The Ambitious 69th “Bhutan Abbot” of Sakya Ngor Monastery

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso (1902 – 1963) the disrobed abbot

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


By: Toby Lee

More than 50 years ago, before the practice of the enlightened Dharma protector Dorje Shugden was banned by the Tibetan leadership in 1996, there existed an extremely ambitious and gifted, but stubborn and destructive monk who courted the support of the Bhutan palace. As the 69th abbot of Sakya Ngor Monastery, he distinguished himself by creating a strong dislike for Dorje Shugden and the teachings of Lama Tsongkhapa, leaving a trail of schism and division behind him.

This was at a time when Dorje Shugden and Lama Tsongkhapa were popularly represented by the Gelugpa stalwart H.H. Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo (1878–1941) who was not only highly respected by the monastic community but also the lay people of the Himalayas.

As a result of Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s ambitious but sectarian actions, Dorje Shugden publications were destroyed and his practice halted at many Sakya and other monasteries that Ngawang Yontan Gyatso had control over or had underhandedly leaned on.

Ironically, his sectarian actions were justified by the Gaden Phodrang (Tibetan government) which had been established in the 17th Century by the 5th Dalai Lama, who had not only fought with the Sakyas but also banned the printing of Gorampa’s writings. Gorampa, as the 6th Abbot of Sakya Ngor Monastery, had been the fiercest critic of Lama Tsongkhapa in his time. Even the Mahasiddha and erudite master Je Tsongkhapa had his strong critics. With the passage of time, we can see that Tsongkhapa’s view and teachings really expanded globally, silencing his critics.

A statue of the 5th Dalai Lama (right) in the Jokhang Temple


Family influence makes a stubborn boy the Abbot of Ngor

As a child, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso is described as being intelligent and witty but also distressingly stubborn and independent, almost notoriously so. For example, it is recorded that when they were studying with their teacher (Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s uncle, Lama Gendun), his distant cousin Dezhung Rinpoche never got beatings over the head with his teacher’s slipper, but Ngawang Yontan Gyatso did.

Through the influence of his family who were relatively well-to-do and could count amongst them a number of respected lamas of rank, he was accepted as a candidate from Khangsar Labrang for the abbotship of Ngor Monastery. Subsequently, he became its 69th Abbot. Unlike some of the other Ngor abbots who ascended the throne due to their hard work, studies and personal achievements, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso ascended the Ngor Abbot’s throne due to wealth and family position which is usually a recipe for disaster.

Ngor Monastery is one of the three main monasteries of the Sakya tradition. It was established by Ngorchen Kunga Zangpo (1382-1444) who is considered one of the Six Ornaments of Tibet due to his many written works (almost 200 titles), teachings, practice, and the monastic institution he established.

Ngor abbots were originally selected primarily for their spiritual attainments, without regard for familial ties or regional origins. However, in the following century after its founding, a few eminent abbots had amassed a great fortune, some of which was kept after their deaths by family members. This became the seed from the 16th century onward for the three oldest Labrangs of Ngor to control the abbotship of the monastery.

The present day Ngor Monastery located in India


A student disrespects his lama

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso may have been known for his intelligence, but respect for those senior to him was not counted amongst his positive qualities.

His main teacher, Dampa Rinpoche, was not a permanent resident of Khangsar Labrang and instead lived in places such as Sakya and Tanag. The lamas in permanent residence at Ngor were Zhalu Kuzhang Lama and Khensur Ngawang Khyenrab Jampal Nyingpo, who had been the 60th abbot of Ngor Monastery.

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso, unsurprisingly, failed to get along with this older abbot and this was the cause of many later problems. In the second year of his term, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s behavior had so disappointed the senior master that he was even temporarily removed from his abbotship. It appears that Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s involvement in religion was for position, power, prestige and wealth. He was even disgracefully removed from the prestigious and sacred position of the abbot of Ngor Monastery. Being removed is a big disgrace.

Dezhung Rinpoche reported:

“The young zhabs-drung [now abbot] soon demonstrated not only a native intelligence and wit, but also a distressing stubbornness and independence. He soon quarrelled with the aged Khang-gsar mKhan-po. As a result of this conflict, he withdrew from the Khang-gsar Lama-palace and set up his own separate ecclesiastical palace.”

So, not only had Ngawang Yontan Gyatso disrespected a senior and older former abbot, but had gone so far as to leave the monastery to set up his own residence.

Sakya Monastery located in Tibet, China.


Spreading sectarianism

Having founded a residence of his own, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso now needed to find some way of funding his activities. In order to obtain patronage to boost his prestige at Ngor, he set out for Bhutan where he attracted the attention of the King who lavished upon him considerable wealth. He soon became the wealthiest of all the “ecclesiastical princes” of Ngor and became popularly known as the “Drukpa Khenpo” (“Bhutan abbot”). Following his success in Bhutan, he returned to Ngor where he remained a controversial figure.

Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo in his younger days

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso also began to manifest intense dislike for the enlightened protector Dorje Shugden, represented by the very popular Gelug lama Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo (1878–1941) at that time. Pabongka Rinpoche is the one who, in 1921 at Chuzang Hermitage near Lhasa, gave a historic 24-day exposition on the Lam Rim, or “stages of the path” that was attended by some 700 people. Many monks came from the three major monasteries in Lhasa (Ganden, Sera and Drepung), and many more traveled weeks from the Central Province of Tsang, and from as far away as Amdo and Kham just to receive teachings from Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche. This included about 30 lamas and reincarnations of lamas, as well as many lay people.

Unlike many other lamas who became famous for their scholarship or practice, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso is perhaps best remembered for his crusade against Dorje Shugden. The writings that exist about him are predominantly related to his anti-Shugden activities, and his systematic targeting of monasteries and monks to dismantle the practice in and around Tibet. In the summer of the third and last year of his abbacy (1935), during the time of the rainy-season retreat, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso began to court open conflict with Dorje Shugden practitioners. He began by sharply criticizing the monks of Khangsar Labrang’s own community, calling them “thieves and breakers of sacred tantric commitments”.

He then set out for Kham where he embarked upon a crusade against Dorje Shugden, destroying images and ritual objects at Damthog Monastery. Around 1948, when his cousin and former classmate Dezhung Rinpoche was at Sakya on pilgrimage, he traveled to Dezhung Rinpoche’s monastery of Tharlam.

Gathering the monks together, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso told them of his crusade against Dorje Shugden and said that Dorje Shugden was not a protector of religion, but an evil spirit who would cause the doctrine to perish. He told the monks of Tharlam that in his previous incarnation as Phankhang Ngawang Kunga Tenpai Gyaltsen, this deity had caused him great obstacles and had caused his early death at the age of 36. He also elicited from the Tharlam monks their agreement to destroy the mask of this deity the next morning. Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s actions showed his blatant disrespect for the previous holy Sakya Throneholders who had in their learning and wisdom installed Dorje Shugden within the Sakya tradition in the first place. But then, Ngawang Yonten Gyatso never had a penchant for respecting his seniors and the learned masters of the past, and was determined to exercise power and control in his focus to gain fame.

Hearing such words being uttered by someone of position, the monks were made sufficiently fearful and, although they were afraid of reprisals from the so-called angered deity, they felt duty-bound to follow the Ngor Abbot’s wishes.

Hence the following morning, after extensive prayers, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso led a procession of monks into the Protector Chapel. They removed a revered mask of Dorje Shugden from its shrine and carried it outside. Ngawang Yontan Gyatso then threw it into a fire, before drawing a pistol and shooting the mask several times. After the mask had been destroyed, he re-entered the Protector Chapel and removed all ritual articles associated with Dorje Shugden. He then had the monks carry the items down to the banks of the Kyichu River and hurl them into the waters.

The 342-mile Kyichu River in Lhasa


Reviving the Dharma out of spite

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s intense dislike for all things Dorje Shugden also manifested in the form of animosity towards the Gelug lama Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche. Ngawang Yontan Gyatso claimed that in 1940, a year before Pabongka Rinpoche’s death, Pabongka Rinpoche carried out “sectarian machinations” by voicing to a Chinese Kuomintang governor his displeasure at the fact “Uncle Jamyang Gyaltsen” had published Gorampa’s works. He even claimed that Pabongka Rinpoche had criticized the exposition of the Thirteen Great Indian Buddhist Works.

“Uncle Jamyang Gyaltsen” here refers to Gapa Khenpo Jamyang Chokyi Gyaltsen (also known as Khenpo Jamgyal; 1870-1940) who played a pivotal role in the preservation and propagation of Gorampa Sonam Senge’s teachings. Gorampa had been the 6th Abbot of Ngor Monastery, and a contemporary of Lama Tsongkhapa as well as his biggest critic. His writings were banned by the Central Tibetan government who, for centuries, had ordered they be held under lock and key, outlawing their reproduction.

In claiming that Pabongka Rinpoche continued to be against Gorampa’s works, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso accomplished a number of things:

Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche was a tremendous proliferator of Dorje Shugden’s practice

  1. He fanned the flames of sectarianism by claiming that Gelugpas (as represented by Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche) were against the teachings of a Sakya lama (as represented by Gorampa). Ngawang Yontan Gyatso was highly sectarian as the evidence shows.
  2. He fanned people’s hatred against Dorje Shugden, just because Dorje Shugden was being heavily promoted by Pabongka Rinpoche. If Ngawang Yontan Gyatso could succeed in painting Pabongka Rinpoche as sectarian and therefore someone to be avoided, then anything else he propagated (i.e. Dorje Shugden) should also be avoided.
  3. This was an opportune moment to remind the laity that the Central Tibetan government, which was predominantly Gelug, had banned the teachings of a Sakya lama for centuries. The Gelugs were a convenient target now that he had gained the support of the Bhutanese palace because, whilst the Sakyas were friendly with Bhutan, the Bhutanese viewed the Gelugs as enemies stemming from the time of the 5th Dalai Lama’s Gaden Phodrang government.
  4. As the 69th Abbot of Ngor, by defending the legacy of the 6th Ngor Abbot, it would legitimize his other actions and reinforce his power base, therefore helping him garner support for his crusade against Dorje Shugden.
  5. Thus for Ngawang Yontan Gyatso, it suited him politically to be on the side of Gorampa and against Dorje Shugden and Pabongka Rinpoche. It was pure revenge which does not reflect well on himself. His vengeful tactics and sectarianism disqualify him as a spiritual master that can be relied upon.


An unremarkable end

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso eventually disrobed, took on a wife and lived the life of a “holy madman”. Even though he was a supposed high lama, he had not gain any sort of discipline. Even after a lifetime of monk-hood and his position as the abbot of such a prestigious monastery, he had no control over his desires, something which led him to disrobe and take on wife like an ordinary layman. Some time between 1959 and 1960, he was imprisoned by the Chinese, telling his remaining disciples, “I am going there, and will die after being tortured. If any of you have real faith and trust in me, come along with me!”

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso died in the early 1960s at about age 60 in a large prison near Siling (Xining), China, which held thousands of prisoners. His karma from persecuting others and destroying their religion finally caught up with him. Unlike other lamas who practice compassion, what Ngawang Yontan Gyatso practiced was the opposite. Genuine lamas make sure that their students do not suffer unnecessarily, but Ngawang Yontan Gyatso invited his disciples to join him in prison to suffer. During his death, he showed no extraordinary signs befitting a high lama, such as ‘thukdam‘ or death meditation, during which a lama remains in the deepest state of meditation when all bodily functions have stopped without physical decomposition occurring. There was a clear absence of rainbows, auspicious singing by celestial beings, or slight earth tremors that usually mark the birth and/or the death of a supreme high lama. There were no tears shed either. He died unceremoniously in prison and was never heard from again.

His legacy remains especially evident in Bhutan where, to this day, many people continue to view Gelugpas with suspicion in general, and Dorje Shugden with hatred in particular. Such is the effect Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s hate has had on the Bhutanese people where centuries later, they continue to dislike Dorje Shugden even though he is deeply rooted in their history via the 4th Zhabdrung Rinpoche Jigme Norbu, the reincarnation of the lama who founded modern-day Bhutan

Fortunately, the younger generation of Bhutanese people are educated, can do research, discern and make their own decisions regarding the sacred practice of Dorje Shugden. Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s negative legacy is fading. The new literate class of young Bhutanese can see that sectarianism is harmful and that the 4th Zhabdrung Rinpoche who was the highest incarnation in the land of Bhutan practiced and promoted Dorje Shugden. He even composed special prayers to Dorje Shugden as he knew that Dorje Shugden is beneficial for the Bhutanese people. The 4th Zhabdrung Rinpoche must have regarded Dorje Shugden highly in order to compose texts to him. Out of faith for Zhabdrung Rinpoche, there has been a resurgence in Dorje Shugden’s practice among the younger generation of Bhutanese as they can feel the swiftness in the efficacy of his practice. 

Dorje Shugden Tanag is a form of Dorje Shugden commonly practised within the Sakya tradition. Click to enlarge.

Observers will also find it contradictory that someone who was the abbot of a Sakya monastery could leave behind him such a trail of destruction and negativity, because real Sakya practitioners are upholders of Buddha Shakyamuni’s doctrine which can only lead to the development of attainments such as compassion and wisdom. Genuine Sakya masters are saintly and they benefit sentient beings. They never cause sectarian destruction.

Yet, neither wisdom nor compassion is associated with Ngawang Yontan Gyatso and when examining the course of his life, it is easy to see why. When someone can challenge an elderly former abbot of his own monastery, to the point that said abbot would try to remove him, such a negative legacy is no longer surprising. Hence, today, the Abbot of Ngor is mostly remembered for his schismatic campaign against Dorje Shugden; even in anti-Shugden literature, his actions are referred to as a “grudge”, a word one does not often associate with Buddhist lamas and Dharma practitioners.

It is worth noting that for all of Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s campaigning against Dorje Shugden, Sakya’s reliance on Dorje Shugden continued well into the 20th Century. For example, the 41st Sakya Trizin was often seen engaging in Dorje Shugden pujas while living in the Tibetan refugee community in Buxa, North-East India back in the 1970s. All the high lamas of the four lineages lived in Buxa together and intermingled when they first went into exile back in 1959. It was well known the Sakyas practiced Dorje Shugden including the 41st Sakya Trizin, who later denied it most likely for political correctness at the height of the ban against Shugden. Many times, the high lamas met and shared their lineages together. Senior Gelugpa monks and Sakya monks attest that Dorje Shugden was practiced in Sakya as well as by the 41st Sakya Trizin while in Buxa. They were all in Buxa for a few years before resettling in various parts of India as designated by the Indian government. Similarly, to this day, there remains a Dorje Shugden mural prominently painted on one of the walls of Sakya Monastery in Shigatse.

Hence, if it was Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s intention to scrub Dorje Shugden’s image and practice off the face of this planet, his own lineage’s continued connection with the deity makes it clear that he was wholly unsuccessful. So if there is one lesson to be learned from the life story of Ngawang Yontan Gyatso, it is how negativity, schism, division and disharmony never pay off in the end.


Relevant readings


A Saint in Seattle; The Life of the Tibetan Mystic Dezhung Rinpoche

Page 31 – 32

Lama Gendun served for about four years as khenpo of the seminary of Jyekundo after Shenga’s departure and was a stout defender of Sakyapa doctrines in local controversies. After that he went to Central Tibet and became head of the small seminary at Ngor. He also traveled widely with the Ngor Khangsar lama Dampa Rinpoche (1876-1953, his teacher and senior classmate under Shenga), receiving many teachings from him, and it was in Tsang at Sakya that he passed away in 1939 or 1940.

Dezhung Rinpoche had been instructed by Gatön to stay with Lama Gendun and was accepted by Lama Gendun as his personal pupil. At this time Lama Gendun had two or three young monks under his personal supervision, including Dezhung Rinpoche and the latter’s distant cousin, the future Ngor Khangsar abbot Ngawang Yontan Gyatso (1902-ca. 1963, Ngor abbot 1933-1936), later known as the “Druk Khenpo.” As a teacher Lama Gendun was so strict that both pupils were afraid of him. Once he asked Dezhung Rinpoche to go to another room and fetch a book and a vase of water. Afraid of some rebuke, Dezhung Rinpoche immediately ran off as requested and rushed back into the room, holding the two objects before him, staring intently into his teacher’s face to try to divine his next wish. In his nervous distraction, he held the vase over the book.

“What are you doing, careless fellow?” said Lama Gendun, snatching the book out of his hands and swatting him over the head with it. “You should never hold something over a book like that!”

Another time, after some mistake, Lama Gendun scolded him sharply, saying, “You a trulku? Hah! Maybe a vulture’s trulku!” But Dezhung Rinpoche never got beatings over the head with his teacher’s slipper, as his more obstinate companion, the future Khangsar abbot Ngawang Yontan Gyatso, Lama Gendun’s nephew, did.

A Saint in Seattle; The Life of the Tibetan Mystic Dezhung Rinpoche, page 31.
Click to enlarge.

A Saint in Seattle; The Life of the Tibetan Mystic Dezhung Rinpoche, page 32.
Click to enlarge.



A Saint in Seattle; The Life of the Tibetan Mystic Dezhung Rinpoche

Page 188 – 189, together with some relevant notes

During this period (ca. 1953-1954), Rinpoche’s distant cousin the Drukpa abbot Ngawang Yontan Gyatso (1902 – ca. 1963), an old classmate of Dezhung Rinpoche from the time of his youthful studies under Shenga and Lama Gendun, and now for many years the ex-abbot of Ngor turned tantrika, also visited Tharlam. He requested Dezhung Rinpoche to record the life story of Ga Lama Jamyang Gyaltsen, saying, “Since Jamgyal Rinpoche was your ‘maternal uncle’ and you studied under him for two years, you should by all means write his biography.” The Drukpa Abbot was a true paternal nephew of Jamgyal, being the son of Jamgyal’s younger brother Skal dga’ (Skal bzang phrin las). He was a well-known and almost notorious figure.

As Dezhung Rinpoche later recalled:

‘Brug pa Mkhan po… was born in Sga in Kham. His family was an old and honorable one, some of whose scions had achieved great prominence as religious figures of the Sakyapa and Nyingmapa sects. His uncle was the famous Sga Lama Jamyang Gyaltsen (1870-1940), the editor of the collected works of Gowo Rabjampa Sonam Sengge (1429-1489). He was related to the ruling houses of Nangchen and Derge. Through the influence of his family and because of his intelligence and wit, he was accepted as a shabdrung of the Khangsar Lama palace of Ngor and proclaimed to be the rebirth of Ngorpa Mkhan po Ngawang Kunga Tenpay Gyaltsen (1863-1899) of the Phan khang Lama palace.712

The young shabdrung soon demonstrated not only a native intelligence and wit, but also a distressing stubbornness and independence. He soon quarrelled with the aged Khang gsar Mkhan po Ngag dbang snying po . As a result of this conflict, he withdrew from the Khang gsar Lama palace and set up his own separate ecclesiastical palace. In order to obtain the wealth necessary to increase his prestige at Ngor, he set out for Bhutan where he attracted the attention of the King of Bhutan, who lavished upon him considerable wealth. He soon was the most wealthy of the ecclesiastical princes of Ngor.

Ngawang Yontan Gyatso, now known as the “Drukpa Khenpo” (“Bhutan abbot”), returned to Ngor and there began a crusade against the protector Rdo rje shugs ldan.713 Still later he returned to Kham and gave up his monk’s vows. Living mainly in Gapa, he was known there as “Lab kha Abbot,” so called from his family home near Tharlam on the opposite side of the Drichu. He is said to have died in the early 1960s in Kham, in Communist imprisonment.

712 – Ngag dbang kun dga’ bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan was the sixty-first abbot of Ngor and his tenure was from 1895 to 1898. During the second year of his term, the senior Khang gsar abbot at that time, Ngag dbang mkhyen rab ‘jam dpal snying po of the Zhwa lu Sku zhang family, was very disappointed at Ngawang Yontan Gyatso’s behavior and succeeded in temporarily removing him from the position of abbot, saying, “I put him up as abbot, and I can take him down!”

713 – According to Dezhung Rinpoche (as recorded in E.G. Smith, unpublished paper “Notes on the History of the Cult of Rdo-rje-shugs-ldan,” Inner Asia Colloquium, July 25, 1963, pp. 7–9), the ‘Brug pa Mkhan po lived as a sort of “holy madman” (chos smyon) and was subject to ecstatic trances in which deities would enter his person. On numerous occasions, when bestowing the initiation of Na ro Mkha’ spyod ma (Naro Kacho Vajrayogini), he would rise and begin dancing and whirling about. He intensely disliked the particular tradition within the Dge lugs pa represented by Pha bong kha pa, and his main wrath was directed against the cult of the protector Rdo rje shugs ldan. Sometimes it seemed as if he were physically struggling with another deity for the possession of his body. That deity was Shugs ldan. As Smith also recorded (pp. 7-8):

It was at Ngor that he began his “war” on Rdo-rje-shugs-ldan. One of the most important mgon-khang of Rdo-rje-shugs-ldan was the rTenmkhar at Ngor. Having made significant gifts to the various politically significant personages and to the monastic community, he assessed the climate to be ripe for the destruction of the mask of Shugs-ldan and the institution of the worship of a rival bstan-srung. His iconoclastic successes at Ngor made him only more eager for more victories against Shugs-ldan, whom, it seems, he actually viewed as a physical enemy.

He set out for Khams where he embarked upon a crusade against this deity. He visited the monastery of ‘Dam thog in Ldan rna and there destroyed the images and ritual objects of this cult. Then he came to Tharlam in about 1948, in the absence of Dezhung Rinpoche (who was at Sakya on pilgrimage). He called the monks together and told them of his crusade against Shugs ldan. He told them that Shugs ldan was not a protector of religion, but that he was an evil spirit who would cause the doctrine to perish. He told them that this deity had caused him great obstacles in his previous incarnation as the Phan khang Ngag dbang kun dga’ bstan pa’i rgyal mtshan (1863-1899), and that Shugs ldan had then actually caused his early death at age thirty-six. He proposed to destroy, if they would agree, the mask of this deity the following morning. Many of the monks feared the consequences of so provocative an act, and they were afraid of reprisals from the angered deity. But being the disciples of ‘Brug pa Mkhan po, they felt bound to follow his wishes. The next morning, after prolonged prayers, he led a procession of monks into the Protector’s Chapel (mgon khang). He took down a revered mask of the deity from its shrine and carried it outside. He then hurled it into a fire, and then drew a pistol and shot at the mask numerous times. After the mask had been destroyed, he reentered the Protector’s Chapel and removed all the ritual articles associated with that deity. These he had the monks carry down to the banks of the ‘Bri chu and hurl into the river.

After this, he reconsecrated the chapel to the deity Beg tse. He defied Shugs ldan to take revenge. When nothing happened, the frightened monks lost their faith in Shugs ldan and accepted the new protective deity.

A Saint in Seattle; The Life of the Tibetan Mystic Dezhung Rinpoche, page 188.
Click to enlarge.

A Saint in Seattle; The Life of the Tibetan Mystic Dezhung Rinpoche, page 189.
Click to enlarge.



Further reading

Lungta 14: Aspects of Tibetan History Spring 2001
Published by Amnye Machen Institute
Guest Editor: Roberto Vitali
Editor: Tashi Tsering
[Click to download a PDF copy]

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
15 total comments on this postSubmit yours
  1. I am sure Sakyas had many holy and genuine lamas, But this Ngawang Yontan Gyatso must be one of the fake, greedy, power-hungry lama of the Sakyas sect. What a shame it is. I am sure after dying in prison, he went to hell.

    What a fanatic Ngawang Yontan Gyatso was.


  2. Even this thangka of Ngawang Yontan Gyatso looks distorted with a big head, no neck and small body. He looks like some sort of imp. Even in this thangka of him, you can feel his negative energy coming out. His face and mustache is really ugly.


  3. This shameful Ngawang Yontan Gyatso after being a monk for a lifetime disrobes as he couldn’t control his desires and married a wife. He was abbot of Ngor Monastery and the seniors dethroned him because he was a very bad abbot with political motives. He was rude and disrespectful to the elders as Dezhung Rinpoche said. Because his career suffered due to all his intrigues, he disrobed and lost his reputation therefore he pretended to be a ‘mad yogi’ wandering around the countryside acting crazy. That didn’t work. Later he was imprisoned and demanded his ‘genuine’ students to follow him to prison and suffer with him. He had no affection for his students. What a shameful person he turned out to be. Totally a sectarian Sakya ‘Lama’.


  4. Ngawang Yontan Gyatso wanted only money and power. Seeing how popular Pabongka Rinpoche was, he must have been very jealous. Therefore, he started to spread rumours about Dorje Shugden so Pabongka Rinpoche’s popularity would decrease because Pabongka Rinpoche was a Dorje Shugden practitioner.

    He claimed he died very young in his previous life because Dorje Shugden created obstacles for him and caused him to die at the age of 36. This didn’t make sense at all, if the law of karma applies, one dies because of one’s karma, not because of spirits. If a spirit can cause a lama to die, it is maybe because the lama is not attained to protect himself from a spirit or it is his karma catching up on him.

    The schism created by Ngawang Yontan Gyatso had caused disharmony among different lineages, some people might have lost faith in Dorje Shugden and not practicing anymore, some might spread the rumours to more people creating even more negative influence and there is a risk of losing a pure lineage if this continues. In the end, Ngawang Yontan Gyatso died in the prison with no sign of attainment. Greed and jealousy lead us to the wrong path regardless of who we are, we have to be careful of our motivation so we don’t end up in a bad place.

  5. Dalai Lama says returning to China is better for Tibetans-What do rangzen (Tibet Independence fighters) people fighting for Tibet’s freedom do now??? Have we wasted our time?

    Suddenly the Dalai Lama keeps insisting he wants to be a part of China. How about all the tens of millions of dollars in money and so much time and resource poured into the Free Tibet movement for 57 years in exile. Is that all wasted? Is that all down the drain? How can the Dalai Lama turn around on us like that?

    If Dalai Lama returns to Tibet/China, then he is telling the world China is good for Tibetans and we Tibetans want to be a part of China. Is that correct? So Dalai Lama is telling the world that Tibet is a part of China? After so many years of saying we want independence and our country was eaten and now Dalai Lama is sending what message to the world?

    How will India feel after hosting the Dalai Lama for so many years? – This one minute video shows the Dalai Lama August 2018 saying he feels Tibet should be a part of China! -

  6. Dalai Lama says returning to China is better for Tibetans-What do rangzen (Tibet Independence fighters) people fighting for Tibet’s freedom do now??? Have we wasted our time?

    Suddenly the Dalai Lama keeps insisting he wants to be a part of China. How about all the tens of millions of dollars in money and so much time and resource poured into the Free Tibet movement for 57 years in exile. Is that all wasted? Is that all down the drain? How can the Dalai Lama turn around on us like that?

    If Dalai Lama returns to Tibet/China, then he is telling the world China is good for Tibetans and we Tibetans want to be a part of China. Is that correct? So Dalai Lama is telling the world that Tibet is a part of China? After so many years of saying we want independence and our country was eaten and now Dalai Lama is sending what message to the world?

    How will India feel after hosting the Dalai Lama for so many years? – This one minute video shows the Dalai Lama August 2018 saying he feels Tibet should be a part of China!

  7. While the government of Nepal has framed a policy to tighten the noose around non-governmental organisations, they have welcomed 30 Chinese NGOs to enter the country. These NGOs will penetrate the country’s social sector at the grassroots level. This is the first time such a large number of Chinese NGOs have entered Nepal at one time. Nepal is increasingly open to Chinese influence, a sign that ties between both countries are strengthening, while India’s influence is being reduced. The time has passed for India’s monopoly to remain uninterrupted in Nepal as opportunities to engage with China are being welcomed.

    30 Chinese NGOs all set to work in Nepal
    Kathmandu, July 30
    At a time when the government has framed a policy to tighten the noose around non-governmental organisations, 30 Chinese NGOs have entered Nepal to penetrate the country’s social sector and the grassroots.
    The Social Welfare Council Nepal and China NGO Network for International Exchanges, an umbrella body of Chinese NGOs, have signed a memorandum of understanding to enable Chinese NGOs to work in Nepal. The agreement was signed yesterday between SWCN Member Secretary Dilli Prasad Bhatt and CNIE General Secretary Zhu Rui in the presence of Minister of Women, Children and Senior Citizen Tham Maya Thapa and Chinese Deputy Minister of External Affairs Wang Yajun.
    The agreement has paved the way for the first batch of 30 Chinese NGOs to work in Nepal for a period of three years. Their contract will be extended based on the consent of SWCN and CNIE. Representatives of these 30 Chinese NGOs were also present during yesterday’s signing ceremony. They have agreed to work in partnership with local NGOs to implement their programmes and projects.
    The Chinese NGOs are eyeing areas such as livelihood, healthcare, education, skill-based training, community development and disaster management. This is the first time such a large number of Chinese NGOs has entered Nepal at one time. The Chinese assistance so far in Nepal has largely been limited to development of infrastructure projects. But the entry of these NGOs indicates China is keen on making its presence felt in Nepal’s social sector and the grassroots, which, till date, have remained domains of the West and countries such as Japan and India.
    The MoU signed between SWCN and CNIE states that Chinese NGOs will be mobilised for ‘the benefit of needy Nepalis and to enhance ties between China and Nepal through people-to-people support programmes’.
    “The Chinese NGOs will abide by the law of Nepal in its entirety while carrying out development cooperation in Nepal,” says the MoU, adding, “Chinese NGOs will submit programmes to the SWCN to carry out development activities in partnership with Nepali NGOs and SWCN in line with plans and policies of the government of Nepal.”
    The MoU was signed at a time when the government has drafted the National Integrity Policy to limit activities of NGOs and INGOs, as some of them were found ‘trying to break communal harmony and proselytising Nepalis’. There were also concerns that high administrative cost of many NGOs and INGOs was preventing money from reaching the real beneficiaries. The policy clearly states that NGOs and INGOs cannot spend more than specified amount under administrative and consultant headings. They will also be barred from working against Nepal’s interests, culture and communal harmony and conducting activities to promote their religious, social or other agenda, adds the policy.
    Around 48,000 NGOs are currently registered in Nepal, of which only 1,600 have been receiving funds from INGOs, as per SWCN. The SWCN has directed INGOs and NGOs to spend 60 per cent of the budget to generate tangible results, while the remaining can be used to cover administrative costs and organise training, meetings and seminars. China NGOs enter Nepal

  8. The Nikkei Asian Review is a highly reputable news platform. They are not tabloid in any sense of the word. What they publish is reputable and thoroughly reliable. They mention clearly in an article published August 7, 2018 that the Dalai Lama has a terminal illness. The Prime Minister of India knowing this is now conciliatory towards China. He understands that the Dalai Lama cannot be used as a pawn in irritating China any further. Negotiations are progressing that after the passing of Dalai Lama, his government in-exile will close. The end.

    India uses rumor of Dalai Lama’s ill health to mend China ties
    If Tibetan exile flow is stemmed, Beijing might compromise on territorial claim
    YUJI KURONUMA, Nikkei staff writer
    August 07, 2018 17:02 JST
    DHARAMSALA — Rumors are flying around in this northern Indian city, home to the Tibetan government-in-exile, that the 14th Dalai Lama is suffering from terminal cancer.
    With Tibetan exiles deeply worried about the 83-year-old religious leader, the Indian government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been using the situation to take a more conciliatory approach to China. Modi also seems to be lowering the standing of the Tibetan government-in-exile.
    Word that the Dalai Lama may be in serious condition has quietly spread. “I have heard that His Holiness is not well,” said Migmar Chodon, a 49-year-old housewife in Dharamsala. “Though I don’t know well about it, I am worried.”
    A 27-year-old restaurant employee in the city said, “I have read somewhere that His Holiness is unwell.”
    In 1959, Tibetan people rose in revolt in Lhasa, Tibet, which had been occupied by China’s military, the People’s Liberation Army, and the 14th Dalai Lama fled to India. At least 130,000 Tibetans later left their homeland. At present, 85,000 Tibetans live in India, about 8,000 of them in Dharamsala, which hosts the Tibetan government-in-exile and a temple where the 14th Dalai Lama lives.
    Rumors about the Dalai Lama suffering from poor health come frequently. The latest one arose in June, when an Indian media company reported that the Dalai Lama was in the “last stage of prostate cancer.” The Dalai Lama’s doctor and the government-in-exile immediately denied the news, and people have tried to remain calm. “I want to believe the words of the doctor,” the restaurant worker said.
    The Indian government thinks the terminal cancer report is credible. A government source said “the prostate cancer has spread to his lymph nodes” and that “his life would not be so long” now.
    In the past two years, the Dalai Lama has received treatment at a hospital in the U.S. People close to the Dalai Lama worry that word of this was leaked by U.S. authorities. Now the Dalai Lama “will be going to Switzerland for radiotherapy in the month of August,” the source said.
    India is using rumors that the Dalai Lama is in poor health to build a more conciliatory relationship with China. In April, during an informal summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Wuhan, China, Modi tried to portray the India-China relationship as improved.
    During the meeting, “Modi apprised President Xi of the Dalai Lama’s health and the Indian position on Tibet after his death,” a government source said. “This information from Modi took Xi by surprise, and the two discussed the issue for a long time at the Wuhan summit.”
    When the leaders met in 2015 and 2016, they informally discussed a proposal for India to stop accepting new Tibetan exiles after the death of the Dalai Lama in return for China withdrawing its territorial claim on some parts of northern India.
    For humanitarian, strategic and other reasons, India has been accepting Tibetan exiles for nearly 60 years. Tibet has been something of a buffer zone between the world’s two most populous countries since shortly after India’s independence in 1947. However, China has strengthened its grip on the Tibet Autonomous Region, and in 2017 new exiles numbered 57, a sharp drop from over 2,000 a decade earlier.
    With Tibet’s strategic value waning, India has moderated its stance.
    At the behest of the Indian government, the Tibetan government-in-exile last year changed the English name for its sikyong from “prime minister” to “president.” Geshe Lhakdor, director of the Library of Tibetan Works and Archives and for years an interpreter for the 14th Dalai Lama, said the new term denotes the leader of an organization, rather than the leader of a country.
    The Indian government is also encouraging Tibetan exiles to acquire Indian citizenship.
    A successor to the 14th Dalai Lama will be installed when a person believed to be his reincarnation is found, or will be appointed under a new system, like nomination.
    The 15th Dalai Lama will then lead the Tibetan Buddhist world. However, it will be difficult for the successor to take the place of the 14th Dalai Lama, who has international influence as a Nobel Peace Prize laureate and is the protector of Tibetan exiles.
    The buildings that house the government-in-exile and the temple which is home to the 14th Dalai Lama sit atop a mountain. At the foot of this mountain is the Tibetan Reception Center that Tibetan exiles first visit for registration. It is quiet these days, and very much unoccupied.


  9. Why doesn’t the United States and its allies end Refugee Status for the useless Tibetans? They have been refugees for 60 years now and don’t tell me they still cannot get their lives back in order?

    Tibetans really know how to put on a good show and use people, take their money and do nothing in return.

    Trump and Allies Seek End to Refugee Status for Millions of Palestinians
    In internal emails, Jared Kushner advocated a “sincere effort to disrupt” the U.N.’s relief agency for Palestinians.
    Jared Kushner, U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and senior advisor, has quietly been trying to do away with the U.N. relief agency that has provided food and essential services to millions of Palestinian refugees for decades, according to internal emails obtained by Foreign Policy.
    His initiative is part of a broader push by the Trump administration and its allies in Congress to strip these Palestinians of their refugee status in the region and take their issue off the table in negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians, according to both American and Palestinian officials. At least two bills now making their way through Congress address the issue.
    Kushner, whom Trump has charged with solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, has been reluctant to speak publicly about any aspect of his Middle East diplomacy. A peace plan he’s been working on with other U.S. officials for some 18 months has been one of Washington’s most closely held documents.
    But his position on the refugee issue and his animus toward the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) is evident in internal emails written by Kushner and others earlier this year.
    “It is important to have an honest and sincere effort to disrupt UNRWA,” Kushner wrote about the agency in one of those emails, dated Jan. 11 and addressed to several other senior officials, including Trump’s Middle East peace envoy, Jason Greenblatt.
    “This [agency] perpetuates a status quo, is corrupt, inefficient and doesn’t help peace,” he wrote.
    The United States has helped fund UNRWA since it was formed in 1949 to provide relief for Palestinians displaced from their homes following the establishment of the State of Israel and ensuing international war. Previous administrations have viewed the agency as a critical contributor to stability in the region.
    But many Israel supporters in the United States today see UNRWA as part of an international infrastructure that has artificially kept the refugee issue alive and kindled hopes among the exiled Palestinians that they might someday return home—a possibility Israel flatly rules out.
    Critics of the agency point in particular to its policy of granting refugee status not just to those who fled Mandatory Palestine 70 years ago but to their descendants as well—accounting that puts the refugee population at around 5 million, nearly one-third of whom live in camps across Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, the West Bank, and Gaza.
    By trying to unwind UNRWA, the Trump administration appears ready to reset the terms of the Palestinian refugee issue in Israel’s favor—as it did on another key issue in December, when Trump recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
    In the same January email, Kushner wrote: “Our goal can’t be to keep things stable and as they are. … Sometimes you have to strategically risk breaking things in order to get there.”
    Kushner raised the refugee issue with officials in Jordan during a visit to the region in June, along with Special Representative for International Negotiations Jason Greenblatt. According to Palestinian officials, he pressed the Jordan to strip its more than 2 million registered Palestinians of their refugee status so that UNRWA would no longer need to operate there.
    “[Kushner said] the resettlement has to take place in the host countries and these governments can do the job that UNRWA was doing,” said Hanan Ashrawi, a member of Executive Committee of the Palestine Liberation Organization.
    She said the Trump administration wanted rich Arab Gulf states to cover the costs Jordan might incur in the process.
    “They want to take a really irresponsible, dangerous decision and the whole region will suffer,” Ashrawi said.
    Saeb Erekat, the Palestinians’ chief negotiator, told reporters in June that Kushner’s delegation had said it was ready to stop funding UNRWA altogether and instead direct the money—$300 million annually—to Jordan and other countries that host Palestinian refugees.
    “All this is actually aimed at liquidating the issue of the Palestinian refugees,” hesaid.
    The White House declined to comment on the record for this story. A senior executive branch official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said U.S. policy regarding the U.N.’s Palestinian refugee program “has been under frequent evaluation and internal discussion. The administration will announce its policy in due course.”
    Jordanian officials in New York and Washington did not respond to queries about the initiative.
    Kushner and Nikki Haley, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, both proposed ending funding for UNRWA back in January. But the State Department, the Pentagon, and the U.S. intelligence community all opposed the idea, fearing in part that it could fuel violence in the region.
    The following week, the State Department announced that that United States would cut the first $125 million installment of its annual payment to UNRWA by more than half, to $60 million.
    “UNRWA has been threatening us for six months that if they don’t get a check they will close schools. Nothing has happened,” Kushner wrote in the same email.
    State Department spokesperson Heather Nauert said at the time that the U.S. had no intention of eliminating funding for Palestinian refugees, and that it was taking time to explore ways to reform UNRWA and to convince other countries to help Washington shoulder the financial burden of aiding the Palestinians.
    But the following day, Victoria Coates, a senior advisor to Greenblatt, sent an email to the White House’s national security staff indicating that the White House was mulling a way to eliminate the U.N.’s agency for Palestinian refugees.
    “UNRWA should come up with a plan to unwind itself and become part of the UNHCR by the time its charter comes up again in 2019,” Coates wrote.
    She noted that the proposal was one of a number of “spitball ideas that I’ve had that are also informed by some thoughts I’ve picked up from Jared, Jason and Nikki.”
    Other ideas included a suggestion that the U.N. relief agency be asked to operate on a month-to-month budget and devise “a plan to remove all anti-Semitism from educational materials.”
    The ideas seemed to track closely with proposals Israel has been making for some time.
    “We believe that UNRWA needs to pass from the world as it is an organization that advocates politically against Israel and perpetuates the Palestinian refugee problem,” said Elad Strohmayer, a spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington.
    Strohmayer said that Palestinians are the only population that is able to transfer its refugee status down through generations.
    The claim, though long advanced by Israel, is not entirely true.
    In an internal report from 2015, the State Department noted that the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees “recognizes descendants of refugees as refugees for purposes of their operations.” The report, which was recently declassified, said the descendants of Afghan, Bhutanese, Burmese, Somali, and Tibetan refugees are all recognized by the U.N. as refugees themselves.
    Of the roughly 700,000 original Palestinian refugees, only a few tens of thousands are still alive, according to estimates.
    The push to deny the status to most Palestinians refugees is also gaining traction in Congress.
    Last week, Rep. Doug Lamborn, a Republican from Colorado, introduced a bill that would limit the United States to assisting only the original refugees. Most savings in U.N. contributions would be directed to the U.S. Agency for International Development, the United States’ principal international development agency. But USAID is currently constrained by the Taylor Force Act, which restricts the provision of humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian Authority until it ends a policy of providing aid to families of fallen terrorists.
    “Instead of resettling Palestinian refugees displaced as a result of the Arab-Israeli Conflict of 1948, UNRWA provides aid to those they define as Palestinian refugees until there is a solution they deem acceptable to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” Lamborn’s bill states.
    “This policy does not help resettle the refugees from 1948 but instead maintains a refugee population in perpetuity.”
    A congressional aide familiar with the legislation said its intent isn’t to gut UNRWA funding, but redirect assistance to descendants through USAID.
    “The people that are suffering should still get assistance, but through appropriately defined humanitarian channels and aid programs,” the aide said.
    Similarly, Sen. James Lankford, (R-Okla.), has drafted legislation that would redirect U.S. funding away from UNRWA and to other local and international agencies.
    The bill, which has not yet officially been introduced, would require the U.S. secretary of state certify by 2020 that the United Nations has ended its recognition of Palestinian descendants as refugees.
    “The United Nations should provide assistance to the Palestinians in a way that makes clear that the United Nations does not recognize the vast majority of Palestinians currently registered by UNRWA as refugees deserving refugee status,” reads a draft obtained by Foreign Policy.
    Previous U.S. administrations have maintained that the vast majority of Palestinian refugees will ultimately have to be absorbed in a new Palestinian state or naturalized in the countries that have hosted them for generations.
    But the fate of the refugee issue was expected to be agreed to as part of a comprehensive peace pact that resulted in the establishment of a Palestinian state.
    “It’s very clear that the overarching goal here is to eliminate the Palestinian refugees as an issue by defining them out of existence,” said Lara Friedman, the president of the Foundation for Middle East Peace.
    “This isn’t going to make peace any easier. It’s going to make it harder.” Trump and Allies Seek End to Refugee Status for Millions of Palestinians

  10. What will the all the people around the world and in Tibet do now? Dalai Lama says he is happy that Tibet is a part of China and should remain a part of China. So many Tibetans self-immolated for Tibet to be independent and now Dalai Lama did a 360 degree turn and says he wants to go back to Tibet and China and Tibet should be a part of China. So unbelievable. So many are angry and disappointed.

    Tibetans ready to be part of China: Dalai Lama
    Organised by the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), the event was a part of “Thank You India – 2018″ held by the Tibetan community across India to mark 60 years of its exile in the country.
    Indo-Asian News Service
    Tibetans are ready to be a part of China if guaranteed full rights to preserve their culture, the Dalai Lama said on Friday.
    “Tibetans are not asking for independence. We are okay with remaining with the People’s Republic of China, provided we have full rights to preserve our culture,” the 83-year-old spiritual leader said at “Thank You Karnataka” event here in the city.
    Organised by the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), the event was a part of “Thank You India – 2018″ held by the Tibetan community across India to mark 60 years of its exile in the country.
    “Several of Chinese citizens practicing Buddhism are keen on Tibetan Buddhism as it is considered scientific,” the Nobel laureate said.
    Born in Taktser hamlet in northeastern Tibet, the Dalai Lama was recognized at the age of two as the reincarnation of the 13th Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso. He fled to India from Tibet after a failed uprising against the Chinese rule in 1959.
    China annexed Tibet in 1950, forcing thousands of Tibetans, including monks, to flee the mountain country and settle in India as refugees.
    Since then, India has been home to over 100,000 Tibetans majorly settled in Karnataka, Himachal Pradesh among other states.


  11. Dear Dalai Lama,

    Since you started the cruel ban against the 350 year Dorje Shugden practice, how has it benefit your Tibetan society and Buddhism in the world? Things have become worse and most educated Tibetans can see this. They don’t speak out not because they don’t see your ban as wrong, but you instill fear in them and not respect. It is like fear of a dictator. I am sorry to say so. Everyone is divided. There is no harmony. Before your ban there was more harmony and unity.

    By enacting the ban, you split the monasteries, split so many families, split regions in Tibet apart, split your disciples from you, split your own gurus from you, split Tibetan Buddhism apart. You have created so much disharmony.

    It is not democratic what you have done to ban a religion within your community. You always talk of tolerance and acceptance and democracy and yet you do not accept and tolerate something different from your beliefs. When people practice Dorje Shugden you ostracize them, ban them from seeing you, ban them from using Tibetan facilities. You know you have done that. There are videos that capture your speech and prove this point. You even had people expelled from monasteries just because they practice Dorje Shugden. Some of the monks you expelled have been in the monastery for over 40 years. Many older monks shed tears because of this.

    Many young educated Tibetans lost confidence in you as they saw the damage the Dorje Shugden ban created and they lose hope. Many have become free thinkers. They reject what you have done. So many people in the west left Buddhism because of the confusion you created with this ban against Dorje Shugden which is immoral.

    You could of had millions of people who practice Dorje Shugden to support, love and follow you, but you scared them away. They are hurt and very disappointed. They loved you and respected you deeply before the ban. It has been 60 years and you have failed to get Tibet back. Your biggest failure is not getting Tibet back after 57 years in exile. Now you are begging China to allow you to return to Tibet to the disappointment of thousands of people who fought for a free Tibet believing in you. So many self-immolated for a free Tibet and now you want Tibet to be a part of China with no referendum from Tibetans. Just like a dictator, you decide on your own. It was your government and you that lost Tibet in the first place. Your policies and style of doing things do not benefit Tibet and Buddhism. You have been the sole ruler of Tibet your whole life and you still have not gotten our country of Tibet back for us. Our families and us are separated. Yet you create more pain by creating a ban to further divide people. Please have compassion.

    No other Buddhist leader has banned or condemned any religion except for you. It looks very bad. You are a Nobel laureate and this is not fitting of a laureate. You should unite people and not separate them by religious differences.

    You said Ms. Aung San Suu Kyi did not do right to the Rohingya people in Myanmar due to religious differences, but you are doing the same thing to the Shugden Buddhists within your own society. There is a parallel in this. You separate the Shugden Buddhists from the others in Tibetan society.

    You have lost so many people who would have loved and supported you. You have lost so much support around the world. The Shugden Buddhists who love you number in the millions. When you are fast losing support from governments and private people, it will not do you well to lose more.

    After you are passed away in the future, the rift you created between the Dorje Shugden and non-Dorje Shugden people will remain for a while and that will be your legacy. Disharmony. You will be remembered for this. Not as a hero but a disharmony creator.

    Dorje Shugden will spread and further grow, but you will be no more as you are a human. No one wishes you bad and in fact we hope you have a long and healthy life, but we have lost so much hope and have so much despair because of you. All the hundreds of Dorje Shugden lamas, tulkus and geshes are maturing and there are hundreds of Dorje Shugden monasteries in Tibet who will not give up Dorje Shugden. You have made a mistake. These hundreds of teachers and teachers to be will spread Dorje Shugden further in the future.

    The gurus that gave us Dorje Shugden as a spiritual practice and you have called these holy gurus wrong and they are mistaken in giving us Dorje Shugden. How can you insult our gurus whom we respect so much? If they can be wrong, then you can be wrong. Then all gurus can be wrong. So no one needs to listen to any guru? You have created this trend. It is not healthy. Your own gurus practiced Dorje Shugden their whole lives. Your own gurus were exemplary and highly learned.

    Dalai Lama you have created so much pain with this ban against so many people due to religion. You are ageing fast. Are you going to do anything about it or stay stubborn, hard and un-moving. You show a smile and preach peace and harmony wherever you go. But will you do the same to your own people? Please rectify the wrong you have done. Please before it is too late. You can create harmony again or you can pass away in the future with this legacy of peace. May you live long and think carefully and admit what was a mistake in having this unethical ban against Dorje Shugden religion.

  12. Murderers, rapists, rabble-rousers and troublemakers! If you need protection, you will find refuge under the Crooked Tibetan Administration. For a fee, you will get carte blanche to exploit who and what you like. And with hundreds of years of experience under their belt in protecting your kind, you can be rest assured that under the Crooked Tibetan Administration, it will be business as usual for you!

  13. The cracks in Tibetan society are starting to show, and it is now coming to the attention of local Indians who have all but identified the Tibetan leadership as the source of the divisions. According to this author, disunity amongst the Tibetans is now creating problems for Indian law enforcement agencies, and this disunity may culminate in young Tibetans holding silent grudges against their host country. It is incredible that after six decades of generosity from India, Indians are now facing the very real possibility Tibetans can be ungrateful towards India. The Tibetan leadership totally failed to impart positive values upon their exiled community, like gratitude for those kindest to them and the need to repay these kindnesses with real, tangible results. It’s also very unlikely that the Tibetan leadership will now start to do this, after six decades of failing to do so. Indians need to realise this, and see that there is no benefit for their nation to align themselves with the Tibetan leadership, and there never will be.
    Tibetan disunity not in India’s interest
    John S. Shilshi
    Updated: August 7, 2018, 11:00 AM
    India is home to the Dalai Lama and an estimated 120,000 Tibetan refugees. Though this humanitarian gesture on India’s part comes at the cost of risking New Delhi’s relations with China, India has never wavered in ensuring that Tibetans live with dignity and respect. Notified settlements across the country were made available so that they can live as independently as possible and practice Tibetan religion and culture. They are also allowed to establish centres of higher learning in Tibetan Buddhism. As a result, several reputed Buddhist institutes came up in Karnataka, and in the Indian Himalayan belt. In what may be termed as a gesture well reciprocated, and because of the respect and influence His Holiness the Dalai Lama commands, the Tibetan diaspora also lived as a peaceful community, rarely creating problems for India’s law enforcement agencies.
    The situation, however, changed from 2000 onwards when unity amongst Tibetans suffered some setback due to developments like the Karmapa succession controversy and the controversy over worshiping of Dorje Shugden. In a unique case of politics getting the better of religion, two senior monks of the Karma kargyue sect of Tibetan Buddhism, Tai Situ Rinpoche and late Shamar Rinpoche, developed serious differences after the demise of Rangjung Rigpe Dorje, the 16th Karmapa, in 1981. This animosity ultimately led to emergence of two 17th Karmapa candidates in the early nineties. While Tai Situ Rinpoche identified and recognised UghyanThinley Dorje, late Shamar Rinpoche anointed Thinley Thaye Dorje as his Karmapa candidate. Enthronement of their respective protégés at the Rumtek Monastery in Sikkim, the supreme seat of the Karma Kargue linage, being their primary objective, both started indulging in activities monks normally are expected to, and bitterness spewed against each other.
    The bitter rivalry assumed a new dimension when UghyenThinley Dorje suddenly appeared in India in January 2000. The competition became fiercer and hectic political lobbying, never known in the history of Tibetan Buddhism on Indian soil, became common place. Apart from pulling strings at their disposal in Sikkim as well as in the power corridors of New Delhi, these senior monks spat against each other with allegations and counter allegations, widening the gaps between their supporters. His Holiness the Dalai Lama, choosing to favour one of the candidates—a decision many Tibet watchers felt was ill-timed—had also limited possible scope of rapprochement. Hence, the Karma Kargyue followers are now vertically divided, while the camps are dragged into a long drawn legal battle.
    Another development that unfortunately split the Tibetans is the controversy over Shugden worshipping, which again is an internal matter of the Gelugpa sect, to which the Dalai Lama belongs. It erupted as a result of the Dalai Lama urging Tibetans to refrain from worshiping Dorje Shugden, a deity believed to be a protector, according to Tibetan legend. Shugden practitioners, who felt offended by the call, describe it as an attack on freedom of religion, a right, which Dalai Lama himself tirelessly fought for. On the other hand, die hard Dalai Lama followers perceived the questioning of the decision as one challenging the wisdom of the Dalai Lama and mounted massive pressure on Dorje Shugden practitioners to relent, with some even demolishing the statues of the deity. The rivalry ultimately led to split in two Gelug monasteries in Karnataka, and Serpom and Shar Garden monasteries in Bylakupe and Mundgod respectively came under the control of Shugden followers. The bitterness associated with the split is exemplified by the fact that till today, members of these monasteries are treated as some sort of outcasts by the others. Thus, for the first time, the Tibetan diaspora in India gave birth to sections opposed to the Dalai Lama, with spillover effects in Tibet and elsewhere.
    For India, with a fragile internal security profile, a divided Tibetan population on its soil is not good news. It has several long-term implications. It is common knowledge that China considers Dalai Lama as a secessionist, one plotting to divide their country. The latter’s claim of “all that Tibetans were asking for, was a status of genuine autonomy within the Constitution of the Peoples’ Republic of China”, had fallen into deaf ears. China also considers him as someone who plays to the Indian tune to tickle China. Therefore, at a time when China has successfully shrunk the Dalai Lama’s space internationally, India continuing to extend the usual space for him is viewed as complicity. Sharp reaction from China when he was allowed to visit Arunachal Pradesh in April 2017, is a recent example. Such being the delicate nature of India-China relations on matters and issues concerning Tibetans, India can hardly afford to ignore the division within the diaspora. Past experience of dubious elements from Tibet having succeeded in infiltrating the Central Tibetan Administration, including the security wing, should be a warning.
    It is also time India understands the reason behind Tibetans seeking Indian passports, despite an existing arrangement for issue of Identity Certificates, which is passport equivalent. Some had even successfully taken recourse to legal remedy on the issue, and left the government of India red-faced. These changing moods should not be viewed as desires by Tibetans to become Indian citizens. They are triggered by the pathetic state of affairs associated with issuing of Identity Certificates, where delays in most cases are anything between six months to one year. Early streamlining of the process will drastically reduce their desire to hold Indian passport. It will also remove the wrongly perceived notion among some educated Tibetan youth, that the cumbersome process was a ploy by India to confine them in this country. While India should not shy from requesting the Dalai Lama to use his good offices to end all differences within the community in the interest of India’s internal security, it will also be necessary to ensure that young Tibetans do not nurse a silent grudge against the very country they called their second home.

  14. Supreme Court of India JUSTICE Mr. MARKANDEY KATJU (RETD) writes that Tibet is much better under the Chinese than it was under the lamas who only wanted to make the populace slaves. It was feudal and it will never return to the backwardness again.

    Time has come to acknowledge that Tibet has vastly improved under Chinese rule
    JUSTICE MARKANDEY KATJU (RETD) | 12 August, 2018
    From a terribly poor state hinged on a feudal system, Tibet has modernised and grows faster than the rest of China
    This article has been prompted by Jyoti Malhotra’s article in ThePrint ‘Tibetan government quietly changed its PM’s designation. India won’t be unhappy about it‘.
    China’s annexation of Tibet in 1959, ousting the Dalai Lama, had attracted it worldwide criticism. The Dalai Lama fled and was granted asylum in India, where he set up a government-in-exile with its headquarters in Dharamshala.
    The Chinese claim Tibet on the grounds that it has been part of the country since the Yuan dynasty of the 13th century, which is disputed by the government-in-exile. But let us leave this that matter aside.
    The more important question is whether Chinese rule has benefited Tibet.
    The answer is that it undoubtedly has. As the Reuters’ Ben Blanchard writes: “Today Tibet is richer and more developed than it has ever been, its people healthier, more literate, better dressed and fed”.
    Although Ben goes on to argue that this development masks “a deep sense of unhappiness among many Tibetans”, I will disagree. How can anyone be unhappy if s/he is healthier, better fed and better clothed?
    Under the rule of the Dalai Lamas (Buddhist priests), the people of Tibet were terribly poor, almost entirely illiterate, and lived like feudal serfs.
    Today, Tibet presents a totally different picture. The illiteracy rate in Tibet has gone down from 95 per cent in the 1950s to 42 per cent in 2000. It has modern schools, universities, engineering and medical colleges, modern hospitals, freeways, supermarkets, fast food restaurants, mobile stores and apartment buildings. The capital Lhasa is like any other modern city.
    While the economic growth in the rest of China has slowed down to about 7 per cent, Tibet has had a 10 per cent growth rate in the last two decades.
    Tibet has huge mineral wealth, which was only awaiting Chinese technology to be tapped. Nowadays, it has numerous hydro and solar power plants and industries running with Chinese help.
    Tibetan literature is flourishing, contrary to claims that the Chinese want to crush Tibetan culture.
    Of course, now the lamas cannot treat their people as slaves.
    The so-called ‘government-in-exile’, of which Lobsang Sangay claims to be the President, is a fake organisation, funded by foreign countries. They only want to restore the feudal Tibet, ruled by the reactionary lamas, something which will never happen.
    The writer is a former judge of the Supreme Court of India

  15. It is all over the Indian media how the Dalai Lama insulted Prime Minister Pandit Nehru. How dare the Dalai Lama insult the very person who allowed him and his people to come to India in 1959 and grow fat and build their golden temples TAX FREE.

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: 2MB 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:4,410,772