Wow, because of the ban and the protest, so many monks and lay people had created such heavy negative karma for themselves as their intention looks like it was to hurt the sangha who practises Dorje Shugden. What a pity. So sad that the unity of Tibetan people has broken apart because of this ban.
Anyways, quoting from the article, it is funny to read that “many anti-Shugden supporters have since gone on the record stating that they do not know what the protests are about because the Tibetan leadership have never banned the practice of Dorje Shugden”.
Take a brief visit to the Dalai Lama’s official website (
http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/atpd-resolutions), and you would find within, under the “Dolgyal” (derogatory term used by CTA and His Holiness to refer to Dorje Shugden) section, a Resolution that was issued in June 1996 titled “The Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies’ Resolutions”. Within this resolution, it clearly states against the practise of Dorje Shugden through examples of the following clauses:
1. “In the interest of Buddhism and the Tibetan national cause, His Holiness the Dalai Lama has openly advised against the propitiation of Shugden. On behalf of the Tibetan people, both in and outside Tibet, the Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies would like to express our thanks and gratitude to His Holiness the Dalai Lama and make a pledge that we will abide by his every advice.”
2. “In sum, the departments, their branches and subsidiaries, monasteries and their branches that, al are functioning under the administrative control of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile should be strictly instructed, in accordance with the rules and regulations, not to indulge in the propitiation of Shugden. We would like to clarify that if individual citizens propitiate Shugden, it will harm the common interest of Tibet, the life of His Holiness the Dalai Lama and strengthen the spirits that are against the religion….”
Aren’t the above two clauses already strong enough evidence to prove that there is a separation, that there is a ban against the practise of Dorje Shugden, because anyone who goes against the Dalai Lama’s wishes is going against law. Being a world renown leader in Tibetan Buddhism, and the head religious figure of Tibet (and ex-political leader), since the Dalai Lama has advcised against the propitiation of Dorje Shugden, isn’t it an unspoken law that no one should break? If there was really religious freedom within Tibet and for Tibetan Buddhist practitioners, then why have a section within the Dalai Lama’s OWN website against Dorje Shugden. It is inciting and quite an obvious rule that no one should practise Dorje Shugden. So what is the CTA and anti-shugden supporters going on about and stating that there is no ban when clearly, everything that has been done and said by His Holiness and the CTA points to that direction.
Further to that, another resolution was passed unanimously on 17 September, 1997. Lets take a look at some interesting clauses, for instance:
1. The joint disinformation campaign of China and a small number of Shugden activists should be challenged within the framework of law
2. Efforts should be made to challenge the Shugden activists’ campaign to intimidate and deceive non-Shugden practitioners, and that the victims should be provided security and legal protection
3. Particularly in the Three Great Monastic Universities of Sera, Gaden and Drepung, the restriction on Shugden practice should be kept up; Wherever the restriction has not been adequately enforced in any quarter of a Monastic University, the abbots, lamas, bureaucracy and scripture teachers should be asked to discourage the practice; support should be given to ordinary monks who are forced to violate the monastic discipline through use of intimidation and threat by Shugden activists
With regards to the above three clauses, by “challenge” what does the resolution mean? Challenge is subjective, and anyone can challenge through violence, harm, hurt, etc. If I, as an Anti-Shugden activist reads this resolution, and would like to challenge the a Shugden’s activists campaign, it is open for me to use intimidation, violence, harm and hurt in my hopes to stop them under the impression that I am playing it right by following His Holiness’s staunch advice against the practise. In addition, what law does the CTA have? What laws has been set when it is so obvious that violence is acceptable, as shown in the video. So it is vague and pretty open as to what a Anti-shugden activist can do to “challenge” the pro-shugden camp. Therefore, it is not surprising that such a riot and protest took place at Dokhang Khangtsen WITHIN the monastery grounds itself.
4. Recognition should be given to those who followed Shugden in the past out of ignorance, but have now given up the practice; efforts should be made to ensure that they do not suffer as a result of having given up the Shugden practice
5. Efforts should be made to ensure that Shugden practitioners do not receive tantric teachings and Sothar teachings/vows;
The above clauses in the resolution is pure discrimination against a Dorje Shugden practitioner. If there was religious freedom, and I CHOSE TO PRACTISE DORJE SHUGDEN, then I should too be entitled to receive teachings and vows. Why is it that because I practise Dorje Shugden, I cannot receive tantric teachings and Sothar teachings/vows? It is clear that there is discrimination, and behind this discrimination is a ban on the practise of Dorje Shugden in which they are now apparently ignorant of?
Most of all, even on His Holiness’s own website, it states that “….However, since he (His Holiness) personally feels strongly about how negative this practice is, he has requested those who continue to propitiate Dolgyal not to attend his formal religious teachings, which traditionally require the establishment of a teacher-disciple relationship.”
As a result, it is obvious that the violence from the protest and riot is caused by the Tibetan leadership, because they are the lawmakers, and they are the ones which the people look up to and listen to for advice. So if the stand against Dorje Shugden has been made so strong and clear by the Tibetan leadership and His Holiness, there is a direct link in them behind this organized violence. And if as His Holiness claims there is no violence, then why didn’t he stop the riot and protest then, being the head religious figure and watching monks break their vows through their participation in the protest. Why didn’t His Holiness do anything to stop the riot and protest. If there is no ban, Why didn’t the CTA step up to protect the Shugden practitioners, who are their people too.