dorjeshugden.com
About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: harrynephew on September 16, 2012, 01:15:03 PM
-
Dear folks,
It's an interesting news posted lately on HHDL's FB account and reported by huffington post. Do take a read and tell me what is HHDL's new direction when it comes to the view of spiritualism?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/dalai-lama-facebook-religion-is-no-longer-adequate-science_n_1880805.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/dalai-lama-facebook-religion-is-no-longer-adequate-science_n_1880805.html)
On Monday, His Holiness the Dalai Lama took to Facebook to tell his four million friends that "religion is no longer adequate."
The Tibetan religious leader was quoting from a book he published last year, entitled "Beyond Religion: Ethics for a Whole World," in which he argues that religion by itself may no longer provide a satisfactory solution to the ills of the world.
"Any religion-based answer to the problem of our neglect of inner values can never be universal, and so will be inadequate. What we need today is an approach to ethics which makes no recourse to religion and can be equally acceptable to those with faith and those without: a secular ethics," he wrote.
In a review of the Dalai Lama's work, however, the Los Angeles Times notes the 77-year-old Buddhist monk was by no means "denouncing faith," but rather highlighting the need for a universally shared ethos that is rooted in compassion and is relevant in this modern age:
A metaphor the Dalai Lama likes to use goes like this: The difference between ethics and religion is like the difference between water and tea. Ethics without religious content is water, a critical requirement for health and survival. Ethics grounded in religion is tea, a nutritious and aromatic blend of water, tea leaves, spices, sugar and, in Tibet, a pinch of salt.
"But however the tea is prepared, the primary ingredient is always water," he says. "While we can live without tea, we can't live without water. Likewise, we are born free of religion, but we are not born free of the need for compassion."
Awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989, the Dalai Lama has long been a vocal advocate for compassion, religious tolerance and the need to bring together science and spirituality in the face of modern suffering.
In his 2005 book, "The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality," he wrote:
-
Forgot to add the screenshot earlier. Here it is for u guys to read.
-
I find it pretty true.
Promoting compassion is more important than promoting religion if we have to choose one. I like the metaphor about water and tea, it makes so much sense.
But I still believe in the power of religions, which for some people, they are born with it. Although I do agree with HHDL on these, I believe to respect others' religion is also an action of compassion.
-
Well it makes sense. What is the point of being religious when some people abused religion for personal gain. Like for example some religious people use religion to declare war and use religion to instill fear in others. Like what HHDL said the problem is our neglect to inner values. Compasion should be across the board and should be instilled in others be it religious or not religious to cultivate good ethics, moralty, peace and harmony.
-
His Holiness Dalai Lama is propagating ethics rooted in compassion. It is His Holiness' skilful means to tell the World that compassion will solve the ills of the world.
What this means is that practices that are applicable to all. Religious practices are just labels. It doesn’t matter if it is a Christian’s or Muslim’s or Hindu’s ways of compassion. Compassion is naturally a quality of the mind that is not differentiated by the different religious practices. Compassion is the mother of all the Buddhas. It is necessary to develop compassion in order to reach enlightenment - the ultimate state of happiness.
-
I understand what the Dalai Lama is saying and yes, it is true that in this day and age, many people would instantly turn away from the teachings and philosophies if there is even a slight association with any form of established religion. So I understand and agree that in some cases, the teachings on compassion, kindness, wisdom etc can be conveyed without the jargon or technicalities used in traditional religious methods. There are pros and cons for following either established religions or a more free-flowing style.
However, what I DON'T understand or agree with is how the Dalai Lama speaks in such a new-age way, but this is not being applied within his very own spiritual community. It is widely known - and he personally announced it, that the Dalai Lama would be stepping down from the secular affairs of his exiled state. But this hardly seems to be the case - the government, CTA, are still maintaining the ban on Dorje Shugden and getting their hands well dirtied in religious issues when they are supposed to be a purely secular body.
So you want to promote the teachings of religion in a non-religious way? But even the basic welfare and human rights of their own people are being determined by and muddled in with religion. How is this fair or unbiased? So yes, the Dalai Lama does speak with much sense and wisdom - of course - but there seems to be quite a different story being practiced and promoted among his own people. How can he not know that he would be judged not just by his words but more so by his actions and the repercussions of these actions around him?
-
That is a very good point Beggar. I agree with much of what the Dalai Lama has said over the years but I find it extremely difficult to reconcile His Holiness's statements with what is going on with the Dorje Shugden ban.
His Holiness said that: "religion by itself may no longer provide a satisfactory solution to the ills of the world" and I agree. And yet, it is precisely His Holiness's own personal interpretation of what is good and acceptable religion, and His wielding of religious power that has created so much suffering for His own people who have quietly practiced Dorje Shugden for so long.
If indeed The Dalai Lama truly believes that there should be a shift away from religious-based solutions, then His Holiness's religious-based opinion of Dorje Shugden should no longer hold, and therefore His Holiness should immediately remove the ban.
Until such time, I would take His Holiness The Dalai Lama's advice to heart, and take anything that comes out of The Dalai Lama's Office...with a pinch of salt.
-
"But however the tea is prepared, the primary ingredient is always water," he says. "While we can live without tea, we can't live without water. Likewise, we are born free of religion, but we are not born free of the need for compassion."
I like the analogy of the tea and water and I do agree on the fact that basis of compassion is important and applies across board to whatever countries or cultures irrespective of religions. This in fact is the basis of our human nature yet many are not practising nor emulate the kindness and compassion. This would only happens if everyone assume the universal responsibility ..by focusing out towards others. If this happens universally, there would be no war and fighting
However, still why the ban continues if he preached that religion no longer adequate and compassion should prevails? Totally contradicts. Why not then lift the ban?
Quote.."We have the capability and the responsibility. We must act before it is too late." (http://www.dalailama.com/messages/environment/universal-responsibility (http://www.dalailama.com/messages/environment/universal-responsibility))
-
Dalai Lama advice is similar to this and if DL version is not being understood on its inner value of all, please refer to the version below :
A Brahman saw the Buddha meditating by the River. He engaged the Buddha in conversation.
"What caste are you? Asked the Brahman.
"Caste is irrelevant." Said the Buddha.
"How so," said the Brahman, "surely you would agree that Brahman and royalty are of considerable worth whereas peasants and commoners are not?"
"Caste and riches matter not," replied the Buddha, "it is one's conduct that matters."
"How so," said the Brahman.
"In that fire comes from any type of wood so can a wise person come from any caste. It is through the knowing of truth that one becomes noble not through caste. The noble one is the one that doesn't cling to unworthy attachments. The noble one realizes the true way that things are, he no longer thinks of himself as a self and thus has gained clarity."
"You are truly wise," said the Brahman.
-
I understand what the Dalai Lama is saying and yes, it is true that in this day and age, many people would instantly turn away from the teachings and philosophies if there is even a slight association with any form of established religion. So I understand and agree that in some cases, the teachings on compassion, kindness, wisdom etc can be conveyed without the jargon or technicalities used in traditional religious methods. There are pros and cons for following either established religions or a more free-flowing style.
Those are called the rebels and they feel that organized religion has done more harm than good over the years. Many people think that religion are a fashion statement and is a club of sorts for some people who see it as a way to associate with others or to hide their insecurities. Thus in that way, religion has lost its purpose and original reason for it to exist has been lost.
However, what I DON'T understand or agree with is how the Dalai Lama speaks in such a new-age way, but this is not being applied within his very own spiritual community. It is widely known - and he personally announced it, that the Dalai Lama would be stepping down from the secular affairs of his exiled state. But this hardly seems to be the case - the government, CTA, are still maintaining the ban on Dorje Shugden and getting their hands well dirtied in religious issues when they are supposed to be a purely secular body.
Perhaps in a way, HHDL is trying to benefit them in the way that they expect him to and on the Tibetan side he has other plans for them thus the difference. He has to manifest in different ways that will benefit different groups of people. That is how I would see it. but the ban is literally off HHDL's hands now, and the Katri can decide but he is not deciding.
So you want to promote the teachings of religion in a non-religious way? But even the basic welfare and human rights of their own people are being determined by and muddled in with religion. How is this fair or unbiased? So yes, the Dalai Lama does speak with much sense and wisdom - of course - but there seems to be quite a different story being practiced and promoted among his own people. How can he not know that he would be judged not just by his words but more so by his actions and the repercussions of these actions around him?
What is interesting is, Tibetan politics are tied in with religion as well. And here, the Dalai Lama says that religion is not adequate. So in another way, he is also hinting to CTA to separate Buddhism from them. Perhaps they would not listen to HHDL directly so HHDL has no choice but to hint here...? Could be.
Yes I have thought of your POV as well but then I also recall that HHDL is chenrenzig as well so the polarity is only meant to teach a lesson in some way. Now i see how hard is it to maintain respect to the Dalai Lama and to Dorje Shugden at the same time and why so many people decide to go one direction. I'm following my Guru's direction.
-
:P
WHEN the sentiment and wisdom are developing to the highest degree, will be melted together and become the whole (complete combination, the absolute in the relative and vice versa) in Buddhist’s eyes.
FROM the “Chain of cause and effect” point of view, the ideas for all practitioners doing their best to practice the merciful mind in worldly business is automatically to get the wisdom of very truth emptiness eventually. Then the limitless merciful actions will be brought about automatically also after getting the great wisdom. 8)
-
That is a very good point Beggar. I agree with much of what the Dalai Lama has said over the years but I find it extremely difficult to reconcile His Holiness's statements with what is going on with the Dorje Shugden ban.
You're not really the only one but it does raise more questions than answers in more ways than one with regards to the ban. Perhaps this ban is not really a ban but something meant for us to think and to provoke us to think deeper about our faith in the Dalai Lama and examine it more clearly.
His Holiness said that: "religion by itself may no longer provide a satisfactory solution to the ills of the world" and I agree. And yet, it is precisely His Holiness's own personal interpretation of what is good and acceptable religion, and His wielding of religious power that has created so much suffering for His own people who have quietly practiced Dorje Shugden for so long.
If it was not for the ban, the religion called Buddhism would have been sufficient as a solution to the ills of the world. Why? because it was not tainted by politics. Now that it is, it is no longer a solution that people can use to solve their problems so when HHDL says this it does make a lot of sense.
If indeed The Dalai Lama truly believes that there should be a shift away from religious-based solutions, then His Holiness's religious-based opinion of Dorje Shugden should no longer hold, and therefore His Holiness should immediately remove the ban.
Correction: If indeed The Dalai Lama truly believes that there should be a shift away from religious-based solutions, then His Holiness's religious-based opinion of Dorje Shugden should no longer hold, and therefore, invalid by all accounts and his students who uphold the ban in the name of Buddhism should stop forcing people to conform to the ban. If his students are his students and not students of their image of the Dalai Lama in their minds, that is.
Until such time, I would take His Holiness The Dalai Lama's advice to heart, and take anything that comes out of The Dalai Lama's Office...with a pinch of salt.
If it was from the office or from CTA, i'd take it with an entire cup of salt, or rather, a barrel. Too many lies and too many discrepancies to deal with.
Nice observation there, Vajratruth. I like how you point out that the Dalai Lama himself does not really want to make use of religion anymore and has therefore debased religion in his latest book...and that should be followed by the CTA. Perhaps this will get some brains to start thinking :)
-
I am glad to see the Dalai lama saying something that makes total sense for a change. However, I wonder about his motivations for saying so. I don't think he is trying to discount religion or even Buddhism for that matter. In fact, it sounds like he is talking about inter religious harmony and interfaith similarities. Obviously, compassion in its many shapes or forms can be found in varying degrees across all religions. Perhaps he is referring to that, and rightly so, seeing as he is a Nobel peace prize winner.
Now, I wonder if this also applies to practitioners of Dorje Shugden? As we know, some of the fundamental requirements of dorje shugden's practice are practicing the lam rim, having guru devotion, and the accomplishment of Bodhicitta.
So, can dorje shugden be a different flavour of tea? It still contains water...
-
The Dalai Lama’s statement makes me think that he is simply tailoring his message for these degenerate times. More and more people are shying away from institutionalized religion and from conversations with my peers, I surmise that people are not interested in religion, having becoming jaded or more skeptical about religion in general.
When the Dalai Lama talks about ethics sans religion, it is quite skillful that he is actually teaching the Dharma without couching it in religious terms, and while the speaker himself wears Buddhist monk robes, no less!
Since the Dalai Lama is so skillful, I hope he will apply his skillful means to lift the ban sooner than later… it’s time!
-
In a world that is fast becoming disenchanted with institutionalized religions, 'religion' has become a word or label with very negative connotations. People today are beginning to shun institutionalized religions. Thus, the Dalai Lama, by promoting the core values of Buddhism - compassion, peace and harmony - as the ethics of the 21st century, is being very skillful indeed.
At the same time, many of us do not understand and cannot accept the fact that HH Dalai Lama does not practice what he preaches here, when it comes to His people who are Shugden practitioners. Because of his unjustifiable labeling of Dorje Shugden as a spirit and his equally unreasonable imposition of the ban on Shugden practice, many Shugden practitioners in exile in India are viciously discriminated against and have to suffer great atrocities in the hands of anti-Shugdenists and the CTA.
As HH Dalai Lama is Chenrezig and as Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche has advised us to not do anything negative,since we only possess an ordinary view of Enlightened Beings' activities, we can only proceed, by using peaceful means and by creating positive causes for the ban to be lifted soon.
-
The Dalai Lama’s statement makes me think that he is simply tailoring his message for these degenerate times. More and more people are shying away from institutionalized religion and from conversations with my peers, I surmise that people are not interested in religion, having becoming jaded or more skeptical about religion in general.
When the Dalai Lama talks about ethics sans religion, it is quite skillful that he is actually teaching the Dharma without couching it in religious terms, and while the speaker himself wears Buddhist monk robes, no less!
Since the Dalai Lama is so skillful, I hope he will apply his skillful means to lift the ban sooner than later… it’s time!
I am not surprised with people who are jaded with religion because religion over the years have been used to exploit and damage people, in fact most forms of religion have traces of these in them and thus when many people study about the history of religions or they gain bad experiences through religions, they shy away. Many mainstream religions these days are tainted with politics and tainted with many scandals that hurt people a lot and cause these people to be bitter in the long run. Many atheists i have met are not really atheists, but mainly people who are bitter about monotheistic religions, or for some, in religion in general. There is a huge difference in hating organized religion and denying spirituality sometimes. In any case, it seems that HHDL is targeting this because he realizes that religion is too tainted to various problems and issues. Case in point is the Dorje Shugden ban, and one can see how much damage it has caused to the Gelug tradition.
Perhaps, I am thinking, HHDL is subtly encouraging Dorje Shugden practitioners?
-
Ethics we need indeed...
What is the difference between compassion in a secular sense and compassion in a spiritual sense?
In the first case it cares about life and dignity in this body and this seen world, in the second case, it cares the same but also extend beyond this body and this world.
Thus religion has ethics, that is a given. If it does not then it misses an essential aspect.
In a world without spirituality, if we looses ethics, we loose all, we fall in a chaos of survival war where everyone on his own against everybody else. So ethics is the only thing that can keep a secular world afloat.
And ethics includes secular compassion and secular wisdom I suppose, if such exists...
In Europe the state and the religion have been dissociated a long time ago now, and a secular ethic has been crafted with the "declaration des droits de l'homme" (the chart of human rights) among other foundation texts for a just and fair society.
The American constitution is not bad a trial at establishing some ethics for a nation to grow (it has not always shone though, despite this remarkable constitution).
Yet, I find that finances has today taken the role of what the organized religion had in the past within the political spheres, in the sense that it influences politics with the same strength and with covered motivations.
Of course, the motivation for religious leaders mostly was towards the spread of a doctrine of peace (well I hope so), when the motivation of the finance makers certainly leaves a lot to desire...
For ethics to come through, then the speculative finance worlds would need to either loose their grip onto the political world and ethics should also make its way into the high-flying speculation financial world!
Enlightened traders soon then?
-
Speaking in the line of this topic, there is a paradox that have came up in my mind:
There are some people who are religious but their ethics suck, and there are people who have no religion but they have great ethics. Ethics here would refer to how people conduct themselves in situations and whether or not they will do the 'right' thing, such as helping the old lady cross the street and showing altruistic qualities. So why is it that people who are religious (not all of them), who are supposedly more spiritual than people who do not profess to belong to any religion have less ethics than people who have no religion? It is an interesting paradox about this topic, no?
-
@Ensapa I wonder if this can be related to one's imprints, if one spent many many lifetimes doing spiritual actions and deeds, then in life they will be inclined to do works and act in a beneficial manner. even though they are not religious or has a spiritual label.
A person like Trijang Dorjechang despite there are threats to his life, because of his relationship with Dorje Shugden it does not stop him from carrying on practicing with a lot of fervor and effort.
-
There will be a time when there will be no more Dharma. When religion is a thing of the past. When the minds of people are so wild that it is so difficult to tame.
I agree with His Holiness that religion is no longer adequate. Even in today's world, although religion is growing, I feel that its impact on people has diminished somewhat. Why? Because people has used the name of religion wrongly, therefore the perception that people have formed of religion is negative.
Religion and Ethics are closely related. To me, religion is teaching you how to be a better person..so if that's the main importance of it, it can be easily taught and transmitted without it being under the label of religion.
-
I think in this modern world, religion especially in the eyes of the public is just a place where they can sought for some mental peace. Temples or centers are places where they will find peace and just get away from the stress at work/home and become holy for a day or two during the weekends. It has degenerated over time and that itself i found most of my friends do not go to temples or monasteries, even though they are Buddhists, they do not engage in prayers or religious practices. All they care would be not to harm others and just be kind. It is like doing good for yourself and that's it. Most of them would doubt there's an existence of Gods or Buddhas and all of their concerns were actually their well being. Oh yeah, they do go to temples or monasteries only on holidays or trips and that's for sightseeing purposes.
-
I think in this modern world, religion especially in the eyes of the public is just a place where they can sought for some mental peace. Temples or centers are places where they will find peace and just get away from the stress at work/home and become holy for a day or two during the weekends. It has degenerated over time and that itself i found most of my friends do not go to temples or monasteries, even though they are Buddhists, they do not engage in prayers or religious practices. All they care would be not to harm others and just be kind. It is like doing good for yourself and that's it. Most of them would doubt there's an existence of Gods or Buddhas and all of their concerns were actually their well being. Oh yeah, they do go to temples or monasteries only on holidays or trips and that's for sightseeing purposes.
Well, I do have friends that go to the temple and like what you said, they only go there as a weekend getaway from the stress of work and they see it as a sanctuary and the minute 'politics' appear in the temple, they stay away from it and cry and make a big thing out of it and get upset. To them the Temple is no longer a place to learn the Dharma but as something to relief them from stress of daily work. Dharma has degenerated into this way because some Dharma centers lack proper foundation, or rather the committee members lack having a solid foundation to build their Dharma practice on, and with a shaky foundation, the Dharma center becomes merely a recreational center and it can be quite sad to see.
-
I think in this modern world, religion especially in the eyes of the public is just a place where they can sought for some mental peace. Temples or centers are places where they will find peace and just get away from the stress at work/home and become holy for a day or two during the weekends. It has degenerated over time and that itself i found most of my friends do not go to temples or monasteries, even though they are Buddhists, they do not engage in prayers or religious practices. All they care would be not to harm others and just be kind. It is like doing good for yourself and that's it. Most of them would doubt there's an existence of Gods or Buddhas and all of their concerns were actually their well being. Oh yeah, they do go to temples or monasteries only on holidays or trips and that's for sightseeing purposes.
Well, I do have friends that go to the temple and like what you said, they only go there as a weekend getaway from the stress of work and they see it as a sanctuary and the minute 'politics' appear in the temple, they stay away from it and cry and make a big thing out of it and get upset. To them the Temple is no longer a place to learn the Dharma but as something to relief them from stress of daily work. Dharma has degenerated into this way because some Dharma centers lack proper foundation, or rather the committee members lack having a solid foundation to build their Dharma practice on, and with a shaky foundation, the Dharma center becomes merely a recreational center and it can be quite sad to see.
Yes indeed, many would not know that Temples or Monasteries are places where Dharma can be practiced and learnt. It has degenerated to this level that visitors would just take photos and burn some incenses only. Even care takers of centers do not understand the true meaning of a center, a temple or even a monastery. At this rate is going, many more people will not understand a word from Buddha's teachings soon. What is the use of building large statues in big centers monasteries when the sole use of these are just for recreational purpose only.
-
Yes indeed, many would not know that Temples or Monasteries are places where Dharma can be practiced and learnt. It has degenerated to this level that visitors would just take photos and burn some incenses only. Even care takers of centers do not understand the true meaning of a center, a temple or even a monastery. At this rate is going, many more people will not understand a word from Buddha's teachings soon. What is the use of building large statues in big centers monasteries when the sole use of these are just for recreational purpose only.
There are a few differences here. There are two types of temples - the first type is the type with big statues and lots of people going and visiting but nobody there teaches Dharma and the caretakers are usually just uneducated people but who have a lot of faith. Then there are those more modern "Dharma centers" which are opened by more 'educated' Buddhists where there are actually study and discussion of the Dharma, but not the way it is meant to be studied but rather for intellectual knowledge. Both types of Dharma centers are prevalent and they do show the degeneration of the Dharma in the countries they are in.