorjee Shugden also used other means to persuade Je Phaphongkha to practice and propagate pure Gelug tradition free of defilements. Finally he stopped taking and practicing Nyingma teachings and did not propagate what he had learned. He kept his promise and maintained pure Gelug tradition. Therefore, during the later part of his life, his Dharma deeds spread even to places outside Tibet like China and Mongolia.

SURKHANG PEMA WANGCHEN

Now let me reveal some accounts of powerful officials who received wrathful punishment from Dorjee Shugden. Surkhang Pema Wangchen became a Cabinet Secretary, because of his corrupted view and conduct his life was short lived. He was born in a noble family which had special links with the deity. From a very young age he was highly talented and well versed in Tibetan language. He was proficient in Chinese language too. If you read his Tibetan poetry, it is enchanting. He was referred to as a pundit. At the age of fourteen, he entered the public service and soon afterwards got promotion. Because of his talent, His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama became fond of him and posted him to the rank of the Cabinet Secretary. That was indeed a great honor for him and obviously a great achievement in worldly affairs. But he did not keep his family tradition of the practice of Dorjee Shugden worship nor did he maintain a pure Gelug tradition. In the Surkhang family, they worshipped Dorjee Shugden on every special occasion. They observed the propitiating of the deity on the eight day of every new year. When invoking the deity, very special offerings were made on that day. The family used to invite all their relations for the occasion, and after the worship they had a great feast. So, he had the responsibility to practice Gelug teachings and worship Dorjee Shugden. But his views and practice were corrupted and he showed much interest in the Nyingma teachings. Because of his influence, his father Sonam Wangchen sought teaching on the `treasure-text’ from Nyarong Terdon Sogyal and due to that he died suddenly at the age of thirty seven.

Pema Wangchen sought many Nyingma initiations and teachings from Lama Pao Rinpoche. He also sought many other Nyingma Lamas, including lama Tenzin Dakpa from whom he received a great deal of Dzongchen teachings. He reprinted `Yonten zot’ which was written by Kunkhen Longchen. Pema Wangchen had a good relationship with Geshe Sharab Rinpoche. Since this Geshe was a scholar of pure Gelug order, he refuted certain thesis written by Lama Tenzin Dakpa. Owing to Pema Wangchen’s persuasion, the Geshe did not complete his composition. In that place, the Geshe advised Pema Wangchen by way of some beautiful poems that the latter should follow the flawless doctrine of the Dharma Raja Lama Tsongkhapa.

The Geshe further added that he was not sectarian and his instructions were proper. But Pema Wangchen was adamant and paid no heed to what the Geshe said. Because he did not enter the proper path and abandon the wrong one he fell ill as a result. So with the invocation of Dorjee Shugden the advice was sought for treating the sickness. Dharma protector Dorjee Shugden told him to make the statues of Lama Tsongkhapa and his two chief disciples. He was also asked to do many ritual services. On top of that the deity advised him to eliminate the wrong path and exhorted the need to enter the proper way. As he did not act in accordance with those instructions he suffered from another disease. This time he got sores on his body. Thamcho Palden, the physician to H.H. the Dalai Lama, treated him. When one sore was cured another appeared and the pain was excruciating. In the mean time, his son, too, died due to the same disease. Pema Wangchen suffered with the pain and misery of that disease for about a year. With the help of some Lamas, he confessed to Dorjee Shugden many times. One time the deity was invoked and Pema Wangchen confessed. But the deity declared his final decision. Dorjee Shugden said that he was helpless. People like him, highly educated and holding high post in the government, but who did not practice pure Gelug tradition could harm Gaden Phodrang, the Tibetan government as well as the Gelug doctrine. All his efforts, taking medical treatment, performing religious services and engaging in every possible means proved of no help. The punishment of Dharma protector Dorjee Shugden struck and he died at the age of twenty two.

LHALU JIGME WANGYAL

Originally the Lhalu family practiced pure Gelug tradition. But Lhalu Jigme Namgyal entered Nyingma order and practiced the teaching to the best of his ability. His spiritual master was a tantric practitioner who lived in Bari retreat. Along with himself, Jigme Namgyal’s mother also received a good deal of Nyingma teachings. But the master committed adultery with his mother. Yangzom Tsering of Shetra was married to Lhalu Jigme Namgyal. She had much faith in the Gelug doctrine and worshipped Dorjee Shugden as the protector. So there remained a discord between the husband and wife. When he was young he suffered from a disease and was infested with lice. The pain and misery were immense and finally through numerous miracles of the deity he had to take the long path to the life beyond. Soon his son Phuntsok Rabgyal also died and Yangzom Tsering was left behind. There was no heir to continue the family.

TSEPON LUNGSHAR

The staff working for the Lhalu family collectively made an application to the Tibetan government stressing the problems in that family. So with instruction from H. H. the 13th Dalai Lama, Tsepon Lungshar was appointed incharge of the Lhalu family. Since the lady in the family, Yangzom Tsering was true to her faith and the deity, there was a clash of faith with Tsepon Lungshar. The man practiced an impure faith as he had heard a great deal of Nyingmapa teachings and received their initiations. Since Lungshar was fairly dogmatic about the Nyingma faith, the lady had to shift the statue of Dorjee Shugden from their house to Tashi Choeling.

Later Tsepon Lungshar was ill for a long time. They saw many evil omens during that time. One day a vulture actually landed on their house top which was considered very ominous. He consulted many great lamas and was told to do many ritual services including Lama Chopa offerings. The later part of Lungshar’s life became more tense as he was caught up in political intrigues. He had some differences with certain cabinet ministers regarding the governance of the nation. So with the support of some officials, he formed his own group and wrote to the Regent, the Prime minister and the Kashag about their proposals. Along with that letter he made allegations against Trimon Kalon. According to another version, Kendung Lobsang Tenkyong and Tsepon Lungshar were jointly commissioned to look after the provisions for the enlarged Tibetan military. The National Assembly had outlined the source of income for the military.

According to that stipulation, the commission scrutinised the estates of the ministers and other high officials. They made good progress, but later they were accused of partiality and favoritism. His colleague Kendung Lobsang Tenkyong, passed away in the mean time. During that political back-stabbing, Lungshar was arrested and put behind the bars. His eye balls were taken out and in their place boiling oil was poured. The intensity of his pain and misery were beyond imagination. The last few years in he prison were most pathetic. Finally he died in prison.

KALON TRIMON NORBU WANGYAL

Kalon Trimon Norbu Wangyal got into the public service during the reign of His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama. He was very efficient and was therefore promoted to higher posts in the bureaucracy. Soon he was raised to the rank of Tsepon. He was chief of the army when the Chinese troops were ousted from Tibet in the water-mouse year and his outstanding job during the time was rewarded. He became knowledgeable in the art of administrations and politics.

His Holiness Thubten Gyatso was very pleased with Kalon Trimon. So later he was appointed as the Governor of Domey with the rank of cabinet minister. He was by all accounts crowned with great success and honor.

Despite his official title and success, he had great faith in the Nyingma tradition and sought various teachings from many Nyingma lamas. He maintained them as his principal practice. These activities annoyed the Gelug Dharma protector Dorjee Shugden and consequently Kalon Trimon became insane. Even when he still had the title of a minister, he did many crazy things. One time he went to the market place and started beating all the cymbals that were arranged for sale. One day he wore a white lower garment, which usually used by Nyingmapas and red upper shawl. In those garments he went straight to see the then regent Reting Rinpoche. The regent said in a matter of jest that he was in the dress of a treasure master. And asked what treasure he had. Since he had many sons, he said, “I have the treasure of human beings.”

So he was out of his senses and did not know what was right and what was wrong. Not only did he suffer, the life for his wife and children were very hard. He did not care for the family property and wealth. He wasted them like anything. So the boys had to leave the home with whatever share they could get. In the process, Kalon Trimon literally became a poor man heavily indebted and at last he had to leave this world.”

(THE LATE ZEME RINPOCHE ON SHUGDEN: Statement on Shugden by TYC, Dharamsala)

Annotation

Ngawang Chokden was the 54th Ganden Throne Holder and tutor of the seventh Dalai Lama. He is also mentioned by the current Dalai Lama as an opponent of spirit worship in the Gelugpa school. The Dalai Lama said:

“I came across the contents of the work of Purchok Ngawang Jampa on the history of the Three Geluk Seats of learning dealing with Ganden. That work records information about restrictions on Dholgyal. And the biography of the Seventh Dalai Lama Kelsang Gyatso’s Tutor Trichen Ngawang Chogden reveals that during his tenure as the Ganden Tripa, the worship of earthly guardian-spirits on the premise of Ganden monastery was restricted. These historical actions are clearly revealed in the biography of Changkya Rolpey Dorje written by Thuken Choekyi Nyima which records that Trichen Ngawang Chogden when restricting the worship of earthly Guardian-spirits within the premise of Ganden monastery clearly mentioned Dholgyal by name. And the historical record there is extraordinarily clear that the tradition of worshipping them in the Ganden monastery’s premise was restricted and outlawed. It is therefore a matter of common knowledge that we are not restricting the worship of Dholgyal, or have brought up a hitherto non-existent Dholgyal name, totally out of nowhere; rather, there is a historical precedent to our action dating from that period.”[8]

Keeping this in mind and examining the conflict as portrayed by Kapstein”[6][9] and other researchers[10], it is amazing to see how all these tensions, problems and controversial historical developments are perverted or actively denied by Shugden followers up to the claims made by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso: “I would like to ask: what is the problem between the Nyingma and Gelug traditions? There is none. The majority of people from both traditions naturally live in harmony, so why is HH the Dalai Lama destroying this harmony by saying things like ‘Shugdens say you should not even touch a Nyingma document’?”[11]

Instead of acknowledging the tensions and trouble Geshe Kelsang claimed wrongly

“Now, my main point is that people should know that all the present problems regarding Dorje Shugden within the Mahayana Buddhist world have no creator other than HH the Dalai Lama.”[11]

Further Resource Links:

[1] Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation by David N. Kay, page 49, Routledge, 2004, ISBN 0415297656

[2] Since the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Pehar has served as the traditional Dharma-protector of the Tibetan state. Pehar has been, and continues to be, consulted by the Dalai Lama and his government on affairs of state through the protector’s chief medium, who is known as the Nechung (gNas chung) Oracle. The importance of oracle priests in the processes of political decision-making may provide a context for understanding the claim that Dorje Shugden should replace Pehar as the state protector. According to ex-monk and popular Buddhist author Stephen Batchelor, such a shift in Dharma-protector allegiance would have given supporters of Dorje Shugden a degree of political influence (interview, June 1994). If the view that he was the chief Dharma-protector in Central Tibet had gained a wider acceptance, it would have been ‘Rdo-Rje-Sugs-Ldan rather than Pe Har himself who functions as the State Oracle at Nechung‘ (Chime Radha Rinpoche, 1981: 31). According to some commentators, Dorje Shugden worshippers within the Gelug continue to harbour aspirations for political power. The most recent declaration of the Dalai Lama regarding Dorje Shugden propitiation has thus been interpreted by some as an essentially political statement.

[3] Palden Lhamo is seen not only as the chief guardian goddess of the Gelug tradition, but also as the patron-deity of Tibet who is ‘very much connected with the cause of Tibetan intependence and the protection of Tibet from foreign invaders’ (Schwartz 1994: 131)

[4] The full Tibetan title of Zimey Rinpoche’s text translates as ‘Account of the Protective Deity Dorje Shugden, Chief Guardian of the Gelug Sect, and of the Punishments meted out to Religious and Lay Leaders who incurred His Wrath’. The book was published in 1973 but not circulated publicly until 1975.

[5] The main participants in this exchange were a Gelug disciple of Zimey Rinpoche called Yonten Gyaltso and the Sakya scholar T. G. Dhongthog, who composed at least three rejoinders to Zimey Rinpoche’s position, one of which was entitled The Rain of Adamant Fire: A Holy Discourse Based Upon Scriptures and Reason, Annihilating the Poisonous Seeds of the Wicked Speech of Dzeme Trulku Lobsang Palden (1979). Full bibliographical details of this dispute can be gleaned from Kapstein (1989:231).*

[6] Kapstein, Matthew (2000) ‘The Tibetan Assimilation of Buddhism: Conversion, Contestation and Memory’ Oxford University Press, p254

[7] The Earth Shaking Thunder of True Word by Tenpai Gyaltsan Dhongthog, 2000, Sapan Institute, Washington, p 3

[8] HH the 14th Dalai Lama, Speech to an audience dominated by Tibetans from Tibet on 27 March 2006 during the Spring Teachings, http://www.dalailama.com/page.135.htm

[9] Kapstein, Matthew (1998) ‘The Purificatory Gem and Its Cleansing: A Late Tibetan Polemical Discussion of Apocryphal Texts‘, History of Religions, February 1989, Vol. 28, No. 3: 217-244

[10] An updated list of research: Academic Research regarding Shugden Controversy & New Kadampa Tradition

[11] False Accusations Against the Innocent, Geshe Kelsang’s letter to Newsweek, http://www.cesnur.org/testi/fr99/gkg.htm

[12] Two weeks before NKT started the present protests via WSS (April 22, 2008) a group of new editors appeared and changed the related articles by means of deleting academic sources; adding extensive quotes from Geshe Kelsang’s writings; adding quotes from anonymous websites; deleting passages even when verified by WP:Reliable Sources; blocking academic research by labelling them as “heavily biased”; using sock puppets, and applying blocking strategies at the talk page. Since that the NKT related articles, like New Kadampa Tradition or Dorje Shugden, are in a constant process of change. The former articles were collected here.

*Note: The Rain of Adamant Fire was written by Chatral Sangye Dorje Rinpoche, a Nyingma lama. The full title reads: The Rain of Adamant Fire. A holy discourse based upon scriptures and reason, annihilating the poisonous seeds of the wicked speech of Dzeme Trulku Lobsang Palden by the old nyingmapa hermit Chatral Sangyey Dorje (PDF-Tibetan language). Tenpai Gyaltsen Dhongthog wrote a few books on this issue, only one was translated into English, called The Earth Shaking Thunder of True Word: A refutation of attacks on the advice of H.H. the Dalai Lama regarding the propitiation of guardian deities. The first few pages were posted on the NKT thread on e-sangha (page 26) It was published in 2000 by the Sapan Institute and may still be available from them: Sapan Institute, 137 N.W. 205th Street, Shoreline, Washington 98177, U.S.A. A PDF of The Earth Shaking Thunder of True Word by Tenpai Gyaltsan Dhongthog can be purchased from the Tibetan Buddhist Resource Center for $30. Being a Sakya lama T.G. Dhongthog probably knows quite a bit about this protector as it started out as a Sakya protector after being tamed by Sakya Trizin Sonam Rinchen. Sakyapas completely reject the NKT claims that Shugden is a reincarnation of Virupa, Sakya Pandita or Buton. (This additional information as well as the excerpt of the Yellow Book was provided by B.J. from the New Kadampa Survivors.)

last update: Jan 18, 2009

Written by tenpel

October 1, 2008 at 7:42 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, Fundamentalism

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

"The Western Shugden Group is severely lacking in credibility" – Correction to the Time Magazine Article by Tibet Scholar Robert Barnett

with 18 comments

Tibet scholar Robert Barnett of Columbia University has denied Time Magazine’s suggestion with respect to obtaining Indian ID cards as stated in the article  The Dalai Lama’s Buddhist Foes July 18, 2008.

TibetanReview.net states:

Tibet scholar Robert Barnett of Columbia University has denied Time Magazine’s obvious suggestion, in a Jul 18 online posting, that he alleged denial of exile Tibetan government help for worshippers of the controversial Shugden spirit in obtaining Indian government ID card. In an email to this magazine and others, Mr Barnett said he had clearly written to the weekly magazine’s correspondent David van Biema, “ID cards are not given out by the exile administration, but by the Indian authorities”.

He also said he wrote to the correspondent: “I also made it clear that the Western Shugden group’s allegations are problematic: they are akin to attacking the Pope because some lay Catholics somewhere abuse non-believers or heretics. The Western Shugden Group is severely lacking in credibility, since its form of spirit-worship is heterodox, provocative and highly sectarian in Buddhist terms and so more than likely to be banned from mainstream monasteries – while its claimed concerns about cases of discrimination in India should be addressed by working within the Tibetan community instead of opportunistically attacking the Dalai Lama in order to provoke misinformed publicity for their sect.”

Written by tenpel

December 14, 2008 at 11:02 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, Fundamentalism, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Western Shugden Society / New Kadampa Tradition have Stopped the Protests against H.H. the Dalai Lama

with 10 comments

Some friends asked me why the NKT protesters didn’t show up at the last teachings of His Holiness, e.g. in USA, France or Germany.

There weren’t protests in Germany because at the same time there was the NKT summer festival in the UK, and Kelsang Gyatso, NKT’s founder and leader, gave his last teachings before he retired.*

However, the protests had already stopped before His Holiness came to Germany in July 2009. So why Western Shugden Society / New Kadampa Tradition have stopped the protests against H.H. the Dalai Lama? Unlike 2002 there is no official statement by Kelsang Gyatso; and the NKT/WSS blogs offer contradicting statements. While NKT’s Wisdom Buddha Dorje Shugden Blog offers a story of successful protests, another blog run by an NKT follower offers a story of unsuccessful protests. Not only this, both contradicting statements of success and non-success can be read also on the former blog. – Be careful when visiting the blogs, you may catch the NKT ‘spin-virus’ but you can also learn the art of how to spin the facts… ;-)

I lack time and enthusiasm to go through all of the perversions in those two statements, rather I found it amazing to see, that two apparent contradicting statements are offered as an explanation by WSS/NKT for stopping and continuing the protests respectively. At the moment the end of the protests are the reality not their continuation.

One remark with respect to the claims of success I wish to make at least. His Holiness always emphasized that people can practice Dorje Shugden privately and at their own places and there has never been a restriction for Shugden followers to set up their own monasteries. So what is sold as a success now by WSS/NKT is rather a natural outcome of what has been emphasized by H.H. the Dalai Lama and the TGIE ever since.

Personally I assume the reason why NKT stopped the protests could be because many NKT members ‘woke up’ due to the protests by NKT, and they started to question the organisation itself; many left NKT, and the protests must have been quite expensive too. Also there has not been too much success and the discussion about NKT’s controversial sides has quite likely damaged to a certain degree NKT’s reputation. However, this is just a speculation based on the New Kadampa Survivors discussions, emails I received and some observations and common sense. (For an example of NKT’s reputation struggle, the ‘false accusations against the innocent’,  see e.g. the NKT Truth-Smear Website or the comments on this page.)

Some Thoughts

Personally I have to say to portray Shugden followers as ‘terrorists’ is beyond my level of comprehension and I can see no reason for the validity of such a claim. Though many Shugden followers may be purists, fundamentalists, rejective in acknowledging the facts, and also some of them were very violent – not only by killing Ven. Lobsang Gyatso and two of his students or trying to kill Chatral Rinpoche and the assistant of Trijang Chogtrul Rinpoche – also in the monasteries there were violence and tensions, though all these actions are condemnable, they do not constitute a proper basis for imputing the term ‘terrorists’. And it is also true, that there was violence against Shugden followers**, and if one investigates a bit, injustices can be recognized against Shugden followers too. However, all these events should be seen in perspective, from a broad and unbiased perspective, according to the facts, without putting a spin on the facts, and based on a proper understanding of the subject matter, including the historical and cultural setting, and the development or dynamics of the events.

Some Positive News***

I acknowledge NKT’s recent trial to be more honest and trying to stick to the facts respectively by rephrasing the description of what NKT is. The Official New Kadampa Tradition Website states now about NKT:

It is an international association of study and meditation centers that follow the pure tradition of Mahayana Buddhism derived from the Buddhist meditators and scholars Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa and introduced into the West by the Buddhist Teacher Venerable Geshe Kelsang Gyatso.

Applause for this brave correction, at least in one point: that NKT is derived from Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa. If something is derived from something else, it is based on it, it has it at its foundation. The verb to derive indicates that the original thing (here, Je Tsongkhapa’s or Atisha’s tradition) and that which is derived from it (here NKT) are not the same. So it is an admission that the two are distinguishable as separate entities, where as previously the NKT claimed they and the old Kadampa school or Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition were synonymous. However, as someone pointed out in an email, the statement still includes a fault: the teachings of Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa were not ‘introduced into the West by the Buddhist Teacher Venerable Geshe Kelsang Gyatso’ – their traditions were known in the west long before Kelsang Gyatso left the Indian exile in 1977.****

With respect to the correct statement, that NKT is derived from their traditions, it would be really fine if  NKT can go along with this way of accuracy and honesty. Well done!

Note

Besides academic analysis the discussion on the Tricycle Blog, with almost 2500 comments, might be helpful as well.

* for his ‘last speech’ read this transcription Kelsang Gyatso’s last speech 2009
** Chryssides, George D. (1999) ‘The New Kadampa Tradition‘ in “Exploring New Religions“, Continuum International Publishing Group, 233-243
*** at least I see this as a positive development
**** as Jones pointed out in a comment I have missed the meaning of the statement here, so there is no fault in the statement and my claim is incorrect. The statement can be read as “Kelsang Gyatso brought to the West what he derived from those two traditions of Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa.” I apologize for this mistake. [Oct 28, 2009]

Written by tenpel

October 4, 2009 at 1:52 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , ,

Cartoon NKT Survivor Experiences

with 2 comments

There is a series of cartoons from a former NKT nun which are well made and shed light on life within the New Kadampa Tradition / Kadampa Buddhism.

It makes me very sad to watch them.

I can highly recommend these clips. Presently one can watch:

NEW: The former NKT nun created now her own website: http://www.xtranormalbuddhist.co.uk/

Last Update: 09 Jan 2012

Written by tenpel

November 4, 2011 at 11:12 am

Posted in Buddhism, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , ,

We are so important, our problems matter: WSS’s new campaign

with one comment

After some time of silence the Western Shugden Society (WSS) / New Kadamapa Tradition (NKT) has picked up again the unilateral fight against the Dalai Lama in the name of “justice” and “religious freedom” etc. At least the WSS runs a new trial of that campaign.

This time I am deliberately saying that they “run a campaign against the Dalai Lama” because a good friend of mine in whom I have trust and who read the WSS book “A Great Deception” said it is ridiculous to claim that the book wants “to restore peace and harmony between Shugden and non-Shugden practitioners within Buddhist communities world-wide” while its main target is just the good reputation of the Dalai Lama which they try to put down by all means, and at all costs.

In the new campaign the Western Shugden Society / New Kadampa Tradition are writing “Open Letters to British Political Leaders“, among them British Prime Minister David Cameron MP, Foreign Secretary William Hague MP, and to Home Secretary Theresa May MP. I wonder why they should take any organisation seriously that says it has “no leader nor registered office” and which official website hides its identity via domain by proxy server? Answer: This time the Western Shugden Society puts a name under the letter. Very clever ;-) The letter is signed by “John McBretney*, PhD, BSc (Hons), Retired Civil Servant Representative, Western Shugden Society.” Ouch!

In the open letters the WSS refers to the self-written book (with no author) “A Great Deception” [nomen est omen ;-)] as a source of information for those high politicians. I wonder how they can really think such a book can convince any informed or reasonable person who can rely on an armada of qualified researchers?

I think the new campaign makes the WSS / NKT into an object of laughter or an object of compassion. How can they really believe to have any chance to convince the mainstream with their crude theses? My understanding is that hostility and pride lead the WSS/NKT more and more away from reality and that these delusions create an own reality for NKT/WSS members with the Dalai Lama as the “evil and cruel” dictator and themselves as the true, honest and pure human beings who must convince the world of their own “truth”.

As an enclosure the WSS added to their letters also their book “A Great Deception”. I feel the following review of “A Great Deception: The Ruling Lamas’ Policies” hits the nail on its head:

»Childishly written (“we wrote to the Dalai Lama for his side and he didn’t respond, so that proves he’s guilty” a paraphrase true to the book’s spirit), and mostly unsubstantiated “facts” (sometimes citations for works also produced by the same group as the book – notice the book doesn’t actually have an author.) I don’t think it is likely that EVERYTHING in the book is just made up, but it certainly can’t all be true either (the Dalai Lama, nor anyone else, could not possibly be Muslim, Communist AND Fascist as this volume breathlessly claims.)«

While the NKT/WSS are following their perception of the Dalai Lama as an evil and cruel dictator, the Dorje Shugden Website follows it’s own strange approach. In their Mission Statement they write:

»This website, an ongoing work in progress, is dedicated to the glorification and deeper appreciation of the name and holy work of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, who by peaceful, increasing, subjugating and wrathful means spreads in this world the general and profound teachings of the Buddhadharma that can dispel all suffering and its causes. We believe that what may sound contradictory today, will be revealed as skilful means in the future.«

Looking on the huge image of Shugden they projected onto a wall on a building, I just thought ‘so much self grasping and grasping to an idea, this is just ridiculous’. And like a comment to this thought I found in the right corner of that image an ad for the musical “WiCKED”. Wicked, indeed.

____

* John McBretney is the Resident Teacher of the NKT Heruka centre in London. John said to a Mexican Newspaper: “La Western Shugden Society (WSSREP, por sus siglas en inglés), con sede en Londres, es seguidora del budismo de Doryhe Shugden pero, a diferencia de la tradición Kadampa, esta agrupación hace activismo político en pro de la libertad religiosa. Apro entrevistó telefónicamente a su vocero, John Mc Bretney.”

Translation: »The WSS, based in London, follows the Buddhism of Dorje Shugden but, differently to the Kadampa Tradition, this group is politically active in favour of religious freedom. Apro interviewed their spokesman, John McBretney, by telephone.«

John McBretney sees no contradiction to say that WSS is political active and NKT is not political active while he and the far majority of the WSS are both WSS followers and NKT followers. I assume the idea is, when they are engaged for WSS they are political active and when they are engaged for NKT they are not political active, and at that time when they are “pure NKT practitioners” the past political actions and the future political actions do not exist, hence they are political inactive (just living in the present moment with no relation to past and future), and they do not have the perceived faults of the Dalai Lama “who pollutes religion with politics”. There is no contradiction for WSS members “To free Buddhism from pollution by politics” by pouring more politics into religion, and by splitting oneself into a Dr. Jekyll und Mr. Hyde personality.

–Update–

New Kadampa CultWatch is online again as NKT Cult Watch.

Written by tenpel

October 22, 2011 at 8:38 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , ,

INFORM statistics – Geshe Title of Kelsang Gyatso – Not Isolating Groups

with one comment

For one week I was in London. During that time I visited also INFORM—an internationally renowned research group based at the London School of Economics. I am full of praise and respect for their work. First of all, the persons I met are very intelligent, clear minded and have a warm, unbiased and compassionate attitude, which I really cherish very much because such qualities are a must for such work and they are always useful for self and others. Also INFORM is not unaware about the harm New Religions can bring to people, which was important for me to see because some accounts I read from Massimo Introvigne (CESNUR) seem to confirm the criticism of cult-watch-movements that he might be rather supporting these groups by downplaying the potential harm that so called cults can bring to others.

Actually I think there is a fine line between the freedom of religion, and a setting which creates an environment that undermines the freedom of an individual or actually encourages the exploitation of individuals on a material, emotionally or sexual level. What is more important, the concept of “freedom of religion” or that the people’s freedom and well-being is not harmed in the name of religion? In Germany the concept of “freedom of religion” was seen as higher than the concept of the “rights of animals”, therefore a German court gave permission in the name of “religious freedom” for kosher butchering. A decision I feel to be quite questionable even in mundane perspective not to speak about a Buddhist point of view.

Researchers like Margaret Thaler Singer stress the rights of the individual not to be harmed in the name of religion and researchers like Massimo Introvigne stress the rights of the freedom of religion and that New Religious Movements should not be harmed by denouncing them or portraying them in a biased manner. Actually I appreciate both approaches. But for my taste how Introvigne writes about Singer appears to me also as being biased and at times even hostile. Maybe I am wrong about Introvigne, but to me the key point seems to be that if we cling too strongly to ideas of purity (etc.) or hold fanatically to the concepts of rights, there is a tendency to see these ideas as more important than the sentient beings’ welfare. These attitudes will always lead us away from being really human, compassionate and wise. All types of fundamentalism or inhumanity go together with the attitude that certain concepts are seen as more important than sentient beings welfare and freedom. What makes the things even more complicated is that these concepts also claim to exactly know what is good or bad for the being’s welfare… We’re walking on razor’s edge…

It was mainly from my Wikipedia work, what I learned there as an editor, some explorations into the so–called “cult” or “anti-cult” stuff, and exchanges with INFORM that protected me from falling from one extreme to another, which means after having followed devotedly a cult movement to apply the same black and white patterns but now as an “anti-cultist”. This danger really exists after having left a cult. One is at risk to not recognize the black-and-white patterns and to fall under their spell again. In that sense one needs really a “deprogramming” of one’s bad mental attitudes in order to really ‘get rid of the cult’ not only outwardly but also inwardly, in the own mind.

During my visit to INFORM and in the last days I learned three things. One is with respect to NKT, the second has to do with the Geshe title claim of Kelsang Gyatso, and the third thing I learned is to question the ways of how to deal with groups which have a lot of destructive patterns. Besides the INFORM visit, one of the highlights with respect to my thinking about NKT and the issue of destructive movements or spiritual leaders who lead their students astray was a meeting with Claude AnShin Thomas, the head of the German Buddhist Monastic Congregation, Ven. Bhikshuni Thubten Choedroen, who I met with in Kassel (Germany) on July 18th, 2011. I was thinking it might be helpful to share some of the points here in brief:

INFORM’s Statistics of Enquiries
It was quite astonishing for me to learn during my INFORM visit that in 2008 and 2010 the most enquiries with respect to groups were with respect to the New Kadampa Tradition. The NKT topped even Scientology. Here are the statistics. They are available for the public and were provided by Suzanne Newcombe (PhD), Research Officer at Inform:

2008
In 2008 Inform received enquiries about 84 different groups about which it already had some information. Of these specific groups, those about which Inform received the most enquiries were:

39 New Kadampa Tradition
37 Mehdi Zand / World of Yaad
22 Church of Soientology
20 Mohan Singh
15 Unification Church
8 The Family International
6 Brahma Kumaris
5 School of Economic Science
4 Exclusive Brethren
4 Hizb ut-Tahrir
4 International Churches of Christ
4 Landmark Education
4 Soka Gakkai International

Inform notes in their report about 2008: “A considerable amount of staff research time arose out of the enquiries about the New Kadampa Tradition, Mohan Singh, and Mehdi Zand and the World of Yaad.”

2010
The 2010 Annual Report is not finalised. For 2010 the comparative figures are:

28 New Kadampa Tradition
27 Mohan Singh
13 Church of Scientology
9 Falun Gong
6 Rigpa
5 Exclusive Brethren
5 Adidam
5 Friends of the Western Buddhist Order
5 School of Economic Science
4 Unification Church
3 Brahma Kumaris
3 Diamond Way Buddhism
3 Divine Light Mission
3 Hizb-ut-Tahrir
3 Jehovah’s Witnesses
3 Landmark
3 New Frontiers
3 Rastafarianism
3 Sahaja Yoga
3 Schiller Institute
3 Universal Church of the Kingdom of God
3 Mehdi Zand

1996-2010 enquiries about the New Kadampa Tradition:

1996 – 19 enquiries
Including:
2 former members
3 current members
2 media

1997 – 9 enquiries

1998 – 11 enquiries
Including:
3 current members
1 media

1999 – 6 enquiries
2000 – 6 enquiries
2001 – 6 enquiries
2002 – 3 enquiries
2003 – 3 enquiries
2004 – 2 enquiries
2005 – 1 enquiries
2006 – 7 enquiries

2007 – 17 enquiries
Including:
8 former members
1 current member

2008 – 39 enquiries
Including:
6 current members
13 former members
1 media

2009 – 23 enquiries
Including:
3 current members
6 former members

2010 – 28 enquiries
Including:
5 current members
7 former members

Geshe Title of Kelsang Gyatso

The Geshe title of Kelsang Gyatso is somewhat a mystery, while he claims to hold a Geshe title, some sources say he didn’t receive the Geshe degree. The New Kadampa Tradition sent their point of view to INFORM together with the permission to make it available if someone asks for it: »Separate document regarding Geshe Kelsang’s personal situation«. (PDF) If one reads it carefully and has some background it shows some inconsistencies, e.g. in Tashi Lhunpo it is not possible to study to become a Geshe, one is offered the Khachen degree. It seems that Kelsang Gyatso indeed didn’t really receive the formal Geshe title, and he himself states that he didn’t accept the changes with respect to it, hence he had to bear the consequences of this decision.

The arguments the New Kadampa Tradition is using to defend the Geshe title are not very helpful because it is not uncommon either to call someone out of respect a Geshe or even just for fun. To praise a learned person as a master and to write long life prayers which portray him to be a great teacher is a common approach in Tibetan Buddhism. The statements made in long life prayers shouldn’t be taken literally. Our Lharampa Geshe in Italy even forbade to recite his long life prayer “because it is not true.” To use long life prayer statements as arguments to settle a controversy about a Geshe title is not very productive in such a context.

The problem seems to be more that the Geshe title is sometimes used or given even if persons did not do the final debates and exams. For instance according to a Geshe at Nalanda monastery (France) Geshe Michael Roach received his Geshe title after he had done the amount of work of four years of study and because he was a generous sponsor. In that context some argued this is the way how corruption enters education and spirituality. I have been told that sometimes even cooks can get an honorific Geshe title. According to a fully ordained nun from the Tibetan Centre in Hamburg (Germany) Khensur Rinpoche Geshe Jampa Tegchok, who taught from 1997-1982 the Geshe program at Manjushri Institute (now NKT’s “mother centre”), a program which was approved by the Dalai Lama, and who served for seven years as an abbot in Sera received the Geshe title without the final requirements. But this is perfectly accepted by everybody and nobody has challenged it, he is held in highest esteems! So there is a type of acceptance, ambiguity or flexibility which is different to our Western world where it is a very clear process when one obtains a PhD. Trying to get some clarity I wrote to some learned persons:

Actual there are some Geshes, who didn’t do their Geshe exam but use the title Geshe and this is perfectly accepted and no problem within Tibetan Buddhism. I just heard that also my 80 year old teacher who was aboot for 7 years of Sera Je in India, Geshe Jampa Tegchok, and who was in the first 2 years together with Kelsang Gyatso at Manjushri Centre, did not do the Geshe exam, still it is perfectly fine for him to have the Geshe title and it is commonly accepted.

Carola Roloff (PhD) replied in an email:

That is true, although I know Tibetan geshes who do not feel that this is appropriate. It seems that it became more and more quite common, at the same time this leads to an inflation of the academic geshe title. Similarly it is criticized that more and more Tulkus are appointed. Generally speaking there are several geshe titles. The term geshe, lit. kalyanamitra, already occurred from the 8th century onwards, as we can see from the Kadam Chöjung and thus correctly pointed out by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. Actually yesterday I learned that even Dromtönpa is considered to have been a geshe in the sense of a scholar, although he was a lay person. It seems that the geshe title by Gelugpa monasteries came only in existence by the 18th century. I have raised the issue of Tibetan scholar titles in my MA thesis and in relation to Rendawa in my PhD thesis.

When I asked for her permission to quote this statement, she agreed and asked to add the following paragraphs:

However, I would like to point out that this is a very complex issue. For example, in the Tibetan Gelug monasteries in Indian exile it was possible that you receive the geshe title as long as you were enrolled, even if you were travelling most of the time and did not join the classes, as long as you participated in the final exam. This does not mean that you have or do not have the knowledge required. It will depend on many circumstances such as the person’s ability and determination, the teachers close to the person etc., whether the knowledge has been accumulated.

For somebody who worked most of the time for the monastery and therefore was not able to join the classes, it was sufficient to memorize a certain text (minimum 50 pages/folios?) to receive the geshe title. During the traditional final debate session such person would sit next to the main of three main candidates, who sits in the middle, but would not be expected to say anything. This leads indeed to situations in which persons who never studied the major five texts receive a geshe title.

On the other hand there are monks (and nuns) who did the full study, which nowadays takes 17 years, but did not receive the geshe title, either because they did not want it (in the case of some monks), or because they did not receive it (in the case of nuns), although they seem to have passed all exams required according to the gelug exam regulations and perhaps could even become a geshe lharampa. Why some monks did not want the title may have various reasons such as (apparent or true) modesty/renunciation, or lack of money to make the traditional offering to the whole community of monks after they have received the degree. But again, this does not mean that those who accepted the geshe title are always true or not true practitioners.

So again, as so often, things are not black and white and have a very complex background. There are also cases like Lama Yeshe–founder of the FPMT and Manjushri Centre near Ulverston/Cumbria)–who was a Tulku and a Rinpoche but never used those titles. As far as it was told to me his situation was similar to that of Kelsang Gyatso but he never used the Geshe title.

Not Isolating Groups
We have a very sad case in Germany were the Vietnamese abbot (Thich Thien Son) of a huge community in Frankfurt (Pagode Path Hue) is accused of having inappropriate sexual relationships with some of his male students. According to former members he even claims wrongly this would be a part of the monk’s training and other masters would do it likewise. This abbot had been the former head of the Deutsche Buddhistische Ordensgemeinschaft (DBO). After extensive research by the DBO board and engaged Buddhists, based on five affidavits the “abbot” was finally expelled from the DBO. The DBO made a public statement on their website too. Some concerned Buddhists and the DBO informed teachers, musicians, and the Jade Buddha project about the findings of the DBO to be able to make an informed decision. Though many terminated their collaboration with the Pagode in Frankfurt, some didn’t. Among them was Claude AnShin Thomas and his decision was felt by some as controversial. Due to different reasons and circumstances the head of the DBO and I were able to meet him, and it was quite an extraordinary experience… To make it short, though Claude Anshin refused to take sides or positions with respect to the accusations his point of view is: “if the accusations are true the group needs help, if they are not true, they need help too and if they are semi-true they also need help. Isolating groups is not a good way of dealing with such problems.”

Though the DBO statement and my own engagement in this case were not based on the wish to isolate the group, public statements such as these will rather naturally lead to an isolation and though such public statements might be useful to protect others and to enable people to make an informed decision, they aren’t necessarily the best way to address spiritual, power, sexual, material or emotional abuse.

At the moment I am in the process of sorting out these understandings, and I asked Suzanne Newcombe (PhD), a research officer at INFORM what she thinks about it. With her permission I quote her here:

Sociological research shows that it is when groups are social and physically isolated that the most harmful things happen. Extremism in both thought and behaviour is moderated somewhat by contact with other groups and ‘mainstream society’. This is partially behind Inform’s policy of always trying to maintain directly contact with the groups we study. ‘New’ groups or those with charismatic leadership can change very quickly and unpredictably, so it is also good to have contact so that one can have accurate information about what is actually happening.

In the Canadian Rigpa documentary one of the women says that she approached a visiting monk at Sogyal’s centre in France asking what it meant to be a ‘consort’ and was told by this person that it was ‘a great honour’. She later felt that this individual was colluding and supporting what she would describe as Sogyal’s ‘abuse’ of women. I wonder what would have happened if that monk would have said – no Buddhist should cause harm by sexual relationships. There is a fine line between being seen as ‘endorsing and colluding’ and being available to moderate, observe and counsel individuals away from harm. Being able to say clearly and with specific examples, how Thich Thien Son’s actions have caused harm to some of those who were in relationship with him, is very helpful.

and

One of the key theories sociologists use is that of ‘deviance amplification’ the wikipedia link here is a fair introduction: Deviancy amplification spiral. Traditionally, it focuses on media involvement in demonising sections of society or particular groups. However, you can also sometimes see the same cycle at work with say, a ‘problem’ child in school – the child becomes labelled as a problem and then acts more and more in accord with the label. If you want more reading along these lines, let me know and I’ll think a bit more.

It might be interesting for you to read some of Eileen’s work in positioning Inform – you can download the academic ‘What Should We Do About the Cults‘. (or from this page http://inform.ac/node/1547)

I hope this is some food for thought.

updated: July 28, 2011 at 4:13 pm

Written by tenpel

July 28, 2011 at 9:57 am

Posted in Buddhism, New Kadampa Tradition, Religion

Tagged with , , , , ,

A life in the day of the New Kadampa Tradition

with 75 comments

[Legal disclaimer: everything in this essay is the view and experience of the author and may not represent the experiences of others who were involved.]

I first came across the NKT when I was given a paid for respite break by a local charity, at Manjushri Kadampa Meditation Centre near Ulverston. I knew nothing of the NKT’s reputation or indeed that there were Buddhist groups with a bad rep.

My impressions were good. I went to puja (prayers sung to simple tunes) nearly every day, read books in the library and tried out meditation. I guess not many people talked to me, but the ones who did were kind and gentle, and I was able to reach some very basic realisations about my life in Buddhist terms. It made good sense, I very much wanted more, and I asked if I could move in. Immediately and with little consideration I was told no, only very select students could live at that centre, but I might try smaller NKT centres elsewhere.

A little over two months later I moved into Chenrezig Centre in Lancaster city centre. I was allocated a room that was large, but had only a skylight to allow in daylight, and no adjustable ventilation – the room was baking hot in summer and freezing cold in winter. We were discouraged from using much heating to save the centre money, despite we were paying towards bills and some of us were also making a monthly donation, as well as buying things for the centre out of our own pockets.

After a few weeks as a resident I was asked by the financial director to give my laptop computer to the resident teacher of the centre. At the time I didn’t believe he could be serious, and I laughed it off. Now I’m sure he was.

I was put under a lot of pressure to make financial donations in indirect ways – to pay for new robes for the resident teacher, to pay for her and other residents to attend teachings at other centres, and such like. I was on disability benefits, and I must have given thousands of pounds to the NKT while I was a member, one way or another.

Despite all this, I was quite happy there for some time. I was appointed meditation room supervisor, which meant keeping it clean, putting out and removing chairs and cushions for pujas and teachings, and organising the more complex puja rituals. I attended both General Program (GP:basic) and Foundation Program (FP:intermediate) classes, and although I wasn’t always entirely happy with answers to my questions, I was persuaded to believe this was due to my inexperience as a Buddhist practitioner. I was told Geshe Kelsang was both a Buddha and my guru, and I accepted that as part of the conditions of belonging to the tradition.  I had little idea what it meant or how to check it out, and we were discouraged from reading any books other than his. As with so many things, no one said you absolutely must not, but the usual phrase was, “Why would you want to?”.

Later the centre was to become divided. Neil Elliott, who had been Gen-la Thubten, moved in along with his wife, and he, the resident teacher and the financial director made a lot of decisions and changes that affected the rest of us, but in which we were allowed no part. NKT centres are definitely not democracies, and being a resident does not give you any say in what happens there.

After about 15 months I had a rough time with jetlag, following a trip to the US, where I had given a presentation on disability and spirituality. Despite my previous hard work and financial support of the centre, I was asked to leave. By now I had permission to take ordination as a nun, which had been granted on the condition of full support of my teacher, and now she was the main player in having me removed from the centre. A man living outside the centre was allocated to speed up my moving process, and within a short time I moved out to Bardsea, a village near Manjushri KMC. Manjushri still refused to consider me for residency, but I hoped that by being nearby and showing willingness and hard work, they might overlook my disabilities and allow me to move in.

Life in Bardsea was horribly lonely.  The village is small, most people drive off to work all day, and those that are left are the elderly, who don’t go out much. I had hoped that going to Manjushri centre would be enough, but it turned out to be the icing on the cake of great loneliness. I was allocated cleaning jobs two mornings a week – toilets and the large dining room – and I came in faithfully to do these.  Rarely did anyone talk to me, and I wonder if anyone even noticed I was doing the work. I went to puja every day, walking a half hour each way, and often no one really spoke to me there either. I attended the resident teacher’s GP class and the Sunday FP, which was where I got most of my interaction for the whole week.

Despite these bad experiences, I decided to go ahead and ordain. The time came, we had preparations the day before, and then the ceremony in the morning.  I took my vows and went home after lunch, in my robes, back to my empty flat, with a certain sense of failure and thoughts of, what’s actually changed? I had heard from other people that the high of being ordained usually lasted a few weeks, but mine didn’t last a day. Still, I was determined I was going to be a good nun and continue to develop my mind in Buddhist ways. I was unprepared for how often I would feel a failure, and how I would still find myself questioning what the NKT and my guru Geshe Kelsang were doing.

Following summer festival, I applied to move to Losang Dragpa centre in Todmorden, West Yorkshire. I had been refused previously, but now that I was a new nun, and there were new people in key roles at LDC, I was accepted, and moved in October. This was just as well – as evenings began to draw in walking to Manjushri centre along unlit lanes with no pavements was beginning to feel very risky, though no one cared to check on my welfare when I didn’t attend. At LDC things were not always a smooth ride.  My accommodation was two rooms in one of the blocks behind the castle – buildings that looked like run down council flats both outside and in. Our stairs had no carpet, just old flaking underlay, the buildings were barely heated, and in the cold, damp Yorkshire winter I had frequent colds and coughs I found hard to shake off.

Other things were quite well.  I had frequent access to my FP teacher and occasional access to the resident teacher, who I admired very much – though it has to be said a lot of the residents didn’t like her because she hardly came out of her rooms.

My work for the centre was mainly ironing guest bedding and helping in the kitchen, as well as some time cleaning in the three meditation rooms. My disabilities were somewhat catered for in that I only had to work mornings, and I tended to get light duties during weekend events. It must be said that when I tried to get across the case for increasing disabled access to the centre I was told that disabled people never showed any interest in attending!  There was a chalet building that had apparently been intended to be wheelchair accessible, but on knowledgeable inspection really wasn’t. The NKT attitude to disability is a misapplication of one of the ten conditions for a human life to qualify as precious (according to Tibetan Buddhism): no physical or mental afflictions. Disabled people naturally have more difficulty accessing teachings and NKT sees little reason to make it easier for them. I struggled with this complete lack of compassion throughout my time in the NKT.

I was aware that other centre residents had a much harder time than I did in some ways – many were working full time at low paid jobs in order to pay their rent, bills and buy basic food, and on top of that they had to spend a set number of hours each week working for the centre, plus most of us were getting up early to attend teachings from 7am to 9am two days a week.  Stories abounded of how much good it had done some of our teachers to be exhausted to the point of crying throughout teachings and pujas through their excessive commitment to the centre.

On a day to day basis life at LDC was not easy, I still questioned things, but I took my ordination seriously, and tended to consider that this was as good as it gets.  I was living in a large centre, attending teachings several times a week, and pujas daily, and what more could a new nun ask for? I did want to volunteer in the local community, but my resident teacher wouldn’t hear of it, and directed me to train to work on the centre’s reception desk instead.

Then, following summer festival 2007, our cold, damp “paradise” on the hill fell apart. The first I heard of it was when a lay woman resident I was friendly with came to talk to me – about her feelings concerning our resident teacher having suddenly announced she was leaving. Despite being a nun, I had not been told, and the news was at least two days old. I managed to see the teacher before she left, and later found out she was not honest with me. Scandal had fallen once more on the NKT – Gen-la Samden, a monk and very high teacher, had been having sexual relations with nuns and lay women in the name of tantric practice. My resident teacher was one of those nuns. I found out at this point that what Samden did was exactly the same as what Neil Elliott, also serving as Gen-la, had done some years previously, though when Elliott had moved to Chenrezig centre we were given a watered down version – that he had given back his vows in order to marry Diane.

Our little world fell apart quickly – within a couple days of our teacher leaving we were informed she wouldn’t be replaced, the centre was closed, we all had to move on. A letter was shown around, declaring the centre to be impure, and leaving us in turmoil. Were we, the residents, also impure? Were the teachings we had received there corrupt?  No one came to help us or advise us. Later Gen-la Khyenrab, who had replaced Samden, said that sending someone to us in our time of need would have been like sending someone into a lion’s den. Both then and now my response to that is, didn’t the NKT have a Bodhisattva – a highly realised practitioner – in its ranks, who could have taken whatever was thrown at them, and helped lead us through the mess we were left in?  It’s ironic that many of us had heard of centres being suddenly closed, but we never thought it would happen to us.

The next few weeks and months were very strange. Residents gradually left, most of them for other NKT centres – despite all that had happened! I applied for a couple of centres – Manjushri, and Madhyamaka near York.  Both offered me a pre-residency working visit, then when I disclosed my disabilities both rejected me, despite my successful residency at LDC. I found myself directed to Nagarjuna centre in the Midlands. It sounded good – was known for taking people with disabilities, pets and/or children. I visited and found it completely isolated, with the format of the working day incompatible with making the long bus journey to town and back.  It was rumoured that the resident teacher, a lay woman, was permitted to have a TV, which was absolutely banned in all other centres. There was something odd about the place, like a kind of dumping ground for NKT misfits where they could cause little trouble.

Around this time I really began to leave the NKT. I visited the FPMT centre (a similar but reputable Buddhist tradition) in Leeds, where I was accepted, NKT ordination and all, and treated with great compassion and respect. Ultimately I was to be unable to continue with the FPMT either due to the traumas caused by NKT; this was no fault of theirs.

I decided to remain a nun, wearing robes and keeping my vows, but trying to make a go of it on my own, on the edges of but not fully involved with other traditions. I moved out from the run down block behind the castle that used to house LDC, tried to keep up a practice, and failed, even despite attending FPMT weekly.  In April I returned my robes, along with a letter returning my vows and expressing my disappointments, in a box posted to Geshe Kelsang. I knew by then not to expect a reply, and I never got one. I had been in NKT about three years, and a nun for around 21 months.

It’s three years now since I posted off my robes. I have changed and moved on but am still working to integrate my NKT experiences into anything coherent as a part of my history.  It’s deeply confusing – there is so much potential good in the beautiful teachings of the Buddha, but the organisation warps them, bending them to maximise its financial profits and minimise its responsibilities to its members. Therefore when a person sees the light and leaves the NKT it is hard to trust again, hard to find the spiritual direction and fulfilment that we need, and that led us there in the first place.

I am left distrusting of ritual and of teachers, even when I have researched a group and found it to be reputable. I feel some desire to strike out on my own spiritual path, but I don’t know how to find it without some direction and the company of others going a similar way. In other words, I don’t trust groups or teachers, and I don’t trust my own judgement. This, for me, is the lasting legacy of my time in NKT.

I valued being a nun more than anything at the time, but now everything holy and pure seems suspect, even though the real difficulty was not that I was too impure for the NKT – but that I was actually too pure for them! I could not, and ultimately would not, rationalise their failure to practise what they preached. Therein lies the irony of being a NKT survivor.

Copyright: this essay may be forwarded by email or printed out in full. Permission is not given for publicly selectively quoting from this essay, or for full or partial publication on websites, blogs or for-profit publications, without the author’s explicit consent.  If you do not know who the author is you must not use it for these purposes.

Written by tenpel

July 5, 2011 at 10:00 pm

Posted in Buddhism, New Kadampa Tradition, Religion

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

BBC: An Unholy Row

leave a comment »

The BBC documentary An Unholy Row about the New Kadampa Tradition from 1998 can be watched now YouTube:

Written by tenpel

June 26, 2011 at 8:58 am

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

NKT Ordination – Clarifying More Misunderstandings

with 4 comments

Recently I received more explanations by Kelsang Gyatso which he gave to his followers with respect to the ordination women and men can receive in the New Kadampa Tradition (aka Kadampa Buddhism). I post them here together with some objections for the sake of dispelling the misunderstandings. At the end of this post there is an excerpt of a talk by Gen-la Samden to NKT monks and nuns.

Ordination ceremony July 28th 1999 at Manjushri

From the Ordination Handbook, p.20

As our renunciation deepens it will transform into bodhichitta, and our ordination vows will transform into Bodhisattva vows and finally into Tantric vows. In this way we can become a higher being able to maintain our ordination into our next life.

Objection: It is impossible that ordination vows can continue into the next life. The Vinaya and all commentaries on the Vinaya are clear about this. If the ordination vows could be carried into the next life then it follows very soon one would break one of the four root vows in the next life by just having sex through one of the three doors of the body, and since one has broken the root vows in one’s youth one cannot receive ordination in that very life again.

The ordination vows last for one life and cease with the death. Ordination vows cannot ‘transform into Bodhisattva vows and finally into Tantric vows”, if it were so then also all the ordained persons would receive the Bodhisattva vows and the Tantric vows by a miraculous way of transformation. The Bodhisattva vows and the Tantric vows as well as the ordination vows are conferred only by the proper ceremony as described in the scriptures, a qualified abbot/Sangha or master, and with a concious intention to receive them. Bodhichitta must be developed by applying the Mahayana teachings and renunciation supports that mind but does not transform into it otherwise if follows the Bodhisattvas who have attained uncontrived Bodhichitta have no renunciation because their renunciation would have transformed into Bodhichitta. What ‘higher being (is) able to maintain (the) ordination into our next life’? Please give an example and a scriptural source.

Ordination talk – Spring Festival 2000, Calistoga, California

In the Kadampa tradition we can carry our ordination with us from one life to the next. This is very different from the Hinayana tradition which nowadays Tibetan Buddhism is following. Western people need Kadam Dharma and it is particularly suited to them. Our Vinaya sutra is the Perfection of Wisdom sutra and Lamrim is its commentary. Our Vinaya is Lamrim. Through improving our Lamrim practice we improve our ordination. This is a different way of practising ordination from the Hinayana tradition, even different from the Mahayana tradition. Our ordination practices are very special and very clear, they are not complicated, so you should be happy with them.

Objection: In the ancient Kadampa tradition there exist no teaching that claims that the ordination would be carried to the next life. Atisha didn’t say that nor did any Kadampa master make such an assertion. Those in the Kadampa tradition, who were ordained, were ordained according to the Vinaya and especially about Atisha it is said that he had respected and followed the Vinaya in a perfect manner. Please give an example and an exact scriptural source where any of the old Kadampa master made such a claim. There is no one who has said this. According to the Vinaya the vows cease at the end of the life. The ordained Kadampas (e.g. Atisha) and the ordained Gelugpas (e.g. Je Tsongkhapa) as well as all the other ordained persons of the Tibetan schools of Buddhism follow the Vinaya. The explanation above is indeed ‘very different from the Hinayana tradition which nowadays Tibetan Buddhism is following.’ Statements like ‘Our Vinaya sutra is the Perfection of Wisdom sutra and Lamrim is its commentary. Our Vinaya is Lamrim.’ are twisted and wrong explanations. Neither the Perfection of Wisdom sutra nor Lamrim reveal or are texts that reveal how ordination vows are conferred and what the duties and rituals of monastic communities are. Though Lamrim practice supports an ordained person it cannot replace the Vinaya and the practice of the Vinaya. It is true what Kelsang Gyatso says: ‘This is a different way of practising ordination from the Hinayana tradition, even different from the Mahayana tradition.’ Yes, it is, it is self-made. I disagree with the conclusion of Kelsang Gyatso: ‘Our ordination practices are very special and very clear, they are not complicated, so you should be happy with them.’ This ordination has no support from any tradition, it is twisted, self-created and this wrong explanation shouldn’t be accepted. Actual it is really sad to read such twisted explanations.

However, still the NKT ordination can be considered to be valid insofar as it can be seen to be a so called “Rabjung ordination”. Such an ordination—usually given to Tibetan kids under the age of 18—does not confer actual ordination vows and the person is an “in-between” which means the person is neither a real lay person nor a real ordained person, such a Rabjung does also not belong to the Buddhist monastic order but is approaching to become a member of it by aspiring to become a novice or a fully ordained person.

‘Ordination handbook’. Ordination talk on July 29th 1999

He calls the vows ‘initial or basic ordination. The second level is called the Getsul – Getsulpa and Getsulma in Tibetan, or Shramanera and Shramanerika in Sanskrit… The third and highest level of ordination within the Pratimoksha is the Gelong ordination – Gelongpa and Gelongma in Tibetan, or Bhikkshu and Bhikkshuni in Sanskrit…’

He says he is following Geshe Potawa’s idea of ordination – that when he gained the realization of renunciation… ‘Only then did his basic ordained vows become actual Pratimoksha vows.’

There follows a discussion of how the New Kadampa ordination is Prasangika, following Khedrubje’s commentary to the Perfection of Wisdom sutras, and that the Vinaya Sutra ordination ‘can only be received from a highly qualified senior Teacher who has been ordained for at least ten years’ – so ‘superficially this was incorrect’ (Geshe Potawa saying that due to receiving Lamrim teachings from Dromtonpa he developed renunciation so his ‘ordaining master’ was Dromtonpa… but Kelsang Gyatso is following Geshe Potawa’s view of ordination.

The previous monastic vows follow ‘Madhyamika-Svantantrika’ commentaries due to the influence of powerful Madhyamika-Svantantrika Masters ‘materially and politically’ according to ‘my root Guru, Kyabje Trijang Dorejechang’.

Therefore when you ‘receive your ordinained vows (from KG) you do not have real renunciation, and your vows are artificial. However, later through the practice of Lamrim your artificial renunciation becomes actual renunciation and your vows become real ordained vows. As your renunciation deepens, and your wish to attain nirvana strengthens, your ordained vows transform into Getsul or Shramanera vows, and you become a Getsul or Getsulma. By continuing to improve your renunciation until it becomes spontaneous, your Getsul vows will transform into Gelong vows and you will become a Bhikkshu or Bhikkshuni.’

Quote:

‘Nowadays the practice of Vinaya has almost died out. Not only the Vinaya but Buddhism in general is degenerating, including the Tibetan Gelug tradition… however here in the West we are very fortunate. For this is not a degenerate time but an increasing time…Since we are living in an increasing time we need to do everything very purely and correctly…If we followed the example of the tradition of a degenerate time, it would be impossible for us to make any progress….According to our Kadampa tradition of Mahayana Buddhism, you do not need to receive Gelong vows, full ordination, in a separate ritual ceremony.

As our renunciation deepens it will transform into bodhichitta, and our ordination vows will transform into Bodhisattva vows and finally into Tantric vows. In this way we can become a higher being able to maintain our ordination into our next life. This is the most profound way of understanding Kadampa ordination. The Dharma is the same but we are practising differently. We have a special presentation, which is simpler, more practical, and causes less confusion. This understanding is very important, otherwise in the future you may develop confusion about your ordination because we are practising very differently from Tibetans. So you need to know these things. This is a special method of practising Dharma and keeping ordination vows for the western practitioner.

Western people are well-educated; they do not have blind faith but immediately question and try to understand the truth. We cannot be like a fully ordained monk who has taken 253 vows but who is not keeping even one. We should never do this; we need to do everything correctly and purely. The Kadampa ordination solves all these problems. Practically speaking, all the 253 vows included in the Vinaya sutra are included within the ten commitments. The commitment ‘…abandon engaging in meaningless activities’ includes abandoning all meaningless activities – mental, verbal or physical. But whether we can abandon them all depends upon our practice of Lamrim.

The actual words of the Kadampa ordination are brief but the practice is very extensive. It is a condensation of the entire practice of Lamrim and includes all the meanings of the Perfection of Wisdom sutra. In the future we can say that our Vinaya Sutra is the Perfection of Wisdom sutra, and Lamrim is its commentary.

…we must be confident that our ordination is correct. If people say that you are doing wrong, you can tell them that we like our tradition, we are happy with it and for us it is enough.

Objection: Here the meaning of what Geshe Potowa said is confused. What Geshe Potowa wanted to emphasize is that due to the influence of Dromtöpa he developed renunciation and this realization made him really an renunciate not the ritual or the ordination. However, this does not imply that he did not receive the ordination vows by the proper Vinaya ceremony nor does this statement by Geshe Potowa imply that his vows were established by developing renunciation. The vows are not received by developing or not developing renunciation but by the proper Vinaya ceremony otherwise it follows that newly ordained people don’t receive the vows by the ceremony of ordination and if they haven’t received the vows they cannot break them, hence they can have sexual intercourse, they can kill human beings, lie about attainments or steal without breaking their vows—at least as long as they haven’t develop renunciation.

From the Ordination ceremony July 29th 1999.

According to the Hinayana Vaibhasika school, ordination vows are subtle physical form and disappear at the time of death, but according to the Mahayana, vows are a type of mind and we do not necessarily lose our ordination when we die. If we can maintain the determination to keep our vows through the death process and into our next rebirth, we will still be ordained in our next life.

When most ordinary beings die they forget everything from their previous life. Their memory and mindfulness degenerates, and when they take their next rebirth they are unable to remember anything. If they were ordained they will again have to receive ordination from their Spiritual Guide. However, those practitioners who have gained profound realizations of moral discipline, which are powerful enough to withstand death, can carry their ordination with them into future lives. The Mahayana view is different from that of the Hinayana Vaibhashika tradition, and is more correct.

Objection: Here two different things are mixed up. The ordination is always based on the Vinaya which Tibetans relate to the Hinayana school. Though realised beings can carry Bodhisattva vows into the next life they cannot carry the ordination vows into the next life unless they are Bodhisattvas who have abandoned all delusions (on the 8th ground) because all Arhats are natural Bhikshus or Bhikshunis due to the purity of their mind.

I will add here some other explanations without commenting on them because those who have knowledge and understanding will be able to judge them for themselves.

Spring Festival 2000, Calistoga, California, Ordination talk – final draft prepared by Dekyi.

We Kadampa Buddhists are trying to bring the Dharma into mainstream of human society and to help people integrate their daily activities with their practice of Dharma. Now we are beginning. I understand we have a very special opportunity here. No Buddhist has ever done this before.

Right now it is your responsibility to improve yourself. Sometimes people respect you and regard you as their Spiritual Guide, as a Holy being, or maybe like a Buddha. Even though we are not yet a Buddha it is right for us to teach the Holy Dharma because from the student’s side, whether his or her Teacher is a real Buddha or not depends upon the student’s faith, and view, not on the actual qualifications of the teacher.

But from our side we shouldn’t believe that we are anything special. If we come to believe that we are a Holy Being or a Buddha we are making a mistake.

We know that we are not a Buddha but we don’t need to say this to our students, because they have faith in us.

Some of you come to me and say, ‘Geshe-la, I am not being honest with my students, I have so many problems, delusions of anger, attachment, jealousy, many negative thoughts. I am just pretending to be a qualified Teacher, I am not being honest.’ Sometimes you might think like this because you are an educated westerner. You should never allow your delusions to make you discouraged, this is ridiculous!

I do appreciate that when some teachers get discouraged, that in reality they are being honest, but that is foolish. If you allow your students to see you unhappy they will lose faith, trust and confidence in you. Of course we have to judge ourselves, but when we find many faults we should not get discouraged but rather we have to encourage ourselves and make a strong determination to improve. This is very important.

We are not saying we are Buddhas, we are simply giving teachings with a good motivation. We are like a mother who cooks food for her children, while at the same time eating the food herself. We are striving to understand the Dharma while at the same time we are also teaching and encouraging others to practice, and practicing and improving ourselves. If faithful students see you as a Buddha, that is alright, you don’t need to say to them, ‘no, I am not a Buddha’. That is not necessary. At the same time you don’t need to say you are a Buddha. Just give people the freedom to believe whatever they want. If your students have pure view of you they will receive the blessings of the Buddhas through you.

You can understand from even the slightest experience that the Dharma works and can make you happy. But if you just read books on an intellectual level, understanding and thinking you know it without putting it into practice, you will have nothing. Only maybe increased pride, thinking that you are a Dharma teacher, and very special.

Sometimes we read our Kadampa books and see some contradictions. Maybe you think it is not clear or maybe you get discouraged. Using your wisdom you should contemplate the meaning and then come to your own conclusions. Or, the meaning may not be clear because your mind is not clear, this indicates that you don’t have much wisdom.

If you read and study the books carefully you will gain the confidence to teach others. It is not wrong to teach if your motivation is pure.

At the beginning don’t expect quick results. I am not saying you have to do everything at once, now we are just opening the door to practice. But do keep the intention to practice. If you give up this intention, then you have broken your vows. Some small damage or degeneration of your vows will happen but every month you can do Sojong and renew your vows and purify your downfalls.

After the third recitation I will click my fingers, this sound indicates that you have received the ordination vows. Generate a strong joyful feeling, a happy mind, thinking, ‘I have received the Dharma Jewel, actual refuge, within my mind and I am protected from samsara’s suffering’. So be happy, OK?

Ordination talk – Ven. Geshe-la, Spring Festival 2000, Calistoga, California, USA by Dekyi

I didn’t take classes on Highest Yoga Tantra myself. I spent most of my study years in debate. The focus in our monasteries was on debate, on philosophical subjects, Dharmakirti’s text alone took many years of study. I received Tantric initiations and some essential teachings from my root gurus, then I concentrated on my own reading of Lama Tsongkhapa’s teachings. I imagined he was talking to me. I would read one paragraph, and through re-reading and contemplating the meaning, eventually it really felt as if he was speaking to me directly. It was like a real oral transmission. The first time I read it I understood the meaning, the second time my understanding improved and by the third reading I had begun to have a deep understanding of the material. In this way I studied the Tantras on my own.

Actually in Tibet at that time there were no Tantric classes, I learnt mainly through reading books and listening carefully to my Teachers. You can do this, these books are your Teacher and your Spiritual Guide. Your Spiritual Guide cannot always be with you in person, but your Dharma books are always with you. If you read and study the books carefully you will gain the confidence to teach others.

Gen-la Samden Sojong April 1993, Toronto. Transcript by Kelsang Wangden

Excerpts:

Very nice to see so many Kadampa monks and nuns here today. Or New Kadampa, New Kadampa monks and nuns. It’s quite important that we do regard ourselves as New Kadampa monks and nuns. It’s clear that since Geshe-la, Venerable Geshe-la arrived in the West that he has created many, many new things. Often within our tradition we feel that it is merely the presentation of Buddha’s teachings that is new. The presentation of Buddha’s teachings is new but there are many other new things that can be found within our tradition that previously didn’t exist. We know the instructions themselves, at least the presentation is new. We know, for example, with respect to the sutra instructions, twenty-one meditations, for example, you will not find the twenty-one meditations explained before. Even within the Tantric instructions there are many, many new presentations given to us by Geshe-la. The programs, entirely new. The communities – new types of communities. Mixed communities of monks, nuns, lay people, all together. This is new.

Also we have to understand that the presentation Geshe-la has given of the ordained way of life is new. Our vows are new, aren’t they? No one had these, specifically these vows before. I think this is something we have to think about very, very carefully, because, with respect to this last point, we are not monks and nuns living in monasteries. We’re monks and nuns living in towns and cities. We’re not merely monks and nuns studying and meditating. If only! We’re monks and nuns doing lots of other things as well: teaching, we’re distributing publicity, meeting lots and lots of people, bank managers, even. It’s unheard of. It’s entirely new. And we’re not living in single sex communities, are we? We’re mixing with all types. We live in Communities, monks, nuns, lay people, female and male, so I think it is important that we think carefully about what it is to be a Kadampa monk or nun.

We have to understand how the ordained way of life is still very much relevant or significant in today’s age, in today’s society. And feel confident, really confident, following that ordained way of life which is not going to be the same as the ordained way of life followed by a monk, for example, in a monastery, studying, meditating, no other goal, meeting no lay people, being able to focus on their practice. If we feel the ordained way of life is, should be, like that, then we’ll run into problems straightaway… We can enjoy our ordained way of life, thinking that for us it’s the best possible way of life.

[There follows an explanation of how to deal with attachment by developing love]

So we can be this monk or nun living with people, loving them, acting out of love, helping them in whatever way we can, being with them, having a nice time with them, enjoying their company. And we’re moving forward. …Geshe-la has said that great bliss, the mind of great bliss, is the supremely peaceful mind, It’s the greatest inner peace we can experience. Why did he say that? We’re moving towards the great bliss that is the inner peace of a Buddha. So again we use that opportunity, when we’re with others we can act in accordance with our Tantric vows, and we try to generate a blissful mind, because we have some control over our attachment, we can try to generate a blissful mind, and at that time we can say that we’re developing our inner peace….That’s what we want! We’re making that journey to the inner pure land of a Buddha, here. So we can start to feel blissful when we’re with others. And our mind becomes even more peaceful….

….We can be monks or nuns living in this kind of society and having so much fun. Seriously…we can be enjoying – personally I feel there is no greater way of enjoying ourselves. If we understand the importance of developing inner peace, practising contentment, with external and internal conditions, revealing that contentment, showing contentment, practising discipline. Especially just watching our mind…And eventually controlling.

We can be the perfect monk, the perfect nun. In our heart we’re loving others, we’re feeling compassion towards others, wherever we may be, whoever we may be with. Deepening, stabilising that inner peace. Further, in accordance with our Tantric discipline we can be feeling blissful when we’re with others. Seems to me, without those Bodhisattva, without the Pratimoksha discipline it’s difficult actually. ..Why do I want to generate bliss? It’s so finally I can experience the inner peace of nirvana, of enlightenment.

Personally I feel that the Kadampa way of following the ordained way of life is the best by a mile, by a hundred miles, by a million miles. Honestly I do, I really do. At these times, in this kind of society, it’s not just that we are able to make swift progress because we are monks and nuns, but we are able to help others in such an extraordinary way. I think if we do it properly, I really do feel that we can bring ourselves so much enjoyment…And we can bring others so much enjoyment. We can be the best example for everyone. Absolutely everybody. Trying, at least, to maintain peace of mind when in the presence of others. Because you know we are very busy, we’re living in a chaotic world…

It seems already, without, even experiencing the unchanging peace of nirvana, we can bring others even a little bit of peace in their lives. That peace we know is the foundation of freedom and happiness. So with that inner peace, we ourselves experience fewer problems. We’re a lot happier. So through this we can actually help others become free of their problems…

Shutting ourselves in our room, ignoring our attachment, or fighting with our attachment, we going to be really miserable. As well, just going out and indulging our attachment are two extremes…

So we’ve got to find that middle way, haven’t we, that is the Kadampa way, being able to live in this kind of society, in these kinds of communities, in these kinds of times, as a monk or a nun….So personally I feel that it is definately possible, if we get it right, I think it’s so relevant, so significant, I really feel that it’s still the best way to practice Dharma, it’s the best way to help others. If we’re still not sure about why that is, then we do need to think about it quite deeply, and we need to discuss it with others….So as I said earlier, then we can go out into this big, wide world with confidence, with real confidence. It’s never been done before, it’s new, which is fantastic. Geshe-la has given us this because he thinks it’s the best way, doesn’t he? Otherwise he wouldn’t have given us it. The best way. So we need to think, how is it the best way? How is it the best way for me, how is it the best way for others? Best way for the whole world.

I can only give an introduction. I haven’t had much time really to explain what is so special about the Kadampa ordained way of life. But we need to think about it, don’t we? It’s new. New Kadampa. We’re New Kadampa monks, we’re New Kadampa nuns, with new vows that no-one’s ever had before, doing what nobody’s ever done before. So fully discuss it with others, just make use of this opportunity we have to discuss with our many spiritual friends. Many Sangha Jewels within our communities. Use them.

See also:

Written by tenpel

June 21, 2011 at 10:55 pm

Posted in Buddhism, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Delusion & Perversion

with 7 comments

Yesterday I became a bit distracted and checked what NKT is presently doing. I found a new blog which I feel is worthwhile to read:

When I checked the WordPress tags I found one WordPress post by Michael-J B. W., a person who was (is still?) extremely skilled in putting a spin on the Wikipedia articles related to NKT or Dorje Shugden. I will comment on that here a bit but before I do that I’ll give a short (and one-sided) background to some of his activities. Michael has not only spun successfully Wikipedia articles, he also removed links to academic papers from my Website about Tibetan Buddhism which were linked on Wikipedia by (ab)using a rule which says that no website which mirrors WP content should be linked. Of course my websites only uses four former articles from WP and there is no problem in linking an academic article which has nothing to do with Wikipedia. WP is flexible enough to allow to link e.g.Prof. von Brück’s or Prof. William’s article though my website indeed include four former WP articles which are marked as being such. Since I’ve encountered Michael’s spins different times, I decided not to say anything or to restrain to respond to his perversions of the facts because I felt any engagement into that direction is just a waste of time.

However, yesterday I glanced through one of his posts, The Virtuous Friend: You Will Know Them by their Root. I was again struck by his abilities to turn the facts upside down. E.g. he wants to give the impression that I would deliberately ignore statements with respect to the teacher student relationship or that I would in a way manipulate or ignore certain information by suggesting e.g. “…but Tenzin Peljor fails to give his audience the surrounding context” or “the quote which Tenzin Peljor left out” or “how Tenzin Peljor pretends that Lama Zopa’s advice on not abandoning Shugden Lamas such as Geshe Kelsang Gyatso does not exist.”

Among others he refers to a post, Characteristics of those unsuitable to be gurus, offered here but Michael ignores that the information these quotes provide were just given for the sake to balance the one-sided and often misleading information of NKT or their followers and the fear and feelings of guilt these install in people and which function to bind people to the NKT making them fear to leave this new religious movement (or this ‘cult’ as some say). He also ignores that unlike Kelsang Gyatso I give exact book titles and page numbers where interested people can actual read the complete context while Kelsang Gyatso mentions certain texts but without mentioning the page number or a publication where people can cross check—not only this, he discourages his students to read books not written by him because they would “confuse” them. So my quotes are means to balance NKT’s or Kelsang Gyasto’s misinformation and they do not claim—unlike NKT or KG—to present the “complete path to enlightenment” implying neither cross checking or anything else is needed to achieve a better understanding of Buddha’s teachings.

Michael goes over the top in his suggestive post when he states:

Indeed, it is also interesting how Tenzin Peljor pretends that Lama Zopa’s advice on not abandoning Shugden Lamas such as Geshe Kelsang Gyatso does not exist. Lama Zopa points out how important it is “not to criticize, to keep the mind in equanimity regarding him.” One wonders why quotes like these do not appear in Tenzin Peljor’s set of advice:

“By giving up Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, you have created heavy negative karma in this life. Since you haven’t given me up, I suggest that you confess to Geshe Kelsang Gyatso about what happened, and devote yourself again to this virtuous friend.” — Lama Zopa Rinpoche

First of all, the ‘set of advice’ Michael is referring to is a compilation of different posts and quotes given in internet forums to fearful NKT followers as a means to help those, who were  manipulated by NKT teachings, to let go their fear and worries to leave that organisation. Since the organisation is totally fixed on Kelsang Gyatso, who himself said that he himself would be the NKT, people should learn that there is no problem in leaving an organisation or a teacher who is not really qualified or even misleading. The ‘set of advice’ states clearly in the beginning:

“This set of advice was compiled quickly for people who left NKT or who are thinking about to leave NKT. It mainly aims to give a quick overview on matters of concern NKT people might have with respect to the Guru. It is aimed to support those who are thinking to leave NKT or who have have left NKT already and who now might have doubts if leaving Geshe Kelsang Gyatso is a negative, positive or neutral action.”

Also I do not pretend that this advice by Lama Zopa Rinpoche does not exist. From what does Michael conclude that? In contradiction to his claim is the fact that I discussed this advice in detail on E-Sangha and put that advice into perspective. Different times I replied to some emails by worried ex-NKT with respect to this advice too. E-Sangha does not exist any more nor do I have a copy of that discussion. To save some time, I just quote from an email I sent to a former NKT follower regarding this advice in 2010:

[... Tulku Rinpoche] advised to ignore this advice.

I wonder why FPMT even puts a personal advice to a specific person online…

Nobody has to accept advice or a teacher which/who is contrary to the teachings. Though it is not good to be negative to one’s teacher and it is correct to inspire to stop such negativity, the teachings suggest to leave a teacher when one realises he is not qualified. And also Je Tsongkhapa comments in his commentary on Guru devotion one should not follow advice of the guru which is contrary to the Dharma.

So leaving NKT or GKG is NOTHING bad, it is virtuous to leave a misleading teacher, because a misleading teacher leads one onto wrong paths. However, one should make a neutral distance, and of course every negativity creates negative Karma but (I think) one should also not be too tight about this. How can one not be upset about being abused? We are human beings, but as Buddhists we work on our states of mind to not respond too negative to things or to respond at least neutral or if possible in a positive manner.

Actual, I do not accept this advice and I wrote something about this and my reasons on E_Sangha in the past.
You can ask also Ringu Tulku about this if you like.

I wonder if Lama Zopa Rinpoche still has this view since he knows now better how much people suffer and are misled in NKT—its a very old advice. I would support that idea to write to Lama Zopa!!! A monk told me when the NKT resident teacher of Paris asked Lama Zopa to be her teacher too, he refused as long as she is a student of Geshe Kelsang!* One can also ask if he finds it a good idea to follow Geshe Kelsang and to learn the Dalai Lama is the enemy of Buddhism (though that is a bit provoking.)

Though I don’t like to write something about this to Lama Zopa Rinpoche, I support the wish to clarify this directly with him.
I would also read or make suggestions with respect to a letter to him, however, the letter must be written by others. For me this matter is finished in a way, and I think it is better people write for whom this really creates worry or is a subject of concern. This makes things more urgent/serious. I do not expect a reply so it would be dishonest if I would write something.

Is this ok for you what I wrote/suggested here?

Though Michael’s post (not to speak about his blog in general) has more perversions, I save my time by just ignoring them and I give rather some quick reasons why I think that actual Kelsang Gyasto is not a reliable spiritual teacher. First of all he has isolated and is isolating himself and his followers from other genuine Buddhist masters, the Dharma (not written by himself), and the Sangha (all the many genuine practitioners and masters outside of the NKT). This is cultish but these are not the actions of a Buddhist master who understands that persons have different needs, Karma and inclinations, and that one can learn from everything and everybody. To create ‘one Dharma for all’ and to bind the own students to one single isolated teacher is also an expression of a lack of compassion and the lack of the wisdom which sees the individual aspects of the phenomena and sentient beings. Because the Buddha has great compassion and because he possesses the wisdom that knows the individual aspects of phenomena, and because all the Buddhas possess these qualities, the enlightened Buddhas know that there are limitless Dharmas for limitless sentient beings. No Buddha has ever claimed that the holy Dharma can be comprised into 22 books written by one single author nor is there any prediction or scriptural quote that this would happen or that such a reduction of the Dharma would be appropriate; instead the scriptures emphasize that there exist limitless doors of Dharmas given by limitless Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, they do not say to read the Dharma of another Buddha would “confuse” the own disciple. Secondly instead of seeing the dependent arising of things Kelsang Gyatso has put the blame different times solely on others and claimed at the same time he would have not done any fault at all. This shows for me that he does not apply even basics of Buddhism when he encounters problems because according to the sixteen aspects of the Four Noble Truths there is no singular external cause for the production of a phenomenon (e.g. it is not possible that the Dalai Lama is the sole and single source which created the problems with respect to the Shugden practice). All phenomena are dependent arising and arise due to many causes and conditions, its parts, and by ‘mere’ thought. So how can a Buddhist master who has an understanding of dependent arising (emptiness) put the blame on others? There is a contradiction here.

I could continue like this but to make it short, I quote from a letter Kelsang Gyatso sent to me and other students of the former NKT resident teacher of Berlin, and NKT’s representative for Germany, Gen Kelsang Dechen. I think for those who have knowledge about Buddhism, NKT’s internal (cultish) dynamics, and psychology or who rely on their common sense it will be easy to recognize that these statements by Kelsang Gyatso are highly manipulative, fear provoking, and contrary to the teachings of the Buddha and the Vinaya (the rules for Buddhist monks and nuns). Kelsang Gyatso threatened those NKT followers who were thinking to follow Gen Dechen—who has full support from Lama Gangchen Rinpoche and Lama Kundeling Rinpoche, two known Shugden Lamas—that if they do so the following will happen:

Wenn Ihr Euch entscheidet Carola zu folgen, wird die Verbindung zwischen Euch und mir automatisch enden. Aufgrund dessen werden Eure Ordinationsgelübde enden. Das bedeutet, daß Ihr nicht mehr länger ordiniert seid und Ihr könnt den Ordinationsnamen, den Ihr von mir empfangen habt, nicht mehr benutzen.

Gleichzeitig werdet Ihr die Überlieferungssegnungen, um meine Bücher zu unterrichten, nicht mehr haben. Das bedeutet, daß Ihr meine Bücher nicht als Dharma-Lehrer unterrichten könnt.

Auf diese Weise werdet Ihr in der gleichen Lage wie Carola sein.

Ich hoffe, Ihr seid Euch im klaren über Eure Entscheidung.

Mit Liebe
Geshe-Ia

(translation)

If you decide to follow Carola [Gen Kelsang Dechen], the connection between you and me will automatically cease. As a result of this your ordination vows will cease. This means that you are no longer ordained and that you cannot use the ordination name any more that you have received from me.

At the same time you won’t have the transmission blessings to teach my books [any more]. This means that you cannot teach my books as a Dharma teacher.

In this way you will be in the same situation like Carola.

I hope you have clarity about your decision.

With love
Geshe-Ia

This approach is “The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away” but it has nothing to do with Buddhism.

* Amendment, June 18, 2011

According to to some emails I’ve received in the past days this is not correct. The person asked me to state “According to this person this is not correct, they never asked Lama Zopa to be their teacher.”

Written by tenpel

June 13, 2011 at 11:11 am

Posted in Buddhism, Fundamentalism, New Kadampa Tradition, Religion

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Jake Wallis Simons About New Kadampa Tradition, Tibetan Buddhism, Dalai Lama, Shugden and Religion

leave a comment »

In a BBC Radio 4 broadcast the novelist and journalist Jake Wallis Simons describes his involvement with the New Kadampa Tradition, the NKT’s opposition and protests against the Dalai Lama, his findings and point of view with respect to the Dorje Shugden Controversy, and why it led him to give up Tibetan Buddhism, Buddhism and religion for good.

Written by tenpel

May 23, 2011 at 12:41 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition, Religion

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Update: New Kadampa Tradition – Ordination

leave a comment »

UPDATE to NKT ordination

April 18, 2011

In a former post I investigated the case of NKT ordination and I asked the question “Are NKT monks and nuns authentic?“. This time I wish to give a slightly different answer to this question.

Actual, one could also answer this question in another or more differentiated way than done in the previous post. E.g. one could say, yes, they are authentic rabjung ordainees but they are not actual monks or nuns who hold the vows of Buddhist monks or nuns, because the rabjung ordination does not confer actual vows. The rabjung ordainee makes promises that belong to the class of “non-revelatory form of virtuous and non-virtuous in-betweens”. Therefore, becoming a rabjung is a virtuous promise but it is not a vow. The advantage is that such a odrination generates habits that bring one closer to getting and holding an actual vow—like that of a novice monk or nun (tib. getsul, getsul ma) or a fully ordained monk (tib. gelong). These promises of a rabjung have neither positively nor negatively the impact of a full vow. (For details see Abhidharma-kośa [Tib. chos mngon pa mdzod] by Vasubandhu.)

Written by tenpel

April 18, 2011 at 9:15 pm

Posted in Buddhism, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Experiences with the New Kadampa Tradition and Kelsang Gyatso

with 43 comments

Someone sent me an excerpt from the book “The Novice: Why I became a Buddhist Monk, Why I Left and Why Learned” by Stephen Schettini (Published by Greenleaf Bookgroup, 2009), page 331, Epilogue:

“Scientists aren’t the only ones with an agenda. In England, the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) has emerged as a player in the Dolgyal affair, a vocal opposition to the Dalai Lama and a cult to be reckoned with. Its founder, the Sera Jey monk Kelsang Gyatso, was installed as a spiritual advisor for Lama Yeshe’s Manjushri Institute back in the early eighties, and promptly commandeered it. That Tibetan imagery and lore can be turned to such forms isn’t at all surprising, but its growth is astonishingly so. The NKT is firmly established in more than two dozen countries, with assets running into the hundreds of millions. Back in 1982, I translated a seven-day course for Geshe Kelsang Gyatso in the Lama Tzongkhapa Institute in Italy. I found him a pedantic teacher and an irascible man, one of very few Tibetan teachers to whom I took a visceral dislike.

I’ve corresponded with several NKT members who initially took up arms against my provocative little web page on the topic. In the end, they admitted that they were in search of a sympathetic ear, and ultimately a way out. This is a guilt-driven rather than a military-style cult, making its web both insidious and sticky. Rather than challenging its members, it’s best to ask about their allegiance and let them formulate their rationalizations out loud. Given time, the skilful design of the Buddha’s teachings seems able to penetrate even such convoluted trips.”

Maybe the future will bring more books which include or offer insight into a life devoted to the New Kadampa Tradition and its founder, Kelsang Gyatso. This could help the public and Buddhists to understand better what people experience in the setting of the NKT.

For the time being most of the experiences are stored either in the archives of INFORM, Cult Information Centre etc, and only few are available online. Most life experience within NKT can be read in the non-public New Kadampa Survivors Forum with its present 1009 members.

Here is a collections of reports by former members which are available online, please feel free to point out or to link other reports about experiences within the NKT.

Also the following letter from Sera Je Dratsang—though very polemical in style—lists at the end some stories of what former members reported: To the Tibetan Buddhists around the world and fellow Tibetan compatriots within and outside Tibet. Then there is Bunting’s The Guardian Article “Special Report: Shadow Boxing on the Path to Nirvana”.

* The blog was run under New Kadampa Cult Watch but later it was deleted by the owner. To get a taste of what the person was saying at that time one can read some material on Dialogue Ireland. The current blog is unstable at the moment, sometimes there are posts, sometimes they are deleted again.

last update: Jan 11, 2012

Written by tenpel

January 7, 2011 at 7:44 pm

Posted in New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , ,

NKT Chaplaincy, NKT Business & NKT Research

with 51 comments

Some updates:

NKT Chaplaincy in Canada

The Sumeru Books Blog wrote in June 2009:

Buddhist chaplaincy in the spotlight

By Yönten, on June 15th, 2009

Correctional Services Canada is looking for Buddhist chaplains and has $75,000 in contracts to back that up, according to a Canadian Press story released today.

Currently, Kelsang Donsang, a Westerner who is resident teacher at the Kuluta Buddhist Centre in Kingston is their only approved contact and is in line to renew the contract for 1,717 hours/year of chaplaincy services.

Kuluta is a New Kadampa Tradition center affiliated with Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. The irony is that most Buddhists do not consider New Kadampa as a legitimate Buddhist organization.

Here is the link on CSC’s website to their report in PDF format:
http://www.csc-scc.gc.ca/text/pa/ev-arsps-378-1-149/relig_spirit_e.pdf

Buddhism and Business Ethics

Justine Elizabeth Haney, Queens University, has tried to research the NKT with respect to “Buddhism and Business Ethics”-Adaptation and Integration: An Inquiry Regarding the Matters of Business and Ethics in The New Kadampa Tradition.

NKT and Research on NKT

I just glanced through Haney’s essay and it might be—though she tried to keep a type of scepticism—she has fallen to a certain extent prey to the euphemist language NKT use so skilfully. For instance she writes: The International Temples Project is Geshe Kelsang Gyatso’s compassionate vision to have a Kadampa Buddhist Temple dedicated to world peace in every major city of the world. That it is a compassionate vision to built an NKT temple in every major city of the world is an NKT claim, it could be claimed that this aim is a megalomaniac vision too, far more as NKT is the brand product of one single person who tries at all means to keep total control over it: Kelsang Gyatso. To call it a megalomaniac vision might be indicated also by the fact that he himself said in Berlin 2000: “I, I am the NKT!” So I would claim: actually, spreading NKT is spreading Kelsang Gyatso and his 23 books. But maybe I am wrong here?

NKT is solely based on his authority and understanding of the Gelug presentation of Vajrayana and Sutra teachings. Kelsang Gyatso is the only accepted living Buddhist authority within NKT. The NKT temples are solely based on his teachings, books etc—though there are Buddha statues and thankas, and one Sutra (the Heart Sutra) these Buddhist icons can not oppose his claims about Buddhism (e.g. the NKT ordination “lineage” would derive from the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras). NKT is an organisation solely circling around one person, hence some refer to it as a personality cult. By spreading NKT temples world wide his personal vision of Buddhism and his created Buddhist brand New Kadampa Tradition is spread worldwide, it increases HIS influence, power and presence, not that of Buddhism. Though it is claimed this is only for the benefit of others, it might be it is only for the benefit of his reputation and fame. At least there might be different perspectives if establishing an NKT temple in every major city of the world and to sell the own books in “every book shop in the world” is qualified to be called a compassionate action or not. I would expect a bit more distance from a researcher with respect to such claims.

It is incorrect by Haney to claim a “Tibetan custom to charge for Buddhist teachings” and the story surrounding Yeshe Ö’s offering of gold to Atisha—which is widely explained to be an expression of his deep appreciation of Buddhist teachings rather than payment demanded by the monastery—is misconstrued by Haney to be an actual payment.  I wonder if this is now the official NKT story of the events in old Tibet or where she got that from. What I like is that she tried to be unbiased and had a certain type of scepticism but I fear NKT research requires really experienced researcher to fully get the things as they are. NKT and Tibetan Buddhism in general as well as the socialisation of Tibetans are extremely complex, the complexity is greater due to cross cultural issues, and if people are not honest in what they say or have an agenda to hide unwelcomed facts.

Sometimes I wonder how much researcher rely and even take over NKT statements without checking them against other sources or to look onto them from different angles. This can be seen in Bluck’s research, as well as in Cozort’s paper, and more recently in Bell’s research on the Shugden history, e.g. when he states on page 21:

“When Dorjé Shukden practitioners in America have protested peacefully against the Dalai Lama’s policies, individuals who have attended the Dalai Lama’s lectures have spat on them and throne bottles.”

When the NKT alias Western Shugden Society protested in New York they claimed to have done this “peacefully” and accused the Dalai Lama followers (mainly Tibetans for whom the event was organised) to have behaved like a “hostile mob“; but to accuse a person in general (or the Dalai Lama particularly in this case) to be a liar and a hypocrite, as NKT/WSS have done it, shouting these accusations loudly with megaphones over a long time is not necessarily peaceful, it could be called aggressive and “violent speech” too. It could be argued as well, the “NKT mob” aggressively provoked the Tibetans who came to listen to the teachings of the Dalai Lama, their respected leader. It is expected from Buddhists not to go to places to propound their own tenets where they are not invited because going to places where one is not invited and to teach the own views could create conflicts for the people at that place. Actual NKT has violated this Buddhist peace means. Then if some conflict arise, who’s fault is it? Nobody invited the “NKT mob” to shout loudly and over a very long time their (hostile) accusations at places where people gathered to listen faithfully the teachings of the Dalai Lama. I was rather amazed to see how easy— e..g.—the people took the aggressive provocations in Nantes, France, 2008, where the noise of the NKT protesters didn’t even stop when the people ate their meals and wished to communicate with each other… even to communicate was difficult due to the constant noise of megaphone amplified slogans shouted by the protesters in rhythms (and I think even supported by drums, when I remember correctly.)…

I think to really make a good account of what NKT is and is not, this requires a researcher with life experience, a deep understanding of Tibetan Buddhism, values in Asian and Western cultures, and also a person who has some experience with wrong truth claims as they can be found so often in New Religious Movements, and which are often just means to rewrite the history of such groups. To my opinion Kay’s research is the best account on this as far as I have seen.

Nevertheless thanks to the young researcher for their effort and hopefully there will be some good and balanced in-depth research in the future. I also do apologize that I mainly focused on some weak points I found, and that I didn’t appreciate strong points!

Written by tenpel

December 13, 2010 at 4:52 pm

Posted in Buddhism, Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , ,

Characteristics of those unsuitable to be gurus

with 7 comments

Many people trained within NKT might be full of fear and guilt to either leave NKT or after they have left NKT already. These feelings of guilt and fear might undermine the clarity to make a firm and strong decision and to rejoice into a virtuous deed.

Since the NKT offer only a selection of the vast basket of Buddhist teachings within the Tibetan Buddhist tradition, it might be helpful for NKT affiliated persons to learn those teachings not given in NKT—especially about the teacher-student-relationship.

Recently a nun pointed out teachings from the Kalachakra Tantra which say that a wise disciple would abandon wrong gurus as they would abandon hell.

I will give the quote—and a link to a file with other quotes from Buddhist scriptures—below.

For the sake of keeping you updated here is a news from the special realm of NKT:

The NKT leadership recommended in a letter from 5th Aug 2010 to all NKT-IKBU Centres to not associate with other Tibetan Buddhist practitioners:

Dear Administrative Directors,
Because of the potential for great spiritual confusion both now and in the future, we advise and request that NKT Centres, teachers, managers and residents do not get involved with the activities of any Tibetan Buddhist groups, teachers or their students.

If you receive any invitations or requests from a Tibetan Buddhist group, teacher or student, please politely decline them, and forward them to the Education Council Representatives for our information.

These approaches can be for support in some form (for example with donations, fund-raising events, visa applications, hosting, transport, publicity, social events); or offers to give teachings, empowerments or informal talks, or to perform pujas, ceremonies, ritual demonstrations and so on.

The main reason for this request is to help NKT practitioners to avoid mixing spiritual traditions, while of course maintaining respect for other traditions. It will also avoid being drawn into the many difficult political problems associated with Tibetan Buddhism, caused by mixing Dharma and politics.

Please inform the teachers, managers and residents at your Centre of this advice and request.

Thank you for your co-operation.
Warm regards,
Steve Cowing, NKT-IKBU Secretary
on behalf of the GSD and Education Council Reps

—

Ornament of Stainless Light – An Exposition of the Kalachakra Tantra by Khedrup Norsang Gyatso, pp. 214–216, translated by Gavin Kilty

Characteristics of those unsuitable to be gurus

The third verse of the Initiations chapter says:

Proud, ruled by anger, and lacking vows,
greedy, without knowledge, working to deceive disciples,
a mind that has fallen from great bliss,
without initiation, totally attached to wealth,
unaware, of harsh and coarse words, filled with carnal desire,
the wise disciples should abandon taking such people
as causes of complete enlightenment
as they would abandon hell.

People with such faults are not fit to be relied upon as gurus in the Vajra Vehicle. Even if one takes such a person as a guru and requests initiations and so forth, there can be no meaningful receiving of the initiation. Moreover one will become infected by a measure of his faults and fall from all elevated status in this and future lives. Most of the above verse is easy to Understand. “Without knowledge” means to be without the essential teachings on the six-branched yoga, for example. “Working to deceive his disciple” means to delude disciples by telling lies. “A mind that has fallen from the great bliss, without initiation” means that without having received the initiation he is bestowing, he nevertheless teaches it to others. “Filled with carnal desire” means working only for the pleasure gained from the sexual union of the two organs.

Therefore the way to rely upon a guru is firstly to know the characteristics worthy and unworthy of devotion and then to examine thoroughly who is and who is not fit to be a guru. The Great Commentary says on the second verse of the Initiations chapter:

Disciples who wish to gain worldly and nonworldly powers by way of mantra should first devote themselves to a guru. Furthermore one should examine the vajra master thoroughly. One should thoroughly examine his words. Otherwise, relying upon a guru unexamined, the disciples’ dharma will be perverse, and perverse dharma will send them to hell.

Also the Paramarthaseva says:

He, omniscient in the complete Vajra Vehicle,
has said that very wished-for siddhi follows the master.
If perfect disciples examine the master, therefore, as they would gold,
they will not accrue even the tiniest of faults.

However what should one do if one already regards as a guru someone endowed with those unworthy characteristics? The Great Commentary says:

In mantra, even though one has taken as a guru a person with the faults of pride and so forth, wise disciples, meaning those of intelligence, will abandon him as a cause of complete enlightenment as they would abandon hell.

Also:

Because of these words, even though he has been taken as a guru, if he does these wrong deeds, disciples who strive for freedom should leave him.

A passage quoted in the Great Commentary says:

Without compassion, angry and malicious,
arrogant, grasping, uncontrolled, and boastful,
the intelligent disciple will not take such a one as guru.

Therefore, if one has taken someone with these faults as a guru, then this disciple who is seeking freedom should part company with him and not associate with him again. These quotes from the Great Commentary teach just this point and this point only. They do not teach that one should loose one’s faith due to seeing faults because, as it is so rightly said:

Once that is used as a reason and one casts off the undertaking of holding him as a guru and as a field of reverence, one opens up the opportunity for a root downfall to occur. One must learn, therefore, to distinguish what is to be developed from what is to be discarded.

Some explain the two instances of the phrase “taken as a guru” in the two Great Commentary passages above as applying to gurus taken by others.

—

Written by tenpel

November 5, 2010 at 4:16 pm

Posted in New Kadampa Tradition, Religion

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Waterstones’ Naivety Helps the Spread of the New Kadampa Tradition

with 11 comments

updated: July 15, 2010

One of the most important features to spread the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) and to attract new members has been since some decades now to get the 22 books of Kelsang Gyatso “into every book shop in the world” (NKT magazine Full Moon No. 7 Spring 1993), and to give talks in bookshops to “inspire” potential new members to follow NKT’s “pure Dharma” and Kelsang Gyatso respectively and finally exclusively (up to the point where they will be completely separated from mainstream Buddhism and the true masters of Buddhism.)

NKT puts the way to hook people into the NKT by Kelsang Gyatso’s books and talks in bookstores that way:

Benefits to the person buying the book: in these talks we introduce shoppers to our Spiritual Guide—listening to teachings Geshe-la enters their heart, buying a book Geshe-la enters their home! The book will continually remind them of Kadam Dharma, and provide them with a source of refuge. Some people share stories of years elapsing between buying a book and coming to classes—and say that having the book in their home as a constant reminder was the decisive factor in making that happen. (see p. 7 in the NKT-document provided below)

To cast in that way for new—and often just ill informed—potential students appears to me as one of the most successful means of the New Kadampa Tradition to increase the number of their followers. Potential new recruits have usually (naive) faith in the good reputation of Buddhism and the Dalai Lama and might not even think about potential risks of following an unhealthy and highly controversial ‘Buddhist’ group. (The issues of the missionary drive and the growth and financing of NKT, which include the imperative of spreading Kelsang Gyatso’s books, have been explored already a bit in another article and in Kay’s research.)

In general, I think, it is correct to say that most people will abide in pseudo-security feelings that there is not any risk for them to attend those talks because they are just listening in a mainstream bookshop some explanations about Buddhism or meditation. What harm could there be? One can leave at any time the bookshop and it appears unlikely that there could be any harm in the future by participating those bookshop talks or buying the books of Kelsang Gyatso. But actually this is the way how many have been attracted into the NKT and were finally caught in the traps of powerful destructive dynamics of a very unhealthy group which circles exclusively around a single person who is totally isolated from the Buddhist community and genuine Buddhist masters.

Because the people are coming “innocently” to those bookshops and usually they have neither ideas about NKT’s controversial background, and that the NKT is seen by most as not abiding in the mainstream of Buddhism nor are most of them protected by having a good understanding of what Buddhism actually is all about, it might be helpful to shed some light on the present situation, and to pass on some information which allow to have more freedom of choice based on knowledge and proper background information using NKT’s own documents.

After campaigning for 2 years worldwide against the Dalai Lama via NKT’s front group Western Shugden Society, the NKT is launching now a huge campaign via the publisher Tharpa in USA and UK. Tharpa Publications is a property of the NKT and publishes exclusively the books of ‘Geshe’ Kelsang Gyatso and the educational material for the NKT organisation and NKT’s followers, including posters, postcards or propaganda material like Tibetan Situation. Since the books about Tibetan Buddhism by Kelsang Gyatso are usually written well, touching basic ideas of Buddhism often in an inspiring way, and the cultish structure of NKT shines through them only slightly, these books are of extreme benefit for NKT to attract new members who are open to Buddhism or who are interested to do something to improve their lives. So it comes to no surprise that after the loss of many followers—due to NKT’s internal sexual scandals and the protests against the Dalai Lama—NKT leadership decided to try hard to attract new members for the sake “to expand their empire”.

Of course the NKT leadership is telling their members that they are helping millions of millions of sentient beings by spreading “the pure Buddhadharma” (=NKT) in “these extremely impure times”. Followers of the NKT is told by the leadership they must serve the organisation because this is the only way “to accumulate merit” and to “attain realizations”. Them is also told that they would not be successful in retreats because of “lacking merits” and due “to the extremely impure times” their endeavour wouldn’t bring big results. But if they teach others the “pure Dharma” (=Kelsang Gyatso’s books or teachings) or work for the organisation as directors, teachers, education program coordinators and all the other needed tasks to run such a huge organisation, they would serve their own enlightenment the best.

What is for others “empire building” is for NKT a noble activity.

So to ‘expand the empire’ (critics) or to ‘spread the pure Kadam Dharma’ (NKT) NKT is launching via the own publisher Tharpa a huge bookshop campaign, cooperating with Waterstones and many small bookshops.

Waterstones themselves do not see any problems with this, arguing about “freedom of speech” makes them no problem to help NKTs further expansion. Tharpa will also work hard to make sure that the upcoming 23rd book of Kelsang Gyatso Modern Buddhism will become a best-seller. Internally the book is seen as “Geshe-la’s last teaching.”

A person from within NKT leaked recently a document Waterstones and other bookstore managers should try to read first before signing contracts with the NKT. Maybe they think twice after having read it about their collaboration with the NKT.

During the last official NKT festival at KMC-New York, there was a workshop on bookstore talks given by Kelsang Togden, the new US Director of Tharpa Publications. He provided a 14-page handout detailing the mechanics and strategies behind the Bookstore Talks.

The document goes into tremendous detail and even includes an introduction letter template designed to be sent to bookstore managers prior to making in-person contact. You can read this 14-page document below but be forewarned: reading it will require a strong stomach. For example:

“Make prayers for the people coming to the talk – and imagine or visualize that everyone in the audience will feel compelled to acquire the book at the end of the event.”

“Introduce yourself, the author (citing Geshe-la as your own Teacher), and the book – holding the book up for all to see. If other titles are available for sale in the bookstore, give a brief description of what they are.”

“Your motivation is to benefit them by helping get Dharma in their hands. If you really believe this, you can be upfront about your motivation: “I’m here tonight to help you understand the great benefits of taking this book home, reading it, and gradually integrating the instructions into your daily life.”

“Encourage people to acquire the book before they leave. This is the most important part of your talk as to whether people will pick up a book on their way out.”

“Point to where the books are located, preferably on their way out to make it easier for those who are timid.”

“Make yourself available and approachable. Invite people to the center or recommend other titles depending on their interests. Show that your happiness comes from cherishing them.”

However, some Waterstones managers seem to be naively enough to refute concerns by former members stating: “…the events in any case are purely a meditation exercise aimed at the general public and are not about religion or the New Kadampa Tradition.”

No, that is not true.
If you still have doubts, just read page 7 and 12-14 (Guidelines and Suggestions for Teachers on Bookstore Talks) of the document below.

The event is about the NKT gaining footing in a visible, mainstream venue in order to recruit new students.

And the stores have no idea…despite how much they research. And they can’t be blamed, either. They are taken in like many were or are blinded by their greed for profit.

Here is the document by Tharpa Publications:

The document above, which is the latest NKT information leaflet for people organising bookshop talks makes clean clear on pp. 7, 12-14 what NKT’s/Tharpa’s motivation for organising these talks is. This particular document applies specifically to the recent bookshop tours organised in UK shops.

What is good to look at is the deceptive packaging on the CDs—the New Kadampa Tradition promote the ‘Living Meditation’ CDs—which are all readings from Kelsang Gyatso’s books spoken using hypnotic techniques. One will see from this document that simple ‘meditation’ does not come without a backlog, an actual ‘author’, but these CDs do not name the author. In this context the problems going along with NKT’s presence at places of UK society’s most sensitive nerves (National Health Care, school kids education in religion and chaplaincy) should be reminded again! (see: http://www.nktinformation.com/ and this short comment) Also one should note the fact that NKT deliberately started to hide their name from advertisement for meditation classes, not mentioning any more that NKT are running them. (A hint to this new mode of behaviour by NKT was already given in Bluck’s research.)

May this information enable Waterstones, book shop managers, and Buddhists and non-Buddhists alike to look behind the NKT machine and to be more aware of the background of these “purely meditation exercises” (Waterstones) before organising NKT talks for the general public or even recommending NKT’s meditation classes to the sick. It is difficult even for the intelligent and informed to find out about these backgrounds, and this is even more difficult when products are ‘repackaged’ and hide their origins. It is difficult (but not impossible) to disconnect ‘Meditation’ from the ethos of the persons leading these meditations but on these CDs they do appear to be completely disconnected from ‘religion’, the NKT, or any particular agenda while aiming at the same time to “introduce shoppers to our Spiritual Guide – listening to teachings Geshe-la enters their heart, buying a book Geshe-la enters their home!” (Tharpa Handout, p. 12)

On the other hand ethical double standards and to tell people only half of the truth (if at all) has been ever since one of the signs of the so called “cults” or questionable companies with no ethical standards.

see

A last note to clarify another common confusion with respect to meditation

First of all there are many meditation practices, not all of them are helpful to everybody. In certain circumstances—dependent on the mind setting / situation of the practitioner and the meditation technique itself—meditation can also be harmful, e.g. teaching to a person suffering on depression “death and impermanence” or “the hell realms”. NKT teachers are even teaching high level practices, like “Tonglen”, to mentally sick people!

Research which found out that certain meditation practices are helpful refer to specific types of meditation which are seen by the NKT as less important (like breathing meditation) or they are not trained at all in these techniques (e.g. mindfulness on the body).

Many former members as well as Buddhist teachers outside of the NKT agree that NKT practices cause nervous illnesses. Usually NKT members are also under stress and have a lot of tensions and pressure and cannot relax at all. Riding on the wave of “research found out meditation to be beneficial” NKT expands their activity to attract those seeking mental or body relaxation without being properly qualified for this task and based on questionable or ambivalent motivations.

This does not exclude that people cannot have very good experiences, inspiration and feeling enthusiastic about what NKT is giving them. In fact most of the followers of NKT were attracted because they felt inspired in the beginning. But the point is that those bookshop talks and the promotion of the books are just a hook to get new people into the NKT and then they will undergo finally the powerful and destructive dynamics and subtle distortions of Buddhist teachings which will very likely harm them in a long term perspective.

Written by tenpel

July 14, 2010 at 10:29 pm

Posted in New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Good Night Lama – The “Blackmail Tape”

with 15 comments

THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED “BLACKMAIL TAPE”

TAPED MESSAGE FROM CHIP RODARMOR – JULY 22, 1983

The voice of Jacqueline Keely, Lama Yeshe’s Administrative Assistant:

“This tape recording is a message from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso delivered to Lama Thubten Yeshe on July 22, 1983 by Chip Rodarmor and Geshe Kelsang’s translator. At enormous expense Geshe Kelsang sent Chip and Tenzin all the way from England to California especially to represent Geshe Kelsang by delivering his blackmail. We hope that these facts are clearly apparent to you.”

The voice of Chip Rodarmor:

“Dear Lama Yeshe, thank you very much for your gifts to us which Tenzin and I both deeply appreciated. We were deeply disappointed at not being able to see you. We feel that we were unable to accomplish one of the most important purposes of our visit to you, which was to explain the urgency and serious dangers in the present situation. We meant to protect you and to protect the FPMT from very serious legal dangers, which would be extremely damaging to your reputation and of FPMT internationally. We do not feel, therefore, that your taped response to our first meeting is acceptable under the circumstances and, therefore, urge you to consider very carefully this taped communication. Please know that we are sincerely and faithfully trying to protect you from these dangers but that you are ignoring us. Please do not ignore us now. The situation at present is that present trustees of the Manjushri Institute, including Peter Kedge and Harvey Horrocks, are involved in irregularities with respect to and violations of the terms of the Manjushri Institute Trust Deed. These constitute civil illegalities and please appreciate that some of these are major. They are very important – and that some of these are viewed by the Charities Commission as extremely serious and could constitute a basis for the removal of three of the four trustees of the Manjushri Institute, including Peter Kedge, Harvey Horrocks and yourself, Lama.

Please also appreciate that the situation, that the present situation, especially with respect to the trustees of the institute, also involve criminal illegalities. Many of these are very serious violations of the law with respect to the conduct of business operations, particularly Lotus Trading Company. Some of these illegalities are extremely serious criminal actions carried out by the trustees themselves and others very closely connected with FPMT. Tenzin and I are not in a position to say what these illegalities are. But if you wish to know the details, and if you wish to know the people involved we urge you to call Peter Kedge or Harvey Horrocks and ask them because they know and its very possible that Jacie Keeley knows as well. Who is involved in the criminal illegalities? Basically, they are key members of FPMT, of the FPMT organisation.

Now at present, the Charities Commission holds a type-written report numbering close to 100 pages which not only summarise a number of civil and criminal illegalities with respect to the conduct of the management of Manjushri Institute but also contains supporting evidence. Please also appreciate that our attorney in London, who is an expert in Charity Law, also holds details of the most serious criminal illegalities conducted by some of the trustees and others and supporting evidence. Now, the immediate consequence of not signing the agreement that we presented to you a few days ago is that our attorney in London will turn over the details of the most serious criminal illegalities to the Solicitor General’s Office. The consequence of this will be a police investigation of the trustees of the Manjushri Institute in addition to the conduct of the FPMT organisation. In addition to this the Charities Commission will start a full investigation of the civil and criminal illegalities contained in the report which I mentioned – which the Charities Commission already has and has examined over the last few weeks, but at our request, is not investigating yet. This report explicitly requests the Charities Commission to remove three trustees from the Manjushri Institute, including Peter Kedge, Harvey Horrocks and you, Lama. And the details given are the illegalities, which I have already mentioned.

Lama, please also appreciate the overall consequence of these actions proceeding in the court and also in the Charities Commission. Please realise that there probably will be a public trial of trustees of the Manjushri Institute in addition to other key FPMT people. Please also appreciate that you, Lama, will probably have to go to court to answer questions and possibly even to stand trial. If prosecuted, trustees of the Manjushri Institute will probably go to jail and possibly also other members of the FPMT. And finally, the Charities Commission, through its own investigation, and as a result of the public trial, and possible prosecution of trustees and other FPMT will formally remove the 3 trustees I have mentioned from the Manjushri Institute. Now please appreciate that the FPMT, as a result of this, will be disgraced internationally. The purpose of Tenzin and my coming from England to see you in California was to impress upon you the grave seriousness of the present situation and to obtain your signature on the agreement we presented to you along with the letter from the Institute. This action we have taken has been at the recommendation of the Charities Commission and also of our own attorney in England.

As you said in your tape that you agree with the proposal that we have offered you, then please sign the agreement now to take back to England with us on Monday. If we are unable to return to England with your signature on that agreement, which you have already indicated you agreed with, then please know, Lama, without doubt that civil and legal actions will commence next week.

Lama, I will call you at 10:30 tomorrow morning to hear your response to this communication. I sincerely hope from the very bottom of my heart that you will be willing to sign the agreement, which represents an extremely tolerant, and an extremely peaceful solution to this overall problem under the circumstances. However, if there are further questions that you wish to ask – if there is any way in which Tenzin or myself can be of further assistance to you in understanding the present situation please let us know and we are completely at you disposal from now until the time that we actually have to leave for England, which is Monday afternoon. Please listen to my tape carefully so that you do understand completely what is involved and that there will be no regret in the future if legal actions are, in fact, taken. Good night, Lama.”

Written by tenpel

July 14, 2010 at 3:35 pm

Posted in New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Global Tribute to the Dalai Lama – 75th Birthday of The Dalai Lama

leave a comment »

AVAAZ wants to help people to express their gratitude and love towards His Holiness the Dalai Lama whose messages of peace and justice are seen to “need a big public jolt of support in these challenging times to demonstrate to those who oppose it that the world is united in hope for a peaceful and fair world.”

The  global tribute Avaaz is organising has collected now almost 300.000 voices that will be delivered personally to the Dalai Lama. According to Avaaz

“signers and messages are being posted on a “wall of warm wishes” just outside the main Temple in Dharamsala, India and will be broadcast across the region. Click below to sign — let’s make his birthday last as long as we keep signing:

To The Dalai Lama: We wish you well on your 75th birthday and stand together across the world to express our thanks for your leadership for justice, non violence and peace.”

For signing the petition see: Dalai Lama: 75th Birthday Global Tribute

Written by tenpel

July 8, 2010 at 11:15 am

Posted in HH the Dalai Lama

Tagged with , , , , ,

The NKT and the UK Charity Commission – Part II

leave a comment »

The UK Charity Commission

An important body that has had a long relationship with the NKT is the UK Charity Commission. Like Inform, one of the fundamental tenets of the Charity Commission is neutrality. Unlike Inform, the NKT have a vested interest in maintaining a healthy relationship with the Commission since their charitable status as the registered charity ‘NKT-IKBU’ brings significant benefits, both in terms of funding and tax exemption.

After the demonstrations of 2008, a number of individuals wrote to the Commission to express their concerns about the NKT-IKBU’s infrastructure, assets and membership being utilised in the WSS’s highly political anti Dalai Lama campaign. Generally speaking, charities are advised not to engage directly in political activity. In a recent report on the activities of the League Against Cruel Sports, for instance, Andrew Hind, Chief Executive of the Charity Commission said:

“Charities must guard their independence very carefully, which means not engaging in any party political activity or leaving the charity open to the perception that they may be.”

Critics of the NKT would certainly suggest that the NKT, in the guise of the WSS, was engaged in just such activity. However, the Commission rejected this complaint stating:

“Our view, is that the charity is undertaking campaigning rather than political activity, (a view) based on the distinct definitions of these terms, derived from charity law. Political activity involves trying to secure support or oppose a change in the law or in the policy or decisions of a central government, local authority, or other public body whether in this country or abroad. Campaigning is about mobilising support and raising awareness about an issue, whether in the public domain generally or particularly among stakeholders or governments, or both.

In this case, the charity is campaigning against an edict or a resolution (I refer However, we do not think that this is a political campaign or political activity because the edict has not been pronounced by a functioning government or political leader. Neither is the edict capable of being legally enforced. Clearly, the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan Government in Exile do pass resolutions, decisions and edicts which are followed by their supporters. However, these do not become laws or policies in Tibet, India or any other country, and their supporters have the choice of whether to comply or not.”

In other words, the campaign against the Dalai Lama is not a political one because the Dalai Lama is not a political leader and his edicts are not legally enforceable.

Supporters of the Dalai Lama’s position on the Shugden issue can be forgiven for perhaps perceiving this somewhat characteristically evasive and insipid response something of a disappointment. To suggest that the Dalai Lama is not a political leader simply because he is not currently the head of state or that his actions are not political simply because his edicts are not legally enforceable seems a very convenient way for the Charity Commission to, once again, refrain from acting when action is urgently needed. Even the NKT would disagree with them on both issues. After all, their central argument is that the Dalai Lama is a political figure and his edicts on Shugden are being enforced within the exiled Tibetan community.

Significantly more noteworthy however, is the repeated use of the phrase “the charity is …campaigning”. To whom exactly do the Commission refer when they speak of ‘the charity’ campaigning against the Dalai Lama’s edicts? Certainly, it is not the Western Shugden Society; the WSS have, at least until now, not registered as a UK charity. Moreover, the complaints that the Charity Commission received were not made against the WSS but rather, against the NKT-IKBU itself.

Thus, when the Commission refer to the non-political ‘campaigning’ activities of ‘the charity’, the charity are referring directly to the NKT. From the perspective of UK Charity Commission, the demonstrations against the Dalai Lama that were carried out in the deliberate guise of the WSS were in fact, the activity of registered charity 101504, the New Kadampa Tradition-International Kadampa Buddhist Union.

The Charity Commission’s response continues:

“…it would appear the charity believes its involvement in the issue to be political. We will therefore write to the trustees to explain the legal position that applies to charities taking part in political activity and campaigning, and the duties and responsibilities that must be complied with. As mentioned above, the reason for being involved in the campaign must be related to the charity’s purposes and trustees must be able to justify the resources applied….Our advice will also include trustees considering the methods used to campaign, such as taking part in demonstrations or associating with another organisation(s).”

This then, further confirms that it is the NKT-IKBU to which the Commission refer in their response. In fact, several phrases in the passage raise some very interesting questions. For instance, if “the charity believes its involvement in the issue to be political.” why does “the charity” publicly deny that it engages in any form of political activity? Again, why do the Commission believe the NKT-IKBU considers its “involvement in the issue to be political.”? Is it because they have consistently denied any association between their own activities and those of the WSS? Is such apparently deceptive behaviour acceptable for a charity in the eyes of the Commission?

According to the Commission’s response to the complaint that the NKT IKBU charity has bee engaging in political activities, charities can undertake such campaigning activity, “as long as they are only undertaken in the context of supporting the delivery of the charity’s purposes or aims, in this case the Dalai Lama’s edict against Shugden propitiation”.

The Charity Commission website states that the aims and purpose of the NKT-IKBU are the “Public promotion of Kadampa Buddhism throughout the world, by supporting the development of Kadampa Buddhist centres throughout the world, by publishing and distributing book on Kadampa Buddhism and training teachers in the same, and finally the maintenance of a year-round programme of Buddhist teachings and meditation at the charity’s home premises.”

Where in this statement of aims and purposes, does the NKT IKBU refer to its ‘religious freedom’ campaigns against the Dalai Lama? Is it not the case that, despite the fact that this has very clearly been one of the NKT IKBU’s most prominent activities of recent, such activities do not appear to link to any of the stated aims or purposes, either explicitly or indeed, implicitly? Why is it that the NKT-IKBU’s significant involvement in these activities is not made clear in the statement aims and purposes?

Surely, if this campaigning has become a significant aspect of the NKT-IKBU’s activities, this should be made clear in its statement of aims and purposes? If not, how are the general public or indeed non-governmental bodies such as English Heritage and the National Lottery to know whether they are contributing to a cause, the aims of which they agree with? Is this perhaps why the NKT have been so keen to hide the fact that, though they and the WSS are nominally distinct, they are in fact the same entity?

After the 2008 demonstrations by the NKT/WSS the Administrative Director of Kadampa Meditation Centre, Florida resigned, declaring:

“Since the beginning of our involvement with the NKT we have been repeatedly told that the NKT was not involved in politics. Now that the NKT has opened up with its political position and begun demonstrating I can no longer be a part of the organization. This complete lack of honesty about the NKT’s involvement in Tibetan politics is the reason for my departure.”

If more people were aware of this total dishonesty over the NKT’s thoroughly political nature, how long would it be before it was no longer one of the largest and fastest growing New Buddhist Movements in the West? How long would it be before the mortgage payments could no longer be met and its burgeoning property empire began to collapse inwards, like the proverbial sand castle slipping back into the sea?

Note: The synopsis of the NKT-Charity Commission case was provided by a third party source.

See Also

Written by tenpel

July 3, 2010 at 10:00 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

New Kadampa Tradition threatened to sue NBO too

with 7 comments

Maybe all of this is also a bit funny. At least it is good to keep some type of humour here ;-)

Not only were certain academics threatened with legal actions by NKT if they publish information the NKT do not like. After the Network of Buddhist Organisations (NBO) have expressed to the NKT—one of their members—their concern about  NKT’s public protests the NKT also threatened the NBO with legal actions. I wonder if the ASA who also expressed their concern about the NKT protests were also threatened to be sued?

The NBO wrote the following letter to the NKT

Dear

It has come to my attention that the Western Shugden Supporters group will be demonstrating at the Teachings of His Holiness the Dalai Lama in Nottingham, Oxford and London. Though I am aware that this group is seen as separate to the NKT, it is also well know that the majority of its members are  part of the NKT.

We at the Network of Buddhist Organisations are greatly concerned about this action and wish to request in the strongest terms that the leaders of the NKT ask their members not to demonstrate, or to organise demonstrations, against his Holiness the Dalai Lama when he  teaches in London, Nottingham and elsewhere on his UK and European tours.

To do so would be a direct breach of  the aims of the Network of Buddhist Organisations and may serve not only to bring the name of Buddhism into disrepute but also to cause damage to the NKT itself.

You may also be aware that some years ago before the NKT joined the NBO we met with Jim Belither who stated that the NKT would no longer be involved in such action. This was a great relief to us all and resulted in the NKT joining the NBO.

We understand that the NKT itself is not supporting this action but rather leaving it up to individuals to decide whether they attend or not. We would respectfully suggest that if the NKT leadership want to enhance the reputation of their organisation they should distance themselves and their organisation from any potential demonstration and  make it clear in writing that if anyone does protest, this is unofficial. We would further suggest that NKT supporters are asked by the leadership not to undertake any protest at all.

It is not for the NBO to get involved in the particular disagreements that exist but I would stress that it saddens us greatly that this unseemly action is being resorted to.

This matter will be discussed at the next NBO meeting and I hope that NKT reps will attend to talk it through with us.

With my hopes that these damaging situations can be sorted out soon.
In the Dharma

Jamie Cresswell
Chair Network of Buddhist Organisations – UK

The reply by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso and the final legal threat against the NBO can be read here:

Among those threatened to be sued by the New Kadampa Tradition are also INFORM, Dr Reiss, Gary Beesley, and Lama Yeshe. For the latter two see these posts:

See Also

Open Letters by Kelsang Gyatso:

Note: If someone is upset that this information or letters are posted here, this person I would like to request to consider the following thoughts. The NKT try by all means to force others to do what they wish others should do according to their own perspectives. The intimidating tactics include to threat legal actions if someone wishes to publish information the NKT leadership do not like. Sadly among the targets of NKT leadership’s intimidating tactics are  researcher or Buddhist head organisations, as well as the Dalai Lama, Robert Thurman, Lama Yeshe and former members. It was a researcher who suggested to me in an email it would be better the methods of NKT get more known in the public. I think this is a valid reason, hence the letters and information are provided here.

last update: July 14, 2010

Written by tenpel

July 3, 2010 at 7:54 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

New Kadamapa Tradition Threats an Author and His Publisher to Sue Them

leave a comment »

I know of some cases where NKT was able to oppress information by academics by threatening to sue them.

Now there is obviously a new case and the question is, how this will turn out…

It is known that UK is among those countries with the strictest libel laws. But what is meant to be a protection to be infamized has been used by powerful organisations to repress information too. The rather funny point here is that NKT threats to sue based on mere speculations gained from an Amazon announcement.

Quite quickly after the announcement of Gary Beesley’s book at AMAZON he and his publisher received two letters threatening a legal case. Check yourself what to think about all of this…

Documents

Details and some discussion

see also

Note: The responsibility for the correctness and truthfulness of the content of external links is in the hands of the owners of those websites.

Written by tenpel

July 2, 2010 at 6:39 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy, New Kadampa Tradition

Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

After the Storm

leave a comment »

The campaign of the Western Shugden Society (WSS) / New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) has settled for the time being. After a big propaganda battle, which was picked up by many media—in almost all cases unable to untangle the accusations and its background—there is time to look a bit what is left over with respect to the facts after this propaganda storm.

Since I have not too much time, I will make it short.

One will find a lot of distorted portrays nowadays on YouTube and all over the internet about the Dalai Lamas, Tibet and Tibetan Buddhism, to which in no small part the WSS have contributed to, a field usually in the hands of China, Trimondis, Goldner and some others who look onto these issues from a very distorted and narrow minded or deluded perspective.

Personally I was forced to read more academic literature on these issues than I’ve ever intended to do but this I see now as a good outcome of it—though it distracts me from my Buddhist philosophical studies.

There are some new articles online—more will come soon hopefully—written by known academic scholars touching many of the issues pushed forward by the WSS and others.

There is also a paper by a university student which I and others found quite interesting:

With respect to the court case of some Shugden followers against the Dalai Lama, there are also news offered at the official TGIE website*:

Delhi High Court Dismisses Dorjee Shugden Devotees’ Charges

Dharamshala: In response to the allegations of harassment and maltreatment filed by the Dorjee Shugden Devotees’ Charitable and Religious Society against the Central Tibetan Administration and His Holiness the Dalai Lama, the High Court of Delhi dismissed their writ petition and application.

In an order dated April 5, 2010, Justice S. Muralidhar dismissed the writ petition and application on the grounds that the allegations of violence and harassment were ‘vague averments’ and that the raised issues ‘do not partake of any public law character and therefore are not justiciable in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution.’

Citing the ‘absence of any specific instances of any such attacks’ on Dorjee Shugden practitioners, the Court noted the counter affidavit submitted by the respondents, referring to ‘an understanding reached whereby it was left to the monks to decide whether they would want to be associated with the practices of Dorjee Shugden.’

Closing the doors on the possibility of similar complaints in the future, Justice Muralidhar concluded that the ‘matters of religion and the differences among groups concerning propitiation of religion, cannot be adjudicated upon by a High Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction.’

This statement by the High Court of Delhi may be also interesting in the light of the claims made by the WSS—or some Shugden devotees—who claimed that “the Dalai Lama found guilty of persecution” and who spoke even of a “criminal case against the Dalai Lama”…

In the next months I hope there will be more papers on controversial discussed issues, e.g. the non-existent ‘Nazi-Tibet-connection’, and the institution of the Dalai Lamas. In rather near future there will be answers given by scholars to a 6page questionnaire which includes the most frequently discussed controversies related to Tibet/Dalai Lamas/Tibetan Buddhism. With respect to the ‘Nazi-Tibet-Connection’ there is a good summery by Jigme Duntak:

The latest and most extensive research article on the ‘Nazi-Tibet-connection’ can be found in the book Images of Tibet in the 19th and 20th Centuries (2008). Paris: École française d’Extrême-Orient (EFEO), coll. Études thématiques 22, vol. I. It includes the excellent article “Nazis of Tibet: A Twentieth Century Myth.”, pp. 63-96, by Isrun Engelhardt.

Since many Tibet critics, who very often fall into the extreme of portraying everything related to Tibet in a very negative way— or to justify China’s invasion as a ‘liberation’—like to stress brutal punishments in Tibet to justify their one-sided criticism, here a quote by Prof. Martin Brauen taken from his highly recommendable book Dreamworld Tibet—Western Illusions, p. 245:

This brings us to the traditional Tibetan system of justice, going back to the seventh century, of which Tsewang Norbu says:

As in many societies at a comparable stage of development, the Tibetan state had at its disposal archaic legal standards and practices, which from a present-day point of view would be characterized as inhuman and barbaric … This legal practice remained in effect in Tibet right into the twentieth century. Fortunately, the application of such methods of punishment was the exception rather than the rule.

But—according to Tswang Norbu—critics of this system ought first to take a glance at the history of the European Middle Ages and note that the nineteenth and twentieth centuries were no tale of glory for Europe either. Thus the author holds a mirror up to Westerners for them to look at themselves—a new, exciting element in the encounter between the West and Tibet.

* see also: Delhi High Court Dismisses Dorjee Shugden Devotees’ Charges by TibetInfoNet

Written by tenpel

April 23, 2010 at 3:38 pm

Posted in Dorje Shugden Controversy

Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

« Older Entries
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.