dorjeshugden.com
About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: beggar on March 07, 2012, 06:49:31 PM
-
Came across a great article today about a Mongolian Gelugpa Lama, Noyon Tulku, who was apparently very well known for blending Nyingma practices with his Gelugpa meditations. He wasn't just any Lama, but apparently, very well known throughout Mongolia who became somewhat of a national hero. He was also known for being a contemporary of the 5th Dalai Lama, and the head Lama of Mongolia, Jetsun Dampa.
See the article here: http://www.glennmullin.com/new/mongolia_projects_00012.php (http://www.glennmullin.com/new/mongolia_projects_00012.php)
This blending of practices is not unusual in the highest lamas across all sects. The biographies of high Lamas, such as Trijang Rinpoche also indicate the great harmony between the sects, with Nyingmpas going to make offerings, pay homage and even receive initiations and teachings from Gelugpa lamas - and vice versa.
At our stage, mixing traditions and teachings may not be beneficial. It could even be detrimental, destabilising and confusing for the average practitioner, but definitely for Lamas of such a high level, they are able to combine teachings across sects and find no conflict nor problem. The frequent accusation launched against Gelugpa practitioners (or Dorje Shugden practitioners in particular) for being sectarian is very much untrue. You need only study the biographies of such Lamas like this respected teacher, Noyon Tulku to see this.
-
Based on my understanding, Lama Tsongkhapa spent his entire lifetime studying, memorizing, meditating, practicing the teachings from all schools of Buddhism present in Tibet. From his practice, He refined the teachings based on the realizations which dawned upon him and passed down these teachings in order to preserve them from deteoriating further.
The Gelug school of Buddhism was of course founded from the manifold teachings of this great master. Being the synthesis of the teachings from all different valid Buddhist schools of thought in Tibet, the Gelugs have had great amount of respect for other schools due to their kindness of these schools having preserved the teachings until present day. What needs to be understood is that masters of our time who holds these teachings and are able to disemminate teachings based on their realizations which is applicable to our lives today.
Maybe it is not at our level to study both these teachings for we do not have the capacity to do so. What we really need to do is to focus on what we're taught and progress from it.
I took a read on this Lama's works. Indeed the communist occupation made it destructive for Buddhism and all its schools. It's a pain to read what had happened. On the bright side, though it may be a hard thing to accept by the Tibetans is that Buddhism is flourishing all over the world now from this incident.
-
Well, I think this has been discussed many times over regarding sectarianism of the Gelugpas. I don't think it is sectarian when a practitioner focuses on one's own lineage. I personally find the Gelug lineage to be a vast tradition with teachings possessing innumerable qualities that would bring one directly towards enlightenment at a vast speed. That is already enough for any practitioner.
However, I can't even begin to fathom the mind of High Tulkus who's intentions is so vast. For them to mix traditions, they must have intentions that is beyond our understanding. However, that is not beneficial for ordinary practitioners as their faith is not grounded and their knowledge of the Dharma is not enough to discern the subtleties of the teachings. Therefore, Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche chastise those that mix the teachings.
-
A friend who is from the Nyingma lineage was warned by his Lama to beware of the Gelugpas.
When I pressed for an explaination on this, he said this is all due to the mixing of politics and religion by the head of the Gelug tradition i.e. HH Dalai Lama.
Historically, DL had used his political power to suppress other lineages as well as taking over the ownership of land and properties from other sects.
I found it ironic that the current DL uses the non sectarian reason to ban his own lineage dharmapala practice, so anyone care to share your view on the following -
Is it DL's political power OR Dorje Shugden that led to the 'sectarianism' issue as claimed by DL and other lineage lamas ?
-
A friend who is from the Nyingma lineage was warned by his Lama to beware of the Gelugpas.
...
Historically, DL had used his political power to suppress other lineages as well as taking over the ownership of land and properties from other sects.
But, you see, as HHDL is a Lama, he therefore must be correct and without faults, so why do the Nyingmapas whine? Whatever the HHDL did to them, was good for them! Why cannot they see that? It is so selfevident.
;)
-
Being sectarian is not practicing your school of Buddhism exclusively. Being sectarian is denegrading other sects and discouraging others from joining.
Tsongkapa's view of Madhyamika may be very quick to gain attainments, perhaps faster than others, but that does not mean other views cannot gain you the attainments of emptiness. It's a matter of applicability according to time, place and presentation of the teachings in accordance with the karmic disposition of the individuals.
-
Being sectarian is not practicing your school of Buddhism exclusively. Being sectarian is denegrading other sects and discouraging others from joining.
Tsongkapa's view of Madhyamika may be very quick to gain attainments, perhaps faster than others, but that does not mean other views cannot gain you the attainments of emptiness. It's a matter of applicability according to time, place and presentation of the teachings in accordance with the karmic disposition of the individuals.
Thank you Thaimonk for this post.
My sect is THE BEST, it really is THE BEST.
I can say that without being sectarian. Why? because when I say it is the best, it does not mean that it is the best for everyone at this point of time.
If I was to think that a sect is the best in the absolute, it would be revealing a mind of duality seeing a set of teachings as an independent object that can be compared with other sets of teachings separately independent and "existing" on their own and then comparing them as distinct objects. That is a wrong view, for nothing exists that way. Nothing.
A set of teaching, or a sect is relevant to beings according to the karmic disposition of the individuals, as Thaimonk explained, and it ceases to exist as it is perceived if the perceiver's karma changes.
So I say, my sect IS THE BEST. This is not derogatory at all. I think this to myself, for if it is not the best, then what i am doing here???? I do not say to OTHERS, my sect is THE BEST with the mindset of putting their sect down and feeling SUPERIOR... If I say this, if I think like this, then obviously I have not practiced well, and I prove that "MY" sect is not the best...
Maybe later, this life, next life, another set of teachings would be THE BEST for me, it is not contradictory.
If more could understand this, there would not be anymore inter-faith conflict. There could not possibly be conflicts between religions, between sects or sets of teachings. There would be more respect and tolerance, and understanding and harmony.
-
Being sectarian is not practicing your school of Buddhism exclusively. Being sectarian is denegrading other sects and discouraging others from joining.
Thanks for explaining the difference thaimonk. According to the bible that is Wikipedia:
Sectarianism, according to one definition, is bigotry, discrimination or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion, class, regional or factions of a political movement.
Someone should put this loud and clear for the Dalai Lamas followers to see that theyre the ones being sectarian by putting down our practice, whereas Dorje Shugden followers never put theirs down. It seems in this degenerate age, even the truth as spelled out in a dictionary can be bent!
-
And no, I dont believe Gelugpas are sectarian because the very basis of our practices are anti-sectarian when Tsongkhapa studied under masters of other traditions, to develop the Gelugpa sect. In any case, other sects are as protective of their practices as we are...and as Gelugpas, both the CTA and our vows dont allow us to speak negatively of or criticise other schools / lineages. After all, dont the CTA keep a tight grip on the Gelugpas, but allow others to freely criticise us?
-
The Gelugpas ARE NOT sectarian, Lama Tsongkhapa has received teachings from many elucidite masters from many different lineages, therefore Gelug lineage is a blend of the best of all lineages. As a matter of fact, practitioners of each traditions are supposed to master their practice well, so I dont think it is appropriate to call any traditions sectarian. Not logical.
I believe the reasons why Gelugpas attracted so much attention is mainly because of the Shugden issue started by HHDL. HHDL had been wearing two hats....spiritual and political hats for the Gelupas and the Tibetan people, as DL has condemned the DS practice, it gave an easy entry point for other sects to say the Gelupas are sectarian.
Like anywhere in the world, religion also cannot escape the scrutiny of juicy gossips, so Gelupas will be the center point for now.
-
A friend who is from the Nyingma lineage was warned by his Lama to beware of the Gelugpas.
When I pressed for an explaination on this, he said this is all due to the mixing of politics and religion by the head of the Gelug tradition i.e. HH Dalai Lama.
Historically, DL had used his political power to suppress other lineages as well as taking over the ownership of land and properties from other sects.
I found it ironic that the current DL uses the non sectarian reason to ban his own lineage dharmapala practice, so anyone care to share your view on the following -
Is it DL's political power OR Dorje Shugden that led to the 'sectarianism' issue as claimed by DL and other lineage lamas ?
This is exactly the kind of sectarianism that is pervasive and practiced throughout the other traditions and it is okay and acceptable because people cannot identify or see the veiled intentions behind such accusations. When the Gelugs came into power during the time of the 5th Dalai Lama, it cannot be denied that monasteries located in strategic parts of Tibet were forcibly converted to Gelug but those are for political reasons.
And now, with the ban, the other traditions have something new to blame and to use as a medium to promote their disdain and antagonism against the Gelugpas. They claim that Dorje Shugden is sectarian but there is no concrete proof that he is, and to prevent their followers from discovering the truth, they claim that even talking about Dorje Shugden is harmful and that they should not investigate further.
Now, that is what I call sectarianism…and in the process it also promotes blind faith. This is very sad indeed for their traditions as it will create the direct cause for them to degenerate and for their practitioners to never gain any attainments because they promote narrow-mindedness and sectarianism…how can anything grow from barren soil? It is neither logical nor possible.
The Gelug school takes most of its lineages from the Kagyu, Kadam and Sakya schools, so how can that be sectarian in any way? But in the case of Gelug, Tsongkhapa has developed an excellent system for everyone to follow that is complete, thus any additions may destroy this balance or system. If you want to bake a perfect cake you never mess with the receipt lest it turns out bad. This is also exact reason to why we should not mix up teachings.
-
Now, that is what I call sectarianism…and in the process it also promotes blind faith. This is very sad indeed for their traditions as it will create the direct cause for them to degenerate and for their practitioners to never gain any attainments because they promote narrow-mindedness and sectarianism…how can anything grow from barren soil? It is neither logical nor possible.
The Gelug school takes most of its lineages from the Kagyu, Kadam and Sakya schools, so how can that be sectarian in any way? But in the case of Gelug, Tsongkhapa has developed an excellent system for everyone to follow that is complete, thus any additions may destroy this balance or system. If you want to bake a perfect cake you never mess with the receipt lest it turns out bad. This is also exact reason to why we should not mix up teachings.
Wow Ensapa well said mate. Yes sectarianism and resulting blind faith contradicts the very basis of Buddhist teachings of an open mind. The Buddha himself said that if you see Buddha on the road, kill him. Many other lamas following from Shakyamuni have repeatedly said that nothing should be accepted without prior investigation.
Having an open mind means having a mind that does not reject. What anti-Shugden followers seem to do is reject off the cuff, just because someone else said so (even if the person doesnt make any sense!). Why all this fanaticism from the Tibetans for the Dalai Lamas teachings without actual investigation? Im not saying that the Dalai Lamas teachings are invalid. What Im saying is that it seems Tibetans just follow him for the sake of following him, without really appreciating what he can do for them ultimately...its not just about a Free Tibet yknow!
-
Wow Ensapa well said mate. Yes sectarianism and resulting blind faith contradicts the very basis of Buddhist teachings of an open mind. The Buddha himself said that if you see Buddha on the road, kill him. Many other lamas following from Shakyamuni have repeatedly said that nothing should be accepted without prior investigation.
Having an open mind means having a mind that does not reject. What anti-Shugden followers seem to do is reject off the cuff, just because someone else said so (even if the person doesnt make any sense!). Why all this fanaticism from the Tibetans for the Dalai Lamas teachings without actual investigation? Im not saying that the Dalai Lamas teachings are invalid. What Im saying is that it seems Tibetans just follow him for the sake of following him, without really appreciating what he can do for them ultimately...its not just about a Free Tibet yknow!
100% of the anti Dorje Shugden people do not seem to know what are they really up against. They don't even now the history of Dorje Shugden and his incarnation lineage. To acknowledge that Dorje Shugden as an evil spirit is also the same as acknowledging that every single tulku out there can and is potentially dangerous, wrong or evil. It cracks the foundations of the tulku system and renders it irrelevant.
The whole point of the tulku system is that we know that this person has great potential to benefit many people and that his credentials lies in what he has done in his previous lives to benefit many, and thus this person can be trusted to do something of such a great magnitude. Thus, tulkus are elevated to high status in the monasteries and are often sent by the monastery to teach everywhere and most of them even open their own centers with great success due to their great potential.
As we all know who Dorje Shugden's previous incarnations are, and all of them are great masters in their own right and have performed many great deeds as well. To say that the final result of someone who has done so many positive deeds is to become an evil spirit or a ghost would be saying that there is no guarantee that the Buddha's teachings will lead us to higher rebirths as even Buton Rinpoche, the person who compiled the Kangyur and Tengyur could end up as a spirit…and thus ineffective.
I guess many people have not really sit down and think what are they implying when they insist that Dorje Shugden is not enlightened. But that is really to be expected as people of this time prefer hearsay to study and investigation.
-
The word sectarian is just another label among all the other labels humans use to complicate ourselves. It would be really peaceful if humans learn to live with one another but I guess that would be next to impossible since samsara is everywhere and humans are just one of the inhabitants.
It would be easier to just say, "I am a Buddhist" rather than "I am a Buddhist of this sect" or "I am a Buddhist of this yana." This want of belonging is also prevalent in other spiritual beliefs/religions. Sad, huh?
-
To answer the question whether Gelug practitioners are sectarian, I would like to go back to the definition of what is sectarianism. Sectarianism, according to one definition, is bigotry, discrimination or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion, class, regional or factions of a political movement.
One choose a particular lineage because it suits one's disposition. In Tibetan Buddhism, one is encouraged to investigate prior to committing to any teachings and practice. If this pre-requisite is executed properly, then it can safely be said that one choose to enter the lineage because it suits one's disposition. There is nothing within the gelug teachings that encourage one not to respect and to hate other true religious denomination.
In that sense I don't think we are secterian
-
To answer the question whether Gelug practitioners are sectarian, I would like to go back to the definition of what is sectarianism. Sectarianism, according to one definition, is bigotry, discrimination or hatred arising from attaching importance to perceived differences between subdivisions within a group, such as between different denominations of a religion, class, regional or factions of a political movement.
One choose a particular lineage because it suits one's disposition. In Tibetan Buddhism, one is encouraged to investigate prior to committing to any teachings and practice. If this pre-requisite is executed properly, then it can safely be said that one choose to enter the lineage because it suits one's disposition. There is nothing within the gelug teachings that encourage one not to respect and to hate other true religious denomination.
In that sense I don't think we are secterian
Gelugpa was never sectarian from the start, so how can it be sectarian now? The sectarianism that is perceived of Gelugpas comes from nothing but pure ignorance and jealousy as the Gelugs are after all the fastest growing tradition compared to the other traditions. It is also the tradition with a very complete set of teachings from the rest of the traditions and a very solid and stable system in place to keep the teachings intact.
Now, why would people perceive exclusivity as sectarian? Mainly due to ignorance. Ignorance of how things work and also what sectarianism really is. There is also the popular belief that is prevalent these days that being non sectarian is to mix everything up together, and it is not sectarian because it shows that you are accepting of other people's tradition and teachings. Or rather, that is what people would like to believe.
So why is that belief a bad one? Because it causes people to not be stable and encourages people to mix things around. If you would not mash up instructions on how to bake a cake with the instructions on how to bake a pie, why would you want to do that with the Buddhist teachings? Every lineage itself has a system within that should not be touched or messed up with. Gelugpa is one of the lineages that are sensitive to being messed up as Tsongkhapa's system is already perfect.
Other traditions may not be exactly be too sensitive in this regard, but what applies to them may not apply to the Gelugs. There is definitely a very good reason why Jamgon Kongtrul did not include Gelug within the Rime movement: because Gelug is Rime by itself.
-
The Dalai Lama has composed a prayer praising various historical figures and lineages of Vajrayana from India and Tibet.Dalai Lama compose this,in short.
May all the teachings off the Buddhas of the land of snow
Flourish long into the future-the ten great pillars
And the chariots of the practice lineage,such as Shilje and the rest
All of them rich with their essential instructions.
May the lives of masters who uphold these teachings be secured and harmonious
May the sangha preserve this teachings from their study meditation and activity
May the world be filled with faithful individual intent on following these teachings
And long may the non sectarian teaching of the Buddha continue to flourish.
Within any tradition of Tibetan Buddhism they are many lineages and it's hard to say each monastery has a lineage.The Gelugpa tradition are not sectarian.
-
Gelug is not sectarian. Choosing to focus on one's own tradition while respecting the other traditions is not sectarian. In fact, those who are really sectarian are those who criticize Gelug an instill fear into people who want to seek out Gelug Lamas because they 'could be a bad one'. i dont see anything wrong with wanting to support my own center and i go sightseeing in other centers, but i dont have to join their puja sessions because i already have my own set to focus on.
-
Great posts.
According to various dictionary definitions of the word 'sectarian', it means being part of a sect or strictly adhering to the doctrines of a particular sect.
So interesting: it appears the Gelug school is both sectarian and non-sectarian. By adhering to the doctrines transmitted within the lineage it is sectarian. By being a combination of many lineages it is non-sectarian.
I wonder at what point (and how) the word 'sectarian' started being used to describe a person who criticizes other religions and lineages? I certainly haven't read all the dictionaries in the world..maybe its in one of the sub-definitions somewhere!
-
Great posts.
According to various dictionary definitions of the word 'sectarian', it means being part of a sect or strictly adhering to the doctrines of a particular sect.
So interesting: it appears the Gelug school is both sectarian and non-sectarian. By adhering to the doctrines transmitted within the lineage it is sectarian. By being a combination of many lineages it is non-sectarian.
I wonder at what point (and how) the word 'sectarian' started being used to describe a person who criticizes other religions and lineages? I certainly haven't read all the dictionaries in the world..maybe its in one of the sub-definitions somewhere!
In a non-general term, being sectarian means promoting only your own tradition and putting down the rest. the thing is this: why is it wrong for someone to focus only on a tradition of their choice and not branch out to the rest of the traditions? If I like vanilla flavored ice cream and i stick to my favorite flavor everywhere i go, does it make me sectarian because i dont choose the other flavors? If I am sectarian by doing so then yes. But in society's term of being sectarian it means criticizing other traditions in favor of your own. In that sense, Gelugpa is just Gelugpa. I dont see what it is as being sectarian at all.
-
Based on my understanding, Lama Tsongkhapa spent his entire lifetime studying, memorizing, meditating, practicing the teachings from all schools of Buddhism present in Tibet. From his practice, He refined the teachings based on the realizations which dawned upon him and passed down these teachings in order to preserve them from deteoriating further.
Based on the above mentioned... hence isn't Gelug the synthesis or essence of every single school/sect what ever you wish to label it. Basically because Lama Tsongkhapa took teaching from all 3 schools... does not already state the obvious Gelug is a combination of all 3 hence what sectarian???
Actually this makes me rejoice even more to know that our lineage teachings are essence of the 3 schools, taking of the best of the best teachings and combining to get the best results... wow Lama Tsongkhapa is super genius and probably knows during this degenerate times we lazy people need it lol :) I definitely think the concept of Gelug being sectarian is totally off... if anything it is a harmonious creation of the three which gave birth to Gelug - how beautiful indeed!
-
Being sectarian is not practicing your school of Buddhism exclusively. Being sectarian is denegrading other sects and discouraging others from joining.
Tsongkapa's view of Madhyamika may be very quick to gain attainments, perhaps faster than others, but that does not mean other views cannot gain you the attainments of emptiness. It's a matter of applicability according to time, place and presentation of the teachings in accordance with the karmic disposition of the individuals.
Of all the posts, I love this post the most. that really defines what being sectarian is all about and why is it imperative that people realize what being sectarian really is. Being sectarian is praising one's own tradition and degrading the other traditions. Tsongkhapa's teachings are the quickest path for our time because of how he presented the teachings. Tsongkhapa did not degrade the other traditions, he only told his students to focus on his methods, but respect everyone else.
-
Yes, that is the type of definition that is commonly used to discuss the topic. I was just pointing out that in all the dictionaries I've come across, the definitions say nothing whatsoever about bigotry or the criticism of other sects or factions. They simply state that it means to be part of a sect or a strict adherent of the doctrines of a particular sect. So, when I heard this new definition and use then looked up the word in the dictionary, it was a little confusing.
-
Yes, that is the type of definition that is commonly used to discuss the topic. I was just pointing out that in all the dictionaries I've come across, the definitions say nothing whatsoever about bigotry or the criticism of other sects or factions. They simply state that it means to be part of a sect or a strict adherent of the doctrines of a particular sect. So, when I heard this new definition and use then looked up the word in the dictionary, it was a little confusing.
Sometimes dictionaries may not be accurate in more ways than one and not every definition would actually follow the dictionary 's definition but what most people think of what it is. Dictionaries are only to look up words and that they are interpreted based on a more robotic or mechanical way of interpreting the words, so it may or may not be something that is true. Dictionaries do not represent what people really think about a certain subject so why not go with the definition that people think?