Trijang Rinpoche’s Story – Truth the Tibetan Leaders Cannot Hide

His Holiness Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche, known as the ‘teacher of teachers’, was the junior tutor of His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. At the Dalai Lama’s request, Trijang Rinpoche composed his autobiography which invariably demonstrates the deep impact that Dorje Shugden had on his life.

The opinion piece below was sent to for publication. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to [email protected].



By: Shashi Kei

A Force of Nature

His Holiness Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche is without question a phenomenal force in Tibetan Buddhism and his name has become synonymous not only with the stainless tradition of Lama Tsongkhapa but also the highest standards of scholarship and monastic excellence. Trijang Rinpoche is hailed as one of the greatest, if not the greatest master of Tibetan Buddhism in the modern era, continuing a legacy of enlightened deeds that began many lifetimes ago. His recognised reincarnation lineage began as Chandra (Chandaka), the chariot driver who took Prince Siddhartha into the forest to begin his journey to become the Buddha. In addition, in his past incarnations, Trijang Rinpoche had been the Great Atisha, the illustrious scholar Santaraksita, and the exemplary debater and logician Candrakirti. Trijang Rinpoche, who had a close relationship with the 16th Karmapa, even took reincarnation in the Karma Kagyu lineage as the 8th Karmapa Mikyo Dorje and he was also the Bodhisattva Dharmamitra.

or watch on our server:

From the time Trijang Rinpoche was born to when he passed into clear light, he lived a faultless life. So immense was Trijang Rinpoche’s contribution to the Tibetan people and to the Buddhadharma that until this day, there is not one shred of accusation or charge against him. This is why when Trijang Rinpoche’s flawlessness was called into question, it raised eyebrows. That was the occasion when the Dalai Lama said that the old masters who worshipped the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden were all ‘wrong’. Trijang Rinpoche was one of the old masters the Dalai Lama referred to and he was well known for his trust in Dorje Shugden.

In saying that these old lamas were wrong, the Dalai Lama based his statement purely on their practice of Dorje Shugden and nothing else. Whilst shocking, it is not entirely surprising because at the time, the Dalai Lama was imposing a ban on Dorje Shugden’s practice for reasons that have never been proven or shown to have logical basis in the greater context of Tibetan Buddhist philosophy. For example, it is contradictory for the Dalai Lama to declare that old masters such as Trijang Rinpoche are infallible Buddhist masters of sutra and tantra, and at the same time accuse them of being worshippers of a “spirit of the dark forces” which the Dalai Lama and the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA; Tibetan leadership based in Dharamsala) say all Dorje Shugden worshippers are.


The Magical Play of Illusion: A Validation of Dorje Shugden

The Magical Play of Illusion. Click on the image to download the English biography (in PDF format). To download the text in Tibetan, please scroll to the bottom of the article.

Trijang Rinpoche entered clear light in 1982 but before he passed away, he wrote his autobiography, The Magical Play of Illusion, at the request of the Dalai Lama. As much as Trijang Rinpoche’s book is a chronicle of the deeds of a Bodhisattva, it is at the same time a firm validation of Dorje Shugden and a narrative of how much the Dharma Protector assisted Trijang Rinpoche in performing his great deeds that continue to benefit people even today. In that sense, the autobiography of this great lama exemplifies the awkwardness of the case against Dorje Shugden; that is, in chronicling the life and activities of Trijang Rinpoche, the book makes it impossible to condemn Dorje Shugden and his practitioners without simultaneously making a fool out of the Gelug lineage and the foundations of Tibetan Buddhism.

The clumsiness is clear right from the beginning. For example, the translator of Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography, Sharpa Tulku wrote in his Preface that,

“My family sought his [Trijang Rinpoche's] guidance and his divination for every major event in our lives, and the advice he gave never failed to be beneficial.”

Over the next few hundred pages of the book, Trijang Rinpoche would articulate repeatedly his deep and unequivocal reliance on Gyalchen Dorje Shugden for advice, divination and prediction. No other Dharma Protector is mentioned with such significance and frequency as Dorje Shugden. Therefore the divinations and advice that Sharpa Tulku’s family benefited from would have come from Gyalchen Dorje Shugden whom Trijang Rinpoche relied on.

This is just but one of many other instances. To point out each and every occasion in Trijang Rinpoche’s life and provide examples where he invoked Dorje Shugden to perform a beneficial act, or turned to the Protector for divination and advice or gave initiations and permissions to Tibetan lamas and personages to practice Dorje Shugden, would yield an essay almost as voluminous as Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography itself. Suffice to say that Trijang Rinpoche’s life is without a doubt an attestation to Dorje Shugden’s divine qualities and the high regard the Protector commanded in Tibet’s lay and monastic community until the Tibetan leadership forcibly changed all that.


The CTA’s Persecution of Shugden Buddhists

On their official website (, there is a list of what they call “Dolgyal” followers which the CTA use to defame Dorje Shugden practitioners and direct violence towards them. Is this what a “democratic” government body should be doing? Click to enlarge.

Within the framework of the Tibetan leadership’s ban on Dorje Shugden, the publication of Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography in English in October 2018 is interesting. Trijang Rinpoche wrote his autobiography in 1975, a few years before any murmurings against the Dorje Shugden practice began. Those murmurings became a formal restriction on the practice in 1996, when resolutions were passed to condemn Dorje Shugden practice and vilify Shugden practitioners. The ban however, was disguised as merely a strong advice, an act that was necessary given the Tibetan leadership’s claims to be a democracy. It would undermine the CTA’s purported democracy if it was seen to be preventing its own Tibetan people from exercising their religious freedom although this was precisely what the CTA’s ban was tantamount to.

Sikyong Lobsang Sangay launches anti-Shugden book

That thinly-veiled ban became an outright commandment by the Dalai Lama in 2008 by which time to practice Dorje Shugden was not only socially taboo but also (according to the Tibetan leadership] somehow against the Buddhadharma. In 2014, the CTA’s Parliament formally passed a resolution declaring all practitioners of Dorje Shugden to be “criminals in history“. The CTA’s propaganda machinery went into overdrive and by 2017, the CTA’s religious ban had successfully driven the worship of this deity underground, much like Nero’s persecutions of Christians drove Christianity underground in 64AD.

In this systematic manner, an ancient and hallowed Protector practice became labelled a cult practice and its followers portrayed as violent extremists bent on destroying Buddhism and harming the Dalai Lama. It became common for Tibetans and supporters of the Dalai Lama to demonstrate their loyalty by harboring enmity against Dorje Shugden practitioners and anyone even remotely associated with the practice. For all intents and purposes, the Tibetan leadership’s efforts to eradicate the practice of Dorje Shugden had worked. Which is why the October 2018 publication of Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography in English where it can reach the widest audience was an unexpected surprise.


The Paradox and Explanations

Trijang Rinpoche was regarded as the embodiment of the practice of the pure Dharma and when he was alive, his word was taken as the ultimate spiritual authority. Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography and other writings bear witness to the fact that he propagated the practice of Dorje Shugden widely, teaching all who received the practice that Dorje Shugden is in fact wrathful Manjushri, the Buddha of Wisdom. This was the prevailing view of Dorje Shugden for centuries. The Dalai Lama was aware of that and it has been said that he waited until the last of the old great lamas had passed into clear light before enacting the Dorje Shugden ban.

H.H. Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche

For example, the Dalai Lama knew that it would have been impossible to denounce Dorje Shugden whilst living Buddhas such as Trijang Rinpoche were still alive. Trijang Rinpoche would never have given up the practice and in retaining it, his influence alone would have emboldened thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, to join him in maintaining their practice too. In this way, imposing the ban on Dorje Shugden while Trijang Rinpoche was alive would have drastically reduced its efficacy.

Dorje Shugden was after all the main Dharma Protector of Pabongka Rinpoche, Trijang Rinpoche and Zong Rinpoche, and virtually every lama, scholar and practitioner of the Gelug lineage. Despite being the spiritual and secular head of the Tibetan people, the Dalai Lama was still a student of Trijang Rinpoche. Given the tremendous significance of Trijang Rinpoche and his unmatched standing within the Tibetan lay and monastic community, it would not have been difficult for the weight of his word or the significance of his own practice of Dorje Shugden to overshadow the Tibetan leadership’s attempts to demonize the deity.

What some might find unusual is that the Dalai Lama, knowing very well Trijang Rinpoche’s relationship with Dorje Shugden, still allowed the publication of this translated autobiography. The Dalai Lama would have known that its publication would revive the memory of this spiritual giant and with it, a restoration of the name of Dorje Shugden, the deity the Tibetan leadership wanted the world to forget. And yet he allowed it.

Could it be that the Dalai Lama had no influence over the matter? Not so. Those familiar with the ways of the Tibetan leadership know that the CTA can easily shut down the publication of any material or literature that does not support their stance on any issue, for example:

  1. The Tibetan magazine Mangtso (meaning ‘democracy’) was shuttered for publishing views deemed critical of the Dalai Lama’s administration;
  2. Guru Deva Rinpoche had his printing press shut down after publishing a letter by a Tibetan layperson who questioned the Dalai Lama’s Dorje Shugden ban. Guru Deva Rinpoche, a great benefactor of the Tibetan people in exile, was himself chased out of town and back to Mongolia.

So it is without question that the Dalai Lama could have easily prevented the publication of Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography. The publisher, Wisdom Publications, is owned by the same interests as the Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition (FPMT) that is not only opposed to the practice of Dorje Shugden but also comes under the control of Lama Zopa who is a staunch Dalai Lama supporter.

Not only did the Dalai Lama allow the publication of the book, but he also endorsed its contents by writing the Foreword to the autobiography of the greatest Dorje Shugden lama of the modern era.

Foreword written by H.H. the 14th Dalai Lama. Click to enlarge.

Dorje Shugden detractors will insist that the Dalai Lama’s Foreword is yet more affirmation of his opposition to the Dorje Shugden practice, but the Dalai Lama’s own words prove them to be wrong. To begin with, the Dalai Lama excuses Trijang Rinpoche’s Dorje Shugden practice by saying,

“Since his predecessors had close ties to the practice, as did his root lama Phabongkha Rinpoche, it is understandable that my late tutor followed them in propitiating Dölgyal (Dorje Shukden).”

In this sentence alone, the Dalai Lama disqualifies the reasons for imposing the Shugden ban because the Dalai Lama confirms:

  1. That past Gaden Tripas relied on Dorje Shugden. The Gaden Tripa is the head of the Gelug lineage and in Trijang Rinpoche’s case, he had two predecessors who were the 69th and the 85th Gaden Tripas. The fact Trijang Rinpoche’s erudite predecessors, who occupied the highest seat in the Gelug lineage twice-over, became closely associated with Dorje Shugden practice indicates that it was not a fringe and unauthorized practice after all.
  2. That worshippers of this supposed “dark force” experience no ill-effects. In fact, Dorje Shugden worshippers can even reincarnate as enlightened masters like Trijang Rinpoche who is deemed holy, attained and qualified even to become the tutor of the Dalai Lama, an emanation of Avalokiteshvara.
  3. That it is natural and understandable for a practitioner to follow his teacher’s worship of Dorje Shugden. The Dalai Lama even confirms that there is a lineage of practice, since Trijang Rinpoche’s own root lama relied on Dorje Shugden. However, this understanding is somehow suspended when the Dalai Lama and CTA forced Dorje Shugden practitioners to break oaths made to their teachers to uphold the Protector practice, and the Dalai Lama even allowed Penpa Tsering to criticize and denigrate his tutor Trijang Rinpoche’s root lama.

Dorje Shugden statue at Nyanang Pelgyeling Monastery in Nepal, made by the Fifth Dalai Lama. Click to enlarge.

Nevertheless, detractors will be keen to point out the Dalai Lama’s reference to the 5th Dalai Lama. In their indictment of the deity, those opposed to Dorje Shugden often misquote the 5th Dalai Lama as having said that Dorje Shugden was “an oath-breaking spirit born from perverse prayers …harming the teachings [the Buddhadharma] and all living beings”.

However, not only is this incorrect but the opposite is true. The 5th Dalai Lama composed the very first prayer to Dorje Shugden, beseeching him to protect Dharma practitioners. He also constructed the very first Dorje Shugden chapel (Trode Khangsar) in Lhasa, and created with his own hands a Dorje Shugden statue for the purposes of worship. All of these are historical facts which have not been disputed.

And notwithstanding his earlier negation of false claims against Dorje Shugden, the Dalai Lama further invalidated that wrong view, albeit subtly, in the very next paragraph where he wrote,

“…and I composed a prayer for the swift return of his reincarnation.”

Even those with the most rudimentary Dharma knowledge will be able to see the contradiction here. If Dorje Shugden is truly a malevolent entity, then Trijang Rinpoche in his previous life as the Gaden Throne-holder and then as the Dalai Lama’s Junior Tutor would have broken his refuge vows and along with it, his monastic, tantric and all other vows.

Why then even spare the effort of composing a prayer for such a person’s swift return? Surely a prolific worshipper of such a destructive demonic force and who had actively facilitated the spread of this ‘evil’ would be heading for the lower realms and remain there for countless aeons according to the laws of karma. And yet the Dalai Lama gave no indication whatsoever that this was to be the result of Trijang Rinpoche’s lifelong worship of Dorje Shugden. Instead with the prayer, the Dalai Lama indicated that he fully expected the swift return of his teacher’s incarnation.

H.H. the 14th Dalai Lama with the current incarnation of H.H. Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche. If Dorje Shugden lamas worship a demon and are supposed to take rebirth in the three lower realms, why then did the Dalai Lama recognize the reincarnation of his guru?

The Epilogue of Trijang Rinpoche’s book narrates how the Dalai Lama actively searched for Trijang Rinpoche’s new incarnation and confirmed through divination the identity of the boy who would eventually be enthroned as the new embodiment of Trijang Rinpoche’s mind stream:

“His Holiness felt certain that Trijang Rinpoche’s reincarnation had been reborn in northwestern India, Kungo Palden, full of hope, went with Jamyang Tashi to Dalhousie on May 8, 1983, and stayed with Losang Thupten…” (page 380)


“There, His Holiness gave the verdict that Sönam Topgyal’s child was the true reincarnation of Kyabje Trijang Vajradhara. With a beaming expression on his face, His Holiness then charged Lati Rinpoche and Kungo Palden with responsibility of caring for the child.” (page 381)

Finally, the Dalai Lama performed a hair-cutting ceremony on Trijang Rinpoche’s incarnation and named the boy Tenzin Losang Yeshe Gyatso.

Page 243, click to enlarge.

Allowing the publication of Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography, endorsing the book by writing a Foreword for it, and then skillfully negating very serious charges against Dorje Shugden, all go against the ban on Dorje Shugden that the Dalai Lama himself had imposed over two decades ago. Many examples of this can be found but an especially glaring example is on page 243 where Trijang Rinpoche wrote that it was the Dalai Lama who personally instructed Trijang Rinpoche to seek the advice of Dorje Shugden at the most crucial time. The Protectors Palden Lhamo, Nechung and Gadong had all given their respective advice but the Dalai Lama needed to be sure and so he sought the final confirmation from Dorje Shugden.

In the final analysis, it was upon Dorje Shugden’s instruction that the Dalai Lama and his party fled Tibet following the route prescribed by the deity Trijang Rinpoche regarded as the “chief protector”. Why would a supposedly perfidious spirit save the Dalai Lama if it is true that his intent is to harm the Buddhadharma?

Note that while the Dalai Lama spent most of his Foreword criticizing the practice of his guru, he did not dispute any information or specific events in the book that soundly mitigate the case against Dorje Shugden. There are only a few ways to look at this incongruity:

  1. It was an oversight on the part of the Dalai Lama. This is highly implausible because the Dalai Lama is well known to be sharp-witted and still in possession of very finely-tuned mental faculties despite his advanced age. In addition, the Dalai Lama has access to a string of aides-de-camp, assistants and secretaries, and not to mention scholars like Sharpa Tulku and his regular translator Thupten Jinpa who would have vetted the book and advised the Dalai Lama accordingly, assuming the Dalai Lama had not read his teacher’s autobiography himself. So this explanation cannot stand on its own merits.
  2. The publication of the book was out of the Dalai Lama’s control. Again, as we examined earlier, the opposite is true. Wisdom Publications comes well under the Dalai Lama’s influence. In any case, even if the publisher was a company outside the Dalai Lama’s clout, his willingness to write the Foreword negates this argument.
  3. The only other explanation is that the Dalai Lama intended for the book to be published and widely read. A critical Foreword would pique interest in the matter, and lead people to look out for mentions of Dorje Shugden. As inconsistent as this may appear, it makes sense when seen from the perspective of recent developments in two other controversies that have dominated the Tibetan Buddhist landscape, besides the Dorje Shugden conflict – the 11th Panchen Lama controversy and the Two Karmapa dispute.



Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the Dalai Lama’s candidate for the 11th Panchen Lama, disappeared shortly after he was recognized. A few months later, the Chinese government recognized their own candidate and since 1995, the Dalai Lama has persisted in his claim that the Chinese candidate is a fake and merely a puppet of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Then suddenly in April 2018, the Dalai Lama changed his mind and endorsed the Chinese Panchen Lama.

In 1995, the Dalai Lama accused the Chinese government of abducting a child that the Dalai Lama had recognised to be the 11th Panchen Lama. In addition, the Dalai Lama declared that the China-enthroned 11th Panchen Lama Gyaincain Norbu was a fraud, which is a stance the Tibetan leadership have vehemently stood by for the past 23 years. Then suddenly, on 25th April 2018, the Dalai Lama made a statement that Gyaincain Norbu is in fact the official and therefore the real Panchen Lama. This sudden reversal of the Dalai Lama’s stance on the Panchen Lama controversy was a harbinger of changes to come.

The two Karmapa candidates Thaye Dorje (left) and Ogyen Trinley (right) during their recent October 2018 meeting in France. Although the Dalai Lama has never traditionally been involved in the search and recognition of the Karmapas, Ogyen Trinley was endorsed by the 14th Dalai Lama, setting off a conflict that has plagued the Karma Kagyu tradition for over 20 years.

Just as mysteriously, on 11th October 2018, the two Karmapa candidates Ogyen Trinley Dorje and Trinley Thaye Dorje met in secret in France before issuing a joint statement declaring their mutual interest in healing the division in the Karma Kagyu lineage. The said division had been caused by a disagreement amongst the four regents of the Karma Kagyu, triggered when Tai Situ Rinpoche declared that Ogyen Trinley was the rightful heir to the Karmapa throne. The Shamarpa, the most senior of the four regents, disagreed with him and insisted that another candidate, Thaye Dorje was the correct reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa and therefore the rightful claimant to the Karmapa seat. Traditionally it has been the role and duty of the Shamarpa to recognize and enthrone the Karmapa but the Dalai Lama acted outside his authority and scuttled the process. In officially endorsing Ogyen Trinley as the Karmapa, the Dalai Lama crystallized the problem and rendered it intractable even though the Shamarpa presented information to indicate that the Dalai Lama was in error.

The Dalai Lama’s interference divided the Karma Kagyu from 1995 onwards. Given the Dalai Lama’s absolute dominance of all matters relating to Tibetan Buddhism, it has been widely speculated that the Dalai Lama secretly engineered the recent France meeting of the two Karmapas to pave the way for reunification in the Karma Kagyu lineage. This is plausible because it would be highly unlikely for the young Karmapas to openly oppose the Dalai Lama and undo what the Dalai Lama had set in stone. And so there appears to be a change in the Dalai Lama’s stance on the Karmapa issue as well.

The developments in the Panchen Lama and Karmapa issues have one thing in common in that they are both reconciliatory in nature and if the Dalai Lama is seeking to harmonize the Tibetan Buddhist community, then it makes sense to also unravel the Dorje Shugden ban. And what better way to do this than to publicize his teacher, Trijang Rinpoche’s close relationship with Dorje Shugden by writing the Foreword to his autobiography. Given Trijang Rinpoche’s stature, the high regard he commanded at all levels of Tibetan society and seeing how the people still regard him indisputably as an enlightened being, his autobiography is a potent antidote against Dorje Shugden disinformation, and a robust counter-argument against detractors’ demonization of the deity.

It is well within reason to ask why the Dalai Lama does not just announce the abolition of the Dorje Shugden ban if that was indeed his intention.

  1. The answer may be as simple as the suggestion that the Dalai Lama does not like to admit that he is wrong. We get a hint of this in a video of the late Shamarpa speaking about his meeting with the Dalai Lama. The Shamarpa recounted how he presented his findings about why the Dalai Lama was in error for endorsing Ogyen Trinley as the 17th Karmapa. According to the Shamarpa’s narrative, the Dalai Lama did not disagree with his findings but instead replied that he had already endorsed Ogyen Trinley and so he could not withdraw it. We may surmise from this that the Dalai Lama may have a habit of refusing to acknowledge his mistakes regardless of the repercussions.

or watch on our server:

The Shamarpa explained that he went to the Dalai Lama to present evidence countering his endorsement of Ogyen Trinley as the 17th Karmapa. The Dalai Lama refused to retract his endorsement, saying once it had been issued there was no way to withdraw it.

  1. Perhaps the Dalai Lama cannot afford to admit he is wrong because in doing so, it would open the floodgates for him to be questioned on a string of other matters. He would no longer be deemed to be faultless and omniscient. As far as the Dorje Shugden conflict is concerned, decades of discrimination against Dorje Shugden worshippers happened based only on the Dalai Lama’s word that the practice is demonic. For the Dalai Lama to openly say that Dorje Shugden is not evil after all would not only discredit him, it would also lay liability on him, for inflicting such a grievous injury on the Tibetan community inside Tibet as well as the Tibetan diaspora around the world.
  2. There are quieter ways of bringing about reconciliation. The Gelug tradition is the predominant Tibetan Buddhist sect and accounts for the largest percentage of the Tibetan population around the world. Within the Gelug school, the practice of Dorje Shugden has always been pervasive especially from the time of Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche. Therefore the harm done by the Dalai Lama’s Dorje Shugden ban has been widespread, damaging the unity of the Tibetan nation, the integrity of the Tibetan Buddhist monastic structure, as well as the good name of Tibetan Buddhism. So it may have been deemed wiser to just quietly take effective measures for the damage to heal, just like how the Dalai Lama secretly set up the meeting of the two Karmapas.

Whatever the reasons may be, the Dalai Lama’s allowance for the publication of Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography and then writing a Foreword for it, is a welcome move not only for Dorje Shugden Buddhists but also for Buddhism in general. It is the Dalai Lama’s way of inviting the world and everyone engaged in the Shugden divide to finally discover the truth and then close a very unfortunate chapter in the history of Tibetan Buddhism. Trijang Rinpoche was and still is the embodiment of a life lived perfectly in accordance to the Buddha’s teachings and as such his name itself is holy and his life story is both an inspiration as well as a lamp that guides all beings out of samsara. The Dalai Lama demonstrated great mastery and wisdom in allowing for the words of his holy teacher to permeate the earth to correct gross misunderstandings about a deity that Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche, Heruka himself, had said we needed to depend on.

And to be sure that what Trijang Rinpoche wrote about Dorje Shugden was accurate and dependable, the translator Sharpa Tulku affirmed (on page 21, Preface) that Trijang Rinpoche wrote his story “without fabrication or omission”. If that is indeed the case, and Sharpa Tulku did not conjure up this statement without basis, then to vilify Dorje Shugden is to negate the choices, practices and existence of Trijang Rinpoche, one of the greatest living Buddhas of our time.


Dorje Shugden
in Magical Play of Illusion

Few lamas have as intimate a connection with Dorje Shugden as Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche does. Trijang Rinpoche writes about Dorje Shugden with great affection, as a close friend who protected him from scolding tutors, who helped him to choose the reincarnation of his guru Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche, who helped him to save the Dalai Lama’s life. Indeed, Trijang Rinpoche relied on Dorje Shugden throughout his life, to assist him in activities that would affect thousands of people. All of this is clearly documented in Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography…that is, if you know where to look because in this translation of the autobiography, the Dharma Protector’s role in this great master’s life has been severely downplayed.

Instead of referring to Dorje Shugden by name, the translator refers to him using obscure, vague terms that would be unfamiliar to the majority of non-Tibetans who pick up this book. Why? Because to translate it clearly and honestly would be to recognize and properly record Dorje Shugden’s involvement in Trijang Rinpoche’s life, thereby invalidating the Tibetan leadership’s narrative of Dorje Shugden as a minor practice of spirit worship.

After all, why would a lama of Trijang Rinpoche’s calibre, who accomplished so much (as evidenced by his autobiography), choose to rely on a so-called ‘spirit’?

For realists, it is a foregone conclusion that Dorje Shugden’s involvement was downplayed purely for commercial reasons. The sad truth is that the Dalai Lama’s endorsement by means of a Foreword is necessary for the book to be a commercial success. In order to obtain such a Foreword, the translator would have had to allow the Dalai Lama to write something that criticizes Dorje Shugden, as well as obscure Dorje Shugden’s role in Trijang Rinpoche’s life.

Hence to clarify things, the team at has compiled this list of the 56 times that Dorje Shugden is referred to in Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography. You can refer to the images below, or click here to download a handy PDF document which you can print out to refer to as you read the book.

Page 1. Click to enlarge.

Page 2. Click to enlarge.

Page 3. Click to enlarge.

Page 4. Click to enlarge.

Page 5. Click to enlarge.

Page 6. Click to enlarge.


Trijang Rinpoche’s Autobiography

The biographies of holy beings such as Trijang Rinpoche serve to inspire and remind us about what is possible if we devote ourselves to our practice. Trijang Rinpoche spent his life tirelessly teaching the Dharma and benefiting sentient beings; his autobiography, which chronicles his deeds, paints the picture of a deeply devoted, kind, humble yet vastly accomplished spiritual practitioner.

Please keep this sacred text on your computers to read at your leisure, or print it to be inserted into statues or keep on your altar. As a Dharma text, please remember to store in a proper and respectful manner.

Please support this website by making a donation.
Your contribution goes towards supporting
our work to spread Dorje Shugden across the world.

Related Topics: , , , ,

Share this article
26 total comments on this postSubmit yours
  1. Such a high lama like Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche with so many choices of whatever protector he wishes to practice and yet he chooses Dorje Shugden. It just shows you that Dorje Shugden is a very powerful, beneficial and quick acting protector. Such a high lama would not choose something evil or ineffective at all.

    Whatever the Tibetan leaders want to say to put down Dorje Shugden, they make themselves look stupid. Who among the Tibetan leaders will have more knowledge of protectors and Buddhism than the Guru of the 14th Dalai Lama, Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche himself?

    This powerful post by as usual tells it like it is and makes the Tibetan leadership exposed to their high handed religious ban and corruption. They have blamed Dorje Shugden as a scape goat for their failures. They blame all the obstacles they created that it was caused by Dorje Shugden. The karma will return to the Tibetan govt in exile soon. Things are not going well for them at all. 👎


  2. After lawsuits for defaming other Buddhist teachers, a certain East German stazi monk is quiet and finally shut up these days about Shugden. He loves to make up ugly stories about Shugden deity and high lamas that practice this deity. Everyone has the right to practice what they want. But this East German stazi monk still lives in the communist world before the wall before the two Germanies broke apart. His karma came back to him for all his lies he spoke on other Buddhist teachers which is none of his business.

    Everyone knows he works for the Tibetan govt in exile and he was not effective in his job. If he opens his big mouth again on his ridiculous and pathetic blog, there will be more lawsuits its said on the grapevine.

    News like this on Trijang Rinpoche’s autobiography makes stazi monk look ridiculous. Shugden is an authentic practice going back over 350 years. Very high lamas like Trijang Rinpoche practiced Dorje Shugden his whole life and he is the guru of the Dalai Lama!☹️👎



  3. I am going to buy this book by Trijang Rinpoche on Amazon. Fantastic!!! Trijang Rinpoche mentions Dorje Shugden 56 times throughout his autobiography!! Wow!


  4. I was wondering if was going to talk about this book.

    I read this book already and it’s explosive. Trijang Rinpoche in his autobiography says clearly that Dorje Shugden is an emanation of Manjushri. Trijang Rinpoche relies and trusts Dorje Shugden all the way and we should follow suit. This is the guru of the Dalai Lama telling us this.

    I bought a few copies to give friends from Amazon.


  5. This book is explosive and will make the Tibetan leaders look like the liars that they are. Finally. 👍

  6. “The bottom line is its not about whether anyone trusts or likes China but whether China can help these countries advance their own respective national interests. And the answer is yes. Correspondingly the question is whether any country can afford not to access China’s vast consumer market moving into the future. Not doing business is bad for local economies and no one will elect or re-elect a government that presides over a failing economy.”~NY Times

    How China Has Defied Expectations, in Canada and Around the Globe
    By Ian Austen
    Nov. 23, 2018
    In Saskatchewan, farming is done on a grand scale. So when I visited the Canadian Western Agribition in Regina this week for an upcoming story, I wasn’t surprised to find that the annual gathering of Western farmers is almost overwhelmingly large, luring 127,000 visitors last year to a city of 215,000.
    Like all agricultural exhibitions, the Agribition has a wide array of activities for city dwellers like me, including a rodeo, horse shows and cattle judging. But what started as a regional exhibition 48 years ago has grown into a global event. Cattle ranchers, many from distant parts of North America, parade their livestock to buyers from around the world looking to improve their herds.
    When I asked breeders where their customers come from these days, many of them said China.
    Canada, like the rest of the world, has not escaped the effects of China’s move from isolated backwater to a global economic and political force. For the past several months, more than a dozen New York Times reporters, editors, photographers and designers have been examining China’s dramatic rise in a project called China Rules, which launched this week.
    Phil Pan, our Hong Kong-based Asia editor, has worked in China for about two decades and returned to writing to produce the must-read opening essay on how China’s rise has defied expectations.
    Political shifts in Washington and Beijing helped influence the timing of the series. “One factor was certainly a sense at the beginning of the year that America under Trump was in retreat or withdrawing from the world,” Phil said.
    Under President Xi Jinping, China saw an opportunity to step up, he said. And in recent months, he said, “We began to see this fundamental shift in the relationship between the U.S. and China from engagement to competition.”
    While President Trump has attacked China and launched a trade war against it, Canada has taken an opposing track. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has said repeatedly that his government is moving toward a full-scale free trade agreement with China, though that movement’s progress has been stately, at best.
    And Mr. Trudeau’s government continues to rebuff American security warnings about allowing equipment made from Huawei Technologies, the Chinese telecommunications company with research operations in Canada, into the coming upgrade of Canada’s wireless networks.
    I asked Phil if Canadians can, or should, trust China.
    “I think the debate in Canada and the United States probably will be much less about trust than about interests,” he said. “Is the fact that the Chinese political system is authoritarian a problem for our national interest?”
    Here, for your weekend reading pleasure, is more from our China Rules series:
    • The American Dream Is Alive. In China.
    • How China Made Its Own Internet
    • How China Took Over Your TV
    • How China Is Writing its Own (Hollywood) Script
    • The World, Built by China
    Among the stories still to come in the series is an examination of China’s authoritarian control of its citizens, as well as articles on how the country is challenging the global, liberal democratic order and why its economic rise left many Western economists red-faced.
    If after reading China Rules, you’d like to discuss the series, we have a new Facebook group: Examining China’s Reach With The New York Times.
    In Conversation
    Mark Thompson, president and chief executive officer of The New York Times Company, will join Chrystia Freeland, Canada’s minister of foreign affairs, in conversation at the University of Toronto on Tuesday, December 11. The two will discuss U.S.-Canada relations, foreign policy challenges and more. Details and ticket information are available here.
    And a final reminder that Sam Tanenhaus, a former editor of The New York Times Book Review, will moderate a panel on book reviewing on Friday, Nov. 30, also in Toronto. Use the code CANADALETTER for $5 off the ticket price.
    Trans Canada
    —The turmoil that followed the arrest of six teenagers accused of sexual assault during hazing rituals at an elite private school in Toronto is prompting some Canadians to question the value of all-boys schools.
    —Canada is pushing the United States to end steel and aluminum tariffs before the ceremonial signing of the replacement deal for Nafta. But Washington is considering another, similarly unappealing measure to replace the duties.
    —An art historian from Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario is among the curators of an exhibit that uses imaging technology to peel back the layers of Bruegel’s complex masterpieces.
    —In Opinion, Amanda Siebert wrote that the legalization of recreational marijuana in Canada will allow medical research to blossom.
    —While the United States dithers, Canada has approved new regulations that will allow for the sale of cars with headlights that automatically adjust their beams, letting drivers see farther down the road without blinding oncoming traffic.
    A native of Windsor, Ontario, Ian Austen was educated in Toronto, lives in Ottawa and has reported about Canada for The New York Times for the past 15 years. Follow him on Twitter at @ianrausten.


  7. I am actually surprised that His Holiness the Dalai Lama even willing to give a foreword for this book which is mentioned quite a bit of information of the protector that he banned, Dorje Shugden. It is impossible for His Holiness to not know this because everyone knows Kaybje Trijang Rinpoche is a huge Dorje Shugden practitioner. The fact that he is willing to give this book a foreword, it actually means that he is willing to promote this book which contains positive information about Dorje Shugden.

    Why is he willing to promote a book that promotes a “demon”? This does not make sense at all. This only means that Dorje Shugden’s true nature is beneficial to us and that is why he is indirectly promoting him by promoting this book.

    This book also tells the truth of the event of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s escape to Tibet is instructed by Dorje Shugden and he is also the one that protects them while they are fleeing Tibet. His Holiness’s should know about it and if he is willing to give a foreword for this book, it means the content must be true! So what CTA is saying about Nechung told Dalai lama to escape is fake.

  8. Everyone is expecting a communist China to fail. But in fact China is getting stronger and bigger and more powerful. China proves communism can work to the chagrin of ‘democratic’ countries such as the US who is jealous and threatened of their own status quo. China will continue to grow according to the New York Times.

    The Land That Failed to Fail
    The West was sure the Chinese approach would not work. It just had to wait. It’s still waiting.
    Photographs by BRYAN DENTON
    NOV. 18, 2018
    In the uncertain years after Mao’s death, long before China became an industrial juggernaut, before the Communist Party went on a winning streak that would reshape the world, a group of economics students gathered at a mountain retreat outside Shanghai. There, in the bamboo forests of Moganshan, the young scholars grappled with a pressing question: How could China catch up with the West?
    It was the autumn of 1984, and on the other side of the world, Ronald Reagan was promising “morning again in America.” China, meanwhile, was just recovering from decades of political and economic turmoil. There had been progress in the countryside, but more than three-quarters of the population still lived in extreme poverty. The state decided where everyone worked, what every factory made and how much everything cost.
    The students and researchers attending the Academic Symposium of Middle-Aged and Young Economists wanted to unleash market forces but worried about crashing the economy — and alarming the party bureaucrats and ideologues who controlled it.
    Late one night, they reached a consensus: Factories should meet state quotas but sell anything extra they made at any price they chose. It was a clever, quietly radical proposal to undercut the planned economy — and it intrigued a young party official in the room who had no background in economics. “As they were discussing the problem, I didn’t say anything at all,” recalled Xu Jing’an, now 76 and retired. “I was thinking, how do we make this work?”
    The Chinese economy has grown so fast for so long now that it is easy to forget how unlikely its metamorphosis into a global powerhouse was, how much of its ascent was improvised and born of desperation. The proposal that Mr. Xu took from the mountain retreat, soon adopted as government policy, was a pivotal early step in this astounding transformation.
    China now leads the world in the number of homeowners, internet users, college graduates and, by some counts, billionaires. Extreme poverty has fallen to less than 1 percent. An isolated, impoverished backwater has evolved into the most significant rival to the United States since the fall of the Soviet Union.
    An epochal contest is underway. With President Xi Jinping pushing a more assertive agenda overseas and tightening controls at home, the Trump administration has launched a trade war and is gearing up for what could be a new Cold War. Meanwhile, in Beijing the question these days is less how to catch up with the West than how to pull ahead — and how to do so in a new era of American hostility.
    The pattern is familiar to historians, a rising power challenging an established one, with a familiar complication: For decades, the United States encouraged and aided China’s rise, working with its leaders and its people to build the most important economic partnership in the world, one that has lifted both nations.
    During this time, eight American presidents assumed, or hoped, that China would eventually bend to what were considered the established rules of modernization: Prosperity would fuel popular demands for political freedom and bring China into the fold of democratic nations. Or the Chinese economy would falter under the weight of authoritarian rule and bureaucratic rot.
    But neither happened. Instead, China’s Communist leaders have defied expectations again and again. They embraced capitalism even as they continued to call themselves Marxists. They used repression to maintain power but without stifling entrepreneurship or innovation. Surrounded by foes and rivals, they avoided war, with one brief exception, even as they fanned nationalist sentiment at home. And they presided over 40 years of uninterrupted growth, often with unorthodox policies the textbooks said would fail.
    In late September, the People’s Republic of China marked a milestone, surpassing the Soviet Union in longevity. Days later, it celebrated a record 69 years of Communist rule. And China may be just hitting its stride — a new superpower with an economy on track to become not just the world’s largest but, quite soon, the largest by a wide margin.
    The world thought it could change China, and in many ways it has. But China’s success has been so spectacular that it has just as often changed the world — and the American understanding of how the world works.
    There is no simple explanation for how China’s leaders pulled this off. There was foresight and luck, skill and violent resolve, but perhaps most important was the fear — a sense of crisis among Mao’s successors that they never shook, and that intensified after the Tiananmen Square massacre and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
    Even as they put the disasters of Mao’s rule behind them, China’s Communists studied and obsessed over the fate of their old ideological allies in Moscow, determined to learn from their mistakes. They drew two lessons: The party needed to embrace “reform” to survive — but “reform” must never include democratization.
    China has veered between these competing impulses ever since, between opening up and clamping down, between experimenting with change and resisting it, always pulling back before going too far in either direction for fear of running aground.
    Many people said that the party would fail, that this tension between openness and repression would be too much for a nation as big as China to sustain. But it may be precisely why China soared.
    Whether it can continue to do so with the United States trying to stop it is another question entirely.
    Apparatchiks Into Capitalists
    None of the participants at the Moganshan conference could have predicted how China would take off, much less the roles they would play in the boom ahead. They had come of age in an era of tumult, almost entirely isolated from the rest of the world, with little to prepare them for the challenge they faced. To succeed, the party had to both reinvent its ideology and reprogram its best and brightest to carry it out.
    Mr. Xu, for example, had graduated with a degree in journalism on the eve of Mao’s violent Cultural Revolution, during which millions of people were purged, persecuted and killed. He spent those years at a “cadre school” doing manual labor and teaching Marxism in an army unit. After Mao’s death, he was assigned to a state research institute tasked with fixing the economy. His first job was figuring out how to give factories more power to make decisions, a subject he knew almost nothing about. Yet he went on to a distinguished career as an economic policymaker, helping launch China’s first stock market in Shenzhen.
    Among the other young participants in Moganshan were Zhou Xiaochuan, who would later lead China’s central bank for 15 years; Lou Jiwei, who ran China’s sovereign wealth fund and recently stepped down as finance minister; and an agricultural policy specialist named Wang Qishan, who rose higher than any of them.
    Mr. Wang headed China’s first investment bank and helped steer the nation through the Asian financial crisis. As Beijing’s mayor, he hosted the 2008 Olympics. Then he oversaw the party’s recent high-stakes crackdown on corruption. Now he is China’s vice president, second in authority only to Xi Jinping, the party’s leader.
    The careers of these men from Moganshan highlight an important aspect of China’s success: It turned its apparatchiks into capitalists.
    Bureaucrats who were once obstacles to growth became engines of growth. Officials devoted to class warfare and price controls began chasing investment and promoting private enterprise. Every day now, the leader of a Chinese district, city or province makes a pitch like the one Yan Chaojun made at a business forum in September.
    “Sanya,” Mr. Yan said, referring to the southern resort town he leads, “must be a good butler, nanny, driver and cleaning person for businesses, and welcome investment from foreign companies.”
    It was a remarkable act of reinvention, one that eluded the Soviets. In both China and the Soviet Union, vast Stalinist bureaucracies had smothered economic growth, with officials who wielded unchecked power resisting change that threatened their privileges.
    Mikhail Gorbachev, the last leader of the Soviet Union, tried to break the hold of these bureaucrats on the economy by opening up the political system. Decades later, Chinese officials still take classes on why that was a mistake. The party even produced a documentary series on the subject in 2006, distributing it on classified DVDs for officials at all levels to watch.
    Afraid to open up politically but unwilling to stand still, the party found another way. It moved gradually and followed the pattern of the compromise at Moganshan, which left the planned economy intact while allowing a market economy to flourish and outgrow it.
    Party leaders called this go-slow, experimental approach “crossing the river by feeling the stones” — allowing farmers to grow and sell their own crops, for example, while retaining state ownership of the land; lifting investment restrictions in “special economic zones,” while leaving them in place in the rest of the country; or introducing privatization by selling only minority stakes in state firms at first.
    “There was resistance,” Mr. Xu said. “Satisfying the reformers and the opposition was an art.”
    American economists were skeptical. Market forces needed to be introduced quickly, they argued; otherwise, the bureaucracy would mobilize to block necessary changes. After a visit to China in 1988, the Nobel laureate Milton Friedman called the party’s strategy “an open invitation to corruption and inefficiency.”
    But China had a strange advantage in battling bureaucratic resistance. The nation’s long economic boom followed one of the darkest chapters of its history, the Cultural Revolution, which decimated the party apparatus and left it in shambles. In effect, autocratic excess set the stage for Mao’s eventual successor, Deng Xiaoping, to lead the party in a radically more open direction.
    That included sending generations of young party officials to the United States and elsewhere to study how modern economies worked. Sometimes they enrolled in universities, sometimes they found jobs, and sometimes they went on brief “study tours.” When they returned, the party promoted their careers and arranged for others to learn from them.
    At the same time, the party invested in education, expanding access to schools and universities, and all but eliminating illiteracy. Many critics focus on the weaknesses of the Chinese system — the emphasis on tests and memorization, the political constraints, the discrimination against rural students. But mainland China now produces more graduates in science and engineering every year than the United States, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan combined.
    In cities like Shanghai, Chinese schoolchildren outperform peers around the world. For many parents, though, even that is not enough. Because of new wealth, a traditional emphasis on education as a path to social mobility and the state’s hypercompetitive college entrance exam, most students also enroll in after-school tutoring programs — a market worth $125 billion, according to one study, or as much as half the government’s annual military budget.
    Another explanation for the party’s transformation lies in bureaucratic mechanics. Analysts sometimes say that China embraced economic reform while resisting political reform. But in reality, the party made changes after Mao’s death that fell short of free elections or independent courts yet were nevertheless significant.
    The party introduced term limits and mandatory retirement ages, for example, making it easier to flush out incompetent officials. And it revamped the internal report cards it used to evaluate local leaders for promotions and bonuses, focusing them almost exclusively on concrete economic targets.
    These seemingly minor adjustments had an outsize impact, injecting a dose of accountability — and competition — into the political system, said Yuen Yuen Ang, a political scientist at the University of Michigan. “China created a unique hybrid,” she said, “an autocracy with democratic characteristics.”
    As the economy flourished, officials with a single-minded focus on growth often ignored widespread pollution, violations of labor standards, and tainted food and medical supplies. They were rewarded with soaring tax revenues and opportunities to enrich their friends, their relatives and themselves. A wave of officials abandoned the state and went into business. Over time, the party elite amassed great wealth, which cemented its support for the privatization of much of the economy it once controlled.
    The private sector now produces more than 60 percent of the nation’s economic output, employs over 80 percent of workers in cities and towns, and generates 90 percent of new jobs, a senior official said in a speech last year. As often as not, the bureaucrats stay out of the way.
    “I basically don’t see them even once a year,” said James Ni, chairman and founder of Mlily, a mattress manufacturer in eastern China. “I’m creating jobs, generating tax revenue. Why should they bother me?”
    In recent years, President Xi has sought to assert the party’s authority inside private firms. He has also bolstered state-owned enterprises with subsidies while preserving barriers to foreign competition. And he has endorsed demands that American companies surrender technology in exchange for market access.
    In doing so, he is betting that the Chinese state has changed so much that it should play a leading role in the economy — that it can build and run “national champions” capable of outcompeting the United States for control of the high-tech industries of the future. But he has also provoked a backlash in Washington.
    ‘Opening Up’
    In December, the Communist Party will celebrate the 40th anniversary of the “reform and opening up” policies that transformed China. The triumphant propaganda has already begun, with Mr. Xi putting himself front and center, as if taking a victory lap for the nation.
    He is the party’s most powerful leader since Deng and the son of a senior official who served Deng, but even as he wraps himself in Deng’s legacy, Mr. Xi has set himself apart in an important way: Deng encouraged the party to seek help and expertise overseas, but Mr. Xi preaches self-reliance and warns of the threats posed by “hostile foreign forces.”
    In other words, he appears to have less use for the “opening up” part of Deng’s slogan.
    Of the many risks that the party took in its pursuit of growth, perhaps the biggest was letting in foreign investment, trade and ideas. It was an exceptional gamble by a country once as isolated as North Korea is today, and it paid off in an exceptional way: China tapped into a wave of globalization sweeping the world and emerged as the world’s factory. China’s embrace of the internet, within limits, helped make it a leader in technology. And foreign advice helped China reshape its banks, build a legal system and create modern corporations.
    The party prefers a different narrative these days, presenting the economic boom as “grown out of the soil of China” and primarily the result of its leadership. But this obscures one of the great ironies of China’s rise — that Beijing’s former enemies helped make it possible.
    The United States and Japan, both routinely vilified by party propagandists, became major trading partners and were important sources of aid, investment and expertise. The real game changers, though, were people like Tony Lin, a factory manager who made his first trip to the mainland in 1988.
    Mr. Lin was born and raised in Taiwan, the self-governing island where those who lost the Chinese civil war fled after the Communist Revolution. As a schoolboy, he was taught that mainland China was the enemy.
    But in the late 1980s, the sneaker factory he managed in central Taiwan was having trouble finding workers, and its biggest customer, Nike, suggested moving some production to China. Mr. Lin set aside his fears and made the trip. What he found surprised him: a large and willing work force, and officials so eager for capital and know-how that they offered the use of a state factory free and a five-year break on taxes.
    Mr. Lin spent the next decade shuttling to and from southern China, spending months at a time there and returning home only for short breaks to see his wife and children. He built and ran five sneaker factories, including Nike’s largest Chinese supplier.
    “China’s policies were tremendous,” he recalled. “They were like a sponge absorbing water, money, technology, everything.”
    Mr. Lin was part of a torrent of investment from ethnic Chinese enclaves in Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore and beyond that washed over China — and gave it a leg up on other developing countries. Without this diaspora, some economists argue, the mainland’s transformation might have stalled at the level of a country like Indonesia or Mexico.
    The timing worked out for China, which opened up just as Taiwan was outgrowing its place in the global manufacturing chain. China benefited from Taiwan’s money, but also its managerial experience, technology and relationships with customers around the world. In effect, Taiwan jump-started capitalism in China and plugged it into the global economy.
    Before long, the government in Taiwan began to worry about relying so much on its onetime enemy and tried to shift investment elsewhere. But the mainland was too cheap, too close and, with a common language and heritage, too familiar. Mr. Lin tried opening factories in Thailand, Vietnam and Indonesia but always came back to China.
    Now Taiwan finds itself increasingly dependent on a much more powerful China, which is pushing ever harder for unification, and the island’s future is uncertain.
    There are echoes of Taiwan’s predicament around the world, where many are having second thoughts about how they rushed to embrace Beijing with trade and investment.
    The remorse may be strongest in the United States, which brought China into the World Trade Organization, became China’s largest customer and now accuses it of large-scale theft of technology — what one official called “the greatest transfer of wealth in history.”
    Many in Washington predicted that trade would bring political change. It did, but not in China. “Opening up” ended up strengthening the party’s hold on power rather than weakening it. The shock of China’s rise as an export colossus, however, was felt in factory towns around the world.
    In the United States, economists say at least two million jobs disappeared as a result, many in districts that ended up voting for President Trump.
    Selective Repression
    Over lunch at a luxurious private club on the 50th floor of an apartment tower in central Beijing, one of China’s most successful real estate tycoons explained why he had left his job at a government research center after the crackdown on the student-led democracy movement in Tiananmen Square.
    “It was very easy,” said Feng Lun, the chairman of Vantone Holdings, which manages a multibillion-dollar portfolio of properties around the world. “One day, I woke up and everyone had run away. So I ran, too.”
    Until the soldiers opened fire, he said, he had planned to spend his entire career in the civil service. Instead, as the party was pushing out those who had sympathized with the students, he joined the exodus of officials who started over as entrepreneurs in the 1990s.
    “At the time, if you held a meeting and told us to go into business, we wouldn’t have gone,” he recalled. “So this incident, it unintentionally planted seeds in the market economy.”
    Such has been the seesaw pattern of the party’s success.
    The pro-democracy movement in 1989 was the closest the party ever came to political liberalization after Mao’s death, and the crackdown that followed was the furthest it went in the other direction, toward repression and control. After the massacre, the economy stalled and retrenchment seemed certain. Yet three years later, Deng used a tour of southern China to wrestle the party back to “reform and opening up” once more.
    Many who had left the government, like Mr. Feng, suddenly found themselves leading the nation’s transformation from the outside, as its first generation of private entrepreneurs.
    Now Mr. Xi is steering the party toward repression again, tightening its grip on society, concentrating power in his own hands and setting himself up to rule for life by abolishing the presidential term limit. Will the party loosen up again, as it did a few years after Tiananmen, or is this a more permanent shift? If it is, what will it mean for the Chinese economic miracle?
    The fear is that Mr. Xi is attempting to rewrite the recipe behind China’s rise, replacing selective repression with something more severe.
    The party has always been vigilant about crushing potential threats — a fledgling opposition party, a popular spiritual movement, even a dissident writer awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. But with some big exceptions, it has also generally retreated from people’s personal lives and given them enough freedom to keep the economy growing.
    The internet is an example of how it has benefited by striking a balance. The party let the nation go online with barely an inkling of what that might mean, then reaped the economic benefits while controlling the spread of information that could hurt it.
    In 2011, it confronted a crisis. After a high-speed train crash in eastern China, more than 30 million messages criticizing the party’s handling of the fatal accident flooded social media — faster than censors could screen them.
    Panicked officials considered shutting down the most popular service, Weibo, the Chinese equivalent of Twitter, but the authorities were afraid of how the public would respond. In the end, they let Weibo stay open but invested much more in tightening controls and ordered companies to do the same.
    The compromise worked. Now, many companies assign hundreds of employees to censorship duties — and China has become a giant on the global internet landscape.
    “The cost of censorship is quite limited compared to the great value created by the internet,” said Chen Tong, an industry pioneer. “We still get the information we need for economic progress.”
    A ‘New Era’
    China is not the only country that has squared the demands of authoritarian rule with the needs of free markets. But it has done so for longer, at greater scale and with more convincing results than any other.
    The question now is whether it can sustain this model with the United States as an adversary rather than a partner.
    The trade war has only just begun. And it is not just a trade war. American warships and planes are challenging Chinese claims to disputed waters with increasing frequency even as China keeps ratcheting up military spending. And Washington is maneuvering to counter Beijing’s growing influence around the world, warning that a Chinese spending spree on global infrastructure comes with strings attached.
    The two nations may yet reach some accommodation. But both left and right in America have portrayed China as the champion of an alternative global order, one that embraces autocratic values and undermines fair competition. It is a rare consensus for the United States, which is deeply divided about so much else, including how it has wielded power abroad in recent decades — and how it should do so now.
    Mr. Xi, on the other hand, has shown no sign of abandoning what he calls “the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation.” Some in his corner have been itching to take on the United States since the 2008 financial crisis and see the Trump administration’s policies as proof of what they have always suspected — that America is determined to keep China down.
    At the same time, there is also widespread anxiety over the new acrimony, because the United States has long inspired admiration and envy in China, and because of a gnawing sense that the party’s formula for success may be faltering.
    Prosperity has brought rising expectations in China; the public wants more than just economic growth. It wants cleaner air, safer food and medicine, better health care and schools, less corruption and greater equality. The party is struggling to deliver, and tweaks to the report cards it uses to measure the performance of officials hardly seem enough.
    “The basic problem is, who is growth for?” said Mr. Xu, the retired official who wrote the Moganshan report. “We haven’t solved this problem.”
    Growth has begun to slow, which may be better for the economy in the long term but could shake public confidence. The party is investing ever more in censorship to control discussion of the challenges the nation faces: widening inequality, dangerous debt levels, an aging population.
    Mr. Xi himself has acknowledged that the party must adapt, declaring that the nation is entering a “new era” requiring new methods. But his prescription has largely been a throwback to repression, including vast internment camps targeting Muslim ethnic minorities. “Opening up” has been replaced by an outward push, with huge loans that critics describe as predatory and other efforts to gain influence — or interfere — in the politics of other countries. At home, experimentation is out while political orthodoxy and discipline are in.
    In effect, Mr. Xi seems to believe that China has been so successful that the party can return to a more conventional authoritarian posture — and that to survive and surpass the United States it must.
    Certainly, the momentum is still with the party. Over the past four decades, economic growth in China has been 10 times faster than in the United States, and it is still more than twice as fast. The party appears to enjoy broad public support, and many around the world are convinced that Mr. Trump’s America is in retreat while China’s moment is just beginning.
    Then again, China has a way of defying expectations.
    Philip P. Pan is The Times’s Asia Editor and author of “Out of Mao’s Shadow: The Struggle for the Soul of a New China.” He has lived in and reported on China for nearly two decades.
    Jonathan Ansfield and Keith Bradsher contributed reporting from Beijing. Claire Fu, Zoe Mou and Iris Zhao contributed research from Beijing, and Carolyn Zhang from Shanghai.
    Design: Matt Ruby, Rumsey Taylor, Quoctrung Bui Editing: Tess Felder, Eric Nagourney, David Schmidt Photo Editing: Craig Allen, Meghan Petersen, Mikko Takkunen Illustrations: Sergio Peçanh




  9. India and China now pushing ahead with resolution of their border disputes. It looks like India is finally ready to officially drop the Tibet card.


    “India and China will have “early harvest” talks on their vexed border dispute as many agreements have been reached by both sides since their top leaders met in Wuhan, Beijing said on Monday”.

    Sino-Indian ‘early harvest’ spells scorched earth for Tibetan dreams.

    Too bad for Tibetans in India. Too bad for Tibetan leadership. Their karma coming back soon for all the harms they have done.

    India, China for ‘early harvest’ talks on border
    November 27, 2018
    BEIJING: India and China will have “early harvest” talks on their vexed border dispute as many agreements have been reached by both sides since their top leaders met in Wuhan, Beijing said on Monday.
    Days after India and China pledged to intensify their efforts to resolve a decades-long boundary feud in their border talks, the Chinese Foreign Ministry said that New Delhi and Beijing have agreed to authorise the Working Mechanism for Consultation and Coordination on border affairs to start “early harvest consultations.”
    The Ministry’s spokesperson Geng Shuang said India’s National Security Advisor and Chinese State Councillor had a constructive and forward-looking meeting at the 21st round of border talks last week.
    Asked what he meant by “early harvest,” Geng did not elaborate.
    “After the Wuhan summit between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, the bilateral relations have made very positive progress and made new developments.
    Indo-Asian News Service


  10. I woke up one day and I asked this question. If HHDL said that DS is wrong then what about my Guru’s lineage? He practiced in His previous lives, He reincarnated and recognized and still practicing Dorje Shugden. So if HHDL said that DS is wrong His Guru is wrong then the whole lineage is wrong? And how did my Guru reincarnate if DS is ‘demon’ and all that practice DS go to hell? With logic and slight ‘wisdom’ I think that is very wrong of HHDL to say. My Guru is not wrong and I have total faith in Him and the practices that He gave us. Sadly, with no disrespect, I do not believe in a word HHDL is saying about DS.

  11. The CTA make false claims against Dorje Shugden just because the Dalai Lama says so. They do the bidding of one person at the expense of the suffering of so many Tibetans. What democratic government does that, using religion to divide its own people? Only the Central Tibetan Administration (who claim they are democratic), who still act as the feudal lords of ancient Tibet.

  12. Dorje Shugden has been practice for the past 400 years by so many people and high lamas. Those highly attained had taken rebirth and return back to continue their legacy. Even His Holiness the Dalai Lama recognised the return of these highly attained Dorje Shugden practitioners. If practice Dorje Shugden will make someone go to lower realms the who are those people that His Holiness recognised?

    HH Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche is a Dorje Shugden practitioners which is the junior tutor of HH the Dalai Lama and transmitted so many teaching to His Holiness. If Dorje Shugden is an evil spirits then isn’t that affect His Holiness the Dalai Lama because what His Holiness had learn is from a Dorje Shugden practioners? In this case also isn’t that whatever His Holiness give the initiation is invalid or without blessing because his guru is a Dorje Shugden? How can the Guru is wrong but the student is right? From which lineage does the blessing come from?

    It’s very obvious that whatever the Tibetan leadership claimed negatively on Dorje Shugden is unjustified and the ban of Dorje Shugden only create suffering to the people and make Tibetan disunity. No one create trouble here but just the Tibetan leadership due to protecting their personal interest and use spiritual as their scapegoat for unable to fulfil the Tibetan promises to bring them back to Tibet.

  13. As what Dalai Lama had predicted that, people worship Dorje Shugden will be reborn in three lower realms, then why Dalai Lama recognized his guru reincarnation since Trijang Rinpoche is strong practitioner of DS? This is really not making any sense. 🤔🤔

  14. HH KyabjeTrijang Rinpoche of this life still practicing Dorje Shugden, and he choose to openly practice and spread the practice also. The one reason I can think of is Dorje Shugden is the powerful protector of our time and he wanted to benefit everyone. Just like His Holiness 16th Karmapa’s prophency ~“Although the time is a little early, in the future you will definitely need to rely on this deity (DorjeShugden)”. The fact that His Holiness Dalai Lama is willing to give this book a foreword already means that he is accepted the Dorje Shugden because this book contains the truth of Dorje Shugden which it proofs that CTA claimed about Dorje Shugden is misinformation.

  15. What Trijang Rinpoche has practice Dorje Shugden in the past is unquestionable because his is highly realise buddhist master. His incarnation come back has prove that practicing Dorje Shugden would not bring him to the three lower realm. No matter how CTA use Dorje Shugden practice to put down Trijang Rinpoche name will not work. Look at current incarnation of Trijang Rinpoche. He still continue giving Dorje Shugden sogtee to the public. CTA will never able put him down again.

  16. 1. The reincarnation of High Lamas who practises Dorje Shugden do come back and do not fall to 3 lower realms as per claimed.

    2. The High Lamas trust whole heartedly into Buddha Dorje Shugden and have been giving accurate and beneficial advises contrary to some other worldly protectors in this case of Dalai Lama’s own escape from Tibet.

    3. Trijang Rinpoche has no reason to lie and He is one of the most respected figures in Tibetan Buddhism and he does not need people to doubt or check on him as already proven by Dalai Lama himself. Hence whatever he says must carry truth.

    The above three points are more than enough evidence for all to know and truly understand the whole situation.

  17. Very inspired to read about a holy guru Kyabje Trjang Rinpoche story. Whenever I read about Dorje Dhugden lamas stories about how determine, ethic and devoted to their own gurus. They are those who guarded the lineage, protected the Dharma and spreading the pure Buddhism. Pure without any stains of the 8 worldly concerns. Pure because of they have achieved the qualities of the 6 paramitas, Bodhicitta and compassion. Their ultimate practice is to benefit others. Giving without agenda. Rarely see lamas like this now. Tibetan Buddhism had degenerated due to the Dorje Shugden ban enforced by the CTA with political and personal agenda. The ban created split among the Buddhists which created tremendous bad karma. CTA is experiencing the karma now.

  18. I’ve been fortunate enough to have read this English translation of Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche Dorje Chang’s autobiography and I must say if one takes a step back and look at the 13 Chapters with its tens of entries where Kyabje Trijang refers to Dorje Shugden respectfully, trustingly, lovingly, like a filial son would have for his kind mother, the same filial relationship Kyabje Trijang would have had with his root guru Kyabje Pabongkha Dorje Chang; one would just have to wonder why His Holiness would have had to spend half his very short foreward undermining Dorje Shugden, undermining the monumental Gelug lama, teacher of hundreds and thousands of lineage holders of His Holiness’ tradition.

    To me, the book in its entirety, is a reflection of what the “Shugden crisis” is all about. It is about the many, many stalwarts of His Holiness’ tradition including his dedicated teachers, who have depended on Dorje Shugden, trusted their lineage teachers such as Kyabje Pabongkha, practiced and who have received much aid from, unharmed and reincarnated perfectly to continue to turn the wheel of Dharma, against what was a solo, indefensible effort to undermine this enlightened deity.

    Sharpa Tulku who did the translation for the book was not spared the influential nature of His Holiness and I suspect had been swayed by this influence to dilute the references to Dorje Shugden in the autobiography by using alternative, less direct, English words in place of Dorje Shugden.

    In the epilogue that Sharpa Tulku wrote for the book, he omitted the fact that Dorje Shugden was consulted as per the instructions of Kyabje Trijang to his main assistant Kunga Palden, pertaining to the search for his perfect reincarnation who we all know, is turning the wheel of Dharma from Vermont here in the United States.

    Perhaps as a non-Tibetan, I can deal with the whole thing more objectively, whereas Tibetans are still under the spell of the arbitrary influence of His Holiness (actually more than just Tibetans, just too many deify him and lose the plot or want photos with him to boost their social status). But as they say here in the USA: “One bad apple spoils the bunch” and that which should not happen is happening right in front of our eyes.

    I suggest that every Tibetan who has not read Kyabje Trijang’s autobiography do so and contemplate the situation. It is not a healthy state to be in and karmically too obviously. I wish Kyabje Trijang Chocktrul Rinpoche all the best in his endeavors to turn the wheel of Dharma.

    May peace be with everyone.

  19. Melodious Praise To Root Guru His Holiness Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche

  20. My favorite monk chant I share.
    Always thing of Kyabje Trijang when I listen.

    Thank you Dorje Shugden .com

  21. Dear Lobsang Sangye and Tibetan Govt in exile in Dharamsala,

    How come after 60 years you are still not at the G20 meetings? How come you cannot get your country back? How come the world economies and power are shifting towards the East which is China? How come you cannot get Tibetan autonomy, or freedom or any leeway with China? How come your negotiations with China is a failure and you produced nothing?

    You run around begging for FREE MONEY from Europe, Australia, Japan, Canada, Taiwan and US for 60 years now but no one in your refugee community has made it big or successful? Where did all the money go? In your pockets? How come all your Tibetans from India/Nepal are going back to Tibet or leaving to the west. How come your schools in India are empty? How come Dharamsala is emptying out?

    How come you are getting weaker and more world governments are ignoring you? How come more are paying attention to China? Less governments are willing to pay attention to you and the Tibet cause? Where is all your rangzen groups? How come they are not effective? Maybe they are disillusioned with your corruption, lies and underhanded tactics and human rights abuses using religion to divide your own people?

    What happened to you? Why are you and your community your Tibetan ‘parliament’ such losers and failures? How come you cannot achieve anything?

    Are you going to continue to beg for more FREE MONEY to fund your trips, houses, children’s education, vacations, five star hotels, nice brocade chubas, expensive accessories, and properties. You know the ordinary Tibetan in India has gotten nothing in financial help of the hundreds of millions in aid for that last 60 years you Tibetan exiled government pocketed. Is that why your Tibetan people in India and Nepal are all leaving to back to Tibet and the west? You failed?

    Your policies and work are not effective.

    Too bad.

    China rises at the G20
    The global balance of power is shifting from West to East
    Tensions loom over Argentina, which plays host to the 2018 summit of the G20 which started on November 30. The G20 is an international forum of the EU and the heads of state of 19 major economies, which discusses global economic challenges. And the challenges are mounting.
    Globalization is in reverse, as the US threatens to escalate its trade war with China and other trading partners; and xenophobia is rife in many Western countries. These challenges are a threat to global prosperity, but what will shape much of the long-term evolution of the global economy is the rise of China and other emerging economies.
    Much of the focus at the G20 has been on Donald Trump and his series of sidebar meetings with other leaders, especially Xi Jinping. Trump has said that it is “highly unlikely” that he would postpone the planned increase in tariff levels from 10% to 25% on $200 billion of Chinese goods in January 2019.
    Of course, this may be bluster and a frequent refrain from apologists for Trump is: “Take note of what the president does, not what he says.” But we may be on the cusp of a full-blown trade war, which will not be confined to the US and China and which will reverse and reconfigure globalization. Entering foreign markets will be more costly and global supply chains will be disrupted.
    Globalization is not inevitable
    The notion that globalization is a natural phenomenon, akin to the change in the seasons or the weather or gravity, is a frequent refrain. During his tenure as prime minister of the United Kingdom, Tony Blair opined: “I hear people say we have to stop and debate globalization. You might as well debate whether autumn should follow summer.” A pithy turn of phrase, but patently not true.
    The configuration and extent of globalization are shaped by public policy and technological change. When this changes, it can, in turn, accelerate, slow, or reverse globalization. In periods of severe economic crisis, it has been common for countries to become inward looking — blaming “others” for economic problems and resorting to protectionism and controls on immigration.
    In the interwar period, for example, the response to the Great Depression was a trade war and competitive devaluations as the Gold Standard unraveled. Similarly, since the 2008-09 financial crisis and the Great Recession that followed, there has been a worldwide rise in protectionist measures and Trump’s interventions may lead to a new phase of “delocalization.”
    An evolving global economic order
    Major economic crises often reflect endemic flaws within the structure of the global economy and lead to major changes in global economic leadership. The crises and lessons of the interwar period led to the establishment of the Bretton Woods system, which managed the world economy during the post-war golden age of capitalism until the early 1970s. It was the system that created new international institutions (the IMF, World Bank, and GATT, which was the forerunner of the WTO) and this was underpinned by the dominance of the US economy.
    But the relative strength of the US (and the dollar) declined and the system unraveled in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This collapse, and a series of oil crises, led to another major economic crisis which temporarily stalled globalization and led to shifting reliance on the power of unfettered market forces.
    Liberal market capitalism may have been unleashed, but is still not ubiquitous in the world economy. The picture of a fully globalized world and the dominance of free markets is a partial distortion of a complex picture. The extent to which countries have embraced the global market agenda is highly variable.
    Although many developed countries have deregulated financial markets, capital controls and managed currencies are still highly prevalent in developing countries. In terms of trade, tariffs have been reduced since World War II but they have not been eradicated.
    Meanwhile, the use of non-tariff barriers has increased, with roughly 80% of all traded goods affected by these restrictive rules and regulations — and these are prevalent in developed countries. The ongoing chaos of Brexit illustrates that “free trade” is not a natural state but is negotiated, complex, and dependent on a litany of regulations and agreements.
    Deregulation, the hollowing out of the welfare state, and intensified global competition have led to rising income and wealth inequality in many Western countries. And many of those who have not benefited from globalization have also borne the brunt of the austerity policies that followed the financial crisis and the Great Recession. The resulting backlash against globalization helps explain the election of Trump and the vote for Brexit.
    The rise of China
    The G20 will focus on current instability but there are long-term structural shifts which are leading to a rebalancing of the global economy. The balance of power is shifting from West to East and we are in the early stages of transition to China as the dominant world economy.
    China is already the largest economy in the world (measured in purchasing power parity) and PwC (using World Bank data) estimates that by 2050, the Chinese economy will be 72% larger than the US. Further, by 2050, six of the largest eight economies will be countries that are still emerging markets.
    China is home to many of the world’s largest companies, including major tech companies like Alibaba and Tencent. It is investing rapidly in research and innovation and although the dollar remains the dominant world currency, the IMF has added the renminbi to its basket of global reserve currencies. It will only become more important as Trump’s policy of American isolationism continues.
    This year’s G20 summit will focus on maintaining some semblance of international cooperation and preventing a global trade war. The short-term noise will probably come from Trump. But China can play a long-term game as its position in the global economy is on the rise. In the face of the gales of the long-term shifts in the global economy, Trump can blow hard now — but as far as the future is concerned, he will be blowing in the wind.
    Michael Kitson is University Senior Lecturer in International Macroeconomics, Cambridge Judge Business School. This article previously appeared in Reuters.



    Note what Namdol Lhagyari said is progressive and unlike the usual Tibetan rhetoric:

    “The problem I see right now is how reliant we are on one individual,” Namdol Lhagyari, 32, the youngest member of Tibet’s exile parliament, said. “I understand that every freedom movement requires one role model, one leader, who would push everyone in the right direction, bring everyone to one goal. But he has reached an age where we will have to prepare ourselves for a post-Dalai Lama.”



    These are important points to remember:

    1. Tibetan lamas and monks SHOULD not enter politics. They should not hold positions of power, leadership and political roles. It will demean the Dharma. They are not trained, nor qualified nor have the credentials to be in government. They also do much damage to religion as people start to respect them less. The lines between respecting them as spiritual beings (sangha) and speaking against them when they are in government and make wrong decisions become blurred.

    2. Monks and nuns should not get involved with the running of the country but should stick to education. Giving good education to the public about ethics, morality and in some cases Buddhism. No one wants to see a political monk or nun. Because it contradicts the very reason they renounced the worldly life in order to enter a life of contemplation, learning, meditation and gaining enlightenment.

    3. Look at other countries where Buddhism is strong where sangha is sangha and never get involved with government or being public officials. In Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, Burma, Sri Lanka etc where there are tens of thousands of sangha, you don’t see them in the government at all. Local or national governments both do not have sangha. Even in Christian countries you don’t see priests in government. That is Tibet’s big mistake to place monks/high lamas in so many government positions and as public officials. Very dangerous for the country as it has proven with Tibet and Tibetans.

    4. Monks, nuns and high lamas should do dharma practice, produce books, videos, give teachings, guide the public, do funerals, blessings, be a nurturer, study dharma, build real temples, keep existing temples spiritual, animal shelters, environmentalists, be mediators, help with orphanages, shelters, the poor, half way houses, poor houses, and basically all sorts of charities that benefit the mind and body of sentient beings that is NOT GOVERNMENT BASED. If sangha gives good education, they can produce kind and good leaders to run the country.

    Tibetans should never never never allow Sangha (monks, nuns and spiritual personages) to be involved with government, politics and rule of law because it ends up in disaster. That is how Tibet lost it’s country and will never get it back. There are too many monks in the Tibetan Parliament and as leaders remember Samdhong Rinpoche as the prime minister of exiles. That was very bad. The King of Tibet currently is a monk. How does that look? Very political.
    Tibet made that huge mistake and Tibet will never recover from it.



    No monk leaders

  23. A friend of mine sent this to me and I thought it was relevant and spot on-

    Namdrol Lhagyari wants to out the Dalai Lama out to pasture because of his age. But the Dalai Lama was only in his 20′s in 1959 and in the past 60 years the CTA let slip many opportunities, if not to regain independence, then to put the Tibetan cause on a better footing. All this time, the CTA not developed itself and have merely relied on the Dalai Lama to do all the work.

    Perhaps some wanted to. Some like Jamyang Norbu was progressive in thinking but he was gagged into oblivion. As the result, today there is no one who can fill the Dalai Lams’s shoes.

    The CTA and Tibetan cause today suffers from its own history of suppressing opinions and fearing the development of any personage who might rival the Dalai Lama and challenge the CTA’s policies. When the Dalai Lama is no more the CTA will run for a short time on the fumes of the DL’s past reputation/goodwill and then the #Tibet will be forgotten.

    CTA only fails and continue to fail.👎

  24. To your Holiness the Dalia Lama,

    You said if people practice Dorje Shugden they will go to the Three Lower Realms (ghost, hell and animals). So how come you Trijang Rinpoche didn’t go to the Three Lower Realms? He practiced Dorje Shugden his whole life?


    After thoughts:

    How come Domo Geshe Rinpoche, Zong Rinpoche, Serkong Dorje Chang, Dagom Rinpoche, Pabongka Rinpoche, Thapu Pema Vajra, Zemey Rinpoche all reincarnated back. They all practiced Dorje Shugden in their previous lives. And you recognized some of them and allow them to be enthroned in the monasteries.


  25. Differences between Dalai Lama and CTA president put Tibetan politics in a tailspin
    By Rajeev Sharma, November 27, 2018

    Tibetan politics is in a tailspin as there are signs of serious differences between the 14th Dalai Lama, unquestionably the supreme and undisputed leader of the Tibetans, and Lobsang Sangay, president of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA).

    The immediate provocation is the unceremonious cancellation of the 13th Religious Conference of the Schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon Tradition, which was scheduled between November 29 and December 1 year in Dharamshala. Insiders have revealed that the conference was cancelled by Lobsang without consulting the Dalai Lama.

    Even more intriguing is the timing of the move. Knowledgeable sources in the Tibetan establishment in India disclosed that Lobsang made the move while the Dalai Lama was travelling back from Japan, knowing that he wouldn’t be able to do anything to stop it.

    Tibetan politics is turning out to be a cloak-and-dagger mystery. According to sources, Lobsang waited until the Dalai Lama was on his way to the airport before ordering the Department of Religion and Culture to cancel the event. Interestingly, the cancellation of the conference is available by way of an announcement in English on the CTA website.

    The CTA’s Department of Religion and Culture announced that owing to the sudden demise of the supreme head of the Nyingma tradition, Kathok Getse Rinpoche, who passed away this week in Nepal and in respecting the sentiments of the followers of Nyingma tradition, the 13th Religious Conference of the Schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon Tradition was being indefinitely postponed.

    The department cited that many lamas and representatives of the Nyingma tradition were unable to participate because of Rinpoche’s passing away.

    On November 22, the CTA organised a prayer service to mourn the demise of Rinpoche, the 7th supreme head of the Nyingma school of Tibetan Buddhism. Rinpoche passed away following an accident on November 19 in Pharping, Nepal. He was 64.

    Sources say the Dalai Lama is furious with Lobsang Sangay for trying to take credit for his negotiations with China about returning to Tibet.

    Sangay claimed that the Dalai Lama has failed for 60 years in negotiations with China, but he has the power and ability to succeed. This is also an indication of how weak the Dalai Lama’s current position is. Sangay knows that the Dalai Lama has been negotiating with China about returning and he’s trying to position himself to take credit for it. Had this happened a few years ago the Dalai Lama would have had him removed, but since his cancer has become terminal, Sangay has been consolidating his position among the exiled community. He controls the press department of the Tibetan government-in-exile and has done so since he ousted Dicki Chhoyang.

    For the record, the head of the department, which cancelled the conference, was appointed by Sangay.

    By the time the Dalai Lama returned to India the event was cancelled and announcements were issued to the media while he was still in the flight, which would have prevented a confirmation with the Tibetan leader and nothing could have been done to stop it. The reason given for the cancellation was the death of a senior monk.

    Sources said that the real reason for the CTA president to keep the Dalai Lama in the dark was because the latter would decide again whether to back the Karmapa as his successor. The Karmapa issue has been a major reason of discord between the Dalai Lama and the CTA president. Sources spoke about a telephonic conversation between the Dalai Lama and Sangay in this regard on November 22 when the former was in Japan.

    During this conversation, furious arguments broke out between the two. The Dalai Lama is said to have “shouted” at Sangay, saying that the Karmapa wouldn’t be chosen and that he wouldn’t be dictated terms by anyone. In this conversation, the Dalai Lama used some expletives in Tibetan language which he did not expect Sangay to understand as the CTA president doesn’t know the language. However, a Lobsang aide is said to have translated what the Dalai Lama said.

    This marks the most significant power play ever between the different factions within the Tibetan exile leadership. In other words, it’s now an all-out battle between the Dalai Lama and Lobsang Sangay over the future of the exile community, which may worsen in the days to come.

    (The writer is a columnist and strategic analyst who tweets @Kishkindha)



    This interesting article has much food for thought:

    1. Dalai Lama is angry and shouting expletives as Lobsang Sangay. Everyone knows the Dalai Lama is in full control. He claims he’s retired from politics but this is just to say what the west wants to hear so he can continue getting funding. It looks good to the west that he voluntarily gave up power and this makes him look progressive. But the Dalai Lama controls everything from behind and if you don’t agree with his decisions, he will be furious. Every Tibetan knows this well.

    2. Interesting the article mentions Dalai Lama’s cancer is terminal. Everyone knew this but the Dalai Lama tries to cover this point up. Why? Who knows? What is the problem if people knows he has cancer. Tibetan govt tries to play it down.

    3. Dalai Lama is angry as his successor will only be on his terms and no one else may dictate to him the terms as Lobsang Sangay tried to do so since it is not a democracy in practice. As all Tibetans know, the Dalai Lama is the Lama-King and he has full power and no one may contradict him. The face he shows the west (soft, friendly, diplomatic, easy-going, democratic) is all just for the west. The face Dalai Lama shows his Tibetan people (fierce, King, angersome, in charge and must be obeyed) is how it really is. Tibetans know the Dalai Lama controls everything and fully manages all politics. People are not happy with this but dare not speak up as there is no democracy.

    Writer Rajeev Sharma is telling the situation like it really is. Finally the truth is coming out. Tibetan government in exile is a regime in every sense of the world that depends on all the hundreds of millions of free dollars it has been taking from the west, Japan, Australia and so on. It exists on free money. It is not a good government and has failed all negotiations with China due to the Tibetan leaders’ arrogance. Why arrogance? They think the world will force China to do what Tibetans leaders want and that they are so important on everyone’s agenda. Tibetans are on no one’s top agenda and China is an economic and military super power. China will not and will never kowtow to the Tibetan demands. It is the Tibetans who must beg China to be friends and get some concessions if at all possible. No country has ever dared stand up to USA, but China has and China is growing in power yearly. Everyone is scrambling to be China’s friend and saying goodbye to the Tibetan cause. Tibetan cause is the thing of the past and no economic benefits to support Tibetan cause.

    These days every country votes in leaders that can better their country’s economy due to world recession. So every country has to do business and trade and aid with China to improve their economy. If you side with the Dalai Lama and Tibetan govt in exile in India, what do you get? Nothing! So leaders of every nation realize this now and will continue to make friends with China and say goodbye to the Dalai Lama. Dalai Lama on a personal level may be rich, famous and sells a lot of books, but that won’t get Tibet back. That won’t win the support of leaders of the free world and other nations.

    There is trouble in paradise as HH Dalai Lama and Lobsang argue over Tibetan succession, evidence of deep rifts within the Tibetan community

    Cropped for brevity. Click to enlarge and read the whole article. Source:

  26. This publication of Trijang Rinpoche’s book is some good news to hear. Trijang Rinpoche in his previous and current reincarnation are both great lamas who practice Dorje Shugden. How can they be wrong? If Dorje Shugden was evil, both Trijang Rinpoche would not have practice it but on the other hand, they rely and spread the practices of Dorje Shugden to others. Banning Dorje Shugden by Dalai Lama is totally opposing to his root Guru’s practice and works. Why does Dalai Lama wants to do that? He himself was practising Dorje Shugden too before he banned it.

Submit your comment

Please enter your name

Please enter a valid email address

Please enter your message

Show More
Show More

(Allowed file types: jpg, jpeg, gif, png, maximum file size: 10MB each)

You can now upload MP4 videos to the comments section. "Choose File" -> click "Upload" then wait while your video is processed. Then copy the link and paste it into the message box. Your video will appear after you submit your comment.
Maximum size is 64MB

Contemplate This

.…Instead of turning away people who practise Dorje Shugden, we should be kind to them. Give them logic and wisdom without fear, then in time they give up the ‘wrong’ practice. Actually Shugden practitioners are not doing anything wrong. But hypothetically, if they are, wouldn’t it be more Buddhistic to be accepting? So those who have views against Dorje Shugden should contemplate this. Those practicing Dorje Shugden should forbear with extreme patience, fortitude and keep your commitments. The time will come as predicted that Dorje Shugden’s practice and it’s terrific quick benefits will be embraced by the world and it will be a practice of many beings.

Dorje Shugden and Dalai Lama – Spreading Dharma Together | Terms of Use | Disclaimer

© 2018 | All Rights Reserved
Total views:5,012,948