Lama Yeshe and Zong Rinpoche

There is hardly anyone in Tibetan Buddhism who has not heard of the Federation For The Preservation Of The Mahayana Tradition (FPMT). Besides the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT), the FPMT is probably the largest network of Tibetan Buddhist Dharma centres in the world. Synonymous with the name FPMT is of course its founder, the great Lama Yeshe and his heart son, Lama Zopa. The closeness between Lama Yeshe and Lama Zopa is legendary. So is Lama Yeshe’s devotion to his guru, H.H. Kyabje Zong Dorje Chang.

The great devotion Lama Yeshe had for H.H. Kyabje Zong Dorje Chang can be seen in this picture. Lama Yeshe on the right, Lama Zopa on the left, and of course in the centre is the illustrious H.H. Kyabje Zong Dorje Chang.

Lama Yeshe was the first lama to invite the great Kyabje Zong Rinpoche to the West. Zong Rinpoche turned the wheel of Dharma for so many of Lama Yeshe’s students. Vast explanations, commentaries, oral transmissions, initiations, ritual instructions, and of course Dorje Shugden initiations were conferred many times at the request of Lama Yeshe.

Zong Rinpoche is the lineage lama of so many great current tulkus and geshes teaching around the world. The lineage that Lama Yeshe practiced is exactly that of H.H. Kyabje Zong Rinpoche. No difference whatsoever. Lama Yeshe kept his guru samaya to Zong Rinpoche fully intact till his passing. He is the perfect example of a humble student to his master and a sublime teacher to his students.

It is a pity that such devotion that Lama Yeshe showed for his guru has not been emulated by Lama Zopa and nowhere is this seen more obviously than in the way Lama Zopa discarded the practice of Dorje Shugden, the Protector deity that Lama Yeshe held very close to his heart.

Lama Yeshe and Dorje Shugden

Lama Yeshe and his root gurus/lineage practiced Dorje Shugden. Lama Yeshe consulted Dorje Shugden on many issues throughout his whole life. That is what makes FPMT so great now.

Lama himself mentions in his books that it is the protector’s divine help in all his works that made it grow. Many people heard Lama Yeshe mention many times during his talks that FPMT grew and was successful due to the blessings of his dharma protector Dorje Shugden.

Lama Yeshe’s personal Dorje Shugden statue

Lama Zopa and Dorje Shugden

Dorje Shugden officially recognized Lama Zopa when no one else knew he was an incarnation (see the book ‘The Lawudo Lama‘ by Jamyang Wangmo, Vajra Publications, pages 171-180). Because of Dorje Shugden, Lama Zopa was accorded the status of a Tulku since very young in Tibet. Like Lama Zopa, Dorje Shugden has also recognized hundreds of Gelug Tulkus and various incarnations including the current H.H. Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche, H.H. Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche and H.H. Kyabje Zong Rinpoche. His identification of these incarnations matched the exact details of His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s.

Lama Yeshe loved Lama Zopa like a son, and gave him the practice of Dorje Shugden. But Lama Zopa abandoned Dorje Shugden to win favor with the Dalai Lama after Lama Yeshe passed away

And yet, many have tried to deny that Dorje Shugden had anything to do with the rise of Lama Zopa. It was an inconvenient fact that the present spiritual head of FPMT was recognized as a tulku and empowered into his present status by the deity he is now disowning.

But it is easy to refute this denial. If Shugden is wrong, then why did they consult him for Lama Zopa’s tulku recognition in the first place? Clearly, the high respect accorded to Shugden is obvious. Remember, this all happened in H.H. Domo Geshe Rinpoche’s monastery in Tibet. We all know the level of respect Domo Geshe was held in. Shugden was one of the principal protectors of Domo Geshe and his institutions. No one doubted the compassion, saintliness and attainments of Domo Geshe Rinpoche. If Domo Geshe held Shugden so highly, it says very much for Shugden himself.

Lama Zopa himself has acknowledged it. In ‘The Door to Satisfaction’ by Wisdom Publications (page X of the Editor’s Preface), Lama Zopa mentions clearly in the 3rd paragraph that the Dharma Protector of Domo Geshe’s Monastery CONFIRMED THAT HE WAS A REINCARNATE LAMA AND OFFERED ADVICE CONCERNING HIS CARE.

We can conclude that, since Lama Zopa mentions no other names of who else recognized him, they did not hold much weight in the eyes of the people to caretake and train him at that time. So they had to consult someone to CONFIRM AND MAKE SURE Lama Zopa is who the others say he is. Who did they trust to confirm? Dorje Shugden.

If the great emanation of Lama Tsongkapa, H.H. Domo Geshe Rinpoche, would have an oracle receiving Dorje Shugden’s presence in his temple, definitely Dorje Shugden is a beneficial and beneficent being. That is unless Domo Geshe Rinpoche was also unattained, which is highly unlikely. Domo Geshe’s famous oracle, whom H.H. the 14th Dalai Lama himself consulted in the 1950′s at Dungkar Choede, can take full possession of 6 different dharma protectors! They are:

1. Dorje Shugden
2. Namka Barzin (Dorje Shugden’s entourage)
3. Kache Marpo (Dorje Shugden’s entourage)
4. Tashi Obar
5. Genyen Jingkarwa
6. Pawo Trobar

Three of them are Dorje Shugden and his acolytes. Surely Domo Geshe Rinpoche, whose people and temple nurtured and took care of Lama Zopa in the early years, are not all evil, wrong and degenerate for propitiating Dorje Shugden? Domo Geshe is famed for his devotion to H.H. Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche (root guru of Lama Yeshe and H.H. Dalai Lama), his great meditative concentration on the Vajra Yogini Tantras, and his powerful propitiation of Dorje Shugden. Is Domo Geshe wrong to have a famous Dorje Shugden oracle in his monastery that people would come from all parts of Tibet to consult on all states of affairs, governmental, secular and so on?

Many high incarnations are found by the oracular pronouncements of Dorje Shugden’s oracles past and present, so why not Lama Zopa Rinpoche? Even the current Trijang Rinpoche and Zong Rinpoche’s incarnations were found and confirmed by the Dorje Shugden oracle or Choyang Dulzin Kuten of Ganden. Only after the confirmation from the oracles was it presented to the Dalai Lama for formal recognition. What Dorje Shugden found and recognized was further confirmed by His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Is that so bad that Lama Zopa was also confirmed by the great protector of Lama Yeshe, Trijang Rinpoche, Zong Rinpoche, Pabongkha Rinpoche, Regent Daktra Rinpoche, and Domo Geshe Rinpoche, that he is authentic? Of course not.

The incarnations of His Holiness the Dalai Lamas are all confirmed by the Nechung Oracle, but recognized and enthroned by the regents of Tibet. So are the confirmations by the Nechung Oracle for the Dalai Lama not important? You don’t say that Nechung recognized the Dalai Lama, but he plays an important part to confirm that LEADS TO EVENTUAL RECOGNITION.

Just the same in the case of Lama Zopa, where Dorje Shugden confirmed he is a real tulku and even gave advice on his care. And in the Tibet of the 1950′s, Dorje Shugden’s oracular pronouncements carried great weight. His famous oracle in Lhasa, called Panglung Kuten, was consulted for private and governmental affairs by many high lamas, nobilities, and government officials. His Holiness Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche very much relied on the accuracy of this oracle of Dorje Shugden/Kache Marpo. You can read this in the autobiography of His Holiness Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche.

If Dorje Shugden is an evil spirit, he would have said that Lama Zopa is not a tulku, and don’t take care of him. Why would he say that? Because he can foresee Lama Zopa would benefit many and he would try to stop it, not being happy about that if he is evil. Devadatta did whatever he could to stop Buddha, but failed of course. Similarly, if Dorje Shugden is so bad, he would have tried to stop Lama Zopa’s works from flowering in the future.

FPMT, the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden

FPMT’s roots have deep-seated connections to Dorje Shugden. They may deny the current connections but they cannot deny past connections. They cannot deny the samaya connections to Dorje Shugden that are deeply interrelated to all of FPMT’s lineage lamas of the past, that created/resulted in its greatness now. Past creates the future. So if you dye a scarf red, it cannot come out blue. If Dorje Shugden practice and practitioners were all evil, then the fruit must be evil and in this case the FPMT must be evil, but this is definitely not the case.

Lama Yeshe and Lama Zopa Rinpoche doing Dorje Shugden puja in Kopan Monastery, Nepal, 1976. (Photo by Jon Landaw. Image extracted from LYWA Image Gallery, 1976, vol. 3)

FPMT claims that Shugden is a demon yet the “embarrassing” fact is that FPMT has become what it is today because of the assistance of Dorje Shugden. FPMT denies Dorje Shugden yet FPMT’s main sadhanas are composed by lamas who held Dorje Shugden as their principal protectors. So, if FPMT wish to throw out Dorje Shugden, they better abandon the practices of Cittamani Tara, Vajra Yogini and Yamantaka, for example, which are composed by H.H. Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche. Since he practiced Dorje Shugden and that is a mistake, then the sadhanas he composed that Gelugpas do every day could be a mistake also? After all, he seems to be able to make mistakes? We have to be very careful? That is not the case definitely.

FPMT centres around the world are famous for their ‘witch hunts’ against other centres that do Dorje Shugden or that are suspected of keeping the practice. They think of themselves as some kind of spiritual police for the Dalai Lama. But the real motivation behind them pointing fingers at others is abundantly clear and it is not for spiritual purposes. No witch hunts can be motivated by spiritually good intentions.

FPMT want to look good for the Dalai Lama or Central Tibetan Administration so they get their support. With more support, more members and MORE MONEY to do their projects. Which in itself is not bad, but to point fingers at other centres and make other centres look bad does not justify the means as an end to the results. Their methods are wrong.

By criticizing Dorje Shugden practitioners to get on the Dalai Lama’s good side, they abandon their own lineage lama (Lama Yeshe). And by abandoning their lineage lama, they slowly create the causes for their own centres/organization to go down, down and finally flat in the future. They may look good by giving up Dorje Shugden and siding with the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan government, but it will not mend the broken samaya with Lama Yeshe and his protector. So by FPMT making the current Dalai Lama ‘happy’, they lose themselves.

Even though FPMT gave up Shugden, they should remain quiet about it. They should just do their dharma practice and be still and not make a fanfare about it. Instead you can hear of their attacks on other centres quite often. They want to look so good that even in their centres they have signs posted up that if you do Shugden, you are not welcome. How strange. How fanatical. So if Lama Yeshe, H.H Trijang Rinpoche, H.H Zong Rinpoche showed up, they wouldn’t be allowed in?

It is better for FPMT to continue their Dorje Shugden practices quietly and stop criticizing other practitioners in order to please the Dalai Lama. Many of the senior FPMT students met Lama Yeshe first and accepted him as their guru before they ever met the Dalai Lama. So they should hold what Lama Yeshe held close to his heart, which is Dorje Shugden and his practices.

By following their lineage lama, they can make their organization succeed well into the future. In the future, whatever the Dalai Lama has said will be forgotten. All thirteen of the previous Dalai Lamas’ words are unknown or forgotten for most dharma practitioners. Hardly anyone cares what the previous Dalai Lamas have said. No doubt they were great teachers, but truth be told, it is past already.

If FPMT continue on their present course, when this current Dalai Lama passes away, then they will have nothing left. There will be no Dalai Lama to win favor with and no blessings of the lineage lamas and no reincarnation of Lama Yeshe doing dharma work. And Lama Zopa will have passed away by then. FPMT should think carefully. Things may look rosy from the outside now, but definitely not in the near and distant future. Cause and effect does exist unless the Buddha was mistaken.

Kopan Monastery

It is not only FPMT that is affected by broken samayas. Kopan Monastery has a large portion of monks who are of Nepalese descent. The other part is Tibetan. These two groups are having problems and not getting along. So Kopan now is not in a harmonious state. The karma of creating dissent in other places using the Shugden issue is now coming back full swing.

Kopan should resume their practices as ordained by their root lama, founding father and Master, Lama Yeshe, and not trade it in for anything if they wish their lineage to grow, and their practices to be able to confer blessings. To abandon their practices in order to get in the good books of the Dalai Lama will have only temporary benefits as their samaya with their root guru, Lama Yeshe, is severely broken.

What happens if the Dalai Lama passes (sorry) and they have another lama teaching in the future? Do they adopt the practices another lama teaches because Dalai Lama has passed? If not, then why would they abandon their practice from Lama Yeshe just because another more famous teacher (Dalai lama) says they should? If we keep doing that, our monasteries will lose their basis.

What happens if everyone does that? The minute your master passes, you abandon what he taught you to practice and adopt another lama’s? Then when the new lama passes, you again abandon what he taught, and adopt yet again more new practices? That does not sound right.

To switch practices each time your lama passes and adopt a new and more famous lama’s practices IS NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO GO. But that is what Kopan/FPMT are doing today. Hence after Lama Zopa, they will have many problems for sure. It is such a waste that a great institution like Kopan/FPMT shows a poor example of guru/lineal devotion. I for one would never join in Kopan or their activities due to this break, I am sorry to say.

FPMT and Lama Osel

Lama Zopa succumbed to the political pressure of the Dalai Lama and broke samaya with his guru

FPMT has broken a very strong samaya by giving up the practice of Lama Yeshe. Dorje Shugden was the one that worked hand in hand with Lama Yeshe to get Kopan land, find sponsors, build, and increase the centres around the world.

Zong Rinpoche and Trijang Dorje Chang were the root lamas of Lama Yeshe. By giving up their Dorje Shugden practice, FPMT sends a message to the world and themselves that Zong Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche were wrong. Certainly, they were not wrong in any way. That breaks the lineal blessings right there. Broken samayas have repercussions. Causes do bear effects.

We see this effect in the new incarnation of Lama Yeshe. Lama Yeshe in the form of Lama Osel is the correct incarnation. Dorje Shugden has confirmed it in the beginning. Lama Zopa consulted Dorje Shugden through the Ganden Oracle himself. But Lama Osel has disrobed, left Sera and is staying in Ibiza, Spain with his girlfriend. Lama Osel’s brother also left Sera.

FPMT has caused many people within their own organization and other organizations to doubt, lose faith, question and have negative thoughts against their gurus for practicing Dorje Shugden. In that way, they have caused many to break their samayas with their gurus. That broken samaya comes back to them by way of Lama Osel, who is not able to manifest and ‘continue’ his dharma works as so much hoped by FPMT.

So doesn’t Lama Yeshe have attainments? If so, what happened? Lama Osel is definitely attained just like his predecessor, Lama Yeshe. So it leads us to believe that Lama Osel cannot manifest his dharma works due to the heavy broken samayas of his wayward students. That his dharma works are delayed due to the karma of his students.

Buddha appeared in this world, but samsara is not empty. Certainly that is not Buddha’s fault. Nagarjuna appeared and lived 600 years, but not everyone still has understood the truth of Emptiness and hence released from dualism. If the lake is not still and free of movement, then the moon cannot be seen in it clearly. That is not the fault of the moon.

Lama Osel as a two-year-old consecrating his previous incarnation’s stupa at Vajrapani Institute in Santa Cruz, where Lama Yeshe was cremated. Lama Zopa is seen on young Lama Osel’s right

A baby Lama Osel in the arms of Lama Zopa.

Lama Osel disrobed. It is a pity that Lama Osel cannot continue the great works of his previous incarnation due to the broken samayas of Lama Zopa and FPMT

Whatever Lama Osel does, I feel it is a teaching to FPMT whose many centres around the world have chosen to forget their lineage lama’s practices. Lama Yeshe definitely was very devoted to Dorje Shugden. Since Lama Yeshe practiced Dorje Shugden, so should his disciples as hundreds of them did in the past. They should continue his lineage and practices regardless of what H.H. the Dalai Lama says. His Holiness has his own reasons for what he is doing. So by practicing Dorje Shugden, it doesn’t show disrespect to His Holiness the Dalai Lama. But by stopping this practice, FPMT show great disrespect to Lama Yeshe and all that he stood for.

I hope so much Lama Osel will manifest his enlightened actions quickly. We hear nothing of him in any of the FPMT websites anymore and FPMT these days seldom talk or mention Lama Osel. It is as if he doesn’t exist anymore. I don’t think that is correct. He is the incarnate founder of FPMT worldwide. It must be a great embarrassment for them.

What FPMT don’t realize is that Lama Zopa is advanced in age and if he passes away, then what happens? They don’t have anyone to pass the torch to. Lama Osel should have been the one. But Lama Osel cannot manifest his dharma work because they have broken their samaya with Lama Yeshe by abandoning Dorje Shugden’s practice.

FPMT should repair their samaya with Lama Yeshe by doing their Dorje Shugden practices. Then Lama Osel can manifest his dharma work and their organization can continue even after the Dalai Lama has passed away. If they wait too long, then the chance for Lama Osel to manifest may pass completely for this lifetime.

I do not wish for FPMT to fall, nor do I wish ill of the Dalai Lama, but I do wish people would follow the teachings and practices of their teachers without being swayed by political winds. Who is Lama Zopa’s root guru? Lama Yeshe or His Holiness the Dalai Lama? Whose words have more precedence in his mind? Lama Yeshe’s or His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s? What factors have more influence on Lama Zopa’s mind? Status, throne, title, wealth, fame or what?

Lama Yeshe practiced Dorje Shugden and His Holiness the Dalai Lama forbids it. Why do the Dalai Lama’s words override that of Lama Yeshe’s? Isn’t Lama Yeshe enlightened? Can Lama Yeshe be wrong and His Holiness is correct and vice versa? If Lama Yeshe is wrong on this count, can he be wrong on other counts? Shouldn’t Lama Zopa recheck all his practices from Lama Yeshe and Lama Yeshe’s gurus?

These questions should make us think deeper on this issue. Lama Zopa and FPMT’s actions undermine not only Lama Yeshe’s credibility but also his own.

Disclaimer: This article was submitted by a third party author and does not necessarily reflect the official opinion of DorjeShugden.com. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to ds@dorjeshugden.com

The Buddha has declared that, even if one practices the profound skillful path of Vajrayana, if one doesn’t possess the virtue arising from vows, enlightenment will not be obtained.
~ Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltsen

There are many ironies and inconsistencies surrounding the Dorje Shugden ban imposed by the Dalai Lama. When we examine the reasons given for the ban, we see that they are hollow. It is also safe to state that a large percentage of people obey the ban without fully understanding it.

The Dalai Lama told the Tibetan people that the practice of Dorje Shugden harms the Tibetan cause, and the refusal to abide by the ban will shorten his life. Not only was this said by the Dalai Lama himself but the Tibetan Kashag (Cabinet of the Tibetan Government-in-Exile) went as far as mandating this wrong belief as law, stating in May 31, 1996 that:

However, some people have continued to propitiate Dolgyal, either because they failed to appreciate the threat it poses to the Tibetan people or because they have decided to disregard it… This has impaired the sacred relationship between the people of Tibet and their protector-deities. Today, this is one of the greatest dangers to the cause of Tibet and the life of His Holiness the Dalai Lama.
Source: https://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/statements-announcements/his-holiness-advice

The underlying belief is the guru’s life is degenerated by the student’s disobedience or refusal to abide by the guru’s instructions. It is in fact blackmail. Therefore, compliance with the ban was not due to any factual reasons but due instead to the Dalai Lama and Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) stressing what would happen if the people did not follow the Dalai Lama’s instructions. Telling the people that the practice is harmful to the Dalai Lama’s life not only resulted in many people abandoning the practice based on a misunderstanding of samaya but also created public sentiments against Shugden practitioners.

Is the Dalai Lama the Guru of all Tibetans?

When we examine it carefully, the Kashag’s statement on Dorje Shugden and the Dalai Lama’s ‘samaya argument’ has one assumption, i.e. that all Tibetans have spiritual samaya with the Dalai Lama. While the Dalai Lama was the political leader of Tibet, he is not necessarily the spiritual teacher of the Tibetans contrary to what many people in the world believe.

Samaya is the spiritual bond forged between a student and his spiritual guide. It is based on loyalty and commitment to certain vows between the guru and the disciple that both voluntarily enter into. Samaya is also the bond between a student and his spiritual community.

So, if the Dalai Lama was the Guru of all Tibetans, then there is samaya and there is a basis to discuss the breaking of samaya with the Dalai Lama. But simply being an unelected political leader of the Tibetan people does not bind them to him under any samaya at all. Otherwise there would be samaya between all Tibetan people and the Sikyong Lobsang Sangay, as well as all members of the CTA. But that is not the case.

In other words, the CTA misled the people when it claimed that not obeying the Dalai Lama’s Shugden ban would harm him and shorten his life. Not every Tibetan has received initiations, vows and commitments from the Dalai Lama and therefore have no samaya with him. So, in the absence of a formal guru-disciple relationship between the Dalai Lama and all Tibetan people, how can a non existent-samaya be broken and how can his life be threatened by broken samaya when there was none to begin with?

Is the Dalai Lama the Leader of all Religions?

Samaya is a question of spiritual commitment and the CTA falsely infers that everyone, including all Tibetans, are obliged to share in the Dalai Lama’s religious beliefs. It is implied, especially in the language that the Dorje Shugden ban has been couched in, that disagreeing with the Dalai Lama is breaking samaya. If this is true, then within the Tibetan exile community, all Tibetan Muslims, Christians, Atheists and those who do not strictly subscribe to Tibetan Buddhist practices would also have broken their samaya with the Dalai Lama.

Yet, those who are not even remotely close to the ‘authorized’ version of Buddhism the Dalai Lama approves of are deemed not to have broken samaya with the Dalai Lama. Those who practice Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Shamanism, Wiccan, and Occultism remain in the CTA and Dalai Lama’s good books even though their religions have virtually nothing in common with Buddhism. In some cases, the religious tenets they hold sacred are the antithesis of what the Dalai Lama himself teaches. Yet they are welcomed with open arms.

Since Shugden Buddhists have been declared to be harming the Dalai Lama because they disagree with his beliefs, shouldn’t practitioners of all these other religions be similarly accused? The logical answer is NO because they have no samaya with the Dalai Lama. If that is the case, then why is it that Shugden practitioners are singled out and discriminated against? The same standard and measure should be applied to all people and if it is not, then there is discrimination.

Tibetans of other religious persuasions are welcomed by the Dalai Lama and CTA but not Shugden Buddhists

Is obedience to the Dalai Lama more important than Buddhism itself?

Dorje Shugden monks and lay practitioners are being denounced by the Tibetan leadership simply because of the practice of ONE deity even though this is not the only practice of Shugden Buddhists. It matters not that Shugden lamas, geshes and monks also practice Lamrim, Lojong, the Three Principal Aspects of the Path, and have studied and mastered Chandrakirti’s Madyhyama, Maitreya’s Ornament of Realizations, and the works of Vasubandhu and Dharmakirti.

It doesn’t matter if some of these lamas have attained Vajrayogini and Heruka and others have perfected the practice of Cakrasamvara and Guhyasamaja.

In addition, it doesn’t matter that so many of these Shugden monks have kept their Refuge Vows, Pratimoksa Vows, Bodhisattva Vows and Tantric Vows perfectly. In fact it is because these monks have kept all their vows perfectly and refused to compromise their spiritual integrity that they run into trouble with the CTA.

As a matter of fact, even a hedonistic non-believer who does not observe even the basic refuge vows – someone who lies and cheats, or is a drunkard and womanizer – is still accepted by the Dalai Lama and is not considered to have broken samaya. But all Dorje Shugden practitioners are said to have breached their spiritual bond with the Dalai Lama. How can this be correct when even at a cursory glance it is obvious that there is no consistent logic to the CTA’s claim?

Is the Dalai Lama more important than other Spiritual Teachers?

Because of one protector practice that the Dalai Lama himself practiced for a long time but now rejects, the entirety of Shugden Buddhists’ practice is dismissed and declared void. Simply because they refuse to break their samaya with their other gurus and toe the CTA’s line, they are declared unholy and cast aside for supposedly breaking a non-existent samaya with the Dalai Lama.

But the question begs to be asked, why is samaya with the Dalai Lama more important than samaya with one’s other teachers? If our guru endorses Dorje Shugden’s practice and we have not received teachings from the Dalai Lama, does the broken samaya argument apply? Similarly, if our root teacher is a staunch Dorje Shugden practitioner and we received teachings from the Dalai Lama at a later date, should we abandon all our commitments, vows, AND BREAK OUR SAMAYA WITH OUR ROOT TEACHER just to preserve samaya with the Dalai Lama?

In a similar vein, if we are to take this ‘samaya only with the Dalai Lama’ approach as authentic, then does samaya with the Dalai Lama ‘override’ the samaya between practitioners of the Kagyu, Nyingma, Sakya, Bon, and Jonang traditions with their respective teachers and lineage leaders? Would the Bonpos, Nyingmas, Kagyus, Sakyas Jonangs, and followers of all other traditions be prepared to revise their traditional lineage teachings, philosophies, pantheon of yidams, and change their protectors to be in line with the Dalai Lama’s preferences?

Take for example the two Karmapa situation that has split the Karma Kagyus. The Dalai Lama and CTA endorsed the 17th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje. Wouldn’t that mean that the other 17th Karmapa Trinley Thaye Dorje has broken his ‘samaya’ with the Dalai Lama simply by his existence? By extension, wouldn’t that mean that all Kagyu monks and lay practitioners following Karmapa Trinley Thaye Dorje have broken their samaya with the Dalai Lama and therefore should denounce him and instead follow Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje, lest they cause harm to the Dalai Lama’s life? Why hasn’t the Tibetan leadership done anything about this, if the samaya argument is indeed valid?

Is the Dalai Lama knowingly causing harm to other teachers?

There are many texts and resources that warn of the terrible consequences of breaking one’s vows and commitments to the guru, and the following is just one typical example:

If the samaya deteriorates, then while you live your complexion will deteriorate, your mind will become unclear, you will be subject to many illnesses and your wishes will go unfulfilled. Innumerable spirits and demons will wound you like an animal. When you die, your senses will become clouded, your tongue will stick [to your palate], you will smell unpleasant, and you will die vomiting blood. You will be escorted [from this life] by innumerable malicious demons.
Source: https://earlytibet.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/vanschaik_2010.pdf

The truth is, samaya does exist and broken samaya does result in great harm to the practitioner, and as the Dalai Lama stated, to the guru as well. However, this consequence is only true if the Dalai Lama is the root guru to all Shugden practitioners, which is not the case. However it does raise an interesting point.

If the Dalai Lama is aware of the harmful effects of broken samaya, then why does His Holiness force so many practitioners to break their samaya with their Shugden lamas, since the Shugden lamas will be harmed in turn?

Some Pertinent Questions

The Dalai Lama has stated on numerous occasions that those who do not comply with his ban cannot have any association with him. This is a terrible blow to many Shugden practitioners who love and venerate the Dalai Lama. The CTA on their part have also stated in no uncertain terms that those who do not abide by the ban (and in so doing break their vows to their guru and commit root downfalls where it applies) are to be regarded as ‘criminals of society’ and ‘enemies of the state’.

• Why would a fair and democratic government that is supposed to represent all Tibetans regardless of their specific religious inclinations force Shugden practitioners to choose between the life of the Dalai Lama and the lives of their own root gurus, not to mention having to personally face the results of their broken vows? Where is the justice and fairness in this?
• Why is it that of all Tibetans of various religious leanings including those who don’t even believe in religion, only Shugden practitioners and monks are forced into this impossible choice?
• And why would the Dalai Lama who, regardless of whether he is the spiritual leader of all Tibetans or not, is still an ordained monk who has sworn not to harm any sentient beings, wish to force Shugden people to commit downfalls in their practice which sends them to the lower realms?
• Some people have argued that the Dalai Lama has merely given his opinion and it is up to individual practitioners to decide if they want to continue with the Shugden practice or not. If that is the case, then why does the CTA persist in forcing people to choose between one guru or another, forcing people to break their samaya which harms themselves and their root gurus, forcing monastic leaders to commit one of the five heinous crimes which is creating schism within the Sangha, and forcing so many Sangha members to participate in this schism?
• And as if damage to the Sangha community is not enough, why does the CTA incite so much hatred amongst Tibetans and force an already small and disenfranchised community to be divided and weakened ever further?

Monks from Ganden Shartse and Sera Monastery were forced to be part of the heinous crime of creating schism or face expulsion

There is no basis to say that the Dalai Lama overrides the spiritual authority of all other lamas. Neither are there any spiritual provisions for the status and fame of the Dalai Lama to overshadow the practitioner’s vows to his root guru.

The Dorje Shugden ban was imposed and continues to be enforced based on false reasons of samaya. Given the pervasiveness of the Dorje Shugden practice, a very large percentage of practitioners do not have any spiritual bond with the Dalai Lama but instead have sworn oaths to their respective gurus. The ban forces these practitioners to stumble in their practice and create serious negative karmas.

There may be some Shugden practitioners who have received teachings and empowerments from the Dalai Lama and have a genuine spiritual bond with him. However, if these practitioners also have gurus who are Shugden practitioners, the ban drives them unnecessarily into breaking samaya with one guru or another.

It is a mystery why a senior lama such as the Dalai Lama and the CTA would wish this upon their own people. The falsity of the samaya-based reasons for the Shugden ban is exposed when we consider that those who do not even believe in Buddhism are absolved from having to obey the Dalai Lama while good Dharma practitioners are illogically punished and pushed into committing root downfalls. Such damage to the Tibetan people and the credibility of Tibetan Buddhism cannot be allowed to continue.

The Kopan Valley

Dear respected friends,

It is with great interest and happiness that we write to share this recent news with you.

Globally, the world knows that there is currently a ban on the Buddhist Protector Deity Dorje Shugden. Many people have publicly denounced the practice and have become very harmful, even unkind, towards Shugden practitioners.

Some Lamas have publicly chosen not to continue their practice – this is their prerogative and we do not question the decisions of such highly attained Lamas. However, we strongly disagree with the ways in which their students have launched very hostile, even damaging verbal or physical attacks on Shugden practitioners. This kind of behavior is not at all in accordance with Dharma practice and teaching.

Recently however, we have received very clear information from reliable, trusted sources about an organization returning to the practice of Shugden, even when they have long criticized and put down others for doing so. We are told that when Lama Zopa was very ill about eight months ago, a monk from Kopan Monastery secretly went to Phelgye Ling Monastery (in the Swayambunath area of Kathmandu, Nepal) to request them to do a Dorje Shugden puja for Lama Zopa’s health. Phelgye Ling Monastery is very well known for their preservation of the Shugden practice and lineage, and for this, they have suffered much discrimination and ostracism from the Tibetan Buddhist community in Nepal since the imposition of the ban.

Phelygye Ling Monastery’s senior administrator refused to do the prayers. They have asked: Since Lama Zopa and his group (commonly known as FPMT) are so ‘vehemently’ against Shugden, why do they now come running to request for a Shugden puja once Lama Zopa is sick?

The people from Kopan eventually had the Shugden puja done urgently at another Shugden monastery in Kathmandu (their name has still not yet been disclosed).

The point of this letter is not to disparage Lama Zopa or his organization. We have a lot of respect for Lama Zopa and his lifetime of work to bring Dharma to so many thousands of people. It is our wish to simply point out a few things:

1. The true enlightened, powerful, and beneficial nature of Dorje Shugden – even groups who have turned away from him and become known for putting down the practice, return to Dorje Shugden at their darkest times.
2. The importance of not criticizing any practice – every developed, successful country in the world supports freedom of religion. As Buddhists who support the way of kindness and harmony, we should too. Respect that every Lama will have his reasons for doing, or not doing, a certain practice. If we do not wish for others to criticize or attack our Lamas and practice, then we shouldn’t do it to others.
3. Not being hypocritical in our practice – either you commit to a practice or you don’t. It is not logical to disparage and discount a practice, but then choose to go back to it when times are bad. How can you expect to have results from a practice if you have been doing the opposite all this time before?
4. Keeping clean samaya – A Lama may choose not to continue the practice of Dorje Shugden and advise his students not to do the practice anymore. However, this does not give us any right to disturb or hurt other Lamas and practitioners who do. You may be “keeping your samaya” by following your Lama’s instruction not to practice Shugden. But you break all your other samaya by being unkind, by attacking others, by creating schism with negative talk. No true, qualified, compassionate Lama would endorse or encourage schism or hurting any being in any way. So you must think if your actions towards Shugden practitioners is really Guru devotion, or a justification for accomplishing your own personal agenda?

In hopes of a more tolerant and harmonious Buddhist community and world, we urge you to think carefully about the points we have mentioned. And in particular, to consider the deeper significance of Lama Zopa’s students “returning” to Shugden practice for their Lama’s health.

The fact is: could they have avoided creating the cases for Lama Zopa to fall ill in the first place? They have broken samaya not just with their lineage practice (Lama Yeshe, the founder of FPMT was a very ardent Shugden practitioner) but also with their teacher for acting in such unkindly ways. Why only panic now – and “return” to a lineage practice – when their Lama is ill?

Yours, in hopes of a better future,

DorjeShugden.com | DorjeShugden.net | xiongdeng.com

For further reading:

Where is Lama Yeshe? (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/where-is-lama-yeshe/)

FPMT Lineage Masters are Dorje Shugden Believers (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/fpmt-lineage-masters-are-believers-of-dorje-shugden/)

FPMT, Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/fpmt-dalai-lama-and-dorje-shugden/)

A True Inspiration: Claudio Cipullo (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/news/a-true-inspiration-claudio-cipullo/)

Fabrizio Pallotti (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/news/fabrizio-pallotti/)

Politically Correct at the Expense of the Lineage (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/politically-correct-at-the-expense-of-the-lineage/)

Lama Yeshe and Geshe Rabten (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/mail-out/lama-yeshe-and-geshe-rabten/)

The Broken Samayas of FPMT (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/the-broken-samayas-of-fpmt/)

The Questionable Policies of the FPMT (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/the-questionable-policies-of-the-fpmt/)

Lama Zopa admitted to being recognized by Dorje Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/others-old/lama-zopa-admitted-to-being-recognized-by-dorje-shugden/)

Recognized by Dorje Shugden, but Speaks against Dorje Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/recognized-by-dorje-shugden-but-speaks-against-dorje-shugden/)

Dakini Healed Lama Zopa? (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/dakini-healed-lama-zopa/)

Who made Lama Zopa a Rinpoche? (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/who-made-lama-zopa-a-rinpoche/)

A Tribute to Ven. Lama Yeshe Rinpoche (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/great-masters/a-tribute-to-ven-lama-yeshe-rinpoche/)

I’m going to try and keep this short – I just wanted to thank you and your government for banning Dorje Shugden. I know it sounds weird but because your government made such a big deal out of the whole thing, it pushed me to contemplate on my dharma practice and the meaning of guru devotion.

To be frank I am scared of losing my lama and according to the teachings, the only way for me to stay connected with my lama is to keep my commitments and create the causes for him to remain. My lama’s been extremely kind to me and his advice has benefited my entire family – from my children’s education, to my divorce from an abusive husband, to helping me get back on my feet after I left. It was because of him I received the practice, and it was this practice that saved my family so many times.

Without Dorje Shugden’s blessings, I don’t think I could have gone back to college, finished and got a degree and a good job so I can provide for my kids. I tell you, the number of times I thought I could not pay my children’s school fees, or my own school fees, or even buy school uniforms of them… incredible how many times Dorje Shugden pulled through when I sincerely asked him for help. For all the benefit I received, now I really want to hold my commitment and not break my samaya. I guess your actions did the same for many devotees around the world

So because of you, and through the kindness of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, I have been driven to become more committed to my spiritual path and practice Dorje Shugden with greater diligence than before.

Thank you,
~ Gracie Kwan ~

The Heart of Buddhist practice is relying sincerely upon the Holy Spiritual Guide who reveals the path.
For 2500 years, each disciple has been completely devoted to their root Guru, following their teachings to the letter..

Question to Dalai Lama : All the masters who have worshipped this deity for the past 300 years,…were they all wrong?
Watch this video of Dalai Lama’s answer to the question.

In particular, the Dalai Lama has initiated referendums at each of the great Gelugpa monasteries on this issue and my efforts here are focused on checking the validity of these referendums.

During a speech made by the Dalai Lama in January 8th 2008 at Drepung Loseling Monastery (transcript from Voice of America) he said:

“In the Vinaya rules also, when there is a contentious issue, the monks take vote-sticks and decide, as mentioned in the seven methods of resolving conflict. In contemporary democratic practice, there is such a thing as ‘referendum’, ‘consulting the majority’. The matter has now reached this point of consulting what the majority wants. Therefore, when you return to your respective places after this programme at Loseling Monastery, put these questions:

1. Whether you want to worship Dholgyal. This is the first question. Those who want to worship, should sign saying they wish to worship Dholgyal; those who don’t want, should sign saying that [they] don’t want to.
2. ‘[Whether] we want to share the religious and material amenities of life with Dholgyal worshippers.’ You should sign saying so. ‘We do not want to share religious and material amenities of life with Dholgyal worshippers.’ (You should) sign saying so.’”

The particular section of the Vinaya to which the Dalai Lama is referring, known as “The Seven Methods for Resolving Conflict”, is the scriptural basis for the referendums at the great Gelugpa monasteries of Sera, Ganden, and Drepung. I decided to study these instructions to discern whether or not those procedures are being followed.

As I proceeded I was shocked to find that the protocols laid out by Buddha on how to handle such conflicts are being completely ignored by both the Dalai Lama and the abbots of those monasteries. In fact, the particular translation and commentary I referenced for this article offered many instructions that, if followed sincerely, would ease much of the suffering being endured by practitioners on both sides of this issue.

For the sake of readability and in the interest of space I will not insert all seven methods for resolving conflict here. I have based this article in its entirety upon The Buddhist Monastic Code, Volume I: The Patimokkha Training Rules Translated and Explained, by Thanissaro Bhikkhu (see here for the full article: http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/bmc1/bmc1.intro.html).

I would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to Thanissaro Bhikkhu for this work as I would be unable to investigate the scriptural validity of these referendums without his kindness in composing this work. In this instance it is not ideal to use the Pali translation of the Vinaya Pitaka because it would not be the translation that the Dalai Lama himself would follow. However, after some consideration, I realised that the violations of the protocols laid out by Buddha in the Pali translation of the Vinaya Pitaka would be reasonable objections to the referendums even if they were not mentioned in the Tibetan translations, thus I decided to compose this article.

The main reason why I didn’t use one of the Tibetan translations is that I could not find them translated into English. If you have access to a translation of these seven methods for resolving conflict from the Kangyur and Tangyur I would love to study those, please pass them along.

The particular method in question is method #5 which I have copied below.

“5. Acting in accordance with the majority. This refers to cases in which bhikkhus are unable to settle a dispute unanimously, even after all the proper procedures are followed, and – in the words of the Canon – are “wounding one another with weapons of the tongue.” In cases such as these, decisions can be made by majority vote.

Such a vote is valid if:

1. The issue is important
2. The procedures of “in the presence of” have all been followed but have not succeeded in settling the issue. (The discussion in the Cullavagga indicates that at least two Communities have tried settling the issue; the Commentary recommends trying the normal procedures in at least two or three)
3. Both sides have been made to reflect on their position
4. The distributor of voting tickets knows that the majority sides with the Dhamma
5. He hopes that the majority sides with the Dhamma
6. The distributor of voting tickets knows that the procedure will not lead to a split in the Sangha
7. He hopes that the procedure will not lead to a split in the Sangha
8. The tickets are taken in accordance with the Dhamma (according to the Commentary, this means that there is no cheating – e.g. one Bhikkhu taking two tickets – and the Dhamma side wins)
9. The assembly is complete
10. The bhikkhus take the tickets in accordance with their views (and not, for example, under fear of intimidation or coercion)”

(Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Buddhist Monastic Code I, Chapter 11 – Adhikarana Samatha)
This brings me to my first observation:

The Referendum is Under Fear of Intimidation or Coercion
(which invalidates the referendum according to #10)

• On January 26th, 2008, the referendum was conducted in Sera-Je monastery.
• On February 9th, 2008 the referendum was conducted in Ganden-Shartse Monastery.

Prior to either of these referendums there were actions already taken against Dorje Shugden monks. Here is the timeline of events:

• On January 8th:
  In the assembly hall of Ganden-Jangtse Monastery, each monk had to stand up in turn and declare that he will never practise Dorje Shugden. Twelve monks who practise Dorje Shugden did not attend and were expelled from the monastery.In Phukang Khangtsen (also in Ganden-Shartse) signed statements were collected from each monk, declaring that the signatory never practises Dorje Shugden. Monks who did not want to sign the statement and take the oath to forgo the practice of Dorje Shugden were pressured to do so. The signature and oath campaign was conducted in ten monastic sections. When the signatures were collected in Phukang Khangtsen, one monk was expelled for refusing to sign.
• o On January 11th 2008:
  The abbot of Ganden-Jangtse Monastery, Gen Rinpoche Geshe Lobsang Tsephel was publicly scolded by the Dalai Lama in a public meeting for being a Dorje Shugden practitioner. He was accused of being ‘two-faced’ for seemingly following the Dalai Lama’s advice while secretly practising Dorje Shugden.

Before any referendum was held at Sera-Je or Ganden-Shartse, monks were already being expelled and humiliated. This is a very important point.

In the shadow of these events, the Ganden and Sera monks were asked to participate in a referendum for which they were already aware of the consequences should they vote against the majority.

My question, is this what we call a referendum? Does it sound like this referendum was held wholly without intimidation or coercion? I ask the reader to consider how you would vote in such a situation if your livelihood was on the line, knowing as well that you would have no more access to physical or spiritual nourishment and would be effectively disowned by your spiritual family. Might it be more prudent to vote against Dorje Shugden in public while continuing to practice in secret? This is precisely what many lay and ordained Tibetans are doing.

When these pre-loaded referendums were being held the Dorje Shugden practitioners had to cast their vote in the face of definite expulsion from their monastery. They also had to consider that non-Dorje Shugden practitioners had signed the oath to not to share material amenities of life. The choice made publically by Dorje Shugden practitioners would clearly impact their ability to survive outside the monastery. It is difficult to conclude that such a ‘choice’ is not coercion in its grossest form and that as such the Dalai Lama’s so-called referendums directly contradict the Vinaya and the spirit of Buddha’s teachings as a whole.

The Referendum will lead to a split in the Sangha
(which invalidates the referendum according to #6 and #7)

The second question put forth by the Dalai Lama is: “[Whether] we want to share the religious and material amenities of life (live together in the monastery) with Dholgyal worshippers.”

What this means is that practitioners who formerly lived together in the same Monastery would now not be able to use the same kitchen, do Sojong together, or use the same Khangtsen at all.

“A schism (saṅgha-bheda, literally a split in the Saṅgha) is a division in the Community in which two groups of bhikkhus of common affiliation, with at least five in one group and four in the other, conduct Community business separately in the same territory.” (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Buddhist Monastic Code II, Chapter 21)

On February 7th 2008, in the assembly hall of Shartse Monastery, the disciplinarian – with tears in his eyes – announced: ‘Now Dhokhang Khangtsen will be separated from Shartse Monastery.’

This clearly meets Buddha’s definition of a schism (which I will explore in a future article). It is clear that the vote itself is on whether or not to split the Sangha. Thanissaro Bhikkhu’s commentary clearly indicates that if it is understood that the referendum would lead to a split in the Sangha the referendum is invalid.

Furthermore, on the issue of how to handle a schism according to the Vinaya, the present Dalai Lama has not been following Buddha’s advice.

“As for the laity, the texts quote the Buddha as saying that they should give gifts to both factions and listen to their Dhamma. Then, on consideration, they should give their preference to the Dhamma-faction. Notice, however, that in advising the laity to give preference to one faction over another, the Buddha does not say that only one faction should receive alms. After all, the laity may be misinformed about the Dhamma and in a poor position to tell the right faction from the wrong. At the same time, the Buddha has never been recorded as declaring a living being as unworthy of gifts, for that would be tantamount to saying that the being was unworthy to live.” (Thanissaro Bhikkhu, Buddhist Monastic Code II, Chapter 21)

This means that the signature campaign being conducted in the lay community by the CTA (within which the Dalai Lama is the final authority) to not share material amenities with Dorje Shugden practitioners directly contradicts the Vinaya. The language of the Vinaya makes clear that both Dorje Shugden practitioners and non-Dorje Shugden practitioners should be able to purchase goods and receive services like any other Tibetan living in exile. If the reader has any doubts as to whether this discrimination is really happening please refer to the France24 documentary which reveals such religious discrimination. http://www.france24.com/en/20080808-dalai-lama-demons-india-buddhism-dorje-shugden

The Referendum has not followed Buddha’s Protocols in the Vinaya
(which invalidates the referendum according to #2)

According to the commentary the referendum is only valid if the procedures of “in the presence of” have all been followed but have not succeeded in settling the issue. “In the presence of” means that the community has to meet and try to settle the issue before the referendum is taken (emphasis added).

This has not happened. In fact, the Dalai Lama has never met with the community of Dorje Shugden monks from these monasteries. There has not even been a reply from the Dalai Lama or his representatives to the requests of Shugden practitioners to have a dialogue on this issue. This is a clear contradiction with the commentary given. The referendum is not the result of a meeting within the monastic community but rather it has been unilaterally decreed by the Dalai Lama himself (please refer to the January 8th, 2008 talk at Drepung for evidence of this).

This brings up the question, is the Dalai Lama a member of these monastic communities? If the answer is yes, then he (or a representative of his) has to meet with the Dorje Shugden communities at these monasteries prior to any referendum. If the answer is no, which can be stated in terms of the Dalai Lama not residing within that monastery, then on what basis is he even involving himself? Where does the Vinaya say that to resolve a conflict, high lamas should adjudicate? This is what the Dalai Lama’s supporters are saying but it has no basis in Buddha’s teachings.

Others might argue that the Dalai Lama is not involving himself but simply saying the matter should go to a vote. To refute this point please watch the France24 video (web link to this piece is above) where the Dalai Lama is on video saying from the teaching throne, “These monks must be expelled from all monasteries. If they are not happy, you can tell them that the Dalai Lama himself asked that this be done, and it is very urgent.”

The most compelling argument on this point is that the Vinaya provides an opportunity for any monk in the assembly to protest against having the matter settled by the group. If this happens then the group is deemed incompetent to resolve the issue. The purpose of this is to protect the Dharma from bhikkhus who advocate what is not truly Dhamma or Vinaya yet hold sway over the group. Surely if such a meeting would have occurred the Dorje Shugden monks would have protested.

The Outcome of the Referendum is not in Accordance with the Dharma
(which invalidates the referendum according to #4, #5, and #8)

Venerable Atisha said,
“Friends, until you attain enlightenment the spiritual teacher is indispensable, therefore rely upon the holy Spiritual Guide. Until you realise ultimate truth, listening is indispensable, therefore listen to the instructions of the Spiritual Guide.”

The referendum contradicts the words of this holy teacher because the practitioners of Dorje Shugden received a commitment to do this practice from their Gurus Trijang Rinpoche, Ling Rinpoche, Geshe Rabten, Zong Rinpoche, Dagom Rinpoche, etc. To abandon their teachers’ advice by voting in favor of the ban would be non-Dharma according to Venerable Atisha.

The irony is that this puts the Dalai Lama and his followers in the position where if they are to establish their view as Dharma then they would have to say that Trijang Rinpoche and Ling Rinpoche (the Dalai Lama’s Gurus) taught non-Dharma thus invalidating his own teachers’ qualifications as authentic Gurus. How can a valid teacher teach non-Dharma? If the Dalai Lama’s teachers are not valid teachers then by what lineage is the Dalai Lama a lama himself?

Therefore, for all the reasons mentioned here, the referendum on Dorje Shugden practice is non-Dharma. Since the Dalai Lama is presenting the referendum as Dharma when in reality it is non-Dharma he is deceiving Buddhist practitioners around the world.

Furthermore, by denying these practitioners the basic necessities of life (by these I mean the aforementioned material amenities) the Dalai Lama and the abbots carrying out these referendums are breaking their refuge vows to Buddha which include not harming any living being.

Typically, those who have spoken out against the Dalai Lama on this issue have been portrayed as gullible, naive, and unaware of the harmfulness of Dorje Shugden. I would like to point out however that those in the Tibetan and Western communities who practise Dorje Shugden have experienced considerable slander and libe,l thus making this issue a point of internal reflection and consideration for many of us.

This article is the result of one Dorje Shugden practitioner’s investigation, my own. What I ask to all those who disagree, can you establish – based on Buddha’s teachings – the validity of these referendums?

Source: DorjeShugden Blog
http://dorjeshugdenblog.wordpress.com/2008/09/07/dalai-lamas-referendum-contradicts-vinaya/

As you can see this history of Pehar’s previous lives do not point to actions of higher level being.

Part 2 of the video:

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

According to Tibetan Buddhist myth, Gyalpo Pehar is a spirit belonging to the gyalpo class. When Padmasambhava arrived in Tibet in the eighth century, he subdued all gyalpo spirits and put them under control of Gyalpo Pehar, who promised not to harm any sentient beings and was made the chief guardian spirit of the Samye Temple built at that time.

Some Tibetans believe that the protector of Samye sometimes enters the body of a medium (called the “Dharma Lord of Samye”) and acts as an oracle.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyalpo_Pehar

Many eons ago, the dharma protector, Pehar, was a royal prince of the Ashuras called Damaraja. At the time of his birth, another boy was also born — to one of the king’s ministers. The two became fast friends and were ordained as monks together by the abbot called Dawe (moonlight.)

Damaraja’s religious name was Dawe Shinu and his friend’s was Tunten Nagpo.

Dawe Shinu became a scholar, who enjoyed teaching Dharma. His friend enjoyed meditating.

One day Dawe Shinu went to visit a Hindu Temple where he met a beautiful girl named Zitan Metog Ke. Overwhelmed by physical attraction, they fell into each other’s arms and ended up making love in the temple for 7 days and nights.

Dawe Shinu had broken his vows of celibacy.

His friend came and tried to stop them, but he could do nothing. Dawe Shinu got so angry at the intervention that he turned into a lion and threatened to kill his friend. If it had not been for Vajrapani, who protected Tunten Nagpo with his vajra, he would have done so.

Years late, when Dawe Shinu died, he was reborn in hell. There, he was known as Butcher’s Horse, and his life was full of suffering.

In his next existence, he was reborn as a human being who was very poor and homeless. One day, as he was wandering he ran into his former friend but they had no liking for each other.

Then Dawe Shinu was born to King Muche Tsampo and his wife, Queen Lhamo Tongon. that time, he was named Vajra Kuhe Samati. His former friend, Tunten Nagpo, was a hermit who meditated in cave and for some reason, Vajra Kuhe Samati was moved to turn himself into a rat just to try and disturb him. Once again Vajprapani intervened to protect Tunten Nagpo.

The fourth existence of Dawe Shinu was as the third son of Dudje Tsempo, king of the local demons. His name this time was Mudu Tankhar. (His father also had four other children.)

Pehar is a reincarnation of that demon, Mudu Tankhar. He is described as having three faces, six arms and riding a lion. He is known as a Tinley Gyalpo, or Action King.

When Padmasambhava and Tibetan ruler, Trison Deutsen, built Samye Monastery, Guru Rinpoche invited Pehar from his realm called Petahor to be the protector. He gave him a wife, Mentsun Karmo, as well as another consort. They were installed in the quarters called Peharchok that was established especially for them in the northern side of Samye. This Pehar temple is known as the Turquoise Palace.

Pehar, as a dharmapala, embodies the activities of the Five Buddhas. He also has five aspects: Body, Mind, Speech, Knowledge and Activity. The Mind aspect of King Pehar (Tuk ki Gyalpo) is brown with one face and two arms. His right hand holds a red spear, his left, a double-edged sword and a lasso. He wears a bear skin shawl and a black turban and is seated on an elephant amidst fire.

The Body aspect of Pehar (Kui Gyalpo) is dark blue, with one face and two arms. His right hand holds a vajra and his left, a single cymbal. He wears a round golden cymbal-shaped hat (tipshu) and rides a black bear.

The Knowledge aspect (Yonten kyi Gyalpo) is black, with one face and two arms. His right hand holds an axe, his left a demon’s lasso. He wears a tiger skin shawl and a black snakeskin and rides a dragon.

The Speech aspect (Sung gi Gyalpo) is dark brown, with one face and two arms. His right hand holds a staff, his left a sandalwood club. He wears a black robe and rides an iron wolf.

The Activity aspect (Thinley gyi Gyalpo) is navy blue with three faces and six arms. His first right hand holds a hook, the second an arrow, and the third, a sword. His first left hand holds a razor-sharp knife, the second a bow, the third a staff. He wears his tipshu, a white shawl and leopard-skin skirt, and rides a snow lion.

~ edited from Lama Kunga Rinpoche’s teaching (02/1999) as recorded by Jeff Watt.

As a state institution, Nechung Monastery stood at the apex of a nationwide system comprised of thousands of mediums and their respective spirits. The network through which the human and spirit worlds were connected, was re-enfranchised annually, in the so-called Lhatrel or God Tax.

Once a year Tibet ’s 120 district governors collected offerings from the mediums in their region on behalf of their spirits. Forwarded to Nechung Monastery, they were given, on the third day of the New Year, in a colossal tsog or offering ritual, to Pehar Gyalpo.

After the rite, Nechung’s monks moved to the center of Lhasa for the oracle’s appearance in Tibet’s most spectacular celebration, the three-week-long Monlam Chenmo or Great Prayer Festival. At this time, over 20,000 monks, joined by thousands of pilgrims from all across the country, crowded into the capital.

The Nechung medium was required to undergo trance on at least ten separate occasions. In the most dramatic event, following days of parades, athletic meetings and religious convocations, he marched in a regal procession south of the city to a field below the Potala, where, wielding his bow, sword and trident before a bonfire, he ritually dispersed the negative spirits of the old year.

The need to thoroughly test the authenticity of the Nechung kuden had, for centuries, been a critical concern of the Tibetan government. As the most delicate policies of state, both domestic and foreign, were involved with the oracle, the possibility of a leak, either from a malignant spirit taking possession (and subsequently relating information via another medium) or from the medium himself retaining some trace memory of the trance, was ever-present. So, too, was the danger of a garbled or mistaken transmission.

To protect against the latter, the level of the medium’s trance was closely observed, a complete possession, inducing unconsciousness, being the ideal state. Such possession could occur only if the 72,000 psychic channels upon which, according to tantric theory, consciousness is mounted in the human body were cleared of all obstructions.

In such a case trance would be undergone swiftly, continuing without fluctuations or other irregularities. Though Lobsang Jigme’s trances revealed him to be very pure “vessel,” the next task, that of checking whether or not if it was in fact Dorje Drakden who possessed him, required, following preliminary observations, three levels of tests.

Initially, four signs of Dorje Drakden’s immense power were sought: swelling of the medium’s body up to two inches, effortless support of the heavy costume, ringing of the golden bells on the helmet’s top and shuddering of the mirror on the chest from the increased heartbeat.

The character of the possessing spirit was then observed. Dorje Drakden’s cham was particular to him, as was the fact that his fierce, prideful attitude gave way to humility only if the Dalai Lama, his picture or an article of his clothing was present. Otherwise the spirit minister demanded complete subjugation from all those in attendance. With these factors present, three categories of tests, known as outer, inner and secret, were undertaken.

In the other test, the medium was presented during trance with sealed boxes and requested to name their contents. This exam was considered easy, as the majority of spirits were believed to possess a minor form of clairvoyance.

It was followed by the inner test, in which the possessing spirit was requested to quote verbatim prophecies given by the Protector on specific dates in the past. With hundreds of prophecies on file, all imparted in Dorje Drakden’s poetic, often cryptic style, this test was virtually impossible to pass if the Protector himself was not present.

The two tests comprising the secret category, however, were believed definitive. Prior to the trance the kuden’s breath was checked to make sure that it had no odour. During trance it was examined again. If Dorje Drakden was in possession, the breath would invariably have a strong scent, similar to that of alcohol but described as actually being that of nectar.

At the moment Padmasambhava had converted the Five Kings, in the form of the eight-year-old novice, to the Dharma, he had anointed the child’s tongue with a few drops of nectar. Its odour was maintained by the spirit as a sign that his vows were being upheld. While exacting allegiance, Padmasambhava had placed the blazing tip of his dorje on the head of the kneeling child.

As the trance ends and the thickly padded helmet is quickly removed before the kuden chokes, Dorje Drakden’s possession is revealed in the well-defined imprint of a dorje, clearly visible for a matter of minutes, on the crown of the medium’s head.

The position of Nechung Kuden, however, was neither easy nor even necessarily desirable. It held the potential of a high as well as an ignominious fate. Many kudens had suffered the latter; only a few had achieved the former.

The very first kuden, appointed at the monastery’s founding in the seventeenth century, had been executed when, through possession by a lesser spirits, secret government information had been revealed to the public. Though no such drastic measure had occurred since, two of the three kudens preceding Lobsang Jigme had been disgraced, fired from their posts, after their meditation practice had deteriorated to the point of interfering with the coherence of their trances.

Shakya Yarpel, though, the renowned kuden prior to them, had been so beloved by the Thirteenth Dalai Lama for the charity of his possessions that he had been accorded honours above even those granted the Prime Minister and Cabinet, actually being conveyed when he traveled in a pep jam, the gold palanquin normally reserved solely for the Dalai Lamas and Regents.

Aware of the difficulty of the post, Lobsang Jigme’s predecessor, had run away on being singled out during a trance of the Gadong Oracle as the new Nechung kuden. Nonetheless, unable to prevent his destiny, he had been possessed by Dorje Drakden and, until his death (attributed by some to the immense strain placed on his heart by possession), accepted the role.

Excerpt from
In Exile from the Land of Snows
By John F. Avedon

Ven. Drubthob Rinpoche’s birth and a brief account of events that preceded it:

Drubthob Rinpoche, popularly known as an extremely simple, humble and compassionate lama by those who know or have heard of him, was born in 1929 towards the end of the Iron Horse year, in Lhoga Dranag, a province in central Tibet, south of Lhasa.

His father Tseten Wangyal was born in Tibet in 1895, a goldsmith by profession but served for most part of his life in the Nepalese Consulate in Lhasa. His mother Dekyi Choedon was a very simple lady from a humble Tibetan family.

Rinpoche’s late parents were great devotees and patrons of Drubchen (Drubthob-Chenpo) Rinpoche, a great Yogi who is said to have spent most of his life meditating in the secluded caves of Lhoga Dranak and Lhasa.

Being patrons and devotees of the great Yogi, Rinpoche’s parents made regular visits to his caves not only to receive his blessings but also to offer him rations. This went on for twelve years.

In the year 1928, touched by the couple’s great sense of devotion towards him, on one cold winter day the Yogi confessed that he had nothing to offer to them in return for their kindness and devotion over so many years, but that he would one day answer their prayers in his next life.

So saying he held out from his bare palm, a fresh peach (fruit), blessed it and asked them to accept it. Soon, Drubchen Rinpoche passed away. Meanwhile, Dekyi Choedon conceived a child in her womb, some time after Drubchen Rinpoche passed away.

When the child was just six months in her womb, she went to see Chokdra Rinpoche to seek his blessing as she had experienced some problems with her health. As Chokdra Rinpoche saw her he instructed her thus, “Your health problem will do no serious harm to you. The child you have in your womb is a boy and his owner is the protector, “Pehar Gyalpo”. Therefore, you should take special care and attention to maintain your health and cleanliness and eat good food”.

The family experienced continuous hardship for three years following the child’s birth: family members fell ill, many cattle perished and obstacles in the family business increased year after year. The parents once again went to see Chokdra Rinpoche and told him everything. Rinpoche told them they could not stay there any longer because there was great possibility of more harm from the protector “Pehar Gyalpo” to the whole of the family if they stayed.

How Ven. Rinpoche came to be known as Drubthob Rinpoche:

Upon the advice of Chokdra Rinpoche, the family finally moved to Lhasa. Soon after they arrived in Lhasa, Dekyi Choedon fell sick. They went to Kangyur Rinpoche for advice and he, too said the family had been affected by the protector, “Pehar Gyalpo” and added that the protection puja should be performed.

When the boy was about 7 years old his parents invited Ven. Kangyur Rinpoche to their home to perform offerings to “Pehar Gyalpo”. During the prayers the boy innocently reached out and touched the prayer drum & bell of Kangyur Rinpoche.

At this incidence Rinpoche’s mother was about to discipline the boy when Kangyur Rinpoche told her not to do so. Moreover, Kangyur Rinpoche recognized the boy, explaining that he was none other than the reincarnation of the great holy yogi Drubchen Rinpoche whom they had served for 12 years.

And Kangyur Rinpoche told the parents that the boy should be called “Drubthob Rinpoche”, which to this day is the name by which Rinpoche is known. Kangyur Rinpoche further advised the family that the boy should be ordained as monk in the Drepung Loseling monastery; at the time, the world’s largest monastic university.

Ven. Rinpoche’s studies in the profound doctrine of Buddhism:

By the age of nineteen, Rinpoche had mastered the art of Buddhist chants and rituals. It was then that he was pronounced one of the sixty “Donsangs” (perfect chanters) out of the seven thousand monks at Drepung Monastery. Among the sixty he was proclaimed to be the outstanding one.

For the next six years till the age of twenty-five, he devoted himself to the study of the subjects of logic, Buddhist Philosophy and it’s texts: Prajnaparamita (She-rab ki Pharchin) and Madhyamika (oo-ma), under the directions Gen Pema Gyaltsen and Pom-para Yeshi Dhondup. He also studied the Vinaya (dhul-wa Gyatso) under the direction of Gen Lobsang Tsewang.

At the age of twenty-five he received the title of “Drha-sang Chentse”. Soon after which Rinpoche studied the practice of Phowa under the direction and empowerment of Kangyur Rinpoche. From the age of twenty-five to twenty-eight he concentrated on retreat and various forms of meditation under Lhaptsun Rinpoche and Kangyur Rinpoche.

His fame in these practices and effects of his profound selfless vision spread quickly among the people and as a result many came with faith and devotion, seeking his blessings.

Chinese invasion of Tibet and Rinpoche’s imprisonment:

When the communist Chinese brutally invaded and occupied Tibet, the saddest moment in Tibetan history befell the Tibetans. A nation that had not seen war for centuries had to face the military might and sophisticated weapons of communist China.

Nevertheless, every soul in the nation along with the ill-equipped and unorganized Tibetan Army, fought back bravely to resist the brutal Chinese occupation, with patriotism as their only common weapon. Almost every Tibetan faced what he or she had to in order to defend the country and it’s rich cultural heritage. Ven. Rinpoche was one among those who suffered the consequences of the invasion.

Rinpoche had started distributing “TSONSUNG” (Protection Amulets) freely amongst the Tibetan Army and to all who asked for them, to protect them against Chinese weapons and bullets. Many people survived from the Chinese weapons and bullets as a result of his “TSONSUNG.” The Chinese later on came to know about this and sentenced Rinpoche to three years imprisonment on the charge of distributing TSONSUNG to the Tibetan Army. Rinpoche remained in prison three years (early 1958 to late 1961.)

Escape from prison and Rinpoche’s selfless activities in Nepal

During these years his father, Tseten Wangyal made several attempts to convince the Chinese that Rinpoche was Nepalese by origin. Finally in 1961, after a long negotiation between the Nepalese Consulate and the Chinese bureaucrats, his hard work brought reward when the Chinese finally decided to escort Rinpoche to Shar-Singma, close to the South Eastern boarder of Tibet, to release him. It was here that he entered Gangtok (Sikkim) and reached Kalimpong (District Darjeeling, India) and finally in 1962 made it to Kathmandu, Nepal.

At the Nepalese border, he was received by his patrons Go-Knonpo (blue door), who had invited him because the people of Kathmandu felt the need for a resident Lama. Upon arrival in Kathmandu, Rinpoche felt great dedication and commitment to stay there and serve the spiritual needs of the local people from all walks of life. Almost every individual that knows him speaks of his selfless deeds and simplicity.

Drubthob Rinpoche, being a simple Gelong monk, has always been available for everyone who seek his help and blessings. Rinpoche’s special attention has been to treat people with ailments like epilepsy and various nervous disorders, besides giving general health advice and pulse checks, for which Rinpoche has been sought out for since his early medical education in Tibet.

Drubthob Rinpoche is always known for his selfless caring for all those facing ill health and/or death. Rinpoche’s disciples from all walks of life invite him to their homes to perform Buddhist rituals prayers i.e., for house blessings, health reasons, weddings, births and deaths. For those whom have passed away Rinpoche performs the “Phowa” ritual, which helps the souls to be reborn in a better world.

Drubthob Rinpoche is especially well known for doing “Mo”(Divination) for his disciples to provide guidance for whatever ventures and activities they may be pursuing. Mo is normally a Buddhist practice of unraveling the unknown outcome of any given situation.

Drubthob Rinpoche is also well known for performing ritual to dispel obstacles from people’s lives, and exorcisms of negativity, etc. Drubthob Rinpoche’s vision is always to help everyone irrespective of his or her faith and creed.

Though originally a Nepalese but born in Tibet, for decades Rinpoche has been a kind father for the hundreds of Tibetan refugees coming to Nepal and has been a main source of encouragement for them. For years Rinpoche has visited each of the many Tibetan refugee centers in Nepal to perform prayers for their well-being.

(extracted from: http://www.drubthobrinpochenp.org/)

It is clear here, that Pehar Gyalpo (Dorje Drakden’s or Nechung’s ‘boss’) is able to harm. He is the one that mentions again and again to Dalai lama that Shugden’s practice should be stopped via his oracle in Dharamsala.

This opens up a can of worms that implicates so much. Can we trust this oracle taking possession of Nechung or is it someone else taking trance?

Nechung is a worldly spirit of the Gyalpo class, most likey from Persia, who tried to block the coming of Buddhism into Tibet, and finally Guru Rinpoche has to wrathfully oath-bound him.

This video clearly demonstrates the contradictions Tibetan Govt overtly exhibits.

They worship Nechung the spirit yet Dorje Shugden’s practice is suppresseed as they claim he is a spirit.

They ask you not to seek advice of spirits as it damages one’s refuge vows, yet they are seeking advice.

They ask you not to pray to spirits, yet they set up Nechung’s chapel right along the lingkor where hundreds of people religiously circumambulate daily.

There’s one policy for them and another for Shugden practitioners.

They put up letters to ban Shugden practitioners yet they promote Nechung the spirit to the lay people.

Why is it they may worship spirits, but we may not worship Dorje Shugden which they have wrongly labeled a spirit?

How can Nechung who has limited clairvoyance advise Dalai Lama to ban Shugden?

How can Nechung with his limited powers as a spirit have the abilities to see the level of Shugden? Why does the Dalai Lama need Nechung’s advice at all?

Trijang Rinpoche clearly states Shugden is Manjushri. Yet Nechung says Shugden is not. Who do we listen to? The Root Guru of all Gurus, Trijang Rinpoche or a spirit called Nechung?

The Tibetan Govt in Dharamsala gives many contradictions that do not make sense to those who are learned, can debate and refute. Hence all requests to discuss the Shugden issue with the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Govt have been refused.

Please contemplate on these contradictions.

This film presented is not meant to disparage the Dalai Lama nor Nechung. It is to bring a point across that the policies from Tibetan Govt must be fair and Dalai Lama should never ban, restrict, or speak against Dorje Shugden’s practice. Dalai Lama has the right to worship Nechung, so the followers of Trijang Rinpoche have the right to worship Shugden.

Shugden’s practice was estimated clearly to be around 4 million strong before 1959. Shugden was not a minor practice but a leading force within the Buddhism of Tibet.