dorjeshugden.com
About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: theloneranger on June 02, 2008, 05:20:57 PM
-
i found this letter under the new article that appeared on the internationalist website that i posted today, my question is to all of you out there is:-
Q. Should we be also posting information about the karmapa/panchen lama controversery? This would also show the press that the Dalai Lama is not just interferring in Shugden affairs but also meddling in the spiritial affairs of other schools within tibetan buddhism as well. Maybe the karmapa controversery can be detailed on WSS, dorjeshugden.com and wisdombuddha websites. It's just an idea, what are your thoughts? I feel it is important to throw this issue in the ballpark as well! This will show the media his full range of political meddling!
on blog of internationalist:-
Not just in Europe.
His Eminence Gangchen Rinpoche is a faithful follower of Dorje Shugden, just like Dalai Lama's own teachers Trijang Rinpoche and Pabonkhapa Rinpoche.
For an alternative view of the controversy go to His Eminence's website here:
http://dharmadhatu.web-log.nl/dharmadhatu/2008/05/a-very-devoted.html
Or you could try the Swiss documentary on the issue from 1998:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5sOm-uQH9Y
Or the New Internationalist's own report on the issue from a few years back:
http://www.newint.org/issue304/update.htm
As far as religion is concerned, the Dalai Lama, as an initiated Buddhist monk, trashed his belief by violating the Buddhist doctrine, trampling the religious rules and raped the religious passion of Tibetans. He picked the reincarnation for the Panchen Lama without following the official procedure, chose a foreign national for a living Buddha, and chose several reincarnations for one living Buddha in total disregard of relevant rules followed in Tibet for centuries. This so-called "protector of human rights" and "guardian of religious freedom" persecuted members of other sects within the Tibetan Buddhist community to purge those who disagreed with his devious ways. As well as his acts against the Dorje Shugden practitioners, he has angered the Sharmapa and caused a split in the Kagyu school by agreeing with the Chinese who should be next Karmapa, when it was by tradition the Sharmapa who should choose:
The Shamar Rinpoche has this to say about the Dalai Lama:
"But if His Holiness is merely using his immense popularity in the Himalayas, in India , and around the world in an attempt to usurp control over the Karmapa Labrang, then I must respectfully reject his opinion about Rumtek. I realize that HH Dalai Lama wants to unite the Tibetan people to work for their freedom. But that is no reason to trample on the human rights and religious freedom of Buddhist believers. As our cause is just, so we should respect human rights in all situations, not only when it is convenient for us to do so.
All leaders, no matter how virtuous, must have limits on their power. Many popular, charismatic leaders in the past have used popularity and prestige to set themselves up as dictators. Perhaps these leaders had good intentions and hoped that by increasing their own power they could accomplish more good in the world. But in the end, absolute rule has always led to suffering.
I hope and pray that His Holiness will not act like such a dictator, and that he will not use mass support to claim authority over the Karmapa that he does not have and to trample the religious freedom of Karma Kagyu believers."
http://www.karmapa-issue.org/politics/hhshamarpa_hhdalailama.htm
Shamar Rinpoche's response to the attack by Dalai Lama supporter Robert Thurman:
http://www.karmapa-issue.org/news/open_letter_thurman.htm
Submitted by Andrew (not verified) on May 30, 2008 - 10:50pm.
-
actually i've just come across these websites:-
http://www.karmapa-issue.org/
http://www.diamondway-buddhism-university.org/KarmapaControversy.htm
can we have links to these websites on dorjeshugden.com?
-
yes, i'm not sure about having this on the main WBDS website page as we should leave it to the Karmapas to fight their battles, but I think it is worthy material for adding to the blog (which will get seen).
-
i thought the letter from Shamar Rimpoche to Robert Thurman was written with great wisdom and clarity. I picked an excerpt from the letter and i have underlined some essential points he makes, especially regarding how the Dalai Lama and the government is trying to take control over the four schools of Tibetan Buddhist, i recommend everyone read the letter:-
excerpt from Letter to Robert A. F. Thurman
by Shamar Rinpoche
Here I agree with you completely. However much you are concerned by this issue - as you clearly are - I'm sure you can be sympathetic to how much more concerned I am. Traditionally, the Shamarpas lead the Karma Kagyu lineage in concert with the Karmapas. This means that I have the responsibility to protect the Karma Kagyu lineage. Please think about how strongly you feel, then put yourself in my shoes for a moment, and imagine how important it is to me to protect the autonomy of the Karma Kagyu.
I understand that you support H.H. Dalai Lama one hundred percent and support completely the Gelukpa school which is the only school you are devoted to. The attempt to give full authority over the four schools to H.H. Dalai Lama, however, cannot be supported and indeed does not have the support of any of the other schools.
Now I will move away from your letter and present you with a question for reflection: if you use the political situation at the time of the 10th Karmapa to prove that the Dalai Lamas have the authority to recognize the Karmapas, you should also consider that from the time of the Great 5th Dalai Lama it has been obligatory that the reincarnations of the Dalai Lamas be approved by the Emperors of China. Setting the precedent that you attempt to do here, how will you prevent in the future, the Chinese government from claiming its historical right to recognize the Dalai Lamas?
The heads of the Karma Kagyu, Drikung Kagyu, Nyingma and Sakya lineages have never required the approval of either the leaders of China or the Dalai Lamas. The precedent you are setting here will pave the way for the collapse of every school of Tibetan Buddhism, Gelukpas included. Please consider the long-term effects.
The general outrage surrounding the whole Karmapa controversy is starting to resemble the howling of crafty coyotes so enthralled by their hunt that nobody can hear the soft voice of a lamb trying to sound a warning. Situ Rinpoche totally failed to prove the so-called prediction letter to be authentic, yet still this letter is waved around by many of his collaborators as some kind of authentic proof.
-
yes, i'm not sure about having this on the main WBDS website page as we should leave it to the Karmapas to fight their battles, but I think it is worthy material for adding to the blog (which will get seen).
Yes please add to the wisdombuddha blog, i think this is important for the media to see.
-
It has been added to the blogspot :)
http://wisdombuddhadorjeshugden.blogspot.com/
-
I agree with you TK. We need to stay on topic with our discussion. I think it can be helpful this one to show that the Dalai Lama has interfered with other traditions and to show that we are non-sectarian.
-
WE AGREE WITH TRINLEY KALSANG. WE'VE EARLIER POSTED H.E. SHAMAR RINPOCHE'S LETTER IN A SECONDARY CONTEXT, BUT LET US FOCUS ON OUR PRIMARY SUBJECT.
ON THAT NOTE, ANY NEGATIVE COMMENTS ON OTHER RELIGIOUS TRADITIONS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED ON THIS FORUM ANYMORE, BE THEY DIRECT OR INDIRECT. THIS IS SIMPLY BENEATH COMMON HUMAN SENSE.
-
As for myself, i've just read the below and it has broken my heart and changed my mind. I feel if we would hope to help any kind of authentic Buddhadharma to prevail in the future - and i mean that completely regardless of Hinayana, Mahayana, Vajrayana and the various forms and lineages therein - we should engage in long-term projects of study and research to completely lay open the damage caused by mixing spirituality with any kind of politics, and possibly thereby make a humble contribution to enhancing the self-responsibility of future Dharma aspirants; to help restoring this most basic tenet of Buddhism - "Don't believe it because i said so - check for yourself."
In that sense, the Karmapa 'controversy' is as much part of this discussion as the Dorje Shugden 'controversy'. By that i don't mean heaping up more three-line comments such as "I knew it! See - Dalai Lama bad..." etc, but serious reading, research, assembling materials and presenting them modeled on historic research, not silly battles between adherents of differing views.
This involves work and patience. There is a growing tendency noticeable here of thinking if only the Dalai Lama would change his stance we would all be in Nirvana... i don't believe this for a minute.
The Dalai Lama or any other political leader is part of a political system and as that temporary and interchangeable. It is the human tendency of seeking security and identity in systems that is the root of the problem, and its fruit is that we allow political systems to take over our lives, mundane and spiritual.
The Dalai Lama (in this case) as a symptom or symbol of this will disappear automatically once his lifespan is exhausted, yet the tendencies in our own minds to look for group-identities - born from the deep recognition that we are nothing tangible anyway and the fear resulting from it - will be exactly as before.
I think it would be good to look inside and think about this for a long minute.
... and here the quote from the website THE KARMAPA CONFLICT under the topic POLITICS.
The sentence that blew my mind is marked red.
An Open Letter
From INTERNATIONAL KARMA KAGYU ORGANISATION
Extracts from An Open letter to His Holiness the Dalai Lama
Kathmandu, 17th March 2001
In 1961 the Tibetan government in exile proposed to merge the four Tibetan schools into one religious body headed by Your Holiness. This policy inflicted serious spiritual suffering on much of the Tibetan exile community. Rallying behind Karmapa's authority, thirteen Tibetan settlements challenged the Exile Government's plan and as a consequence the whole scheme was abandoned. Later in the seventies Karmapa came under blame because he had chosen to defend the autonomy of the three other lineages….
In July 2000, Your Holiness' involvement in the matter went even further. Your Holiness informed H.H. Shamar Rinpoche in writing that even if an authentic prediction from the 16th Karmapa was found and presented, it would not sway your insistence that Urgyen Trinley is the Throneholder-Karmapa. By doing so Your Holiness would retrospectively deprive the undisputed 16th Karmapa of his right to determine his own reincarnation. Such a preposterous claim goes against the Karma Kagyu tradition and sets the stage for a take-over of the Karma Kagyu School by Your Holiness' School and Government.
Up until Your Holiness' interference in 1992, no other Dalai Lama has ever played a role in the recognition of a genuine Karmapa. As Your Holiness well knows, the Karmapa incarnations precede the Dalai Lama line by over three hundred years. There is no historical precedent for Your Holiness' current involvement.
We highly respect and support Your Holiness' struggle for the welfare and freedom of the Tibetan people. We therefore request you to apply the same goodwill in the case of the Karmapa controversy. For the sake of the integrity of our lineage, we urge Your Holiness to gracefully bow out of this internal conflict of the Karma Kagyu School. We also ask for Your Holiness' support regarding our view that the whole world will benefit by preserving the rich diversity of all four schools, including the Karma Kagyu.We sincerely make wishes for Your Holiness' long life and continued health. Most respectfully, for and on behalf of all delegates to the International Karma Kagyu Conference
H.H. Luehrs (Chairman)
Later Comments from the Sharmapa
“I believe that the Karma Kagyu should be able to choose its own spiritual leader in the traditional way,” Shamar told his students. “Ogyen Trinley was not chosen in the traditional way, but through political interference from the Tibetan exile government, the government of China and many others. All the other religious schools of Tibet are able to choose their leaders on their own. Why can’t we choose ours? His Holiness Dalai Lama is putting politics before religion in this case.
“Because his devotees in foreign countries are not in the habit of questioning his actions, they blindly support His Holiness Dalai Lama in this case. I call such followers ‘package believers.’ They follow the Dalai Lama because he is a Buddhist teacher and leader of Tibetans, so that is all they need to know. They just accept the whole package without investigating for themselves whether what His Holiness does is really right in this case. For example, if I had a house, and the Dalai Lama wanted to take it for himself, these package believers among his devotees would say that I am wrong to protect my property or even to complain, and that he is right to take it.
“I understand when Tibetans feel this way; their livelihood may depend on being on good terms with the Tibetan exile administration in India. Maybe they would lose their job if they questioned the Dalai Lama’s right to choose the Karmapa. But for people around the world, this is an unhealthy development in Buddhism. If one man is so admired around the world that he can do anything he wants without fair scrutiny, then he is effectively a dictator. There is no oversight. And, if the Karma Kagyu school cannot choose its own leader, does this set a precedent for the other religious schools of Tibet? Will the Dalai Lama choose their leaders too?
Dharma is about thinking for yourself. It is not about automatically following a teacher in all things, no matter how respected that teacher may be. More than anyone else, Buddhists should respect other people’s rights—their human rights and their religious freedom.”
The Shamar Rinpoche also says elsewhere: "But if His Holiness is merely using his immense popularity in the Himalayas, in India , and around the world in an attempt to usurp control over the Karmapa Labrang, then I must respectfully reject his opinion about Rumtek. I realize that HH Dalai Lama wants to unite the Tibetan people to work for their freedom. But that is no reason to trample on the human rights and religious freedom of Buddhist believers. As our cause is just, so we should respect human rights in all situations, not only when it is convenient for us to do so.
All leaders, no matter how virtuous, must have limits on their power. Many popular, charismatic leaders in the past have used popularity and prestige to set themselves up as dictators. Perhaps these leaders had good intentions and hoped that by increasing their own power they could accomplish more good in the world. But in the end, absolute rule has always led to suffering.I hope and pray that His Holiness will not act like such a dictator, and that he will not use mass support to claim authority over the Karmapa that he does not have and to trample the religious freedom of Karma Kagyu believers."
-
Quoted from the same website (paragraph marked red by me):
January, 2007 His Holiness Shamarpa Rimpoche met His Holiness Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche - Revised
Recently, on January 9, 2007, His Holiness Shamarpa Rinpoche met His Holiness Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche at 10 a.m. in the Oberoi Intercontinental Hotel at New Delhi, India.
In 2005, while Shamarpa Rinpoche was teaching in Hong Kong, he received a phone call from H.H. Drigung Chetsang Rinpoche. During the conversation, Drigung Chetsang Rinpoche mentioned to Shamar Rinpoche that, during his recent meeting with Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche at Bodh Gaya, Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche had requested him to arrange a personal meeting with Shamar Rinpoche. Drigung Chetsang Rinpoche expressed that if this meeting between Shamar Rinpoche and Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche could take place, it would bring positive results for everyone.
Shamar Rinpoche himself was open to this meeting. However, he told Drigung Chetsang Rinpoche that he could not decide about the meeting at that very moment. He wished to wait until he was back in India to give his reply.
After he arrived in India, Shamar Rinpoche sent a written letter to Drigung Chetsang Rinpoche thanking him for conveying the message from Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche. He also mentioned that the meeting with Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche was not possible at that time. The reason was because in the past, some corrupt politicians in Sikkim have misused the name of Orgyen Trinley, and collaborated with China. As a result, their actions have greatly aggravated the government of India. Therefore, for Shamar Rinpoche to meet with Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche at that time would invite unwarranted suspicions from the India government upon himself.
Early this year, Venerable Chokyi Nyima of Ka Nying Shedrub Ling Monastery in Nepal met Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche at Bodh Gaya. Once again Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche mentioned his desire to meet Shamar Rinpoche and requested Chokyi Nyima to arrange a personal meeting with Shamar Rinpoche. This time, Shamar Rinpoche, respecting Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche’s invitation, proceeded to arrange a time to meet.
During the meeting, I observed and understood that clearly, Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche’s objective in meeting with Shamar Rinpoche was not because he was eager to go to Rumtek Monastery, nor was it to gain control of the monastery. Rather, it appears that Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche, who is now an adult, has come to realize that some of his own people, the so-called fighters on his behalf, are actually misusing his name and position for their own selfish goals. Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche expressed his strong distaste at their negative activities, which have violated the peace in the dharma communities.
At the same time, Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche recognized that it was important to meet Shamar Rinpoche. The two of them working together, would be able to restore peace to the dharma communities.
Therefore, I ask every one of you to please guard against those people who have created, and are still creating the negative obstacles in the dharma communities. I request each and every well-wisher to please support both Shamar Rinpoche, and Orgyen Trinley Rinpoche to help fulfill their wishes to restore harmony among the dharma followers. Please give them your support not through feelings of the heart, but by sound judgment of the overall situation.
Dawa Tsering, Administration of His Holiness Shamarpa Rimpoche, March 19, 2007.
-
Letter to H.H. the Dalai Lama by Shamar Rinpoche
Date: 20.06.00
Your Holiness,
The controversy of the two Karmapas has caused considerable dissension within Tibetan Buddhism, not to mention confusion in the outside world. In this letter, I humbly explain the reason for my position in the matter and respectfully propose a convenient way to solve the problem that should be satisfactory to all concerned.
Shamar Rinpoche
In late 1991 and early 1992, Situ Rinpoche and the government of the People’s Republic of China jointly selected Urgyen Trinley to be installed at the Tshurphu Monastery in Tibet as the Karmapa. In March 1992, the Chinese government sent Situ Rinpoche to India for the purpose of inviting me and some other Rinpoches to attend the ceremony. I was informed of this subsequently by the Chinese embassy.
Because Situ realized that I would not accept this invitation, he did not actually invite me. Instead, he met with me and produced a suspicious letter reputedly conveying the 16th Karmapa’s instructions for finding his reincarnation. Afterwards he used this letter to deceive Your Holiness and to confuse the Karma Kagyu lamas. In addition to this, he curried the favor of Sikkimese politicians in order to persuade the government of Sikkim to support the Chinese decision to recognize Urgyen Trinley as the Karmapa.
In June 1992, the Chinese government officially announced the recognition of Urgyen Trinley. Your Holiness formally consented to this decision. Your consent however, did not amount to a "recognition" of Urgyen Trinley as the genuine Karmapa. Because I was never consulted nor informed beforehand of the identification of Urgyen Trinley as should have happened according to Karma Kagyu religious customs, there was little that I could do about this fait accompli. I tacitly accepted Urgyen Trinley as a Karmapa in Tibet. Nonetheless, because I wanted to maintain the spiritual purity of the Karma Kagyu lineage, I continued my search for the genuine Karmapa.
Page Two
As you know, the Karmapa and the Shamarpa for centuries have alternated in exercising authority over the Karma Kagyu. In 1994, I alone identified and recognized Thaye Dorje according to traditional spiritual practices, and I arranged for his and his family’s escape from Tibet. His recognition did not directly or indirectly involve any intervention by the Chinese government.
Ever since the recognition of two different Karmapas by different leaders of the Karma Kagyu School, there has been a spiraling series of charges and countercharges. After Urgyen Trinley escaped from Tibet to India, the controversy has escalated, and the government of India, which is the host of many Tibetans, has been placed in a difficult bind.
Previously, you have stated that there can be more than one Karmapa. I accept this position and accordingly as that you publicly state that you accept both Urgyen Trinley and Thaye Dorje as Karmapas. If you issue such a statement, I will follow suit.
The Tshurphu Monastery has been and should remain the legitimate and sole seat of the Karmapa, just as the Potala Palace is your seat. Urgyen Trinley was installed in Tshurphu, and so this naturally should continue to be his seat. Thaye Dorje will forever renounce any right to this seat in Tibet. In return, I propose that he be publicly supported by you as the Karmapa for India and head of monasteries there, including Rumtek.
I humbly pray that you see the wisdom of this compromise and accept it.
Yours respectfully
The Shamarpa
-
AN OPEN LETTER:
Reply to Tashi Wangdi's statement
Regarding the Karmapa issue
Date: 20.08.01
We refer to Mr Tashi Wangdi's (minister of religious and cultural affairs, exiled Tibetan government) statement in the Times of India on 14th of August, 2001. We respectfully disagree with his statement, which says that "there should be no controversy at all about the 17th Karmapa and head of the Kagyu sect, Urgyen Trinley Dorje."
We disagree with it because of the pretension the Tibetan exiled government can brush aside any contention or opposition created as a result of its machinations. We oppose it because it seeks to accuse both Thaye Dorje and Dawa Sangpo of duplicity and sham while offering no proof or explanation as would be prudent and appropriate in a pronouncement of this importance.
In consequence to statements such as this, a climate of suspicion and confusion has been created and perpetuated by the exiled government. On numerous occasions we are forced to make corrective statements to the exiled government's statements in order to clarify our positions, statements that are open to verification any time.
With regard to Dawa Sangpo, he is recognised and supported by the Sikkimese Sharpa community as the Karmapa. Although Mr. Wangdi equates Dawa Sangpo with Thaye Dorje, he obviously neglects to mention an important point of reference that would have made this equation invalid, namely: that Dawa Sangpo's
position is at variance with the tradition of the school to which this
particular community claims he belongs, i.e. to-date, he has not been recognised or accepted by either Shamar Rinpoche or Situ Rinpoche according to tradition.
If history means anything at all, Mr Wangdi has conveniently dispensed with it by taking the Karmapa's recognition completely out of context by limiting it to a mere question of the 'prediction letter'. But if tradition is any guide for human conduct, then it is worthwhile for Mr. Wangdi to note that, by Karma Kagyupa tradition, the Shamarpas have always been responsible for
the recognition or enthronement of the historical Karmapas: only when the Shamarpa is indisposed would Situ Rinpoche step in to fill the gap. Because of Mr Wangdi's statement and limited, albeit chosen perspective, it is appropriate to remind the reader that the history of Karma Kagyu tradition can be freely verified by anyone interested: all he or she needs to do is to refer to any of the major reference libraries in the USA, China, the Himalayan countries or India.
But, since Mr Wangdi has elected to narrow down the reincarnation issue to the 'prediction letter', at the expense of the Dalai Lama's perceived authority, one might add, it would be pertinent to recall the Tibetan exiled government's earlier insistence on the Dalai Lama's final word on the Karmapa issue. Is the complexity of reincarnation issues too much for Mr. Wangdi? His has been such a patchwork and arbitrary presentation of 'the relevant facts' that one is tempted to wonder if the minister is just incompetent in his job or he has another agenda. In any case taking a broader view of the complex
intertwining of Tibetan politics and religion might provide a better insight about the purpose and activities of the exiled government and, by implication, its bold disregard of public perception whenever it changes tack to suit its convenience.
One possible account is that: As the majority of Tibetan youths outside Tibet grows up in India and Himalayas, in a secular environment and goes to schools run by the exiled government, the traditional attachment to the identities respectively of the four religious schools is now replaced by a single national Tibetan identity represented almost exclusively by the Dalai Lama
and his exiled government, to the extent that the time-honoured distinctions of the Four Schools are no longer relevant in their lives.
The other possible account is: As idealistic and western disciples and followers of the Dalai Lama have now fatefully wedded their utopia to a distant Tibet and Tibetans dispossessed of their country, the majority of westerners would gladly identify the ideal of compassion and enlightenment in Tibetan Buddhism with Tibetan freedom and the Tibetans' 'natural' goodness. And since the Dalai Lama would have been an important head of state as well as a 'sacred' Buddhist monk (if Tibet were independent), westerners would also tend to regard the Dalai Lama implicitly, like Popes used to be, as supreme, infallible and perfect.
This then explains the boldness of the exiled government's ability and success to always put itself beyond the reach of critical examination. It is unfortunate that this should be allowed to happen at all, especially in face of the fact that the US Library of Congress had spent millions of dollars in past decades to gather and purchase extensive collections of Tibetan texts, both religious and secular, from India and Tibet, and deposited them in libraries across the country: Yet today, these ancient documents are just so
much 'waste paper', because when it is time to study these records for better understanding of current Tibetan problems, few if any have taken the trouble to do it.
Lastly we are obliged to correct Mr. Wangdi's statement which, apparently, refers to our "allegations that the Dalai Lama was supporting Urgyen Trinley Dorje" was " 'due to financial reason' ", etc. We never said that the Dalai Lama's support of Urgyen Trinley was due to financial reasons. But we did say that it was for political reasons that the Dalai Lama supported Urgyen Trinley as the Karmapa incarnation, and that it was completely out of character with our Karma Kagyu tradition.
Nonetheless, now that Mr. Wangdi, as minister of religion and cultural affairs, has changed tack again by saying that "a Karmapa is always chosen by the previous Karmapa, and according to a letter written by the 16th Karmapa¦.",etc., we will perhaps agree with him. To give him the benefit of the doubt, his statement appears to be in agreement with our tradition. Adherence to tradition is what we have repeatedly demanded in the past, namely:
1) if there is no letter of prediction, then the principal leader or leaders of the Karma Kagyu school will recognise or approve, as the case may be, the new Karmapa;
2) if, however, there is a letter of prediction, then the new incarnation should be recognised in accordance with the letter's instructions.
If the letter of prediction produced by Situ Rinpoche in 1992 is proven to be genuine, we would follow it without question to the end, and no doubt the Karmapa controversy would then be resolved peacefully. In any case we should be most appreciative if the exiled government would refrain from interfering further with our Karma Kagyu School. We should be most appreciative if the exiled government would respect our rights to our own affairs, and not to change the direction or the tone of dialogue again.
International Karma Kagyu Organisation
15 August, 2001
Karma Wangshuk
-
From Tenzin Chogyal
Examining the Death of Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche
Date: May 13, 2004
Twelve years have passed since Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche was killed in a car accident. Since that time, a great many details surrounding the tragic event have come to be known. Today, it is important that information surrounding Jamgon Rinpoche's death be reviewed in light of all the known facts.
Mick Brown, in his recently released book The Dance of Seventeen Lives by Bloomsbury, and Lea Terhune, in Karmapa The Politics of Reincarnation by Wisdom Publications, have both written inaccurate and biased stories about the recognition of the 17th Karmapa. Neither author gives a truthful account of the subject nor explores opposing sides to the story. Lea Terhune wrote her volume under Situ Rinpoche's direct supervision. In fact, Lea Terhune was Situ Rinpoche's personal secretary and student for many years. Mick Brown wrote his book after Mr. Tashi Wangdu, a minister within the Tibetan Government in Exile, approached Bloomsbury Publishing to take on the project. Both authors base their case on longstanding misinformation perpetuated by both Situ Rinpoche and Gyaltsab Rinpoche. Each book acts in an undisguised fashion as a vehicle to slander and defame Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche, both nephews of H.H. the late 16th Karmapa.
The allegations put forth in these books come twelve years after the fact. The entire story involves a complex Tibetan political intrigue that has been largely ignored by the American press. Both authors rely on the Western person's naiveté in the matter and steer the reader solely towards one side of the story.
In his book, Brown spins the story about Jamgon Rinpoche's death. On page 143, he writes, “Indeed, so shocking- so inconceivable- was Jamgon's death that it was hard to believe that it was an accident. What possible forces of karma could have made it so? Rumors quickly began to multiply. Photographs showed that the engine had been found some thirty yards away from the crashed car, suggesting that the engine had been catapulted from the car, as if by an explosion. The soles of Jamgon's feet were said to be scorched. On the day before the accident, the car had been serviced by mechanics who had been summoned from Delhi. Clearly, they had planted a bomb. Or they had tampered with the brakes. No, the mechanics actually came from Bhutan, organized by Topga.” Brown continues, “But who stood to gain from Jamgon Kongtrul's death? He had been on his way to Tibet to fulfill the instructions of the prediction letter presented by Tai Situ. Only someone who wished to prevent that would benefit. The names of Topga and Shamar Rinpoche were whispered in corners.”
In Karmapa the Politics of Reincarnation, Terhune angles the story in a similar fashion. On page 176, she states, “The obituary in the Sikkim Observer, however, which called Kongtrul ‘perhaps the main pillar of Rumtek monastery,' also noted, ‘While no one has so far openly questioned the manner in which the ‘accident' took place, many people are now quite doubtful and suspicious about what has been described by many as a ‘mysterious' death.” Here, Terhune clearly tries to insinuate that Jamgon Kongtrul's death was no accident. As the tone of her rhetoric unfolds, little is left to the imagination in noting that the villains alluded to are none other than Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche.
In both books, it is insinuated that both Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche arranged the death of Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche, who was killed in a car accident on April 26th, 1992. However, in the following pages, it will be shown that these conclusions raise glaring suspicions. Situ Rinpoche and his team have a long established pattern of covering their tracks by accusing others of the very crimes they themselves committed. The following events review some of Situ Rinpoche and Gyaltsab Rinpoche's recent activity and its connection to the death of Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche.
A. The accident occurred in Siliguri, in the foothills of the Himalayas in Northern India, at a remote location, removed from any telephone, and before cell phones were available. However, news of the accident managed to reach the leader of Situ Rinpoche's organization, the Joint Action Committee, in Gangtok literally ten minutes after the tragedy. That person was phoning Rumtek about the accident immediately after it occurred. The news reached Situ Rinpoche soon after. How was that possible?
B. On the day Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche died, Situ Rinpoche was in Taipei, far removed from the roadside accident. However, from his distant vantage point, Situ Rinpoche immediately began to blame Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche for having caused the tragedy. Accusations that Shamar and Topga Rinpoches had arranged the murder of Jamgon Rinpoche began to fly literally minutes after the accident. The utter speed and manner of blame that ensued following the crash appeared to be prearranged propaganda. A network was clearly in place to spread the news almost at light speed. Indeed, Situ Rinpoche did not waste a single minute before broadcasting his allegation far and wide. The very day of the accident, news reached every place within Situ's Rinpoche's worldwide sphere of influence. In Lhasa, Tibet, Akong Tulku and Bu Chung Chung, a well-known smuggler of rare antelope skins, spread the scandal regarding Shamar Rinpoche's alleged involvement. In Taipei, Chen Lu An, a close confidant of Situ Rinpoche's, spread the word. In America, Bardo Tulku and Tenzin Chonyi and Bokar Ngodrub from Woodstock told of Situ Rinpoche's certainty regarding who had arranged the accident, and in the United Kingdom, the task went to members of the Samye Ling Center and its sub branches.
The first people who came to see Jamgon Kongtrul's body were his parents. Kongtrul's chief of staff, Tenzin Dorje, survived the crash. That same day, it fell to Jamgon Kongtrul's family to follow through with the accident investigation. In fact, the wrecked BMW car was later kept at the family home in Kalimpong. On that day, among those close to the accident, no one, including any member of Jamgon Rinpoche's family, raised the slightest suspicion that someone had murdered him. However, back in Taiwan, Situ Rinpoche proclaimed he had just this conviction and was broadcasting it to one and all. The question was why? The idea that Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche could have been murdered never even entered the minds of most people, yet Situ Rinpoche thought of it without hesitation and blamed the accident on both Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche.
C. There were in fact, good reasons for Situ Rinpoche's manner of thinking. Situ Rinpoche had already organized the Joint Action Committee in Gantok, Sikkim, India, and infused his organization with enormous sums of money. The Joint Action Committee consisted of a group of politicians in Sikkim who have strong indirect influence over the government. The head of the Joint Action Committee was Mr. Tashi of the Mathang family. Mr. Tashi lived at Sikkim House in New Delhi and held the position of Commissioner of the Sikkim Government. Prior to the accident in Siliguri, Mr. Tashi had personally made all the arrangements for a mechanic to be sent from Delhi to work on Jamgon Rinpoche's car. The mechanic told Jamgon Rinpoche that he had worked on the brand new 5 series BMW the entire previous day and not finished before the evening. He gave express instructions to Jamgon Rinpoche that the car should be driven very fast on one occasion to test for any mechanical fault. It was during the speed test on the following morning that the crash occurred. It should be noted that the person who arranged the mechanic to work on Jamgon Rinpoche's car was not Topga Rinpoche as alleged in Brown's book, it was Mr. Tashi of the Mathang family.
On August 2nd, 1993, individuals closely allied to Situ Rinpoche attacked Rumtek Monastery. On that day the entire Mathang family was there in force to help spearhead the takeover. In fact, the Mathangs have acted hand in hand with Situ Rinpoche from the beginning to the present.
D. It worked out to be especially convenient for Situ Rinpoche that Jamgon Kongtrul died just when he did. Only two months previously on March 4th, 1992, Situ Rinpoche had suddenly produced what he claimed was the “prediction” letter of the 16th Karmapa. Both Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche had cried foul, saying that the penmanship on the document in no way resembled the 16th Karmapa's handwriting. The 16th Karmapa was in fact, Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche's uncle so both nephews were intimately familiar with the his writing. On top of this, Shamar Rinpoche had studied alongside Situ Rinpoche for eight years in Rumtek Monastery and was very well acquainted with his handwriting style. It appeared that someone had attempted to replicate the 16th Karmapa's handwriting. According to Shamar Rinpoche, there was no disguising the author's penmanship; it was Situ Rinpoche's. Raising further suspicion, the signature had been well smudged. Situ Rinpoche claimed this was due to having sweated onto the document over the years while keeping it next to his body. Again, here was a contradiction that Shamar Rinpoche was quick to point out. The letter had been kept inside an envelope that was also kept inside a silk pouch. How, Shamar Rinpoche posed the question, could the signature have been smudged while the envelope that had carried the letter over the years show not the slightest stain? While Shamar Rinpoche challenged the letter's authenticity, Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche had excused himself and gone straight to his own home to collect two papers. One of these was a hand written letter sent to him by the 16th Karmapa, and the other was a letter sent to him from Situ Rinpoche himself. Both letters were immediately compared with Situ Rinpoche's “prediction” letter in order to determine if Shamar Rinpoche's suspicions of a forgery were correct. Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche had also brought from his home a small tape recorder to record the historical meeting. When he turned the machine on Situ Rinpoche became extremely agitated and angry and forced Jamgon Rinpoche to turn it off. Situ Rinpoche demanded that all four Rinpoches present at the meeting agree then and there to the letter's authenticity. Shamar Rinpoche stood his ground and insisted the document undergo a forensic examination before it be used to find the 17th Karmapa. Situ Rinpoche countered with the argument that such a test would take years to perform and cost too much money. As Shamar Rinpoche continued to demand that a forensic test be done, Situ Rinpoche yelled, “I will not let this letter be checked by forensic science even if I die nine times to stop it.” All this occurred before Gyaltsab Rinpoche managed to examine the letter himself. From across the room, Gyaltsab Rinpoche pronounced that he could clearly see that the letter was in the 16th Karmapa's handwriting. At that point, Shamar Rinpoche challenged him, “How can you know, you haven't even examined the letter yet?” After that, Gyaltsab Rinpoche stayed very quiet.
Situ and Gyaltsab had brought nine jeep loads of people from Gantok to the meeting. These people were members of the Joint Action Committee and they had begun to behave extremely aggressively. It became clear to both Shamar Rinpoche and Jamgon Rinpoche that in order to hold off the tidal force of support for Situ and his proposed candidate they would need to create a diversion. Jamgon Rinpoche made a proposal to postpone any decision for eight more months while he himself would travel into Tibet and locate the boy from the “prediction” letter. When found, Jamgon Rinpoche was to determine if the boy was the genuine Karmapa or not. All four Rinpoches agreed on this plan. It was the logical next step so no one could refuse to agree to it. In the face of these suddenly unfolding events, Shamar Rinpoche and Jamgon Rinpoche hoped to buy time.
In hindsight, it is not so strange that Situ Rinpoche and Gyaltsab Rinpoche went forward with their plan immediately after Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche's death. Things were then able to proceed smoothly without Jamgon Rinpoche's interference. There would be no more active threat to the confirmation of Situ's candidate. The timing of Jamgon Rinpoche's death fit perfectly into Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoche's strategy to enthrone the boy of their choosing at all costs.
E. Jamgon Rinpoche and Situ Rinpoche had been closely linked in the early 1980s. Then in the late 80s, they began to fall out. In fact, Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche had clashed with Situ Rinpoche six months before his death. This happened when Jamgon Rinpoche was forced to challenge Situ Rinpoche's authority after it became apparent that he was conducting unethical business at Rumtek. Situ Rinpoche had sent Akong Tulku and his secretary Lea Wyler to Rumtek in order to buy off members of the Rumtek community by giving away large sums of money. Their activity had raised Jamgon Rinpoche's suspicions and he wanted to know what all this money was paying for. When confronted, Akong Tulku and Lea replied that they were acting specifically on Situ Rinpoche's orders. Jamgon Kongtrul insisted that before any more funds be distributed the pair would first have to consult the General Secretary of Rumtek, Topga Rinpoche. Unable to locate Topga Rinpoche by phone, Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche decided to take matters into his own hands. He insisted that Akong and Lea stop passing out money and asked both of them to leave Rumtek immediately. Jamgon Kongtrul Rinpoche's secretary, Mr. Trinley Ngodrub, his American wife Kunga and over five hundred members of the Rumtek community who kept their alliance with Shamar Rinpoche, witnessed these events.
F. Situ Rinpoche's strategy, from the beginning to the present, has been to blame those he attacks as being the attacker, and to ambush those who stand in his way. On August 2nd, 1993, he organized the attack on Rumtek Monastery. To do this, Situ Rinpoche hired about a thousand people along with bribed policemen and politicians from nearby Gantok City. At 5:00 a.m., this group began their violent attack on Rumtek Monastery. Twelve hours later, Situ Rinpoche's force had managed to remove all the 16th Karmapa's monks and administrators except for fourteen people. After the attack, Situ Rinpoche's people loudly claimed that it was the Rumtek monks themselves who had initiated the attack. In fact, Situ Rinpoche and Gyaltsab Rinpoche announced the following day that the attack had occurred directly as a result of an order issued by Shamar Rinpoche and Topga Rinpoche. Neither Topga Rinpoche nor Shamar Rinpoche had even been in India during that time. All of these facts have been proven in the Indian courts and today are a matter of public record.
Another disgraceful incident involving a member of Situ Rinpoche's group occurred in 2001. A young man, Mr. Samdrub Tsering, formerly an attendant to Shamar Rinpoche was stabbed and killed by one of Situ Rinpoche's men in Siliguri. This murder occurred at almost the exact location where Jamgon Rinpoche was killed. Tsering's killer turned himself in to the police and confessed to the murder. The reason he gave to the police for the killing was that Mr Tsering had criticized the Dalai Lama for backing Urgyen Trinley, the Chinese nominee for Karmapa. This murder is also a matter of public record in the police department in Siliguri.
The misinformation in Terhune and Brown's books is part of a longstanding pattern of lies and deceit used by Situ Rinpoche to cover up his corrupt behavior. When the evidence surrounding Jamgon Rinpoche's death is examined, there are serious reasons to suspect that Situ Rinpoche and his right hand man, Akong Goenpo, were involved in the tragedy. Under close examination, it becomes clear that Jamgon Rinpoche's death had nothing to do with Shamar Rinpoche, while a preponderance of evidence points to the fact that it had a great deal to do with Situ Rinpoche himself.
-
TIBT. GOVT. IN EXILE - TOOLS OF THE CHINESE? CHINA - TOOL OF TIBT.GOVT.?
WHATEVER PAYS OFF MOST ON TODAY'S MARKET...
Letter to The Hindustan Times by Khenpo Chodrag Tenphel Rinpoche
Date: 12.11.01
To The Editor in Chief of The Hindustan Times
Concerning your article of the 7th November 2001 about the Dalai Lama we would like to call your attention to a number of errors.
The Dalai Lama, your article records, said, concerning the issue of the Karmapa reincarnation, that officially "only one can be allowed to claim the seat in a monastery " To begin with, the word officially, in this case, denotes a political appointee as Ugyen Thinley Dorje was installed by Communist China in July 1992 and as the Tibetan Government in Exile choose to back that appointment. However, the proper tradition of the Karma Kagyu School, founded by the 1st Karmapa, is that the second ranking religious dignitary in this school, the Shamarpa, is to recognize and enthrone the Karmapa in accordance with the nine-hundred year old traditions of the school.
Thus, the official recognition rests with the Shamarpa and the present Shamarpa, the 14th, has recognized Thinley Thaye Dorje as the authentic reincarnation of the late Karmapa. Also, the present political circumstances of Urgyen Thinley Dorje's appointment is a new phenomenon, neither China nor the Tibetan Government in Exile have any authority in this matter, the political schemes surrounding the appointment have never before occurred in the history of our school.
It should be clear that the religious lineage to which the reincarnation belongs has the authority to recognize the reincarnation not some political institutions.
We would see it fit that you inform your readers and we're willing to assist you with further information if required.
Yours sincerely,
Khenpo Chodrag Tenphel Rinpoche
Chief Abbot of the Karma Kagyu School
on behalf of the International Karma Kagyu Organisation
-
17.03.03
An Open letter to His Holiness the Dalai Lama
Your Holiness,
An International Karma Kagyu Conference was held in Kathmandu, Nepal, on16th and 17th of March, 2001. Delegates representing over five hundred monasteries and centers of the Karma Kagyu Lineage from around the world attended.The conference was expressly convened to address the present crisis within the Karma Kagyu lineage. A unanimous resolution was passed to declare our school's determination to reject any interference from outside the Karma Kagyu lineage regarding the process of recognition and enthronement of the Karmapas and to protect the authentic transmission of the Karma Kagyu Lineage.
At the heart of the Karma Kagyu lineage's existence lies its own fundamental right to recognize the Karmapa, the spiritual leader of the lineage. This must be done in accordance with the genuine, spiritual custom of the Karma Kagyu lineage and without interference from outside the lineage. Traditionally the Black-Hat and the Red-Hat Karmapas have recognized and enthroned each other's incarnations. History shows that the present crisis is rooted in the past. For centuries, the Gelugpa lineage of the Dalai Lamas and the Karma Kagyu lineage of the Gyalwa Karmapas have been locked in a struggle.
The conflict started as early as the fifteenth century, at the time of the Seventh Karmapa and Fourth Shamarpa. This coincided with a period during which the Tibetan government was controlled by the Kagyupas. Hostilities peaked in 1638 when the Fifth Dalai Lama invited the Mongolian army under Goshir Khan to invade Tibet. The Gelugpa and Mongol alliance was subsequently responsible for the death by decapitation of virtually all abbots from one thousand Karma Kagyu monasteries. All these monasteries were converted to the Gelugpa order by force. The Tenth Karmapa's camp came under attack and over seven thousand of his monks were slaughtered. Only Karmapa and his attendant managed to escape. The Karmapa was forced to stay in exile for the next forty years.
Two centuries later the struggle escalated further during the regency period between the Seventh and Eighth Dalai Lamas. Tenpai Goenpo, a Gelugpa minister, took the opportunity to permanently remove the Shamar Rinpoche from the religious scene in Tibet. In spite of having mediated in the war between Nepal and Tibet-China, the Ching-Emperor of China declared him a traitor and all his monasteries were forcibly converted to the Gelugpa order. An edict banning Shamarpa's future incarnations was proclaimed.
In 1959 came the demise of Tibet at the hands of the Communists. Unfortunately Tibet's destruction seemed not to have been disaster enough to reign in the long-standing and unjustified aggression of the Gelugpa School towards the Karmapa and his Karma Kagyu order. In 1961 the Tibetan government in exile proposed to merge the four Tibetan schools into one religious body headed by Your Holiness. This policy inflicted serious spiritual suffering on much of the Tibetan exile community. Rallying behind Karmapa's authority, thirteen Tibetan settlements challenged the Exile Government's plan and as a consequence the whole scheme was abandoned. Later in the seventies Karmapa came under blame because he had chosen to defend the autonomy of the three other lineages. The aggressive atmosphere which had been fomented during that period triggered joyful celebrations at the Tibetan camps in Ladakh when H.H. the 16th Karmapa died in 1981. This painful incident further inflamed the mistrust between the two schools.
Even before the 16th Karmapa's death, members of Your Holiness' circle had already approached certain high Kagyu lamas with an offer of collaboration in the search and recognition of the 17th Karmapa. In close cooperation with this traitorous Kagyu group, Your Holiness succeeded in dividing our school for the first time in its history. This scheme brought about the subsequent enthronement of a false Karmapa in China. In 1992 and 1993 Your Holiness deliberately endorsed the wrongful claims and actions of this group of corrupt Kagyu lamas. This interference is absolutely unacceptable to the Karma Kagyu School. In July 2000, Your Holiness' involvement in the matter went even further. Your Holiness informed H.H. Shamar Rinpoche in writing that even if an authentic prediction from the 16th Karmapa was found and presented, it would not sway your insistence that Urgyen Trinley is the Throneholder-Karmapa. By doing so Your Holiness would retrospectively deprive the undisputed 16th Karmapa of his right to determine his own reincarnation.
Such a preposterous claim goes against the Karma Kagyu tradition and sets the stage for a take-over of the Karma Kagyu School by Your Holiness' School and Government. Up until Your Holiness' interference in 1992, no other Dalai Lama has ever played a role in the recognition of a genuine Karmapa. As Your Holiness well knows, the Karmapa incarnations precede the Dalai Lama line by over three hundred years. There is no historical precedent for Your Holiness' current involvement. We highly respect and support Your Holiness' struggle for the welfare and freedom of the Tibetan people. We therefore request you to apply the same goodwill in the case of the Karmapa controversy. For the sake of the integrity of our lineage, we urge Your Holiness to gracefully bow out of this internal conflict of the Karma Kagyu School. We also ask for Your Holiness' support regarding our view that the whole world will benefit by preserving the rich diversity of all four schools, including the Karma Kagyu. We sincerely make wishes for Your Holiness' long life and continued health.
Most respectfully, for and on behalf of all delegates to the International Karma Kagyu Conference
H.H. Luehrs (Chairman)
-
Article #6: “His Master's Voice”
by Jay Landman
This is the sixth article in a series of responses to Mick Brown's The Dance of 17 Lives: The Incredible True Story of Tibet's 17 th Karmapa (Bloomsbury , 2004).
Date: 10.08.2004
From the Washington Post Book World
Sunday, August 1, 2004
The 17th Karmapa
It is a disappointment that Jeffery Paine's review of The Dance of 17 Lives: The Incredible True Story of Tibet's 17th Karmapa by Mick Brown (Book World, June 27) fails to investigate the validity of that book's conclusions before giving it an endorsement.
The book by Mick Brown
Paine fails to mention that the letter recognizing Orgyen Trinley as the Karmapa is likely a forgery. The letter's handwriting and style are surely those of Situ Rinpoche himself. Yet Situ has refused to release this letter for scientific testing, claiming that such testing would be disrespectful to a "holy object." Brown uncritically accepts this rationale, even though it runs directly counter to the show-me skepticism traditional of Tibetan Buddhism and creates much cause for doubt.
Second, Paine accepts Brown's assertion that Orgyen Trinley's candidacy is somehow more valid because the Dalai Lama supports him. In fact, under Tibetan Buddhist tradition, the Dalai Lama does not have authority to approve head lamas for any other school of Tibetan Buddhism besides his own Gelugpa lineage. His role as political leader of the Tibetan government-in-exile does not grant him spiritual authority over the three autonomous Tibetan Buddhist schools outside his own. HH Dalai Lama is not authorized to recognize the Karmapa, who is the leader of the Karma Kagyu school. Only the administration of the late 16th Karmapa is authorized to validate his reincarnation.
Finally, Paine incorrectly implies that because Mick Brown is not a disciple, he must be objective. While Brown may indeed employ a "neutral journalistic tone," his narrative betrays obvious bias toward Orgyen Trinley and the lamas who support him. In particular, through details large and small, Brown offers flattering descriptions of Situ Rinpoche and Akong Tulku that contrast starkly with his denigrating portraits of supporters of the other candidate, Thaye Dorje.
Paine did your readers a disservice by failing to note this bias and failing to point out that Brown uncritically accepts the accounts of Orgyen Trinley's supporters, and perhaps as a result of this bias, producing many errors of fact and conclusion in his book. Interested readers can find a detailed discussion of Brown's errors at www.karmapa-issue.org.
JAY LANDMAN
Director, North America Office International
Karma Kagyu Buddhist Organization
Natural Bridge, Va.
---------------------------------------------------
Jeffery Paine replies:
Jay Landman's charges about the Dalai Lama and especially about the forged letter are exhaustively refuted not only in Mick Brown's The Dance of 17 Lives but also in the other major books on the subject, Michele Martin's Music in the Sky and Lea Terhune's The Politics of Reincarnation.
Mr. Landman represents the position of Shamar Rinpoche, whom, unfortunately, all three books paint as doing the Tibetan cause harm in order to secure the profits from the Karmapa's holdings for himself. I hope, and would like to believe, that there are honorable motives for Shamar Rinpoche's actions that all three books have overlooked.
---------------------------------------------------------
Open letter by Lunrig Gyatso in response to Mr. Paine's reply
Date: 10.08.2004
---------------------------------------------------
Reply by Jeffery Paine from the Washington Post Book World Sunday, August 1, 2004:
Jay Landman's charges about the Dalai Lama and especially about the forged letter are exhaustively refuted not only in Mick Brown's The Dance of 17 Lives but also in the other major books on the subject, Michele Martin's Music in the Sky and Lea Terhune's The Politics of Reincarnation.
Mr. Landman represents the position of Shamar Rinpoche, whom, unfortunately, all three books paint as doing the Tibetan cause harm in order to secure the profits from the Karmapa's holdings for himself. I hope, and would like to believe, that there are honorable motives for Shamar Rinpoche's actions that all three books have overlooked.
---------------------------------------------------
August 2, 2004
W. W. NORTON & COMPANY, INC.
Attn: Author Jeffrey Paine
500 Fifth Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10110
USA
Dear Mr. Paine:
Let me introduce myself. I am one of the chief administrators of the Shamar Labrang and am writing this open letter to you on behalf of supporters of Karmapa Thaye Dorje. We have read your reply to Jay Landman’s response to your review in the Washington Post Book World of August 1, 2004. There you say that the major points of the our position—that Situ’s Karmapa prediction letter is fake and that HH Dalai Lama has no jurisdiction to recognize Karmapa—are invalid because three books have already been published which “refute” these points. You further add that these three books cast doubt on Shamar Rinpoche’s character and motivations, but that you personally hope that they are not correct in this.
Firstly, I thank you for your good hopes and for keeping an open mind.
However, I wish to beg your indulgence to say that in my opinion, passing along such character aspersions does you no credit. Even with the qualifications you added, this was a very low blow. I am very surprised that a scholar and writer of your position would resort to debased personal attack. This sort of gutter rhetoric is more appropriate to a political campaign than to a sober discussion of the unfortunate controversy over our Buddhist lineage. Mr. Landman’s letter was indeed critical, but it was respectful and stuck to the issues. Your response however attempted to nullify everything Mr. Landman said by passing along very serious criticism of Shamar Rinpoche that is, despite what these books may say, completely unfounded.
I do not need to defend Shamar Rinpoche’s character and motivations here. Let it suffice to say that ample documentary evidence is available from the Indian court system as well as public records on file with government agencies in India to demonstrate how Shamar Rinpoche has worked only to protect the Karma Kagyu lineage from betrayal by Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches, which is the role of the Shamarpa. In addition, anyone who knows Rinpoche knows that personally, his lifestyle is modern but simple, he enjoys few comforts and works tirelessly only to spread dharma and to protect the purity of the Karma Kagyu lineage.
So shame on you Mr. Paine! I am sure that you could have done better. And I do hope that this kind of statement doesn’t mean that you think that nothing we say has any value because three books support Orgyen Trinley as Karmapa?
Well, now I hope you will allow me to discuss the facts of these three books with you. Then perhaps you will have more information to decide if you really feel that they are credible enough to have “refuted” our points.
It is true that there are three books published that support Orgyen Trinley, but even by your own logic you are wrong to claim that all three of these books “refute” us. Only two of them in fact deal explicitly with the Karmapa controversy: Lea Terhune’s Karmapa: The Politics of Reincarnation and Mick Brown’s The Dance of 17 Lives.
You should not count Michelle Martin’s book Music in the Sky: The Life, Art & Teachings of the 17th Karmapa Orgyen Trinley Dorje as “refuting” our points, since hers is strictly a hagiography of Orgyen Trinley without much discussion of the issues of the controversy. Her treatment of the controversy is limited to a couple of sentences and one footnote, where she explains that Shamar Rinpoche initially doubted the prediction letter. Otherwise, Martin proceeds as if the whole controversy did not exist and as if everyone agreed that Orgyen Trinley was the Karmapa.
For this reason, we have not made any criticisms of her book. She does not engage in debate here but simply celebrates Orgyen Trinley. We have no desire to reduce anyone’s devotion to the boy, and Martin has every right to pen a tribute to her guru. She may even believe what she has written about Orgyen Trinley, so we cannot criticize her intentions.
That leaves two books that attempt to refute our position, the books by Terhune and Brown. I could understand it you felt that two books disagreeing with us versus no books supporting us makes a pretty strong argument.
But you should be aware that there are also books published in English, predating Terhune and Brown, that support Thaye Dorje: The Buddha Cries (New Delhi, 2000) by Hindustan Times journalist Anil Maheshwari and The Karmapa Papers (France, 1992) and The Siege of Karmapa (New Delhi, 1999) by our group. However, since these titles were not published in the USA or the UK, but instead in Europe and in India, perhaps you do not think they are credible.
Since the books of Terhune and Brown have been published so close together, we have not yet had a chance to publish our own rebuttals in book form in the USA or the UK. We are working on this at present. In the meantime, we have published our responses online, at www.karmapa-issue.org. Our forthcoming book will contain ample documentary proof truly refuting all the major claims of Terhune and Brown, using respected third-party sources like official transcripts of courts of law.
Yet for now, Situ Rinpoche and his group have two brand new books in the USA and in the UK and we have none. I would like to ask you, however, Mr. Paine, do you think that having two books in itself makes someone right? What if these are bad books that may be proven wrong in the near future, and may even be under litigation now? And what if these books contradict judgments already given by law courts and ignore decades of public records on file with government agencies?
Against the two biased books, we would offer more reliable sources: the verdicts of three courts in India, including the Supreme Court. These courts have all ruled against Situ Rinpoche and his group and in favor of Shamar Rinpoche’s position. The full text of their decisions can be found at www.karmapa-issue.org.
Thus, I would submit to you that Terhune and Brown do not refute our position at all. Their motivation is not to inform but to persuade, and as a result their information is bad and their presentation is biased.
We believe that Martin’s goal may really be to support Orgyen Trinley and so we wish her well. But this is not true for Terhune and Brown. We think they actually don’t care about convincing anyone that Orgyen Trinley is Karmapa. Instead, Terhune and Brown write for much worse reasons.
To be very blunt, Terhune and Brown write only to help hide the crimes of the lamas they sympathize with, Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches and the others who have seized the seat of the Karmapas, Rumtek Monastery in Sikkim. They seized this cloister purely to get their hands on its valuable antiques and to gain prestige for themselves.
We believe that Terhune and Brown thus employ a version of Josef Goebbels’ famous propaganda technique known as “the Big Lie.” Under this technique, if you yourself have committed a crime, you should protect yourself by accusing your opponent of exactly the same thing. Then you should repeat your accusations over and over again until the public is convinced that these false charges are true. Thus, Terhune and Brown accuse Shamar Rinpoche of the exact crime that their lamas, Situ and Gyaltsab, are guilty of- causing trouble in the Karmapa lineage purely for their own personal gain, as you boldly state in your answer to Mr. Landman’s letter in the Washington Post.
We will prove all of this legally in court shortly. Meantime, perhaps you do not know that the Indian courts have determined that Situ’s group is illegally occupying Rumtek? Situ and his followers seized Rumtek by force from the administration of the Karmapa Charitable Trust on August 2, 1993 and shortly afterwards the Karmapa Trust began legal proceedings against them to regain the monastery. Perhaps you do not know that supporters of Orgyen Trinley have lost all their appeals in this case, all the way up to the Indian Supreme Court? Perhaps you also do not know that the courts have determined that while occupying Rumtek, Situ’s group has removed valuable objects from its treasury as well?
We have heard that Situ and his group are afraid of criminal prosecution in India for these thefts. Therefore, we believe, their group has enlisted Terhune and Brown to put out books that will confuse the issue with the public and cover for the crimes of those who seized Rumtek. These books were clearly rushed to print in anticipation of some ugliness for Situ and his group in criminal court. Perhaps these lamas hope that such a propaganda effort will help them to avoid prosecution or at least help them maintain the support of their followers once prosecution begins?
Terhune and Brown are no more than mouthpieces for Situ’s group. And we cannot emphasize enough that this group does not really care if Orgyen Trinley is recognized as Karmapa in the long run. What they care about is avoiding criminal prosecution and punishment in the short run for Situ, Gyaltsab and others.
With such an ignoble goal, it is not surprising that Terhune and Brown draw from poor quality sources. Their main sources are either biased ones like Situ Rinpoche and Tenzin Namgyal, or uninformed ones like Akong Tulku’s brother Jamdrak or, worst of all, sources who are both biased and uninformed, like Akong Tulku himself. At the same time, these authors ignore well informed and trustworthy sources like the trustees of the Karmapa Charitable Trust appointed directly by the late 16th Karmapa, the records of the Trust since the death of the late Karmapa and of course, the decisions of the Indian court system. It is true that Brown spoke with three sources from our side, Thaye Dorje, Shamar Rinpoche and Khenpo Chodrak Tenphel Rinpoche. But as Mr. Landman wrote to the Washington Post, Brown used little information from these sources. And why did Brown not consult the other highly credible sources, like the court verdicts and the public records?
If you lack all this knowledge, then we can understand how you might have been convinced by Terhune and Brown. But it is difficult for us to believe that you would be so poorly informed on these issues. Your being brave enough to endorse Brown’s book as trustworthy in a major US newspaper without any independent investigation of your own seems naïve at best and dishonest at worst.
Regarding Lea Terhune’s book, we have already filed a defamation case in the High Court of New Delhi because many of the lies in her book are very serious, including charges of theft and murder. These lies are also obvious and easy to detect. Under Indian law her text is open to legal challenge because accusing someone of such serious crimes in writing can greatly injure the character of the person so accused. It would then not fall into the category of protected free speech, but instead into the category of character defamation. And if the accusations turn out to be incorrect, then Indian law concludes that the accuser herself is at legal fault.
We can only suppose that it is a very strange karmic force that has caused you to recognize the validity of these two sloppy, biased books without recognizing, on the other side, court decisions and supporting public documents over a thirty-year span.
It is a shame that as a professor you cannot accurately judge our position in this unfortunate situation. We have not criticized Michelle Martin and we will continue to support her right to express her devotion to Orgyen Trinley. Instead, we have only responded to Terhune and Brown because they seem to be intentionally retailing lies merely to cover up the worst type of larceny by high rinpoches who have dishonored their titles for generations to come. We are only doing this to set the historical record straight and protect the Karma Kagyu lineage for future generations.
I believe I know something about your situation, Mr. Paine. I believe that you are a follower of the Gelug school, that you are not associated with the Karma Kagyu. Is it possible that you are supporting Situ’s group because they have betrayed the Karma Kagyu in favor of HH Dalai Lama’s sect? I do not wish to insult you, Mr. Paine, but I believe you may be a bit of a fanatical follower of any group that does anything to sabotage the independent administration of the Karmapas. Therefore, I would not be surprised if you are predisposed to believe anyone who writes something bad about Shamar Rinpoche, the last guardian of the independence of the Karmapas and that, consequently, your mind is closed to any facts coming from Shamar’s side.
I believe that this may be your prejudice. But I do hope that I will be proven wrong in this.
In the end, even if you have an agenda to aid and comfort those who would destroy the Karma Kagyu, do you think that it is convincing to support an unreliable book by Mick Brown by reference to the unreliable book of Terhune, which is currently in litigation? Isn’t that like asking one thief who is now in court to vouch for the good character of another thief who has just been indicted?
If you cannot see the difference between our motivation and our principles on the one hand and those of Terhune, Brown and their masters Situ and Gyaltsab on the other, then we might suggest that you should forget about reviewing books about Tibetan Buddhism. This subject may just be too complex for you to understand.
We are exposing all the lies of Terhune and Brown one by one on our website, and as I said, we will soon publish our work as a book. So I believe that we will truly refute these books. But I would like to invite you, since you claim that these books have “refuted” our points, to provide your proof. On what basis do you accept the arguments of Terhune and Brown? I am very curious to know.
We will publish this letter on our website, along with any response that you care to send. Please be assured we will endeavor to represent your views fairly and accurately.
Sincerely,
Karma Lunrig Gyaltso
Officer of Shamar Labrang
-
Prediction About the Future of the Kagyu Lineage
By Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche.
While living at Rumtek monastery in Sikkim, Shamar Rinpoche received this prediction letter from Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche late 1970's.
Before writing this prediction, Trungpa Rinpoche did the practice of prasena for Dorje Yudronma, a female deity. He invoked Yudronma and asked her to give a prediction concerning the future life of Shamar Rinpoche. Then, following tradition, the text of the prediction appeared in a mirror. Trungpa Rinpoche copied the words in his own hand, composing the letter below.
Prediction about the life of Kyabje Shamar Rinpoche
Jaya Hoh!
The Vajra-Spring is permanent and unchanging.
Unobstructed Yudronma1 revealed through the list of verses profound, clear symbolic words.
The devi2 of long life who shines like an emerald,
Always keep at the center of your heart.
Youth is the messenger of the god of desire who will be burned by the fire of samadhi3.
You should do the practice on the wrathful aspect of Guru Rinpoche (Padmasambhava).
You, the Ruby-crowned one4, may burn away the darkness of the era.
In your 50th year5,
Do the practice of the essence of the Buddha of Long Life and
The practice of Vajrakilaya to counter black magic.
Wash yourself with the water of Mamaki deities.
An elephant who has been intoxicated by poison will slander and create fighting within the lineage.
So take extreme caution against the corruption and trembling within the lineage6.
The wealthy yellow dialecticians7 will harm the genuine lineage of the Kagyu dharma,
So you should strive to sharpen the spear-tip of your mind.
The Vajra-rock which is golden and shining is where you should abide in holy meditation.
You should do the three year, three month retreat.
Through the white luminosity of Vajrasattva you will go to the place of the Dharmakaya which is beyond meditation.
Keep that meaning in your heart.
Samaya.
Notes :
1 An aspect of Tara
2 literally "Goddess" refers to Yudronma
3 literally “burned by the fire at the end of the kalpa”. The oral explanation given by Shamar Rinpoche is that this is a warning to not follow the temptations of youthful desire, to avoid the trap of worldly life by means of the remedy of samadhi.
4 Shamar Rinpoche: Sha = hat; mar = red
5 literally 10 X 5 rounds
6 literally “…within.”
7 According to the tradition of both the Kagyu and Nyingma schools, this term usually refers to the government of the Dalai Lama.
-
hi beggar
you have been a busy boy! I'm in thailand now chilling out! ;) why don't you move all this valuable info to the top of the forum for save keepings and so others can views it.
-
... I'm in thailand now chilling out! ;) ...
Well well... are you by any chance in Bangkok or hereabouts?
If you wish to enjoy a couple of Singhas or Shugden Prayers with a fellow Shugdenite, just tell me. 8)
Zhalmed Pawo,
Bangkok
-
My wife was in Bangkok 2 weeks ago :)