dorjeshugden.com
About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: thor on March 24, 2010, 07:13:05 PM
-
This was extracted from a talk by Lama Zopa:
"Some people think that the practice of Shugden prevents Lama Tsongkhapa’s teachings from degenerating and promotes their development. But there have been many Gelug lamas who without practicing Shugden, spread Buddhadharma, spread the stainless teaching of Lama Tsongkhapa like the sky. Lamas like Their Holinesses the Thirteenth and the Fourteenth Dalai Lamas, Ling Rinpoche and Kachen Yeshe Gyaltsen—a great, well-known Tibetan lama who wrote many, many teachings and not only didn’t practice Shugden but also advised against the practice.
Purchog Jampa Rinpoche, a very high lama of Sera Je Monastery and an incarnation of Maitreya Buddha, wrote against the practice of Shugden in the Monastery’s constitution. Jangkya Rölpa’i Dorje and Jangkyang Ngawang Chödrön, who wrote many excellent texts, also advised against this practice, as did Tenpa’i Wangchuk, the Eighth Panchen Lama, and Losang Chökyi Gyaltsen, the Fourth Panchen Lama, who composed the Guru Puja and wrote many other teachings, and Ngulchu Dharmabhadra. All these great lamas, and many other highly accomplished scholars and yogis who preserved and spread the stainless teaching of Lama Tsongkhapa, recommended that Shugden not be practiced.
This point is very important, because people think that His Holiness the Dalai Lama is the only one trying to stop the practice of Shugden. Therefore, the people who are practicing it get negative towards His Holiness. But His Holiness is not the only one. There are many other high lamas who, in monastery constitutions, have advised their monasteries not to practice, or, if they are practicing, to stop. There are many, many lamas who have done this."
Perhaps someone on this forum can advise if there is any basis to these statements?
The full article is here (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=3196):
-
Dear friends, Trinley Kelsang has answered these questions in his great website. His humility does not allow him to say it but I can say it because I read through his research.
About the Lamas mentioned there, they could´ve been advising against any Protector, it´s the biased reading of the Dalai Lama´s followers that put in their sayings what they didn't say.
But please go to his website and find out:
http://www.dorjeshugdenhistory.org/index.html (http://www.dorjeshugdenhistory.org/index.html)
.
-
:) :) :) utter rejoicing in the dispelling of silly talk :) :) :)
-
You may find this blog post interesting:
http://truthaboutshugden.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/the-dalai-lamas-research-concerning-past-masters-and-dorje-shugden/ (http://truthaboutshugden.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/the-dalai-lamas-research-concerning-past-masters-and-dorje-shugden/)
My comment to this blog (still awaiting approval) is:
It should be noted that when the Dalai Lama summaries his investigation, he says that we must contrast Phabongkhapa’s views next to the views of (a) the Fifth Dalai Lama, (b) Phurchog Ngawang Tampa, a Mahamudra lineage holder, and (c) Trichen Ngawang Chokdhen, a Ganden Tripa.
This blog has done a great service in explaining (c). Did you also know that his reincarnation is one of the featured Lamas on the Dorje Shugden History website? Check out:
[url]http://www.dorjeshugdenhistory.org/among-shugden-texts-1759.html[/url]
For (b), why is it that the Dalai Lama always these Masters quotes word for word, and yet when it comes to their supposed proscriptions against Shugden he has to make parenthetical remarks like, “here it very clearly states that the spirit was Dholgyal” (not!) … “it is not specifically stated that the spirit is Dholgyal, but it is clear from Changkya’s biography that the spirit referred to is Dholgyal” … ” It is clearly stated below that this account refers to Dholgyal.”
Well, if you’re quoting everything else verbatim, why not give us the direct quotes for these, too?
-
Lamas like Their Holinesses the Thirteenth
Ambiguous, possibly... but doesn't seem likely, see Dorje Shugden History RE: Pabonbka Rinpoche entry
Fourteenth Dalai Lama
I heard this Lama DID actually try to ban the practice, but was ultimately unsuccessful...poor fellow.
Ling Rinpoche
NOPE.
Kachen Yeshe Gyaltsen
NOPE.
Purchog Jampa Rinpoche, a very high lama of Sera Je Monastery and an incarnation of Maitreya Buddha, wrote against the practice of Shugden in the Monastery’s constitution.
Have heard this before, but never seen any evidence. Given the intensity with which the TGIE has been promoting this ridiculous idea, if it was there I suspect we would've seen it by now.
Jangkya Rölpa’i Dorje
NOPE.
Jangkyang Ngawang Chödrön,
Never heard of him. Later rebirth of Rolpai Dorje, perhaps?
Or is this supposed to be Trichen Nagawang Chogden? If so, NOPE.
Tenpa’i Wangchuk, the Eighth Panchen Lama,
Never heard he tried to Ban (except from Lama Z). Ninth and tenth ended up practicing, so what does THAT tell you?
Losang Chökyi Gyaltsen, the Fourth Panchen Lama,
Is it worht the time it takes to type it that Lama Losang Chokyi Gyaltsen passed away before the name Dorje Shugden was ever uttered? That there was preciecly NO PRACTICE whatsoever to ban?
Ngulchu Dharmabhadra.
Apparently heard that DS was causing some harm by banging some boulders together. How he felt about being told this is not in the record, nor is it ever mentioned that he ever tried to ban. Silly, if you ask me....
Also, Mahamudra Lineage Guru Khedrub Tenzin Tsondru, direct disciple of Je Dharmabhadra and his Nephew Yangchen Drupai Dorje, ended up being a famous Dorje Sugden practitoner. Go figger, huh?
SO....
Then go have a look at those Lamas that unquestionably DID engage in the practice. Ganden Tripas, Sakya Tris, abbots of the three great monasteries, abbots of the tantric monasteries, Ganden ear whispered lineage holders, Tenshaps to Various DL's, Yongdzins to various DL's, your lineage gurus, your lama, Kybabje Pabonka R, Kybabje Trijang R, Kyabje Zong R...etc etc etc etc etc.....
In conclusion,
Dalai Lama, Stop lying.
-
Thank you all for sharing your thoughts - I had read that piece that was posted by Dulzin too and was puzzled by it. Then again, i did think at the time that there wasn't even any evidence as to when these lamas denounced the practice or the context in which they may have commented on it. On the other hand, as you have also mentioned, the overwhelming numbers of masters who HAVE practised DS openly and certainly, far outnumber this little list and their practice was very much celebrated and renown.
I have heard that something like 99% per cent of monks in monasteries like Gaden and Sera practised Dorje Shugden - to make these accusations that a few DS lamas denounced the practice is to say that ALL these monks of the monasteries were also wrong, and all the monks who practised over the past 350 years were wrong. how can that be?! That would mean almost our entire lineage of masters have been engaging in a wrong practices. Oh dear!
What was also quite disturbing to me when I read this article by Lama Zopa is that I had previously thought that at the very least Lama Zopa did not speak against the practice but only in the context of promoting and adhering to Dalai Lama's advice. This shows that he goes a little further in denouncing the "wrongness" of the practice. It is quite disheartening to hear him saying / publishing this view so publically.
-
I particularly liked crazycloud's post esp re 8th, 9th and 10th Panchen Lamas.
- the 8th Panchen Lama tried to ban Dorje Shugden, the 9th and 10th practised.
- similarly, various lives of the Dalai Lama either banned, practised or switched between the two (the 14th!)
I would conclude they do what is necessary for that particular time.
-
Personally, we can keep on talking about Lamas who practices Dorje Shugden and those that opposes it till the cows come home. As far as i am concerned, only my Lama's words and teachings are paramount because listening to other Lamas can contradict my samaya with my Lama.
I think, we should spread the word that Dorje Shugden is special and extremely beneficial and for people to commit to a Lama and go all the way. We also shouldn't just loose faith in the Lama just because we read that some Lamas don't approve of the practices that our own Lama has given us. On the other hand, we should spread the word that those who are with a Lama who discourage certain practices like Dorje Shugden to go round on a witch hunt because we are severing the samaya people have with their Lamas. This is severe karma because it causes others to break their samaya and hence not able to gain any attainments. And if the Lama is attained, we get even bigger negative karma because we obstruct their Dharma work that can potentially benefit many beings.
That is what I think is more important than debate and research on what certain Lamas said about Dorje Shugden.
-
Personally, we can keep on talking about Lamas who practices Dorje Shugden and those that opposes it till the cows come home. As far as i am concerned, only my Lama's words and teachings are paramount because listening to other Lamas can contradict my samaya with my Lama.
I think, we should spread the word that Dorje Shugden is special and extremely beneficial and for people to commit to a Lama and go all the way. We also shouldn't just loose faith in the Lama just because we read that some Lamas don't approve of the practices that our own Lama has given us. On the other hand, we should spread the word that those who are with a Lama who discourage certain practices like Dorje Shugden to go round on a witch hunt because we are severing the samaya people have with their Lamas. This is severe karma because it causes others to break their samaya and hence not able to gain any attainments. And if the Lama is attained, we get even bigger negative karma because we obstruct their Dharma work that can potentially benefit many beings.
That is what I think is more important than debate and research on what certain Lamas said about Dorje Shugden.
Well said big uncle!
At the end of the day, we must always remember the advice of our lamas and not let the advice of another lama influence our practice and decisions just because that Lama is of a higher status, bigger name, more influential etc. I think this is what is happening increasingly, throughout the world - that people kinda name-drop Lamas' names to get more clout onto their side, and this gets very dangerous. People forgo their own Lama's advice because another higher name with bigger, more numerous centres advises against that practice. Then it never ends - what happens if yet another higher lama comes along and tells you to resume the practice? Then what? We end up only confused by the practices and in the end, even lose faith in what we're practising.
-
Personally, we can keep on talking about Lamas who practices Dorje Shugden and those that opposes it till the cows come home. As far as i am concerned, only my Lama's words and teachings are paramount because listening to other Lamas can contradict my samaya with my Lama.
I think, we should spread the word that Dorje Shugden is special and extremely beneficial and for people to commit to a Lama and go all the way. We also shouldn't just loose faith in the Lama just because we read that some Lamas don't approve of the practices that our own Lama has given us. On the other hand, we should spread the word that those who are with a Lama who discourage certain practices like Dorje Shugden to go round on a witch hunt because we are severing the samaya people have with their Lamas. This is severe karma because it causes others to break their samaya and hence not able to gain any attainments. And if the Lama is attained, we get even bigger negative karma because we obstruct their Dharma work that can potentially benefit many beings.
That is what I think is more important than debate and research on what certain Lamas said about Dorje Shugden.
I cannot agree with you more. At the end of the day just follow your Lama's advice. One Lama is enough no need so many. Choose one, trust one and go all the way. No confusion there. And besides I don't think any Lama would encourage their students to condemn another sangha/monk. My Lama does not advice so I am going to just follow that. Period!
Besides who are we to say and know what is his/her motivation. Nobody knows except the Buddhas. Perhaps there could be more then 1 method like what honeydakini said in another post.
The Buddha taught us 84,000 different methods for different minds. So I guess why not to a peaceful strategy. I don't like headache and pin pong games so I'll choose the more peaceful middle way approach. Thank you :)
-
Disagree.
It can be very important for those who have not developed an unshakeable faith in a Lama as yet to KNOW that the great Lamas they are being told rejected the practice DID NOT, and that many many Great Lamas in whom they have faith were indeed practitioners.
It helps to understand, for example, that if you say that Dorje Shugden is a ghost, the Ganden tradition is closed to you as no blessings will flow into your mindstream. Why? Your lack of faith prevents it. What blessings could you recieve from ordinary beings who thought a malicious spirit was an enlightened being?
Therefore, if you hope to benefit others by relying on Ganden tradition, better get right with Dorje Shugden!
:)
-
In an old Mandala magazine (FPMT magazine) there was a description of Lama Zopa traveling to Mongolia.
At a monastery there he proposed to offer food for all the monks............except those who practiced Dorje Shugden.
He then said that if they renounced Dorje Shugden practice he would pay for their food too. I don't have this issue but it was probably 10 years ago.
So he is really trying to destroy the practice.
Vajra
PS if someone has old Mandala magazines, maybe they could check ? It might have been an issue dating 1999.
-
To All The Lamas and Devoted to Shri Dorje Shugden Sing His Praise!
The Great King
Duldzin Dorje Shugden
O Hero Manjushri and Yamantaka in a fearsome disguise,
With the strength of a million Dharma Protectors; to you
we offer praise.
With a captivating, ruby smile of affection and compassion,
You are graceful whether wrathful, affectionate, peaceful, or smiling.
The moment we remember the unseen secrets of your body,
You grant all needs and wishes; to you we offer praise.
You hold a wisdom sword that cuts asunder the foe of samsara,
and a heart of great bliss that overcomes the extreme of peace.
You display skilful means beyond the extremes of samsara and peace,
O Glory of countless living beings, to you we offer praise.
Kyabje Zong Rinpoche teachings on chanting prayers of Dorje Shugden
www.youtube.com
-
It is important for a practitioner to "commit to a lama and go all the way" (see Big Uncle) and not worry about what other lamas say. But for those who have "developed unshakeable faith in a lama" (see Crazycloud) it is all right to follow the development of the controversy, find out about what other lamas say and understand the situation. It is important to know what is going on but one's faith in one's lama must not waver.
-
It is equally important to check everything against Buddha's words, the treatises and previous masters to determine the truth of the matter. Also if one's lama is asking you to do something non-virtuous then it is important not to become like a robot and execute heinous acts.
I completely agree with this. If it doesn't accord with reason, it should not be accepted. I had the idea to analyse the Dalai Lama's reasons for banning Dorje Shugden using the analysis of the three modes and so forth to show that, according to Buddhist logic, they are not tenable.
There is no valid cognizer that apprehends Dorje Shugden to a spirit and the ban to be justified.
-
I just have a question which is not directly related to Dorje Shugden but to Guru Devotion.
I had read that Buddha had said that we can take whatever we understand from his teachings and the parts we don't accept, we don't have to.
In the 50 verses of Guru devotion, verse 24 says:
(A disciple) having great sense should obey the words of his Guru joyfully and with enthusiasm, If you lack the knowledge or ability (to do what he says), explain in (polite) words why you cannot (comply).
(http://www.viewonbuddhism.org/resources/50_verses_guru_devotion.html)
in that sense, we do not necessarily have to follow what the Guru says without question.
However, i do read about the mahasiddhas who advise their students to do crazy things... which are not the heinous or non-virtuous actions, eg Milarepa... it was just to clear stuff for him even though it was physically and emotionally tough for him. So how do we distinguish between what is crazy wisdom and what isn't. I have heard that once you take a guru, you just follow whatever he says.
With reference to verse 24,
1. you can say that if the Guru tells you to do something, he would know if you have the knowledge or ability to do it when he asks you, so you should just follow.
2. if we think we cannot, perhaps it's our deluded mind that thinks we cannot when we can.
3. if we think we cannot, do we even dare to tell the Guru that we think we cannot!
What do you think?
-
With reference to verse 24,
1. you can say that if the Guru tells you to do something, he would know if you have the knowledge or ability to do it when he asks you, so you should just follow.
2. if we think we cannot, perhaps it's our deluded mind that thinks we cannot when we can.
3. if we think we cannot, do we even dare to tell the Guru that we think we cannot!
What do you think?
Hi WisdomBeing, this is good food for thought and important for our understanding of following our Lama's advice.
I think that Verse 24 however, is not meant to be a loophole for not following our Lama's advice just because we are lazy, feel we can't do it because we're insecure or inadequate etc but rather about a practicality. It is about questioning not to be belligerent or resistant or to flat out say "Nope, I can't do it and here are my reasons why."
Rather, I think it is a guideline for a few things:
1) If you don't really understand the instruction and need to clarify something so that you can carry out the assignment commitment with fuller understanding and to do it well. In this case, questioning is beneficial as it is to clear your doubts, not to reinforce and live by them.
2) If there really is a practicality for not being able to do something, which the Lama may not know of. Something as basic as your Lama asks you to please drive him somewhere but you do not have a driver's license. Of course then you would explain to him that you cannot fulfil the assignment as you can't legally drive. Clearly, this is not wrong. But it is also not to just say that and then look at the lama, blink and expect that that's it. It would also be to think of how else you can fulfil what needs to be done, such as to arrange for another driver. Then to tell the Lama, "I am unable to drive, but Mary will be able to drive you and I will also accompany you if you need me to".
At the end of the day, it always goes back to our motivation - why are we questioning or saying we cannot do something? Is it because of our own fears / laziness etc?
as to whether we "dare tell our Guru that we cannot" - i think Guru Devotion shouldn't be characterised by fear. if we sincerely feel that we cannot do something, and we explain it to him with a sincere heart and motivation, he will not be angry. He may show us a different way or explain further to us to help us understand so we CAN do it. Again, we need to check ourselves - why are we scared of telling him we cannot? And after the lama explains, are we happy to go away and fulfil the assignment or do we get even more resistant? find even more ways and reasons to disagree or not follow? That should tell us the real motivation for why we say we cannot do it in the first place.
Or if we really are confused and not sure whether we can or not, we can speak to our Dharma brothers and sisters to find other methods and solutions to accomplish what the lama has advised us to and which we thought was not possible. E.g. the example of driving the lama. If we really cannot, we can ask our dharma friends who can drive and find a solution that way.
-
The Dalai Lama’s ‘Research’ Concerning Past Masters and Dorje Shugden
By truthaboutshugden
When the Dalai Lama speaks out against the practice of Dorje Shugden, he often describes how he came to renounce his own practice of this deity, a practice he engaged in for a quarter-century. In these speeches, he inevitably mentions his own “thorough research.” Due to this reference, repeated over and over again, most people already inclined to believe the Dalai Lama are mollified, and are therefore disinclined to look into the matter further.
As an example, consider this introduction on the Dalai Lama’s own website…
His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s Advice Concerning Dolgyal (Shugden)
Following long and careful investigations, His Holiness the Dalai Lama strongly discourages Tibetan Buddhists from propitiating the fierce spirit known as Dolgyal (Shugden)….
and from the Dalai Lama’s talk at Lehigh University in July 2008.
During the Fifth Dalai Lama this problem started. From 1951 to the early 70’s, I myself was a worshipper of this spirit, so actually, previously, I was also one of them….Then around early 70’s..using different sort of methods to investigate, also reading the biographies of past many great masters, mainly the lamas of the yellow hat sect, …suppose if this Shugden is truly reliable, most of the great lamas after the fifth Dalai Lama, then I think must practice….but this is not the case. So….I developed some doubt. Then…thorough investigation, then it became clear.
So, what are the results of all this thorough research? What did the Dalai Lama discover amongst the thousands of works written by the great masters of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition?
Let’s take a look.
Three of the seven “historical references” listed on the Dalai Lama’s website refer to works that do not even mention Dorje Shugden. Of the remaining references, one is by Je Pabongka, one of the most well-know advocates of Dorje Shugden practice. Another is from the Fifth Dalai Lama, although it is believed by many that he later retracted this opinion and changed his view, composing prayers to Dorje Shugden as an enlightened being. The final mention is by one “Jigme Damchoe Gyatso” and is hardly compelling. It is also rejected by several important contemporary Lamas, such as Lama Zopa and Zong Rinpoche.
However, this does not stop the Dalai Lama and his government from citing the many “references” they have found, and representing them as being about Dorje Shugden when they are not.
Trichen Ngawang Chogden
This extraordinary master was the root guru of Kelsang Gyatso, the Seventh Dalai Lama. He was also the 54th Ganden Tripa, head of the Gelugpa Tradition. The view that this Lama spoke out against the practice of Dorje Shugden is derived from an episode in his biography written by Chankya Rolpai Dorje, another highly renowned Lama of the Gelug tradition. This Biography, however, never mentions Dorje Shugden. Instead, it talks about a local spirit known as Taktse Gyalpo.
The incident (the Dalai Lama) refers to is narrated in Changya’s biography of Trichen Ngawang Chogden. An evil monk spirit (rgyal.’gong) from Dragsob (brag.sob) who was invoked by some active Lama retired from his monastic office (bla.zur) and a Khamtsen at Ganden. They built a wayside shrine for this spirit in the circumambulation path of Ganden.
Trichen Ngawang Chogden declared this unsuitable. He said that since the time of Je Tsong Khapa and his disciples no worldly spirits were worshiped at his [Ganden] monastery and that in future this would also not be permitted. When that spirit was invoked through an oracle, he said that since the Trichen Rinpoche had said this, he had no choice but to leave and he excused himself and left for Taktse-Shöl. The Lama retired from his monastic office who had relied on that evil spirit died soon after as punishment by Kalarupa [one of Je Tsong Khapa’s protectors]. There is no reference to Dorje Shugden in this passage . The evil monk spirit (rgyal.’gong) was continued to be worshiped as a local deity at the place where he came from.
-Ursula Bernis, Condemned to Silence A Tibetan Identity Crisis, 1999
The reason this spirit from went back to “the place where he came from,” Taktse, an estate not far from Ganden Monastery, is because the spirit referred to in this verse is Taktse Gyalpo, a local spirit said to have been the spirit of a monk who died in bad circumstances.
In this biography master Changya clearly mentions what Trichen Ngawang Chogden has expelled is a ‘Gyalpo’, instead of ‘Dolgyal’. ‘Gyalpo’ is a general name used for all the deities and spirits born as incarnation of former lamas or monks. Therefore hundreds of Gyalpos exist in the Tibetan pantheon, and the term does not only apply to the Dolgyal. The name Dolgyal is a short term for ‘dol gyi gyalpo’. Dol is the name of a place, where the first temple of Dorje Shugden was erected by the 5th Dalai Lama.
-Dorje Shugden Charitable Societey, Chronicle, 2008.
So the original text says “Gyalpo,” and clearly refers to Taktse Gylapo, not Dorje Shugden. Dorje Shugden is not mentioned.
The Samlo department of Ganden monastery took over (the Taktse) estate, and with it, adopted that spirit of the estate as a protector deity of the department. It was then worshipped in the Ganden monastery in their department for some time, until it was expelled by the great master Trichen Ngawang Chogden, who at that time was the throne-holder of Ganden. The spirit was sent back to its estate, where it was worshipped by the villagers until 1959.
-Chronicle
The recognized reincarnation of Trichen Ngawang Chogden was called Trichen Tenpa Rabgya. Tenpa Rabgya was a Geshe lharampa from Sera Monastery, and became the tutor to Changkya Yeshe Tenpai Gyaltsen, the reincarnation of Chankya Rolpai Dorje. Among his teachers were such luminaries as Panchen Lama Palden Yeshe and Kachen Yeshe Gyaltsen. Tenpa Rabgya was a famous practitioner of Dorje Shugden, and wrote praises and rituals for his practice, requesting him to come from the “wisdom Dharmakaya,” clearly indicating his view that Dorje Shugden was a Buddha.
Extracted from: http://truthaboutshugden.wordpress.com/2010/01/14/the-dalai-lamas-research-concerning-past-masters-and-dorje-shugden/#comment-120
-
Of course he has engaged in deception but also in plain lies.
Like saying that there was no ban. Or saying that the oaths in front of deities in the monasteries against Dorje Shugden practitioners had been the initiative of the abbots as if he never had severely incited them to do what they did.
These lies are not at all difficult to explain because we have his original words and his subsequent denials.