dorjeshugden.com
About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: Tenzin Gyatso on February 14, 2012, 10:41:52 AM
-
I don't know if I should be on this forum but let's give it a try. I've been watching this forum and I came over because of phayul. There were threads which talked about Shugden.
Most of you say HH Dalai Lama is wrong about speaking against Dorje Shugden. Did ever think he can be right. I know you claim much pain was caused due to the speaking out against Shugden by HHDL. But did you ever think of the pain that was caused from NOT speaking out? I mean if Dorje Shugden was not harmful, why would HHDL speak out. He gets nothing but backlash. Why would Dalai Lama knowingly hurt his own people? The media rarely speaks out about Shugden? Why? Maybe because Shugden people are wrong and there is not much news to report. No point in reporting? I mean a Nobel Peace laureate like HHDL who is celebrated by millions as a man of peace suppressing his own people by religioius segregation would be big news right?
I don't want to create trouble, but these are my thoughts. Yes, I am a follower of His Holiness and I live in Dharamsala and I've been here for over 10 years. I attend most of HHDL's talks and he is amazing to me.
-
I don't know if I should be on this forum but let's give it a try. I've been watching this forum and I came over because of phayul. There were threads which talked about Shugden.
Most of you say HH Dalai Lama is wrong about speaking against Dorje Shugden. Did ever think he can be right. I know you claim much pain was caused due to the speaking out against Shugden by HHDL. But did you ever think of the pain that was caused from NOT speaking out? I mean if Dorje Shugden was not harmful, why would HHDL speak out. He gets nothing but backlash. Why would Dalai Lama knowingly hurt his own people? The media rarely speaks out about Shugden? Why? Maybe because Shugden people are wrong and there is not much news to report. No point in reporting? I mean a Nobel Peace laureate like HHDL who is celebrated by millions as a man of peace suppressing his own people by religioius segregation would be big news right?
I don't want to create trouble, but these are my thoughts. Yes, I am a follower of His Holiness and I live in Dharamsala and I've been here for over 10 years. I attend most of HHDL's talks and he is amazing to me.
Welcome to the forum, you add an interesting 'flavor' to the forum. Please comment more on the forum but refrain from using harsh language or express opinions that are derogatory towards any Lamas or lineages.
Right or wrong is a debate that has been raging on and on. I have read and heard so many reasons why Dorje Shugden is Manjushri and is beneficial but I heard so little of what the Dalai Lama said is true, that Dorje Shugden is evil. Even the reasons that the Dalai Lama had used, I am sorry and with the deepest respect, illogical.
Even if Dorje Shugden was truly evil, why is the Dalai Lama so afraid? Can't he perform a ritual to get rid of him? Can the Buddha be powerless against a mere evil spirit? Can an evil spirit harm the Bodhisattva of Compassion, Chenrezig? If the all the Buddhist rituals are powerless against a mere spirit, why should I even take refuge in the Buddha? For me, to believe in what the Dalai Lama had said about Dorje Shugden destabilizes all that I believe in Buddhism. Too many doubts and questions will appear. So, I take refuge in Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche's prophesies and teachings about Dorje Shugden. It makes so much more sense.
-
I don't know if I should be on this forum but let's give it a try. I've been watching this forum and I came over because of phayul. There were threads which talked about Shugden.
Most of you say HH Dalai Lama is wrong about speaking against Dorje Shugden. Did ever think he can be right. I know you claim much pain was caused due to the speaking out against Shugden by HHDL. But did you ever think of the pain that was caused from NOT speaking out? I mean if Dorje Shugden was not harmful, why would HHDL speak out. He gets nothing but backlash. Why would Dalai Lama knowingly hurt his own people? The media rarely speaks out about Shugden? Why? Maybe because Shugden people are wrong and there is not much news to report. No point in reporting? I mean a Nobel Peace laureate like HHDL who is celebrated by millions as a man of peace suppressing his own people by religioius segregation would be big news right?
I don't want to create trouble, but these are my thoughts. Yes, I am a follower of His Holiness and I live in Dharamsala and I've been here for over 10 years. I attend most of HHDL's talks and he is amazing to me.
Welcome to the forum, you add an interesting 'flavor' to the forum. Please comment more on the forum but refrain from using harsh language or express opinions that are derogatory towards any Lamas or lineages.
Right or wrong is a debate that has been raging on and on. I have read and heard so many reasons why Dorje Shugden is Manjushri and is beneficial but I heard so little of what the Dalai Lama said is true, that Dorje Shugden is evil. Even the reasons that the Dalai Lama had used, I am sorry and with the deepest respect, illogical.
Even if Dorje Shugden was truly evil, why is the Dalai Lama so afraid? Can't he perform a ritual to get rid of him? Can the Buddha be powerless against a mere evil spirit? Can an evil spirit harm the Bodhisattva of Compassion, Chenrezig? If the all the Buddhist rituals are powerless against a mere spirit, why should I even take refuge in the Buddha? For me, to believe in what the Dalai Lama had said about Dorje Shugden destabilizes all that I believe in Buddhism. Too many doubts and questions will appear. So, I take refuge in Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche's prophesies and teachings about Dorje Shugden. It makes so much more sense.
Thanks for the welcome. Yeah, I will read up in time most of the posts.
HHDL is not afraid for himself. Shugden couldn't harm him. HHDL is afraid for all of us who have enough bad karma to warrant a triggering of problems from a negative spirit like Shugden. I mean nagas, ghosts, demons, elementals, goblins and what not all have some kind of power to harm us and if we have the karma, they can trigger our bad karma open for us to get harm. Why doesn't Buddha completely eradicate them so we don't suffer? So if Buddha can't eradicate negative ethereal beings, HHDL wouldn't eradicate Shugden.
But we have people telling us don't play with the supernatural, ghosts, demons and spirits because they could do real damage to us. So why don't all the priests, monks and whatever just subdue all the evil beings and then they don't have to warn us. Same logic. No more worries if they are all gone.
-
We hear of lamas subduing spirits that possess other human beings for example , why because they can and because BUddhism is based on the truth so negative beings can never overcome ultimate truth.
So there is this evil/negative being harming people, governments, Tibetan cause for freedom, the Dalai Lama himself, so so many things at stake and if Dorje Shugden can be send to a pure land why not? The benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Losing the Dalai Lama early is a great great blow to Buddhism, it is almost like Zamabala coming to the rescue of Shakyamuni when Devadatta tried to push a rock to crush Buddha.
Why be so gentle to a negative being who is polluting buddha dharma? Why can't Nechung subdue Dorje Shugden to save the Dalai Lama isn't that his role?
-
We hear of lamas subduing spirits that possess other human beings for example , why because they can and because BUddhism is based on the truth so negative beings can never overcome ultimate truth.
So there is this evil/negative being harming people, governments, Tibetan cause for freedom, the Dalai Lama himself, so so many things at stake and if Dorje Shugden can be send to a pure land why not? The benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Losing the Dalai Lama early is a great great blow to Buddhism, it is almost like Zamabala coming to the rescue of Shakyamuni when Devadatta tried to push a rock to crush Buddha.
Why be so gentle to a negative being who is polluting buddha dharma? Why can't Nechung subdue Dorje Shugden to save the Dalai Lama isn't that his role?
Maybe all of our karmas collectively is too strong to allow HHDL to subdue Dorje Shugden. So he just warns us.
-
These are poor excuses on behalf of His Holiness. If Avolektishvara cannot subdue a worldly being a nor can wrathful pujas destroy it either then it is not a worldly being as HHDL's guru has said. He calls our lineage into question in a distasteful manner.
-
These are poor excuses on behalf of His Holiness. If Avolektishvara cannot subdue a worldly being a nor can wrathful pujas destroy it either then it is not a worldly being as HHDL's guru has said. He calls our lineage into question in a distasteful manner.
I am not making excuses for HHDL. He doesn't need my help and he is doing really well all on his own. Advising against Shugden's practice was from his compassion. What does he gain from doing this. Take a good long think at it. It must be for the greater benefit of many.
-
Maybe all of our karmas collectively is too strong to allow HHDL to subdue Dorje Shugden. So he just warns us.
That is not true he went beyond warning us, he banned the practise and denied Dorje Shugden practitioners their basic human rights to live. yes this is the Kaliyuga, but to assume a Buddha like HHDL cannot subdue a mere spirit due to our karma is putting down the power of Buddha Dharma.
Tibetan Buddhism has many rituals to destroy obstacles, if the beings have obstacles these can be cleared can't they? If such obstacles hinder the destruction of Dorje Shugden. So why don't the HHDL ask all Tibetans to do purification practises so he can overcome Dorje Shugden? So HHDL makes mistakes too?
-
Maybe all of our karmas collectively is too strong to allow HHDL to subdue Dorje Shugden. So he just warns us.
That is not true he went beyond warning us, he banned the practise and denied Dorje Shugden practitioners their basic human rights to live. yes this is the Kaliyuga, but to assume a Buddha like HHDL cannot subdue a mere spirit due to our karma is putting down the power of Buddha Dharma.
Tibetan Buddhism has many rituals to destroy obstacles, if the beings have obstacles these can be cleared can't they? If such obstacles hinder the destruction of Dorje Shugden. So why don't the HHDL ask all Tibetans to do purification practises so he can overcome Dorje Shugden? So HHDL makes mistakes too?
HHDL probably does make mistakes but much less than all the lamas who still hold onto Shugden. I mean take a good look: WHO IS THE BIGGEST TIBETAN LAMA IN THE WORLD?
So it might do us good to follow a lama who makes less mistakes? Who is far more effective in spreading Buddha Dharma than any other teacher of any religion on this earth.
Just my thoughts.
-
These are poor excuses on behalf of His Holiness. If Avolektishvara cannot subdue a worldly being a nor can wrathful pujas destroy it either then it is not a worldly being as HHDL's guru has said. He calls our lineage into question in a distasteful manner.
I am not making excuses for HHDL. He doesn't need my help and he is doing really well all on his own. Advising against Shugden's practice was from his compassion. What does he gain from doing this. Take a good long think at it. It must be for the greater benefit of many.
For the great benefit of his political aims perhapes. Not for the benefit of Gelugpas in general his speaking out and disrespecting his spiritual guides directly contradicts the basis of reliance upon ones guru, its a double edge sword to defend his actions and at the same time expect lineage blessings to ripen on oneself while believing his gurus where in authentic spirit worshippers.
Welcome to the forum by the way. ;D
-
These are poor excuses on behalf of His Holiness. If Avolektishvara cannot subdue a worldly being a nor can wrathful pujas destroy it either then it is not a worldly being as HHDL's guru has said. He calls our lineage into question in a distasteful manner.
I am not making excuses for HHDL. He doesn't need my help and he is doing really well all on his own. Advising against Shugden's practice was from his compassion. What does he gain from doing this. Take a good long think at it. It must be for the greater benefit of many.
For the great benefit of his political aims perhapes. Not for the benefit of Gelugpas in general his speaking out and disrespecting his spiritual guides directly contradicts the basis of reliance upon ones guru, its a double edge sword to defend his actions and at the same time expect lineage blessings to ripen on oneself while believing his gurus where in authentic spirit worshippers.
Welcome to the forum by the way. ;D
HHDL should not work for just the benefit of the Gelugpas. That is precisely the point.
If a few gurus have to be pointed out as wrong for the greater many, then so be it.
Thanks for the welcome btw.
-
These are poor excuses on behalf of His Holiness. If Avolektishvara cannot subdue a worldly being a nor can wrathful pujas destroy it either then it is not a worldly being as HHDL's guru has said. He calls our lineage into question in a distasteful manner.
I am not making excuses for HHDL. He doesn't need my help and he is doing really well all on his own. Advising against Shugden's practice was from his compassion. What does he gain from doing this. Take a good long think at it. It must be for the greater benefit of many.
For the great benefit of his political aims perhapes. Not for the benefit of Gelugpas in general his speaking out and disrespecting his spiritual guides directly contradicts the basis of reliance upon ones guru, its a double edge sword to defend his actions and at the same time expect lineage blessings to ripen on oneself while believing his gurus where in authentic spirit worshippers.
Welcome to the forum by the way. ;D
HHDL should not work for just the benefit of the Gelugpas. That is precisely the point.
If a few gurus have to be pointed out as wrong for the greater many, then so be it.
Thanks for the welcome btw.
So His Holiness should not work for the benefit of Gelugpas ? Well for the past few decades he certainly hasnt been, by pulling apart teachers reputations and splitting sanghas he has created more harm then even devadatta did to Buddha's original sangha. The Ocean Lama is ment to benefit all living beings even those of different sects but hold Je Tsongkhapas doctrine as supreme and its lineage, however he cannot have done this because the incarnate of one of his gurus has effectivly had to move countries and be as far away from these machinations as possible certainly says something when ones spiritual guide is displeased with ones actions such a connection will cease to function as well in future lives.
-
Welcome to the forum and thank you for your perspectives.
Please note that this forum and website is NOT about bashing any Lamas. The views that we hold are that we respect His Holiness the Dalai Lama very much and have much gratitude for how much he has done for Buddhism in the world, but we do not agree with the ban, nor with the logic and reasons that he has put forward about the ban. We are protesting the ban and the negative ways in which Dorje Shugden practitioners are treated by the Dala Lama's people. We are not protesting the Dalai Lama himself, we would never dare to as we do respect him very much as a teacher of so many millions of people everywhere.
First of all, may I please invite you to see these articles that we have prepared, which debate clearly and logically the arguments which have been put forward by the Dalai Lama and his supporters about this issue of Dorje Shugden. We extracted articles directly from the Dalai Lama's website regarding Shugden, and show clearly why these points are not logical nor correct, from a Dharma perspective. please see the articles here:
http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9022 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9022)
http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9033 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9033)
http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9039 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9039)
http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9045 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=9045)
Secondly, your points about Dalai Lama giving us a warning and trying to protect sentient beings from the so-called "harmful" effects of Dorje Shugden. This is appreciated and I understand what you are trying to say. However, it is one thing to issue a warning and quite another to send out very obvious witchhunts against people who choose to continue the practice.
It is widely and commonly known that anti-shugden people launch physical attacks on Shugdenpas. Shugden practitioners have bricks thrown into their homes, their statues are brutally taken out and smashed up, they themselves experience physical attacks on their bodies. Shugden practitioners are denied medical aid, social welfare, voting rights; their passports are taken away; children of Shugdenpas are not permitted to attend the Tibetan schools; government workers are sacked from their jobs. Isn't this kind of reaction to Shugden practitioners also HARMFUL? If you say that Dalai Lama is protecting his people and warning them against something harmful, then why are attacks being launched against them and they are denied any kind of social help and welfare? It is completely contradictory.
Further, if you look at the statistics and reactions around the world, the moment the Dalai Lama began speaking about Shugden, he has become one of the most talked about deities in the world. The ban and the controversy has made him more famous than ever, more well known throughout countries and practitioners all over the world. There are more Dorje Shugden institutions and monasteries coming up throughout the world - just look at the recent opening of very strong Shugden institutions Serpom and Shar Gaden monasteries. The practice is stronger than ever. If Dalai Lama is chenrezig, a fully enlightened being, which we believe him to me, then why would he willingly create so much hype about a practice and draw so much more attention to something is supposed to be "bad"? Again, contradictions.
Other points have also been made to question why the Dalai Lama (or the hundreds of other high lamas) don't simply just bind this supposed "bad spirit", control him the way Guru Rinpoche did or just destroy him altogether. Why issue a warning about something that is supposed to be bad but not do anything to stop its harmful effects directly? Why just talk about it? And instead of protecting Shugden practitioners, launch more difficulties against them, kick them out of their monasteries, deny them social welfare etc etc…. It really all does not make sense and is very contradictory.
-
HHDL should not work for just the benefit of the Gelugpas. That is precisely the point.
If a few gurus have to be pointed out as wrong for the greater many, then so be it.
Thanks for the welcome btw.
I agree with you, the Dalai Lama should not work only for the benefit of the the Gelugpas, but neither should he discriminate against them which is what appears to be happening.
There is no evidence anywhere, other than in the 5th Dalai Lama's biography that Dorje Shugden is a spirit but there are lots of high Gelugpa and Sakya Lamas who say he is a Buddha.
-
Most of you say HH Dalai Lama is wrong about speaking against Dorje Shugden. Did ever think he can be right.
Hi there TG,
The following are my observations:
(i) As Buddhist scholars, we are taught to examine all information thoroughly and to be critical of them before we accept them as facts. It is not sufficient to simply claim that HHDL or Dorje Shugden is right or wrong. You must be able to provide a basis for your claims.
(ii) The practitioners of Dorje Shugden have been able to lay out very strong arguments as to why Dorje Shugden is in fact a benevolent Buddha, and they have been very CONSISTENT in their beliefs and Dorje Shugden has been very consistent in his protection of his practitioners including HHDL. Their belief of the facts have never changed.
(ii) On the other hand, HHDL has not to my knowledge laid out any concrete reasons as to why he believes Dorje Shugden to be an evil spirit. I am not even asking for concrete proof but merely for the HHDL to set out solid reasons as to why HE believes Dorje Shugden is malicious. If HHDL truly believes that Dorje Shugden is a harmful spirit, then HHDL as an enlightened mind should have no problems laying our solid arguments to justify his ban of a Buddha. In fact, his compassion would have compelled him to go all the way to do so in order to protect those who may be "misguided". Why else is Chenrezig here? Surely not to win Nobel Prizes?
(iii) Assuming HHDL is right as you claim. By that definition, then Pabongkha Rinpoche was wrong, and a whole long list of High Lamas before and after Pabongkha was wrong. None of these highly attained teachers have been known to be or proven to be wrong about anything. The only exception is HHHDL who claimed he was wrong about Dorje Shugden. I wonder, WAS the HHDL wrong or IS he wrong now?
(iv) Seeing that we cannot empirically proof that a being is either an evil spirit or an enlightened Buddha, we can only do the next best and reliable thing i.e. to look at the fruits or results of either (a) continuing to practice Dorje Shugden (b) obeying HHDL instructions to abandon the practice.
The most obvious fruit shown by those who decided to keep the Dorje Shugden practice is the fact that in so doing they also decided to keep their vows to their Guru at any costs. Those who abandoned the practice deemed the vows as mere undertakings to be abandoned at their own convenience. Which is a better fruit?
Next, those who kept the practice maintained peace and observed equanimity. Those who abandoned the practice became judgmental persecutors and vigilantes. Which is a better fruit?
I can go on but I trust you get the picture.
(v) I myself started off not knowing about Dorje Shugden and now I do and I practice this incredible Buddha. And I see the results of my practice and by that I see that with my practice of Dorje Shugden, the most hardcore of my negative habits are beginning to wane. I see myself before this practice and I see myself now. If I did see that as a result of my practicing Dorje Shugden I have become more deluded, selfish, angry etc, would I not know it? Even if I am personally blinded, would my family and friends not intervene? Instead they ask for the basis of my change.
In other words, TG, I am open to listen to facts but there's nothing coming out of the anti-Shugden camp that is remotely digest-able by the logical and willing mind.
-
Food for thoughts:
1.
To doubt the fact that Dorje Dhugden is a Buddha equates to:
- doubt that Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche was a qualified Teacher,
- and doubt that Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche was a qualified Teacher.
(How could they be if they propitiated to take refuge in a spirit? And if they did not know, how come we titled them with "kyabje" and also entrusted one of them as tutor to His Holiness? And if they were spirit worshipers, then why did the Dalai Lama himself recognize their re-incarnations? Aren't spirit worshipers supposed to be end up elsewhere?)
2.
To doubt the fact that Dorje Dhugden is a Buddha therefore equates to saying that His Holiness the Dalai Lama did not have qualified Teachers.
3.
Thus, to doubt the fact that Dorje Dhugden is a Buddha equates to saying that His Holiness the Dalai Lama is not a qualified Teacher, because He would not have received the blessing of an unbroken lineage and instead would have been instructed by spirit worshipers mascarading as lamas.
If Dorje Shugden was not a Buddha, then the lineage could not be trusted, neither the lineage, neither His Holiness.
There is a flagrant contradiction right in front of us, and I think its is flagrant so that we don't miss it and think deeper, longer and with faith. Faith in His Holiness the Dalai Lama, faith in Trijang Rinpoche, faith in the lineage and faith in Dorje Shugden.
-
Ultimately it becomes the classic chicken and egg scenario of which one came first. Yes the Dalai Lama's gurus practiced Shugden. During their time there was Tibetan unity so Shugden was tolerated. Now during modern times when Tibetans are scattered and unity is necessary, disallowing the worship of this spirit is more than necessary.
When the HHDL gave up his practice, he told Trijang Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche was ok with it. Doesn't that say alot? I think it does. By HHDL rejecting the practice, Trijang Rinpoche should know it is like an omen of things to come.
Since Trijang Rinpoche gave permission for Dalai Lama not to practice, it is indirectly allowing the HHDL's students also not to practice.
Since the worship of Shugden has stopped in Dharamsala nothing negative has happened. No bad omens. The Dalai Lama is fine and healthy. If the HHDL is creating the causes for so many to break their samayas, shouldn't the heavy karma of breaking samayas for millions bring it's effects already? Why is HHDL not showing any signs of karmic retribution for breaking up the samayas of so called millions who gave up Shugden. So many monks and laypersons have so called gone against their lamas and rejected Shugden. This is suppose to be real heavy samaya karma. Well I don't see this karma affecting HHDL at all. He is going super strong still and still speaking out against the spirit Shugden. That itself says alot. Don't you all think?
Stop practicing Shugden already. Don't be stubborn. The facts are clear. I mean take up on of the other protectors available. What's the difference. You need a protector, just take another one that is beyond doubt of being a spirit. Safer for everyone.
-
Ultimately it becomes the classic chicken and egg scenario of which one came first. Yes the Dalai Lama's gurus practiced Shugden. During their time there was Tibetan unity so Shugden was tolerated. Now during modern times when Tibetans are scattered and unity is necessary, disallowing the worship of this spirit is more than necessary.
When the HHDL gave up his practice, he told Trijang Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche was ok with it. Doesn't that say alot? I think it does. By HHDL rejecting the practice, Trijang Rinpoche should know it is like an omen of things to come.
Since Trijang Rinpoche gave permission for Dalai Lama not to practice, it is indirectly allowing the HHDL's students also not to practice.
Since the worship of Shugden has stopped in Dharamsala nothing negative has happened. No bad omens. The Dalai Lama is fine and healthy. If the HHDL is creating the causes for so many to break their samayas, shouldn't the heavy karma of breaking samayas for millions bring it's effects already? Why is HHDL not showing any signs of karmic retribution for breaking up the samayas of so called millions who gave up Shugden. So many monks and laypersons have so called gone against their lamas and rejected Shugden. This is suppose to be real heavy samaya karma. Well I don't see this karma affecting HHDL at all. He is going super strong still and still speaking out against the spirit Shugden. That itself says alot. Don't you all think?
Stop practicing Shugden already. Don't be stubborn. The facts are clear. I mean take up on of the other protectors available. What's the difference. You need a protector, just take another one that is beyond doubt of being a spirit. Safer for everyone.
Trijang Rinpoche had no choice but to accept that the Dalai Lama didn't want to practise Dorje Shugden. Every student has a choice to practice or not and the Guru isn't going to force you to practice if you don't want to. Apparently he was very disappointed that the Dalai Lama had rejected the practice - he in no way endorsed his decision.
If relying on a spirit is no longer required, why does the Dalai Lama still consult Nechung? That doesn't make sense.
About the breaking of samaya that the Dalai Lama is responsible for, the reply from Nagarjuna's letter to a friend is:
(31) Although any commitment of negative karmic acts
May not cut (you) immediately afterwards like a sword;
Nevertheless, when the time of death comes,
Whatever karmic results there will be will become manifest.
Until the Dalai Lama provides some evidence that the practice of Dorje Shugden is harmful, or that he is a spirit (other than his say so) I will continue to practice for all the benefits I and others receive. There is absolutely no sound reason to do otherwise.
-
The facts that establish Dorje Shugden as a Buddha are way too many in the balance against the words pronounced by the Dalai Lama that say he is a spirit.
The words of the Dalai Lama cannot wipe out the historical facts.
The Dalai Lama's words from before in this life or previous lives demonstrate a contradiction for us to see and contemplate upon.
The Dalai Lama has NEVER shown contradictions in His speech, NEVER.
Only when it comes to Dorje Shugden. Why?
If someone had a mind of contradictions, wouldn't that show as a pattern in every part of his speech?
The Dalai Lama is an attained Teacher, he is Chenrezig, there is NO contradictions in his speech, unless He is giving us clues, unless His purpose is not for us to understand right now, unless it benefits MANY, even if I suffer in the meantime.
Why does the Dalai Lama ban Dorje Shugden? If not to make His practice grow, for the result is there, the practice is growing, among non-followers of His Holiness and among followers of His Holiness too. If the aim was to ban the practice of Dorje Shugden, then His Holiness did not show very good skills...
But on the contrary, His Holiness has proven to the world His skillful means and His great compassion, and as TG says, He is not a Nobel Prize for nothing.
On the instance of Dorje Shugden, the Dalai Lama has shown to all again that he is skillful and acts out of Bodhicitta. Almost everyday now we receive news of new Shugden practitioners, from most every country in the world.
Dorje Shugden is the protector of Nagarjuna's teachings, as clearly taught by Tsongkhapa, He is the protector of the Guelougpa's and the Protector of all spiritual practitioners.
Dorje Shugden is very powerful because we have the karma to benefit from His activities, He is a young Protector, He is the Protector for our time.
Let's not be blind.
If Dorje Shugden was not enlightened, Trijang Rinpoche could not have taken rebirth with the 18 opportune conditions and be recognized by the Dalai Lama (same goes for many other lamas).
If Dorje Shugden was a spirit who's worship threatens His Holiness' life, then why authorize Trijang Rinpoche to practice.
My faith in the Dalai Lama is unwavering, in fact it is strengthened, for what His Holiness is doing is acting for the benefit of the many and with long term view.
To conclude (and I hope this will help):
"One is to follow His Guru's instruction with faith, for the merit gained comes from that, not from the action itself."
-
I don't know if I should be on this forum but let's give it a try. I've been watching this forum and I came over because of phayul. There were threads which talked about Shugden.
Most of you say HH Dalai Lama is wrong about speaking against Dorje Shugden. Did ever think he can be right. I know you claim much pain was caused due to the speaking out against Shugden by HHDL. But did you ever think of the pain that was caused from NOT speaking out? I mean if Dorje Shugden was not harmful, why would HHDL speak out. He gets nothing but backlash. Why would Dalai Lama knowingly hurt his own people? The media rarely speaks out about Shugden? Why? Maybe because Shugden people are wrong and there is not much news to report. No point in reporting? I mean a Nobel Peace laureate like HHDL who is celebrated by millions as a man of peace suppressing his own people by religioius segregation would be big news right?
I don't want to create trouble, but these are my thoughts. Yes, I am a follower of His Holiness and I live in Dharamsala and I've been here for over 10 years. I attend most of HHDL's talks and he is amazing to me.
I would say it is wrong when HHDL said Dorje Shugden (DS) is a demon because there are many evidences show that DS is an enlightened being; but not wrong when HHDL spoke against DS because he somehow created lots of publicity for DS. Look, which protector in this time has more publicity than DS? How many people know about, let's say Palden Lhamo as compared to DS?
It did make me curious as well, why did HHDL speak about Dorje Shugden when media was not interested at all? Why would a Nobel Peace Laureate like HHDL be so unfair to his own people? Media look for 'sellable' news, the reason why they report was because they think it didn't make sense for HHDL to ban DS, because it was just not logical, how can his life be threatened and how can the freedom of Tibet be threatened by DS? It was definitely not because DS was said to be a demon that the media reported this issue.
Think of it from another angle, could it be that HHDL is working together with DS to protect and bring Dharma to the world? Remember why DS araised? He araised as an uncommon protector of our time. He sworn to protect Tsongkhapa's Doctrine, he sacrificed his life in order to fulfill this promise. If it wasn't the ban from HHDL, would HHDL and DS become so famous in the world? Look at far Tibetan Buddhism has spread. Look at the number of Tibetan buddhist center all around the world. Look at the media coverage on Tibetan Buddhism. For enlightened beings like HHDL and DS, they have no 8 wordly concerns at all, they will do everything they can to protect and spread Dharma, including having a bad name for themselves. This is how compassionate they are.
As to whether to practice DS, one should follow the instructions of one's Guru. If HHDL is your Guru, then follow what he says for you have to keep you Guru Samaya clean. If your Guru is not HHDL, then you do not have to listen to him. But we do have to respect other Lamas.
-
If you think about it, it is very, very funny and illogical when it comes to trying to rationalize the ban. Why is the Dalai Lama seeing the Nechung oracle even though Nechung has been clearly stated to be not enlightened? And even if Dorje Shugden is not enlightened, there is no reason for the Dalai Lama to not speak to him via an oracle on the whole issue before the ban took place. He can communicate with Dorje Shugden directly in that way.
Second inconsistency: Ngari Rinpoche, which is also HHDL's brother, is considered as a Dorje Shugden reincarnate as he is considered the direct reincarnation of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen, as stated in the other thread. Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen himself prophesied that he will be reborn as the Ngari tulkus. Again, this is something well known and that is documented. Samdong Rinpoche, the ex prime minister of Tibet is also widely known to be Dorje Shugden's emanation, this was said by Trijang Rinpoche himself, but he was allowed to be prime minister anyway...why would you let the manifestation of a spirit be a prime minister? Weird right? Then there is also Guru Deva Rinpoche who is widely known to be Gyenze's emanation as well. He was recognized as such...my question is, if HHDL really believes that Dorje Shugden is a spirit, why dosent he invalidate their titles or put them into exile?
Third inconsistency: The Dalai Lama cited many works in his website on why Dorje Shugden is evil. After thorough research, which you can find here in this forum, it has been proven that most of the points presented are not substantial and upon further investigation, is just the misinterpretation of the historical texts and the confusion of names. These doubts were not refuted or countered by the Dalai Lama and his people. Why would HHDL want to choose materials with poor credibility to support his stand? He is the Dalai Lama.
With all these inconsistencies for the reasons for the ban, why would someone like the Dalai Lama want to leave loose ends with the ban? Unless he is not really serious with the ban and leave these loose ends for a reason, and to send everyone a message that the ban is only temporary. If he was really serious about it, he would not leave so much loose ends to tie, even after more than 30 years since the ban was declared. Can someone like the Dalai Lama be "clumsy or sloppy" (sorry, no disrespect intended...just to get my point across) to not tie up the rest of the loose ends? Unless they were left loose for a purpose?
Maybe it is time, we put a magnifying glass at the ban to see what is really going on in reality.
-
Third inconsistency: The Dalai Lama cited many works in his website on why Dorje Shugden is evil. After thorough research, which you can find here in this forum, it has been proven that most of the points presented are not substantial and upon further investigation, is just the misinterpretation of the historical texts and the confusion of names. These doubts were not refuted or countered by the Dalai Lama and his people. Why would HHDL want to choose materials with poor credibility to support his stand? He is the Dalai Lama.
With all these inconsistencies for the reasons for the ban, why would someone like the Dalai Lama want to leave loose ends with the ban? Unless he is not really serious with the ban and leave these loose ends for a reason, and to send everyone a message that the ban is only temporary. If he was really serious about it, he would not leave so much loose ends to tie, even after more than 30 years since the ban was declared. Can someone like the Dalai Lama be "clumsy or sloppy" (sorry, no disrespect intended...just to get my point across) to not tie up the rest of the loose ends? Unless they were left loose for a purpose?
Maybe it is time, we put a magnifying glass at the ban to see what is really going on in reality.
I agree, perhaps it's time to entertain another possibility that will never even be mentioned on this forum - It's precisely because he's the Dalai Lama, the God King of Tibet, that he simply expects people to believe him with scant references and faulty reasoning. And in general, he's right - some people continue to follow him with blind faith in exactly in the same way that this forum tries to find pure reasons for something that may simply be impure and a product of delusion.
I understand that you see him as a holy being and have samaya with him which is precisely why people find it difficult to challenge him. The Dalai Lama's possible fallibility is the elephant in the room that will never be a subject of discussion on this forum and this, with respect, is this forum's blind spot. It's exactly as it says in the Mongoose Canine Letter:
Moreover, to challenge Lamas you have used religion for your aim. To that purpose you had to develop the Tibetan people’s blind faith. In the end you adopted the same activity that you yourself had pointed out was mistaken in other Lamas. For instance, you started the politics of public Kalachakra initiations. Normally the Kalachakra initiation is not given in public. Then you started to use it continuously in a big way for your politics. The result is that now the Tibetan people have returned to exactly the same muddy and dirty mixing of politics and religion of Lamas which you yourself had so precisely criticised in earlier times
And later it says:
Nowadays you have given the Kalachakra initiation so many times you have made the Tibetan people into donkeys. You can force them to go here and there as you like. In your words you always say that you want to be Gandhi but in your action you are like a religious fundamentalist who uses religious faith for political purposes. Your image is the Dalai Lama, your mouth is Mahatma Gandhi and your heart is like that of a religious dictator
http://dorjeshugdentruth.wordpress.com/2008/10/16/the-mixing-of-dharma-and-politics-the-mongoose-canine-letter/ (http://dorjeshugdentruth.wordpress.com/2008/10/16/the-mixing-of-dharma-and-politics-the-mongoose-canine-letter/)
It's not my intention to cause offence, I'm simply pointing out that because many people have taken the Dalai Lama as their Guru they cannot now see anything but a bigger picture in the ban and this reduces your effectiveness in being able to see what may be the truth - that the Dalai Lama has become a religious dictator who has gone against his Gurus. Sad, but apparently true.
Do you deny that such a thing could possibly happen - that a Lama could go 'rogue' and reject his lineage and Teachers? Is it possible to incorrectly use pure view to make excuses and in that way deny such a possible truth? I don't think we need a bigger picture, we simply need to say that the Dalai Lama is wrong. He's got no qualms about saying that about his own Gurus. The fact that similar problems are being experienced by the Karma Kagyu lineage certainly seems to point to a bigger picture: that the Dalai Lama's actions are deluded and need to be seen as such. There are no benefits to the suffering he has created for others through religious division. Buddhas don't cause suffering to people and they certainly don't destroy pure spiritual lineages.
I'm sorry if this has upset anyone but Dharma is about examining valid reasons and thereby realizing the truth, even if that truth is unpalatable. Can anyone give valid reasons why the assertion that the Dalai Lama's actions are deluded is not correct? If you don't want to discuss it, I understand.
-
Lineageholder, I really like what you said. While faith is important in Buddhism, so is wisdom and reasoning. And while faith in the Teacher can be held supreme in the secret and internal practices of Tantra, in the public discourse out in the open we must apply reason and wisdom.
One can internally hold the Guru to be without errors, but if one discusses the actions of the Guru in public, one must rely on the observable facts, not on the pure view, on the public view but not on the internal view. If this were not so, then all tantrikas would have to say that all the wars and murderings in this world are good and pure, as they happen in the mandala and are done by emanated Buddhas of the Guru-Yidam. But as the internal view is not to be applied in the public sphere, all tantrikas can reasonably say that war and murder are bad. Therefore, all those who have pure view of HHDL must keep that vision secret, and in the public sphere accept the norms of the society, or else keep silent - they cannot put forth their internal secret view into the public discussion. At least not if they want to maintain the Tantric samaya, which require secrecy.
-
Thank you LH for bringing up this important piece of information in this forum...Not sure if this has been in the forum previously before under a different title? But think the Mongoose-Canine letter is an interesting piece of information that requires a little background information for people on the forum.
This anonymous letter was given by the Tibetan people to an English woman now living in Italy while she was travelling in Nepal in Sept 1995.
As to verifying the validity of the information contained within? I am not so sure from my personal point of view...but it certainly highlights an overview of events.
The full letter can be found in Appendix 2 of the book "A Great Deception by Western Shugden Society".
I found this book a good resource to find out more about the DS issue BUT felt uncomfortable about the validity of this piece of information presented - anonymously and then passed on again anonymously as third hand information? (I don't mean to discredit the book as a whole or the hard work done by WSS to further the debate of DS issue and ban).
I feel at this time interested parties sympathetic to DS practitioners and ending the BAN require the sound logic of presented facts without the we are right you are wrong positions.
We learn so much more as DS practitioners with full information and full facts from both sides of the debate.
A balance of objectivity and clear logic and facts to cut through distorted views in this debate.
Ensapa I agree with you about the comedy of the DS affair it does make for a great comic buddhist stand-up routine for sure...
Actually the Dalai Lama can admit to the failure of handling the Tibet Cause (check out video here) and in the next breadth accept the views of his younger brother an incarnation of Nagri Rinpoche (TDG) again on this website in an interview of his brother.
The Dalai Lama says Trijang Rinpoche and others can practise DS even though their is the Ban.
Definitely many inconsistencies to be sure man if I had a dollar for everytime someone on this forum posted about the inconsistencies in the DS debate I'd be a rich man now but alas not to be.
I think their are subtle hints on how to move forward from both sides of the debate if we simplify the emotional parts and focus on the clear facts of the DS issue.
Dalai Lama has said DS Lama's can practise DS.
Dalai Lama has said that practitioners are free to choose practise DS or not.
Trijang Rinpoche's previous incarnation...stated that Dalai Lama and DS would appear to be working against another but DS practitioners were to have faith in both and hold vows and practice accordingly.
xo
-
I agree, perhaps it's time to entertain another possibility that will never even be mentioned on this forum - It's precisely because he's the Dalai Lama, the God King of Tibet, that he simply expects people to believe him with scant references and faulty reasoning. And in general, he's right - some people continue to follow him with blind faith in exactly in the same way that this forum tries to find pure reasons for something that may simply be impure and a product of delusion.
I understand that you see him as a holy being and have samaya with him which is precisely why people find it difficult to challenge him. The Dalai Lama's possible fallibility is the elephant in the room that will never be a subject of discussion on this forum and this, with respect, is this forum's blind spot. It's exactly as it says in the Mongoose Canine Letter:
I think it's not necessary to always mention about THIS FORUM's 'blind spot'. I think we should stop finding fault with this forum again and again. Year after year. This forum as well as every other forum in the world has it's faults and advantages. Just work with what we have. It's free and it's available. It's no effort on our parts for this forum to exist. Just be happy someone/group provides this space for everyone. THANK YOU TO THIS WEBSITE.
Please as a fellow practitioner of the mind trainings, please say something nice too. :)
This is a wonderful OPEN public forum that we can talk about Dorje Shugden NO MATTER WHO ARE TEACHER IS, WHAT CENTRE WE BELONG TO AND WHAT TRADITION WE FOLLOW. Let's just propagate our lineage here.
I think we should feel fortunate we can band together to speak about everything that concerns Dorje Shugden in this space. We will always have differences among ourselves and THAT IS OK.
No offence to you at all. TK :)
-
Lineageholder, I really like what you said. While faith is important in Buddhism, so is wisdom and reasoning. And while faith in the Teacher can be held supreme in the secret and internal practices of Tantra, in the public discourse out in the open we must apply reason and wisdom.
One can internally hold the Guru to be without errors, but if one discusses the actions of the Guru in public, one must rely on the observable facts, not on the pure view, on the public view but not on the internal view. If this were not so, then all tantrikas would have to say that all the wars and murderings in this world are good and pure, as they happen in the mandala and are done by emanated Buddhas of the Guru-Yidam. But as the internal view is not to be applied in the public sphere, all tantrikas can reasonably say that war and murder are bad. Therefore, all those who have pure view of HHDL must keep that vision secret, and in the public sphere accept the norms of the society, or else keep silent - they cannot put forth their internal secret view into the public discussion. At least not if they want to maintain the Tantric samaya, which require secrecy.
I agree with this. I agree 100%.
In the public view Geshe Kelsang funding scores of protests, writing, opposition against Dalai Lama does not make him look good in the public view. If he has a certain view of Dalai Lama he should have kept it secret.
Hypothesis: Dalai Lama has easily 10 million students/followers inside and outside Tibet. Geshe Kelsang perhaps 100,000. If Geshe Kelsang 'attacks' Dalai Lama in the public arena, he damages 10 million and 100,000 persons' spiritual practice is safeguarded. If the attacks did not happen, then 10 million persons' spiritual practice is safeguarded instead of 100,000.
In other words, it would be better for Geshe Kelsang and NKT to quietly practice Dhogyal if you so insist upon it.
Geshe Kelsang's attacks, protests, writings, and stance against the Dalai Lama should never have been publicly done. It makes the millions of followers of HHDL have terrible views of Geshe Kelsang. Geshe Kelsang had to go underground and form the WSS because his open protests were a PR disaster for this old scholar monk.
A dharma centre and it's head should not use so much energy, resources and effort to protest and go against another spiritual master should they? People join dharma centres to practice the teachings. They didn't join to go and protest the views of one teacher against another did they?
Geshe Kelsang's views should be kept tantrically quiet and secret. All his students should have been advised to do the same.
-
Lineageholder, I really like what you said. While faith is important in Buddhism, so is wisdom and reasoning. And while faith in the Teacher can be held supreme in the secret and internal practices of Tantra, in the public discourse out in the open we must apply reason and wisdom.
One can internally hold the Guru to be without errors, but if one discusses the actions of the Guru in public, one must rely on the observable facts, not on the pure view, on the public view but not on the internal view. If this were not so, then all tantrikas would have to say that all the wars and murderings in this world are good and pure, as they happen in the mandala and are done by emanated Buddhas of the Guru-Yidam. But as the internal view is not to be applied in the public sphere, all tantrikas can reasonably say that war and murder are bad. Therefore, all those who have pure view of HHDL must keep that vision secret, and in the public sphere accept the norms of the society, or else keep silent - they cannot put forth their internal secret view into the public discussion. At least not if they want to maintain the Tantric samaya, which require secrecy.
I agree with this. I agree 100%.
In the public view Geshe Kelsang funding scores of protests, writing, opposition against Dalai Lama does not make him look good in the public view. If he has a certain view of Dalai Lama he should have kept it secret.
...
Geshe Kelsang's views should be kept tantrically quiet and secret. All his students should have been advised to do the same.
You obviously missed the point completely.
As for your case of GKG, it goes like this: Since GKG has no samaya with HHDL he cannot have any tantric pure view towards him. Therefore he specifically does not have the "tantric option" of being silent in the face of unjustice instigated by HHDL.
And in any case, all Buddhists are free to voice their voices in the face of unjustice. If the instigator is your own Guru, if one chooses to speak up, one cannot use tantric arguments, like "he is truly a Buddha, but...", since the secret view is to remain secret. In public view, as opposed to the secret view, the Gurus are capable of doing evil or just plain mistakes just as anyone else. (By common sense and general karmic view Je Tshongkhapa and even Shakyamuni Buddha did some blunders.)
-
Lineageholder, I really like what you said. While faith is important in Buddhism, so is wisdom and reasoning. And while faith in the Teacher can be held supreme in the secret and internal practices of Tantra, in the public discourse out in the open we must apply reason and wisdom.
One can internally hold the Guru to be without errors, but if one discusses the actions of the Guru in public, one must rely on the observable facts, not on the pure view, on the public view but not on the internal view. If this were not so, then all tantrikas would have to say that all the wars and murderings in this world are good and pure, as they happen in the mandala and are done by emanated Buddhas of the Guru-Yidam. But as the internal view is not to be applied in the public sphere, all tantrikas can reasonably say that war and murder are bad. Therefore, all those who have pure view of HHDL must keep that vision secret, and in the public sphere accept the norms of the society, or else keep silent - they cannot put forth their internal secret view into the public discussion. At least not if they want to maintain the Tantric samaya, which require secrecy.
I agree with this. I agree 100%.
In the public view Geshe Kelsang funding scores of protests, writing, opposition against Dalai Lama does not make him look good in the public view. If he has a certain view of Dalai Lama he should have kept it secret.
...
Geshe Kelsang's views should be kept tantrically quiet and secret. All his students should have been advised to do the same.
You obviously missed the point completely.
As for your case of GKG, it goes like this: Since GKG has no samaya with HHDL he cannot have any tantric pure view towards him. Therefore he specifically does not have the "tantric option" of being silent in the face of unjustice instigated by HHDL.
And in any case, all Buddhists are free to voice their voices in the face of unjustice. If the instigator is your own Guru, if one chooses to speak up, one cannot use tantric arguments, like "he is truly a Buddha, but...", since the secret view is to remain secret. In public view, as opposed to the secret view, the Gurus are capable of doing evil or just plain mistakes just as anyone else. (By common sense and general karmic view Je Tshongkhapa and even Shakyamuni Buddha did some blunders.)
GKG creates the causes by funding so many protests for many to have wrong view about dharma, dharma resources being used incorrectly and for politics. GKG is has never been a politically leader. Why is a Tibetan Buddhist monk organizing protests which brought him so much negative PR and negative PR for the Buddhism he is teachings. This confused many.
GKG is in danger of creating negative view about NKT and Dalai Lama to millions. That would break some tantric commitments/samayas.
GKG should just quietly practice Dhogyal if he wishes. He has no authority or business as the leader of the Tibetans. So puts many at risk I feel.
GKG is a scholar for sure and good monk as far as I know, but he can make mistakes too.
Your tantric view of GKG as your teacher (secretly) is he is a tantric Buddha. But to the world stage and general view, he is a ordinary human monk that organized alot of protests that was very bad PR for Buddhism. He can be wrong about Dhogyal also.
In tantric view according to their students, they are tantric Buddhas.
If the HHDL can be wrong, so can Geshe Kelsang Gyatso in ordinary view or general view.
-
I think it's not necessary to always mention about THIS FORUM's 'blind spot'. I think we should stop finding fault with this forum again and again. Year after year. This forum as well as every other forum in the world has it's faults and advantages. Just work with what we have. It's free and it's available. It's no effort on our parts for this forum to exist. Just be happy someone/group provides this space for everyone. THANK YOU TO THIS WEBSITE.
Please as a fellow practitioner of the mind trainings, please say something nice too. :)
This is a wonderful OPEN public forum that we can talk about Dorje Shugden NO MATTER WHO ARE TEACHER IS, WHAT CENTRE WE BELONG TO AND WHAT TRADITION WE FOLLOW. Let's just propagate our lineage here.
I think we should feel fortunate we can band together to speak about everything that concerns Dorje Shugden in this space. We will always have differences among ourselves and THAT IS OK.
No offence to you at all. TK :)
Dear TK, no offence taken. I know we are all brothers and sisters when it comes to the practice of Dorje Shugden and I deeply appreciate the efforts that have been made by the owners of this website to publicise the truth about Dorje Shugden and thus undermine the ban. However, to ignore the possibility that the Dalai Lama's actions are deluded without valid reasons seems like denial and is not in keeping with our tradition of critically examining our beliefs. I'm prepared to be challenged by sound reasoning too.
Are there things that we don't talk about? Is it too taboo to consider that the Dalai Lama might not be a Buddha of Compassion but a destroyer of Je Tsongkhapa's tradition? The evidence seems to point to this unless there are clear, logical reasons why this is not the case.
Sorry for any offence but we should be open to examining our beliefs and backing them up with valid reasoning.
-
I think it's not necessary to always mention about THIS FORUM's 'blind spot'. I think we should stop finding fault with this forum again and again. Year after year. This forum as well as every other forum in the world has it's faults and advantages. Just work with what we have. It's free and it's available. It's no effort on our parts for this forum to exist. Just be happy someone/group provides this space for everyone. THANK YOU TO THIS WEBSITE.
Please as a fellow practitioner of the mind trainings, please say something nice too. :)
This is a wonderful OPEN public forum that we can talk about Dorje Shugden NO MATTER WHO ARE TEACHER IS, WHAT CENTRE WE BELONG TO AND WHAT TRADITION WE FOLLOW. Let's just propagate our lineage here.
I think we should feel fortunate we can band together to speak about everything that concerns Dorje Shugden in this space. We will always have differences among ourselves and THAT IS OK.
No offence to you at all. TK :)
Dear TK, no offence taken. I know we are all brothers and sisters when it comes to the practice of Dorje Shugden and I deeply appreciate the efforts that have been made by the owners of this website to publicise the truth about Dorje Shugden and thus undermine the ban. However, to ignore the possibility that the Dalai Lama's actions are deluded without valid reasons seems like denial and is not in keeping with our tradition of critically examining our beliefs. I'm prepared to be challenged by sound reasoning too.
Are there things that we don't talk about? Is it too taboo to consider that the Dalai Lama might not be a Buddha of Compassion but a destroyer of Je Tsongkhapa's tradition? The evidence seems to point to this unless there are clear, logical reasons why this is not the case.
Sorry for any offence but we should be open to examining our beliefs and backing them up with valid reasoning.
Dear LH,
I appreciate your views. And I am in full understanding of how much the unjust ban has hurt you, your friends, me, many people, the dharma, Gelug lineage, Gelug lamas and the general Buddha Dharma. That is why I contribute to this forum/website in any way I can and will continue to do so as a way to 'fight' back or reverse this.
Please look at it this way.
1. There are people on this forum and perhaps some of the people behind this website who have taken teachings from Dalai Lama and Shugden Lamas. So they are stuck in between. They are not 'clean' like the fortunate followers of NKT. To refrain from harsh negative speech re the Dalai Lama protects their feelings. It is not in denial of what the Dalai Lama is doing but you protecting the practice of fellow Shugden practitioners who do not have it easy like you perhaps. If the people who are Shugden practitioners abandon their guru devotion towards Dalai Lama then according to tantra they are not going to be successful in their practice. Please for their sakes, say what you want as you may not be wrong, but in a dharma gentle way perhaps. Saying it differently is not saying you are wrong or your point is not valid, it just says you are kind.
The Dalai Lama seems to have hurt many, we don't have to add to it.
So I guess my request is, of course we can talk about Dalai Lama this and that but please becareful of the people who are 'stuck' with the Dalai Lama as their teacher.
2. Many have taken teachings from Geshe Kelsang. I am sure there are many who visit this website who do not believe and trust in the actions of this courageous being. But if they started saying very harsh views of their perception of Geshe-la, it would hurt the many practitioners of Geshe-la who must have guru samaya and trust in this great being to have tantric success in our lineage. It is the same. And for new students of Geshe Kelsang in far flung areas of the world, constant harsh words that seems 'close' to the truth but are not might affect their practice and faith unnecessarily.
In an ordinary view, Geshe la and Dalai Lama both make 'mistakes' but to highlight, debate, reason, and spell out always is damaging to students of both lamas when they do their practice. It is for this we should realize the truth and say it in a way that is protective but not in lying of course.
I am not protecting the Dalai Lama, just concerned about the minds of his student also and for some who don't know any better.
3. You have your views that Dalai Lama is a wrong, deluded and destroying the Gelug. I respect that and I am not arguing that. But please protect the minds of many WHO HAVE TAKEN TEACHINGS FROM DALAI LAMA and trust Shugden AND THEY HAVE NO CHOICE ALREADY. the hundreds of monks of Serpom and Shar Gaden have taken teachings from Dalai Lama and yet do not give up Shugden. The are gentle and do not criticize Dalai Lama but that does not mean they don't know what is going on. They seperate from mainstream Tibetans without criticizing Dalai Lama as it will hurt their practice. A few very learned and senior great geshes in the monasteries have told me exactly what I am sharing with you. To protect theirs' and others' practice.
You are not wrong. My point is of course I understand your views.
4. I know for sure the Mission statement on this website to not disparage the Dalai Lama is not to feign ignorance but to protect the minds of many. I think being an advanced practitioner that you are would undertstand this please.
5. I am so glad you acknowledge the contribution of the hardworking people at this website. That is wonderful. Thank you. (Please acknowledge more often in the future. They work very hard I am sure.They will appreciate it. Thanking you ahead ;))
NKT and all of us should join as one to enlighten the world on the pure lineage and Manjushri quality of Shugden to work towards removing this unjust ban. After the ban is removed we can openly sit together, debate, have some tea and talk more on our views of Dalai Lama being ordinary or what? LOL. Let's work together to get rid of the ban IRREGARDLESS OF OUR DIFFERING VIEWS OF THE DALAI LAMA'S MOTIVE. Our views of Dalai Lama's motive is a small reason for us to have differences if I may please. That DOES NOT MATTER ANYMORE at this point. Let's join forces here! We have a bigger goal to achieve and we will achieve it. :)
And if we do debate, it's a friendly debate and we focus on so many other qualities about our lineage and practice to educate the world.
6. Why don't we focus on consistently posting and contributing THE TRUTH ABOUT DORJE SHUGDEN AND IN THAT WAY, UNDERMINE THE BAN. You see if we keep posting about the great Shugden lamas, monasteries, teachings, lineage, practice, centres, people and activities, then automatically we show the world the ban is wrong. The negative views will melt away in time due to our results and patient illuminations moist with compassion.
We both accomplish what we want in a gently dharma manner.
Valid reason and debate are welcome but with the consideration of our words to who's practice it might damage is very importatn. The means do not justify the ends. We have to consider karma and it's effects after the ban is over.
I hope this sharing will let you know we are on the same side although we have our slight differences. That is ok.
Thank you.
Tk
-
bla bla bla
bla bla bla
bla bla bla
.... GKG is a scholar for sure and good monk as far as I know, but he can make mistakes too.
Your tantric view of GKG as your teacher (secretly) is he is a tantric Buddha. But to the world stage and general view, he is a ordinary human monk that organized alot of protests that was very bad PR for Buddhism. He can be wrong about Dhogyal also.
Yes, GKG is my Guru, and yes, he can make mistakes. The Buddha did some mistakes as well. This is not a problem.
But concerning DS, he has not made a mistake, nor is he wrong. On the contrary. He merely continued and spread the practice given to him by HE Trijang Rinpoche.
The mistake was done by certain other student of HE Trijang Rinpoche, who for some mysterious reasons wanted to discontinue and suppress the practice in question.
In tantric view according to their students, they are tantric Buddhas.
If the HHDL can be wrong, so can Geshe Kelsang Gyatso in ordinary view or general view.
Yes. Exactly. On this point, it seems, we do agree. This is a good starting point.
-
Are there things that we don't talk about? Is it too taboo to consider that the Dalai Lama might not be a Buddha of Compassion but a destroyer of Je Tsongkhapa's tradition? The evidence seems to point to this unless there are clear, logical reasons why this is not the case.
On top of what TK has already very clearly expounded on, I'd like to also shed my views on this.
At our level of practice (well, mine anyway) there is no way for us to judge the level of anyone, least of all the teachers. So we are also "faulted" in this way when we begin this conversation.
I think of Dalai Lama as Chenrezig as I do have faith in my teacher and his lineage of teachers. My own teacher, the teachers before him and many highly attained masters of our lineage have recognised Dalai Lama as Chenrezig. Whether or not he really is will never be verified by ourselves, but there must be some level of trust we have in our own teachers and lineage lamas.
In any case, whether or not he really is is secondary. More important, I think is, as TK has already pointed out, how we affect the minds and practice of other students. If we are talking badly about the Dalai Lama, based upon our own very limited perceptions, then we can become a direct cause for so many negative things to arise, such as:
- for students to lose faith and begin to doubt their teacher, the dalai Lama. we become responsible for their broken samaya. Whatever good and practice they may have done by their relationship with the Dalai Lama, would be derailed and we would be responsible for that.
- we show others that it is "alright" for us to criticise, talk and "discuss" the actions of the Lamas, gauging them to be right or wrong according to our own limited compass. one student does it, then another, then another, then eventually, we are all talking about other lamas. Some may be out of some kind of genuine concern, but there is the risk that the talk spins off into blatant rumor-mongering. People will look back upon us and say, "well you are doing it, so we can too." Then what is sacred anymore?
- If we are drawing attention to the negatives of a Lama - ANY LAMA - then what makes us so sure of our own Lama? Are we that sure of our judgement to know whether one lama is better or not? If the Dalai Lama - or any other Lama - could act in such faulty ways, then what's to say our Lama isn't acting in wrong ways also?
It is not to say that we don't bring attention at all to what a teacher may be doing that is perceived as wrong or unusual. But I think it would be more helpful to provide education and knowledge to people, according to the teachings and "rules" of Dharma and allow people to make up their own minds. At the same time, we are also sharing Dharma, so there is much more benefit in this way. We are not just directing our comments at the Dalai Lama, as TK has already made very clear, but directly affecting the practice of millions of other students in the world. Do we want to risk that? We must think clearly how our actions and what we are saying against or about another lama will ENCOURAGE a student in his practice or DISCOURAGE him.
-
This is certainly an interesting thread and one which will make many people who are confused over the Dorje Shugden/Dalai Lama issue think more deeply. When I first learned about Dorje Shugden, I was also in great conflict over why the Dalai Lama was so aggressively against Dorje Shugden. It just didn’t sit well with me to think that the Dalai Lama was being unfair and unkind. When I came across this website and read about the bigger picture hypothesis, I felt so happy because it simply gave me an alternative view where I could keep a pure opinion of the Dalai Lama and keep my practice.
On a very simple and personal level, it does make me feel a bit uncomfortable when I read about people criticizing the Dalai Lama on this forum and elsewhere, so what TK says about being kind and thinking about other people’s feelings really makes sense and affects many people like me. Thank you Tk. You are a genuine Buddhist and from my heart, I appreciate your kind consideration for others.
-
bla bla bla
bla bla bla
bla bla bla
.... GKG is a scholar for sure and good monk as far as I know, but he can make mistakes too.
Your tantric view of GKG as your teacher (secretly) is he is a tantric Buddha. But to the world stage and general view, he is a ordinary human monk that organized alot of protests that was very bad PR for Buddhism. He can be wrong about Dhogyal also.
Yes, GKG is my Guru, and yes, he can make mistakes. The Buddha did some mistakes as well. This is not a problem.
But concerning DS, he has not made a mistake, nor is he wrong. On the contrary. He merely continued and spread the practice given to him by HE Trijang Rinpoche.
The mistake was done by certain other student of HE Trijang Rinpoche, who for some mysterious reasons wanted to discontinue and suppress the practice in question.
In tantric view according to their students, they are tantric Buddhas.
If the HHDL can be wrong, so can Geshe Kelsang Gyatso in ordinary view or general view.
Yes. Exactly. On this point, it seems, we do agree. This is a good starting point.
Zp,
The other points is your view and my view. It doesn't matter. Subjective. Your guru makes mistakes, BUT (LOL) on this Shugden point he doesn't make mistakes. Well if he CAN make mistakes, he can make mistakes on much bigger issues than Shugden. That would be 'dangerous' to take tantric commitments from him then. Out of your sessions Geshe Kelsang makes mistakes and during your tantric practice session, he is perfect? No attainments would arise there as you are suppose to have pure view always. Like I said, your guru, my guru, whatever. Subjective.
But the Buddha does not make mistakes. As it says in Abisamaya-alankara text after three countless aeons the Buddha-awakened mind arose or was 'born' free from mistakes in Shakyamui's mindsteam and in total omniscience. If the Buddha makes mistakes then we are taking refuge in a being that is not a Buddha. The state of enlightenment is total awakening free of all mistakes. Free of all traces of ignorance and karma. All klesas and traces of ignorance are removed. The Buddha or a Buddha makes no mistakes. If a Buddha makes mistakes, Manjushri, Tara, Heruka, Vajryogini, Kalacakra can make mistakes. Not logical. Since you believe Shugden to be a Buddha, Shugden makes mistakes. A Buddha does not make mistakes but Geshe Kelsang can and Dalai Lama can.
This text was taught in the Tibetan Library of Works and Archives by senior Geshes in lower Dharamsala (Gangchen Kyishong).
-
Are there things that we don't talk about? Is it too taboo to consider that the Dalai Lama might not be a Buddha of Compassion but a destroyer of Je Tsongkhapa's tradition? The evidence seems to point to this unless there are clear, logical reasons why this is not the case.
On top of what TK has already very clearly expounded on, I'd like to also shed my views on this.
At our level of practice (well, mine anyway) there is no way for us to judge the level of anyone, least of all the teachers. So we are also "faulted" in this way when we begin this conversation.
I think of Dalai Lama as Chenrezig as I do have faith in my teacher and his lineage of teachers. My own teacher, the teachers before him and many highly attained masters of our lineage have recognised Dalai Lama as Chenrezig. Whether or not he really is will never be verified by ourselves, but there must be some level of trust we have in our own teachers and lineage lamas.
But you have judged someone to be a Buddha already! And that judgement, which is based on judgements of others, in this case many Lineage Gurus, prevents you, or anyone else making the same judgement based on judgements of others, from seeing the reality of observable facts. In other words, it keeps one in an imaginary La-la-land, and prevents one to enter the gates of Dharma. It keeps one a child or a dharma-baby, and prevents any real growth into dharmic adulthood. As long as people say that "we are not yet capable to understand/judge this or that ourselves..." they will never be capable. The tantric pure view, brought into the public sphere, arrests all development, it dumbs down the Dharma.
I am sorry to yap yap about this, and I do know this might not sound nice, and I do understand that this might hurt some feelings, but the other option is an affront and a slap to the face of intellect, reason, growth, personal responsibility, development, the progress on the Path.
We can rely on our senses and sensibilities, on our own wits. A mind of faith is important, but an overdose of faith makes things and therefore the Path too fluffy and incoherent, bland even. Some pepper of wisdom of discrimination is sometimes needed. I think it is needed just now.
-
Your guru makes mistakes, BUT (LOL) on this Shugden point he doesn't make mistakes. Well if he CAN make mistakes, he can make mistakes on much bigger issues than Shugden. That would be 'dangerous' to take tantric commitments from him then.
.....
But the Buddha does not make mistakes. As it says in Abisamaya-alankara text after three countless aeons the Buddha-awakened mind arose or was 'born' free from mistakes in Shakyamui's mindsteam and in total omniscience. If the Buddha makes mistakes then we are taking refuge in a being that is not a Buddha. The state of enlightenment is total awakening free of all mistakes. Free of all traces of ignorance and karma. All klesas and traces of ignorance are removed.
According to the classical Suttas, the Buddha did make mistakes which even caused several deaths. This by the way also means that the Buddha was not omniscient.
I have no problem with these facts, for I do not seek a Holy Totally Pure Perfection, only the ending of all suffering.
-
After reading all the arguments, facts, and reasons put forth on this thread by the proponents as well as the opponents, a verdict cannot be reached as to who would ‘win’ this debate of whether HHDL is wrong to speak against Shugden unless the rules of this debate is spelt out clearly at the outset. In the eyes of the proponents, HHDL is always correct. However in the eyes of the opponents, HHDL is always wrong. In between we have the bigger picture view - HHDL and DS are working together for the spread of Buddhadharma.
I agree with what TK has mentioned. We have to be sensitive to the words or facts that we used in getting our points across in the debate on Dorje Shugden. Any speech unskillfully used will have an impact on the person(s) listening.
What is important to know is that everyone is personally responsible for his or her own spiritual practice including Dorje Shugden practice. If our lama had kindly given us Dorje Shugden practice then we must go all the way and adopt the practice. Since we have chosen our lama, then what our lama had prescribed for us is correct, and we should not doubt our lama or the practice. If you believe Dorje Shugden is a spirit and is not a Buddha, then you doubt your lama, HH Trijang Rinpoche, HH Pabongka Rinpoche, the lineage lamas, Buddha Manjuhsri, and Buddha Shakyamuni. If you doubt the Dorje Shugden practice, then you have a choice i.e. don’t practise Dorje Shugden.
But what is wrong is:
- to put a ban on the practice of DS.
- the ban on DS had created schisms in Sangha
- the ban had inflicted immeasurable sufferings on many DS practitioners.
- spreading lies about DS and this is disparaging the pure DS lineage in particular and Buddhadharma in general
- stopping others who have faith in Dorje Shugden to practise DS freely.
- depriving Tibetan DS practitioners their basic human rights as citizens of the Tibetan in Exile community.
- to ostracize monks or nuns from their monasteries because of their DS practice.
- TGIE (currently CTA) forcing ordained sangha to swear not to practise DS.
- etc.
The truth shall prevails ...
-
Your guru makes mistakes, BUT (LOL) on this Shugden point he doesn't make mistakes. Well if he CAN make mistakes, he can make mistakes on much bigger issues than Shugden. That would be 'dangerous' to take tantric commitments from him then.
.....
But the Buddha does not make mistakes. As it says in Abisamaya-alankara text after three countless aeons the Buddha-awakened mind arose or was 'born' free from mistakes in Shakyamui's mindsteam and in total omniscience. If the Buddha makes mistakes then we are taking refuge in a being that is not a Buddha. The state of enlightenment is total awakening free of all mistakes. Free of all traces of ignorance and karma. All klesas and traces of ignorance are removed.
According to the classical Suttas, the Buddha did make mistakes which even caused several deaths. This by the way also means that the Buddha was not omniscient.
I have no problem with these facts, for I do not seek a Holy Totally Pure Perfection, only the ending of all suffering.
An ending of all sufferings means the end to all klesas, defilements and their imprints. Having Klesas, defilements and imprints completely removed and fully negates any room for mistakes. Mistakes can only arise from ignorance of any level. Without ignorance it is impossible for mistakes. Therefore a fully enlightened being cannot have any mistakes otherwise a Buddha does not fit the description of Buddha. State the name of the classical sutta and author in which Siddhartha after his enlightenment can make mistakes. One unnamed Sutta cannot rewrite the descriptions of a omniscient Buddha.
In Tsongkapa's praise in dependent origination, clearly when all ignorance is removed you are totally omniscient without any faults. This is not seeking any HOLY TOTALLY PURE PERFECTION, but the description of a fully perfected Buddha. Therefore Shakyamuni, Manjushri, Heruka, Vajrayogini, Avalokitesvara, Krukkachanda, Tsongkapa, Guru Rinpoche and all the field of merit are without mistakes. Cannot make mistakes. Will not create mistakes. Mistakes are a sign of samsara arising and creation of samsara. Enlightenment has no trace of Samsara therefore mistake free. Why would people meditate on the sadhana of Heruka/Vajrayogini to reach their completely enlightened state fo mind, if they make mistakes. Why retreat, do mantras, practices and put effort toward reaching a Buddha state that was not fully omniscient. If Buddhas can make mistakes then either they are not out of samsara or they can fall back into samsara. Mistakes lead to bigger mistakes in turn leading to huge mistakes and problems. What Buddhas lead themselves to problems?
Manjushri, Shakyamuni and any Buddha are free of mistakes. That is a description of a Buddha.
Therefore Geshe Kelsang and Dalai Lama can make mistakes. So can Shugden make mistakes? Can Manjushri make mistakes? No.
I went over to the Tibetan works and Archives and just asked a senior Geshe if Buddha can make mistakes. He said definitely not as it would indicate defilements (samsara).
-
Are there things that we don't talk about? Is it too taboo to consider that the Dalai Lama might not be a Buddha of Compassion but a destroyer of Je Tsongkhapa's tradition? The evidence seems to point to this unless there are clear, logical reasons why this is not the case.
On top of what TK has already very clearly expounded on, I'd like to also shed my views on this.
At our level of practice (well, mine anyway) there is no way for us to judge the level of anyone, least of all the teachers. So we are also "faulted" in this way when we begin this conversation.
I think of Dalai Lama as Chenrezig as I do have faith in my teacher and his lineage of teachers. My own teacher, the teachers before him and many highly attained masters of our lineage have recognised Dalai Lama as Chenrezig. Whether or not he really is will never be verified by ourselves, but there must be some level of trust we have in our own teachers and lineage lamas.
But you have judged someone to be a Buddha already! And that judgement, which is based on judgements of others, in this case many Lineage Gurus, prevents you, or anyone else making the same judgement based on judgements of others, from seeing the reality of observable facts. In other words, it keeps one in an imaginary La-la-land, and prevents one to enter the gates of Dharma. It keeps one a child or a dharma-baby, and prevents any real growth into dharmic adulthood. As long as people say that "we are not yet capable to understand/judge this or that ourselves..." they will never be capable. The tantric pure view, brought into the public sphere, arrests all development, it dumbs down the Dharma.
I am sorry to yap yap about this, and I do know this might not sound nice, and I do understand that this might hurt some feelings, but the other option is an affront and a slap to the face of intellect, reason, growth, personal responsibility, development, the progress on the Path.
We can rely on our senses and sensibilities, on our own wits. A mind of faith is important, but an overdose of faith makes things and therefore the Path too fluffy and incoherent, bland even. Some pepper of wisdom of discrimination is sometimes needed. I think it is needed just now.
Zp,
If Buddhas such as Shakyamuni, Manjushri, Vajra Yogini can make mistakes, there is no friendly debate left at all.
Everyone's judgement is wrong. You, me, Geshe Kelsang, Shakyamuni, Dalai Lama, Manjushri, Tara, Vajrayogini, Heruka, Shugden are all wrong. Why practice Dharma? So ultimately there is no Buddhas at all, so why bother following a guru or practicing a questionable protector. Geshe Kelsang, his guru and his gurus make mistakes. So don't believe anyone. Everyone makes mistakes and therefore there is no exiting of samsara.
:(
-
Dear TG,
By one classical Sutta, the Buddha did fumble in his meditation instructions and caused a mass suicide of a group of monks. He was rather surprised to find out, and changed the instructions afterwards by request of the ever compassionate Ananda. Not something one would expect from an omniscient being.
By another classical Sutta, the Buddha himself categorically denies that it is possible for anyone, including him, to be omniscient.
In the collected writings of Je Tsongkhapa, an enligtened being, we find him disproving his own prior works.
I do know that some Buddhists think that to be a Buddha is to be a Totally Awesomelly Pure and All Knowing Godly Source of Sheer Radiance, but there are many other traditional Buddhists who do not understand supreme enlightenment like that. Some Buddhists do not seek Absolute Perfection, and even dare to believe the Buddha when he says that omniscience is impossible. Mistakes are made and shit happens. Not everything goes according to the plan. There are chance occurences in the universe. And the Buddha had back pains, eventhough he was outside of samsara. Stuff exists and reality bites. Our refuge is Buddha and Dharma, not Krishna and fantasyland, you see.
So think carefully when you say "if Buddhas such as Shakyamuni, Manjushri, Vajra Yogini can make mistakes, there is no friendly debate left at all", for quite a many traditional Buddhists do believe in the Teachings of the classical Suttas.
When we were kids, we thought that our Mama and Papa were capable of everything, knew everything, were perfect. They could open doors, tie our shoe laces, open food cans and soda bottles, and could answer all our questions. But then we grew up, and the illusion of perfection was just a childish dream. We must now be careful not to approach Buddhism in that same childish sense. It might be helpful for a while, year or two, but then we must grow up, and see that there is no way back to that carefree existence when Momma and Poppy did everything perfectly and skillfully and all-knowingly whenever we needed their help. We ourselves must walk the Way - the Buddha and all of Sangha can just give maps and point the way in the hope that neither we, nor them, fumble. Some of us do, sadly, and equally sadly some of them have done and will do. It is a crap, but what can you do. Maintaining a view that someone out there is Perfect-and-Holier-than-Holy sadly does not help - it only keeps us infantile.
-
Dear TG,
By one classical Sutta, the Buddha did fumble in his meditation instructions and caused a mass suicide of a group of monks. He was rather surprised to find out, and changed the instructions afterwards by request of the ever compassionate Ananda. Not something one would expect from an omniscient being.
By another classical Sutta, the Buddha himself categorically denies that it is possible for anyone, including him, to be omniscient.
In the collected writings of Je Tsongkhapa, an enligtened being, we find him disproving his own prior works.
I do know that some Buddhists think that to be a Buddha is to be a Totally Awesomelly Pure and All Knowing Godly Source of Sheer Radiance, but there are many other traditional Buddhists who do not understand supreme enlightenment like that. Some Buddhists do not seek Absolute Perfection, and even dare to believe the Buddha when he says that omniscience is impossible. Mistakes are made and shit happens. Not everything goes according to the plan. There are chance occurences in the universe. And the Buddha had back pains, eventhough he was outside of samsara. Stuff exists and reality bites. Our refuge is Buddha and Dharma, not Krishna and fantasyland, you see.
So think carefully when you say "if Buddhas such as Shakyamuni, Manjushri, Vajra Yogini can make mistakes, there is no friendly debate left at all", for quite a many traditional Buddhists do believe in the Teachings of the classical Suttas.
When we were kids, we thought that our Mama and Papa were capable of everything, knew everything, were perfect. They could open doors, tie our shoe laces, open food cans and soda bottles, and could answer all our questions. But then we grew up, and the illusion of perfection was just a childish dream. We must now be careful not to approach Buddhism in that same childish sense. It might be helpful for a while, year or two, but then we must grow up, and see that there is no way back to that carefree existence when Momma and Poppy did everything perfectly and skillfully and all-knowingly whenever we needed their help. We ourselves must walk the Way - the Buddha and all of Sangha can just give maps and point the way in the hope that neither we, nor them, fumble. Some of us do, sadly, and equally sadly some of them have done and will do. It is a crap, but what can you do. Maintaining a view that someone out there is Perfect-and-Holier-than-Holy sadly does not help - it only keeps us infantile.
Dear Zp,
Since the Buddha as you say, can make mistakes and are so untrustworthy, why do you still call yourself a Buddhist? Why take refuge in Geshe Kelsang Gyatso as his teachings come from the Buddha and you said that the Buddha could make mistakes and Lama Tsongkhapa said his earlier teachings were wrong? Those are very scary statements to make as you are saying that the teachings could be wrong, there are so many teachings that could be wrong as well.
So, who is going to decide which teachings are flawless and perfect since the highest authority has been downgraded by you. I recall that a Buddha is a suitable object of refuge simply because his teachings are perfect for us and can bring us to enlightenment. So, after you have proclaimed the Buddha lead monks to suicide, how can the Buddha be a suitable object for refuge. Hence, I ask you why do you call yourself a Buddhist?
I hope you reflect on this as your words are very damaging for the Buddhadharma. Your warped logic will help many to develop doubts in the sublime Buddha's and Lama Tsongkhapa's teachings. Please use your logic and knowledge to increase faith in Buddhadharma and Dorje Shugden. Otherwise, you are undoing Dorje Shugden's hard work along with all the many High Lamas including your own Lama. Why do I say this? There are thousands reading this forum and many of them are very new in the Dharma.
-
[/quote]
...Please use your logic and knowledge to increase faith in Buddhadharma and Dorje Shugden. Otherwise, you are undoing Dorje Shugden's hard work along with all the many High Lamas including your own Lama. Why do I say this? There are thousands reading this forum and many of them are very new in the Dharma.
[/quote]
Looks you don't get his point...:)
-
Dear ZP,
The very fact that the Buddhadharma has been passed down for thousands of years, shows the quality of the Buddha and Dharma. I am dumbfounded with your point of the Buddha making mistakes.
Thousands and thousands of years we have been practicing the Buddhadharma. Are you saying that we all have made a mistake by doing so? The reason we are all practicing the Buddhadharma is because WE HAVE MADE MISTAKES in our lives and in need of a remedy, NOT BECAUSE THE BUDDHAS AND GREAT MASTERS MADE MISTAKES. We know that by taking refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha we will be able to obtain eternal happiness (enlightenment).
For example, the Lamrim which was written by Atisha is widely studied by millions until today. The teachings were debated by many great masters and monks and no one could find any faults in it. This is the reason why the teachings were passed down through many great masters like Pabongkha Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche. Even Lama Tsongkhapa who is a Buddha written a few books like the Lamrim Chen Mo (Path to Enlightenment) based on the original text by Atisha.
Many have gained enlightenment by studying the Lamrim. I am just giving an example of how the Buddhadharma is flawless. There are many more facts out there. Please brush up your knowledge for you to have more faith in your protector, Dorje Shugden!
-
But you have judged someone to be a Buddha already! And that judgement, which is based on judgements of others, in this case many Lineage Gurus, prevents you, or anyone else making the same judgement based on judgements of others, from seeing the reality of observable facts. In other words, it keeps one in an imaginary La-la-land, and prevents one to enter the gates of Dharma. It keeps one a child or a dharma-baby, and prevents any real growth into dharmic adulthood. As long as people say that "we are not yet capable to understand/judge this or that ourselves..." they will never be capable. The tantric pure view, brought into the public sphere, arrests all development, it dumbs down the Dharma.
I am sorry to yap yap about this, and I do know this might not sound nice, and I do understand that this might hurt some feelings, but the other option is an affront and a slap to the face of intellect, reason, growth, personal responsibility, development, the progress on the Path.
We can rely on our senses and sensibilities, on our own wits. A mind of faith is important, but an overdose of faith makes things and therefore the Path too fluffy and incoherent, bland even. Some pepper of wisdom of discrimination is sometimes needed. I think it is needed just now.
This is why, in the first place, it is so important to check a teacher before we take him as our teacher. The scriptures outline clearly the "criteria" for a true teacher and we are encouraged to thoroughly check a teacher before accepting him as our guide to enlightenment. Once you have checked and examined the teacher's actions, motivations, teachings and results, it is understood that you have faith that he can convey the perfect teachings to you in a perfect way to lead you to enlightenment. If you believe that your teacher is full of mistakes, then why take him as a teacher in the first place? If he can be "wrong" in one aspect, what's to say that he's not wrong in another aspect? and another? and another? And are we as learned, trained, have been ordained for as long as our teachers to be able to gauge what he teaches is perfect or riddled with mistakes?
It is conflicting to rely on the Buddha's teachings as our sole spiritual path, and then turn around to say that the person who gave those teachings is imperfect and mistaken. Then, why are we following a path that we don't have 100% confidence in for being perfect and faultless? Then what are we aspiring towards? And there is no possibility, ever, for being free of mistakes? Then what are doing on this path in the first place?
-
I don't know if I should be on this forum but let's give it a try. I've been watching this forum and I came over because of phayul. There were threads which talked about Shugden.
Most of you say HH Dalai Lama is wrong about speaking against Dorje Shugden. Did ever think he can be right. I know you claim much pain was caused due to the speaking out against Shugden by HHDL. But did you ever think of the pain that was caused from NOT speaking out? I mean if Dorje Shugden was not harmful, why would HHDL speak out. He gets nothing but backlash. Why would Dalai Lama knowingly hurt his own people? The media rarely speaks out about Shugden? Why? Maybe because Shugden people are wrong and there is not much news to report. No point in reporting? I mean a Nobel Peace laureate like HHDL who is celebrated by millions as a man of peace suppressing his own people by religioius segregation would be big news right?
I don't want to create trouble, but these are my thoughts. Yes, I am a follower of His Holiness and I live in Dharamsala and I've been here for over 10 years. I attend most of HHDL's talks and he is amazing to me.
I'd like to add a twist to this :
As you have said Tenzin Gyatso, not many media spoke about Dorje Shugden.
It really depends which way you look at it ......I think the Dalai Lama is correct in speaking against Shugden. As a Nobel peace icon, when Dalai Lama spoke against Shugden, the effect is hundred folds.... I don't believe that Dalai Lama is not aware of the Dorje Shugden's lineage as this protector practice was passed down to him from his junior tutor, HE Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche and has been practised by so many elucidate high lamas of the Gelupa sect. As a result of this "bad publicity" of Dorje Shugden, many many more people get a chance to even hear the name of this enlightened protector Dorje Shugden. So many imprints are planted.....it is not bad afterall, isn't it?
And I disagree with you that Media don't talk about Shugden becasue Shugden people was wrong and nothing to report. On the contrary, media people would jump on something bad, dig anything possible to talk about and make it the headlines. That is exactly the results of what Dalai Lama has helped to create, the whole propaganda was initiated by Dalai Lama, ever since the ban was in place, the name Dorje Shugden has been heard in Television, newspaper, radio station...I personally think Dalai Lama is the greatest marketing strategist.
Some would say but what about the pain and sufferings caused to those DS practitioners who have been ostracized, striped of their rights to basic humanity, threatened to death.....I dont believe that is the intention of the Dalai Lama at all, No, definitely not. That is the results of how the followers interpreted the ban.
To me, I remain open minded, and I choose to follow HE Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche's advice, which is not to loose faith in both the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden.
-
Hi Tenzin Gyatso...
The very fact that you're on this forum shows that you have made the right decision and not a mistake...simply because being in this forum, whether or not you're pro Dorje Shugden or anti Dorje Shugden you will gain knowledge. Definitely not a mistake...
By reading your postings I believe you have read up a lot on this forum and website. Congratulations because when the ban is lifted, these knowledge you have gained will help you to understand and realize better and most importantly to clear your doubts on Dorje Shugden.
When the ban is lifted you can proudly tell all your friends you have been on this forum to support the practice of Dorje Shugden, though indirectly. Your 'profound' arguments had led to more debates which is equal to a better understanding of this Dorje Shugden issue. Reading this thread has strengthen my faith in Dorje Shugden as a rightful protector thanks to you.
Thank you also for bringing up that Manjushri is a Buddha. Manjushri = Budhha, Dorje Shugden = Manjushri hence Dorje Shugden = BUDDHA! A simple equation like that you should be able to comprehend right?
You mentioned that Trijang Rinpoche gave permission to the Dalai Lama not to practice Dorje Shugden. Did you also know the Dalai Lama said that the current Trijang Rinpoche can practice Dorje Shugden? Why would Dalai Lama want to harm his Guru if he knew Dorje Shugden is harmful but still allow his Guru to practice? Doesn't make sense isn't it? Read this: http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=5993 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=5993)
Based on my personal experience, I can tell you very clearly Dorje Shugden is a Enlightened Being! I was one of the lucky few from the west to be invited to Serpom Monastery's new prayer hall opening a couple of months back. Over there I witnessed Dorje Shugden taking trance through an oracle to bless the new prayer hall. Right after Dorje Shugden, the oracle took trance of Dharmapala Setrab! and Setrab was extremely delighted when He came to bless all of us. If Dorje Shugden is a spirit, do you think Setrab would be so happy or even accept the offerings of Yongyal Rinpoche and all the High Lamas present? Did you also know Setrab resides in the same mandala as Dorje Shugden? Read about it here: http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=10276 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=10276)
With so much facts and explanations presented to you in this thread (besides ZP), I sure do hope you gained something from it...have faith and believe in Dorje Shugden..He will bring you out of samsara!
-
Dear TG,
By one classical Sutta, the Buddha did fumble in his meditation instructions and caused a mass suicide of a group of monks. He was rather surprised to find out, and changed the instructions afterwards by request of the ever compassionate Ananda. Not something one would expect from an omniscient being.
By another classical Sutta, the Buddha himself categorically denies that it is possible for anyone, including him, to be omniscient.
In the collected writings of Je Tsongkhapa, an enligtened being, we find him disproving his own prior works.
I do know that some Buddhists think that to be a Buddha is to be a Totally Awesomelly Pure and All Knowing Godly Source of Sheer Radiance, but there are many other traditional Buddhists who do not understand supreme enlightenment like that. Some Buddhists do not seek Absolute Perfection, and even dare to believe the Buddha when he says that omniscience is impossible. Mistakes are made and shit happens. Not everything goes according to the plan. There are chance occurences in the universe. And the Buddha had back pains, eventhough he was outside of samsara. Stuff exists and reality bites. Our refuge is Buddha and Dharma, not Krishna and fantasyland, you see.
So think carefully when you say "if Buddhas such as Shakyamuni, Manjushri, Vajra Yogini can make mistakes, there is no friendly debate left at all", for quite a many traditional Buddhists do believe in the Teachings of the classical Suttas.
When we were kids, we thought that our Mama and Papa were capable of everything, knew everything, were perfect. They could open doors, tie our shoe laces, open food cans and soda bottles, and could answer all our questions. But then we grew up, and the illusion of perfection was just a childish dream. We must now be careful not to approach Buddhism in that same childish sense. It might be helpful for a while, year or two, but then we must grow up, and see that there is no way back to that carefree existence when Momma and Poppy did everything perfectly and skillfully and all-knowingly whenever we needed their help. We ourselves must walk the Way - the Buddha and all of Sangha can just give maps and point the way in the hope that neither we, nor them, fumble. Some of us do, sadly, and equally sadly some of them have done and will do. It is a crap, but what can you do. Maintaining a view that someone out there is Perfect-and-Holier-than-Holy sadly does not help - it only keeps us infantile.
Dear Zp,
What sutta please? What's the author?
Thanks. :)
-
Dear LH,
I appreciate your views. And I am in full understanding of how much the unjust ban has hurt you, your friends, me, many people, the dharma, Gelug lineage, Gelug lamas and the general Buddha Dharma. That is why I contribute to this forum/website in any way I can and will continue to do so as a way to 'fight' back or reverse this.
(snip)
Thank you.
Tk
Dear TK,
I thank you for your honest response to my concerns, and for your explanation and advice: I will consider it carefully.
It's true that we are all sincere Dorje Shugden practitioners and working for the same goal. It's our job to keep the Ganden Lineage alive in our hearts with the help of our precious uncommon protector. Let's pray that it can be so.
With respect,
Lineageholder
-
Dear LH,
I appreciate your views. And I am in full understanding of how much the unjust ban has hurt you, your friends, me, many people, the dharma, Gelug lineage, Gelug lamas and the general Buddha Dharma. That is why I contribute to this forum/website in any way I can and will continue to do so as a way to 'fight' back or reverse this.
(snip)
Thank you.
Tk
Dear TK,
I thank you for your honest response to my concerns, and for your explanation and advice: I will consider it carefully.
It's true that we are all sincere Dorje Shugden practitioners and working for the same goal. It's our job to keep the Ganden Lineage alive in our hearts with the help of our precious uncommon protector. Let's pray that it can be so.
With respect,
Lineageholder
To dear friends TK and Lineageholder
thank you for your contributions to this thread. It is really so encouraging to read what both of you are writing to each other. I think it is great that we can have very different views on the same subject, after agreeing to disagree, still respect each other and work towards a shared goal to keep our lineage alive and our Protector practices strong.
I wish you both my sincerest prayers from my heart in your practices. May we become very strong in our practice, as shining beacons in the world for all those who say that Shugden creates harm.
Respect!
-
To dear friends TK and Lineageholder
thank you for your contributions to this thread. It is really so encouraging to read what both of you are writing to each other. I think it is great that we can have very different views on the same subject, after agreeing to disagree, still respect each other and work towards a shared goal to keep our lineage alive and our Protector practices strong.
I wish you both my sincerest prayers from my heart in your practices. May we become very strong in our practice, as shining beacons in the world for all those who say that Shugden creates harm.
Respect!
Thanks beggar for your kind words and wishes, they are appreciated. Thanks for all your hard work also in keeping the practice of Dorje Shugden alive, we're all very fortunate to have faith in him and to be under his care.
Many prayers for your practice and work,
LH
-
Dear Zp,
What sutta please? What's the author?
Thanks. :)
In this essay (http://www.westernbuddhistreview.com/vol4/was_the_buddha_omniscient.html) you can find references to many Suttas that touch on the subject. The Suttas themselves can be found from Sutta-pitaka.
-
In Introduction to Buddhism Geshe Kelsang Gyatso says;
"There is nothing Buddha does not know. Because he has awakened from the sleep of ignorance and has removed all obstructions from his mind, he knows everything of the pas, present and future, directly and simultaneously. "
Geshe-la also talks about removing obstructions to liberation (delusions) and removing obstructions to omniscience (imprints of delusions) .
Sounds like omniscience to me.
Vajra
PS Although I love Theravada scriptures, I prefer to follow Mahayana scriptures when I need confirmation of a point.
-
PS Although I love Theravada scriptures, I prefer to follow Mahayana scriptures when I need confirmation of a point.
I prefer neither, since both sources pose occasionally big problems, internal contradictions, unethical crankery, and so forth. And also, both sources were composed and compiled over hundreds of years, by many different minds who were historically and possibly practicewise far removed from the Buddha. So, no textual source can be relied as truly reliable.
But back to the supposed omniscience and the possibility of changing the enlightened mind.
For instance, in this thread here (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=379.0), we find the words of the HHDL:
Dalai Lama: That is actually, strictly speaking, not religion. This spirit worship. So actually I myself since early 50 until 70, I myself also worship that (giggles) out of ignorance. Then eventually I notice... this spirit happen during 5th Dalai Lama. The 5th Dalai Lama, I think this happened during his lifetime, so he knows, I think, much better the reality. So he consider this spirit is evil spirit. So therefore after I realized that though his own autobiography and also some of his sort of, writings, and also many important lamas also consider that this is evil spirit, so therefore it remain or lasted more than 370 years, it remain very controversial worship.
For those who think that HHDL does not tell lies and is a Buddha, and who think that Buddhas are omniscient and cannot therefore change their views (as they knew everything all the time), that statement is a big problem.
If on the other hand, one would allow the Buddhas to be non-omniscient and capable of error of judgement, there would be no problems whatsoever. For then, it would simply be the case that Shakyamuni made occasionally some errors, and so did the HHDL (either when practicing DS or when stopping to practice DS). Also the problem of how could different enlightened Gurus disagree on the status of DS, becomes a non-problem.
Those who imagine to find some sort of perfection in samsara, will only find many unnecessary problems. It must be remembered, that Shakyamuni and HHDL are in samsara, not in nirvana, for otherwise we humans could not observe them. All the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are by necessity functioning within the samsara. Therefore error is inevitable.
-
I prefer neither, since both sources pose occasionally big problems, internal contradictions, unethical crankery, and so forth. And also, both sources were composed and compiled over hundreds of years, by many different minds who were historically and possibly practicewise far removed from the Buddha. So, no textual source can be relied as truly reliable.
But back to the supposed omniscience and the possibility of changing the enlightened mind.
For instance, in this thread here ([url]http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=379.0[/url]), we find the words of the HHDL:
Dalai Lama: That is actually, strictly speaking, not religion. This spirit worship. So actually I myself since early 50 until 70, I myself also worship that (giggles) out of ignorance. Then eventually I notice... this spirit happen during 5th Dalai Lama. The 5th Dalai Lama, I think this happened during his lifetime, so he knows, I think, much better the reality. So he consider this spirit is evil spirit. So therefore after I realized that though his own autobiography and also some of his sort of, writings, and also many important lamas also consider that this is evil spirit, so therefore it remain or lasted more than 370 years, it remain very controversial worship.
For those who think that HHDL does not tell lies and is a Buddha, and who think that Buddhas are omniscient and cannot therefore change their views (as they knew everything all the time), that statement is a big problem.
If on the other hand, one would allow the Buddhas to be non-omniscient and capable of error of judgement, there would be no problems whatsoever. For then, it would simply be the case that Shakyamuni made occasionally some errors, and so did the HHDL (either when practicing DS or when stopping to practice DS). Also the problem of how could different enlightened Gurus disagree on the status of DS, becomes a non-problem.
Those who imagine to find some sort of perfection in samsara, will only find many unnecessary problems. It must be remembered, that Shakyamuni and HHDL are in samsara, not in nirvana, for otherwise we humans could not observe them. All the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas are by necessity functioning within the samsara. Therefore error is inevitable.
What I find interesting is that Zong Rinpoche had mentioned before that Pabongkha Rinpoche is in reality Heruka, but due to our deluded minds and our negative karma we are unable to see it as such. If what Zong Rinpoche said about Pabongkha Rinpoche is true, then all mistakes of any Buddha are not really mistakes but our own delusion and ignorance and lack of understanding because we do not understand the actions of a Buddha and therefore we impute it to be a mistake. This is a point that we have to consider if we say that high lamas make mistakes.
Shakyamuni had Devadatta and also other people who thought that he was nothing more than just a sham. If even the historical Buddha had detractors, what is there to say about his emanations appearing as various different teachers? Criticism is unavoidable but to focus on it and not practice Dharma instead is a waste of time. The time you use to criticize others can be easily used for Dharma practice.
There is no point in finding fault in lamas, simply because it is a complete waste of time. It is better to find fault in ourselves instead. Because the scenario of "If the Buddhas are wrong" can and will never exist. But it is very obvious that all of us have a deluded mind as we are not enlightened yet.
If we want to talk about the 5th Dalai Lama, his act of ousting the Karmapa from ruling Tibet appears as a very undharmic thing to do, but there was not much negative impact from that. So now what? Does that action mean that the line of Dalai Lamas are bad? I don't think so. If we depend too much on our own emotions and limited logic to judge lamas, we will be incurring a lot of negative karma in the form of holding on to wrong views.
-
What I find interesting is that Zong Rinpoche had mentioned before that Pabongkha Rinpoche is in reality Heruka, but due to our deluded minds and our negative karma we are unable to see it as such. If what Zong Rinpoche said about Pabongkha Rinpoche is true, then all mistakes of any Buddha are not really mistakes but our own delusion and ignorance and lack of understanding because we do not understand the actions of a Buddha and therefore we impute it to be a mistake. This is a point that we have to consider if we say that high lamas make mistakes.
I would think rather, that if one Guru is enlightened from his own side, whether we see him as enlightened or not, it doesn't follow that Buddhas would be without faults. I think people generally miss the whole point in all this "Guru is a Buddha" -thingy.
From the point of view of Sutra, the Guru is not seen as a Buddha (except the Guru-Founder Shakyamuni, of course). Therefore there is no need to suppose or see either faults or purity, or to see the Teacher in any specific way.
From the point of view of Tantra, the practice is to see the Guru as a Buddha, and this must be done in a specific way. But for starters, one must understand, that it does not matter whether the Guru is or isn't a Buddha from his own side. It does not matter whether the Guru really is Heruka or not, for the practice is the same in any case. Vajramaster can be unenlightened, but if the student sees him as enlightened, the student gets the blessings just as well as if the Guru would be enlightened. And now comes the tricky part: If one has a pure mind, on the level of samadhi or dhyana perhaps, one could see and relate to the Guru on the level of enjoyment body, sambhogakaya, the pure body, and then, one would see only purity. (Perhaps Zong Rinpoche could see Je Pabongkhapa as Heruka directly.) But for most practitioners, this is impossible, and they see only the form body or emanation body, nirmanakaya, and have to relate to the Guru on that impure level. This means that one will see faults. There is no need to find faults, as the faults are a given. And it is here where the "magic of Tantra" happens.
Basic idea of practicing Tantra is that one sees and approaches a faulty thing, a samsaric thing, an impure thing, but views it as pure, as blissfull, for in Tantra, there is no dualism of pure and impure! The whole world, or mandala, is just a big and horrible charnel ground, and that is called the pure land of Vajrayogini. In tsog, one partakes of bala and madana, and considers them to be pure bliss. Also, one cannot see one's own enlightened nature if one cannot see it first in some other faulty being, the Guru. This means that if one categorically refuses to see faults in the Guru, one cannot see purity in the impure either, cannot see enlightenment within the darkness, nirvana in the samsara, or even the possibility of nirvana amidst the samsara - and therefore one is not practicing Tantra at all. If one separates the pure from impure, one has created a gap that makes Tantra impossibility. The whole point in having a Guru is that one can see one's own capability of being a Buddha right here right now, just as one is, faults and all. Those who dogmatically refuse to see enlightenment within faults, have pushed or lifted Buddha's nirmanakaya back to the level of sambhogakaya, and can not therefore see either one - those people merely have a human teacher onto whom they have sticked a label "buddha". If one says that "the Guru is totally pure", then that Guru is not an emanation body of a Buddha, for emanations exist only on the level of Desire Realm, which is by default impure. Since the Buddhas care to send emanations to help us, then I think it would be at least courteous to relate to them as such, and not to try to throw them back to a level where we cannot relate to them at all.
In short: From the point of view of Tantra, one needs to see both impurity and purity, and learn to lose the duality.
PS: I find it most inspiring when the classical Suttas and the Vajrayana agree on something. So wonderful.
-
Dear ZP,
The very fact that the Buddhadharma has been passed down for thousands of years, shows the quality of the Buddha and Dharma. I am dumbfounded with your point of the Buddha making mistakes.
Well, he nevertheless did. Why do you feel it is a problem?
And furthermore, the Vedas and the Torah have been passed down at least equally long, but does this now say something about the quality of Moses and the Rishis and their traditions? In other words, the ancient provenance of a tradition tells us nothing about the qualities of the originator or the tradition itself - it tells us only about the tenacity of the followers of the tradition. Cannibalistic ritualism for instance, which exists even today in certain parts of the globe, is a much longer tradition than any of the aforementioned traditions.
Thousands and thousands of years we have been practicing the Buddhadharma. Are you saying that we all have made a mistake by doing so?
Of course not. Why do you think I would say something like that?
Many have gained enlightenment by studying the Lamrim. I am just giving an example of how the Buddhadharma is flawless. There are many more facts out there. Please brush up your knowledge for you to have more faith in your protector, Dorje Shugden!
While it is true that by practicing Dharma one can become enlightened, it does not follow that all Dharma is flawless. According to Je Tsongkhapa, the Buddhist schools known as Vaibhaasika Sarvastivada, Sautraantika Sarvastivada, Yogacara, Svatantrika Madhyamika, and Prasangika Madhyamika of the Sakyas have flaws, and do not lead to liberation. Either those schools are mistaken, or Je Tsongkhapa made a mistake. In any case, there is some mistake somewhere within the Buddhadharma-lineage of the Gelukpas, that is, lineage of ours...
Buddhism or Buddhadharma is not an unitary thing. It consists of many different traditions. Some have flaws, some are mistaken. One cannot generalise and say that it all is flawless.
-
Dear LH,
I appreciate your views. And I am in full understanding of how much the unjust ban has hurt you, your friends, me, many people, the dharma, Gelug lineage, Gelug lamas and the general Buddha Dharma. That is why I contribute to this forum/website in any way I can and will continue to do so as a way to 'fight' back or reverse this.
(snip)
Thank you.
Tk
Dear TK,
I thank you for your honest response to my concerns, and for your explanation and advice: I will consider it carefully.
It's true that we are all sincere Dorje Shugden practitioners and working for the same goal. It's our job to keep the Ganden Lineage alive in our hearts with the help of our precious uncommon protector. Let's pray that it can be so.
With respect,
Lineageholder
I read this thread with much interest as TK and LH present views wich differs, yet both keeps coming back to this forum and contributing perhaps because of one key common factor (amongst many other reasons) , which is the trust in the UNCOMMON PROTECTOR and wish to keep the Ganden Lineage alive.
The ban has hurt many. However, I feel it will be even more damaging if we criticize lamas and teachers whom we are not associated with...especially in Vajrayana where relying on a Guru is of utmost importance.
Many around the world may not be fortunate to "figure it all out" regarding the whole issue surrounding this ban. I don't think this forum claims to have it all "figured out" but I can be sure that the view presented and what this forum stands for offers substantial information and logic to acquire a view which :
1. helps heal and bring peace of mind
2. unites people
3. respects fellow dharma practitioners and most of all respect lamas
4. allows one to continue growing spiritually
5. keeps Je tsongkhapa's pure lineage alive
This forum and website space is self serving in a way for many of us to learn. NOT only that, but this space has grown to serve thousands who visits.
The knowledge which has been shared impacts someone, somewhere who is searching for hope, solace, and to grow spiritually. I thank the admin of this website and all who have contributed as it only goes to show a genuine buddhist heart of compassion, reaching out to others.
-
...Please use your logic and knowledge to increase faith in Buddhadharma and Dorje Shugden. Otherwise, you are undoing Dorje Shugden's hard work along with all the many High Lamas including your own Lama. Why do I say this? There are thousands reading this forum and many of them are very new in the Dharma.
Looks you don't get his point...:)
Dear Wang,
I am sorry Wang but what is it that I don't get from ZP's post? He quotes from the scriptures and came to a summary that the Guru and the Buddha makes mistakes. What I am saying is that such pattern of thought creates doubts that makes it difficult for people to develop trust in the Guru and the Buddha. I think that is a dangerous path to go as it strikes at the foundation of the teachings. If you have other thoughts regarding what I said or what ZP said, please share.
-
Dear Wang,
I am sorry Wang but what is it that I don't get from ZP's post? He quotes from the scriptures and came to a summary that the Guru and the Buddha makes mistakes. What I am saying is that such pattern of thought creates doubts that makes it difficult for people to develop trust in the Guru and the Buddha. I think that is a dangerous path to go as it strikes at the foundation of the teachings. If you have other thoughts regarding what I said or what ZP said, please share.
This is a perfect example on why the uninitiated should not be reading tantric texts, because without the proper foundations of the 3 principle paths and Guru devotion, it is very easy for someone to misinterpret them. Thus in Vajrayana these texts are secret. To be honest, i don't think we can relate to someone who makes mistakes in a positive way. Even if we can there is no way that it can be a postive association so why would we want to perceive a person who can give us enlightenment in that way?
The point of sutra and tantra is to see that our perceptions are not real and cannot be trusted so by forming more of them, there is a logic loop there. In the generation stage of any tantra, we are taught that we are the deity, and not just us but every single sentient being is the deity as well and this is because we want to develop the pure view of not seeing the negatives of others.
If we can relate to a Guru because he makes mistakes, why would we want to associate ourselves with someone that will increase our negative aspects? It does not make sense at all. And to use a tantric text to justify this view is indeed perplexing. Also I thought such things are not to be discussed by people who do not understand…please do not create wrong views in the minds of others..
However, us being too critical or too paranoid of the Buddha or other people making mistakes also reveals to us our insecurity that is basically a limit..so it is something to work on as well…being bitter does nothing to help us with our Dharma practice.
-
I am not making excuses for HHDL. He doesn't need my help and he is doing really well all on his own. Advising against Shugden's practice was from his compassion. What does he gain from doing this. Take a good long think at it. It must be for the greater benefit of many.
For several weeks now I have been going into this forum and have read many topics and opinions from many devout DS practitioners and non practitioners alike. Today I have finally decided to post something because I took Tenzin Gyatso's advise to "take a long good think" at all the controversies and contridictions pertaining to HHDL's stand against Shugden.
This is what I think. Yes, I believe HHDL advise against Shugden's practice was from compassion and greater benefit of many. How? By banning the practice, HHDL created a split between the Tibetan community and His actions were condemned by many. Hence this in turn created a rift and a diversion from the Tibetan's cause to gain automony from China, and destroyed a united opposition against the Chinese. Why is this a 'good' thing? Because, if the Tibetans were united and continued their fight against China, a small country like Tibet will be destroyed. The Chinese in their sheer numbers will massacre the Tibetans.
Judging by the result of this ban, HHDL has achieved what no other Lamas have - the spread of Shugden practice on a global scale and most importantly, the acceptance of Tibetan Buddhism in China. So instead of spending all their energy in destroying the Tibetan cause, the Chinese are now open to the spread of Buddhism and forging better relations with Tibetans.
Yes, this ban had created many hardships, confusion and pain for the Tibetan citizens, but this is comparatively a small price to pay for the greater good and survival of the Tibetan community.
And for this, HHDL is brillant. Imagine, both HHDL and DS together have saved Tibet.
-
This is a perfect example on why the uninitiated should not be reading tantric texts, because without the proper foundations of the 3 principle paths and Guru devotion, it is very easy for someone to misinterpret them. Thus in Vajrayana these texts are secret.
Bingo! The whole idea of Guru being a Buddha is a secret Varjayana teaching, and should be kept out of the public view, and also from the Buddhist beginners. But for some mysterious reason, people do shout that view constantly in the open. They even use it as an argument to brush aside bad behaviour of many Big Name Buddhists.
To be honest, i don't think we can relate to someone who makes mistakes in a positive way. Even if we can there is no way that it can be a postive association so why would we want to perceive a person who can give us enlightenment in that way?
Us ourselves, our families, friends, colleagues, fellow practitioners, and so forth, all make mistakes, and yet, we can very easily have positive, meaningful and fulfilling relationships with them.
It is not about wanting to see faults and mistakes in anyone, least in the Gurus, but about accepting the reality as it is. Everything in samsara is impure, not pure. That must be the basis of the path, if the path is to be real.
If we can relate to a Guru because he makes mistakes, why would we want to associate ourselves with someone that will increase our negative aspects?
Why do you think that recognizing and accepting reality would increase our negativities?
-
I would first like to say "thank you" to the admin of this website for providing a very broad platform for debate and argument on this forum. All the same, I would like to bring the argument of this thread back to the original topic of this thread.
Those who disagree with this statement - re HH Dalai Lama being correct in speaking against Shugden - have shown how, on the one hand , Shugden practitioners have shown with sound valid reasoning that Dorje Shugden is a Buddha and not an evil malicious spirit, and how ,on the other hand, HH Dalai Lama has not given clear, sound and logical reasons to show that Shugden is an evil spirit and hence his practice should be banned.
Furthermore, there are so many contradictions and inconsistencies in the Dalai Lama's words and actions with regard to the practice of Shugden. He was once a Shugden practitioner who wrote a beautiful prayer in praise of Dorje Shugden in Dungkar Monastery called "Melody of the Unceasing Vajra". He then decided to give up the practice, saying (with no substantive proof) that Shugden was an evil spirit. He had propitiated Shugden's help in His successful escape from Tibet and later denied it was Shugden who had helped Him escape. Between Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche(HH Dalai Lama's Root Guru) and the Dalai Lama , there are further inconsistencies. Trijang Rinpoche allowed the Dalai Lama to give up his practice of Shugden. The Dalai Lama allows the Current Trijang Rinpoche to practice Shugden and also allows the throne of Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche to remain in Gaden Monastery. Kyabje Trijang's senior students are among the older generation of the CTA. These include the ex-Kalon Tripa, Samdhong Rinpoche, who had been most vocal against Shugden practitioners and in enforcing the ban. Then, when he was about to retire, he made a 180 degree turn and said that he had all along been following his Root Guru, Kyabje Trijand Rinpoche's instructions in his anti-Shugden stance!
To add more pieces to the jigsaw puzzle, both Samdhong Rinpoche and The Dalai Lama's youngest brother are said to be emanations of Dorje Shugden! Thus, as this website has so consistently shown, there is a bigger picture which seems to be unfolding, in which Enlightened and compassionate Beings, like the Dalai Lam(who is an emanation of Chenrezig) and Dorje Shudgen are working together! Thus the more vehemently the Dalai Lama condemns Shugden and Shugden practitioners, the faster and further does Shugden practice spread. As Buddhism continues to spread with its greatest of modern-day teachers, HH Dalai Lama's tireless efforts, so does Shugden practice!
Finally, as Ensapa says: " (All) mistakes(and contradictions) of any Buddha are not really mistakes, but our own (limited )minds of delusion and ignorance and our lack of understanding(sees them as such)".
-
Everyone has the right and freedom to voice his opinion here but the rule of the thumb is not to bash another lama nor dharma center. I certainly do not have the qualifications to judge anyone here. HH has his reasons for doing what he is doing, I have my reasons for doing what I am doing and will continue doing.
HH says do not do Dorje Shugden’s practice but other high incarnate lamas still do because they received the practice from their root gurus (some who still practice Dorje Shugden) and not from HH directly. Some of these great practitioners had taken very positive and controlled rebirth and returned to continue and benefiting many more. I wonder how this is possible if Dorje Shugden is a demon.
I am like in a movie hall watching a movie and just waiting to see how the movie ends, I am sure the ending would be of huge benefit to all. The movie may end soon, quite soon.
-
Bingo! The whole idea of Guru being a Buddha is a secret Varjayana teaching, and should be kept out of the public view, and also from the Buddhist beginners. But for some mysterious reason, people do shout that view constantly in the open. They even use it as an argument to brush aside bad behaviour of many Big Name Buddhists.
That is no secret as the Guru openly displays his enlightened qualities whenever he gives teachings or guides his students, but to respect the other traditions such as theravarda who only believe in the existence on 1 Buddha, this will not be said to them as they cannot handle nor accept it. We're in a vajrayana forum, brother, which is why we can talk about this here openly as it is understood and the basis of all vajrayana teachings. So that view is not secret at all.
Us ourselves, our families, friends, colleagues, fellow practitioners, and so forth, all make mistakes, and yet, we can very easily have positive, meaningful and fulfilling relationships with them.
It is not about wanting to see faults and mistakes in anyone, least in the Gurus, but about accepting the reality as it is. Everything in samsara is impure, not pure. That must be the basis of the path, if the path is to be real.
Yeah but we also accept the fact that our friends, families etc are not 100% reliable as they are part of samsara and therefore we turn our attention to the Dharma, to our Gurus who as many texts have pointed out are in reality Shakyamunis appearing in different guises to benefit many, fulfilling his vow. Is this what is not taught in the Lamrim, that in order to practice sincerely one must accept the faults of samsara and then turn their back on them and follow the teachings wholeheartedly under the care of a spiritual guide?
Why do you think that recognizing and accepting reality would increase our negativities?
By the virtual of the object. If we focus on a negative quality, how do we hope to get something positive out of it?If you want to focus on your Guru's negative qualities, might as well focus and accept of those who have committed crime and murder. Isn't that even more obvious and easier to "relate" to because they made "mistakes" in life? What you said is not really reality but your imputation of reality that Gurus can make mistakes, if their mistakes are real then we all have no hope of Buddhahood and they're not attained at all, but thats not the case as time and time have proven again that many lamas are still capable of passing into clear light and some even attain the rainbow body.
Every single Guru in this world are the same and one in nature, but in a different form or container yet the contents are still the same: they contain the essence of Vajradhara: the nectar that grants us Buddhahood. To discriminate against one is to discriminate against all of them because they all have similar natures. If you want to accept that the Buddha makes mistakes, you can too because he did not get rid of Devadatta and allowed him to do harm and to split the sangha. So is that a mistake or as Chandrakirti had mentioned that it is merely his emanations staging an act to teach all of us? If the Buddha can do it why not our Gurus who make mistakes on purpose to teach us a lesson?
Lastly, if you wish to believe that teachers can do mistakes that is all right but please do not spread the view or it will damage many people as this contradicts what has been said in many stainless tantric texts about Guru devotion as well as sutra teachings on Guru devotion….and planting a view that is not in line with the Dharma texts in others. You want to do that? You know how heavy that karma is right?
-
Yes, as is stated in the first stanza of Yonten Shigyurma, the Lamrim Lineage Prayer and Meditation by Lama Tsongkapa, the root of the path is Guru Devotion and proper reliance on one's Guru by focusing on him (as is stated in the Lamrim) as a Buddha. Hence, there should be no shadow of a doubt in the mind about one's Spiritual Guide who leads us on the Path to full Enlightenment. Hence, it is a mistaken path to tread to start seeing faults and mistakes in our Gurus.To engage in talk and discussion about this is also wrong and damaging, especially in a forum with many viewers from everywhere.
(By the way, just to correct an error in my earlier post on this thread, re- the Dalai Lama's youngest brother as an incarnation of Dorje Shugden. I beg to apologize. It should be the Dalai Lama's youngest brother as an incarnation of Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen. Thank you.).
-
Yes, as is stated in the first stanza of Yonten Shigyurma, the Lamrim Lineage Prayer and Meditation by Lama Tsongkapa, the root of the path is Guru Devotion and proper reliance on one's Guru by focusing on him (as is stated in the Lamrim) as a Buddha. Hence, there should be no shadow of a doubt in the mind about one's Spiritual Guide who leads us on the Path to full Enlightenment. Hence, it is a mistaken path to tread to start seeing faults and mistakes in our Gurus.To engage in talk and discussion about this is also wrong and damaging, especially in a forum with many viewers from everywhere.
(By the way, just to correct an error in my earlier post on this thread, re- the Dalai Lama's youngest brother as an incarnation of Dorje Shugden. I beg to apologize. It should be the Dalai Lama's youngest brother as an incarnation of Tulku Drakpa Gyeltsen. Thank you.).
It just does not make sense. Why would you want to relate and take refuge with someone just because he or she makes mistakes? Then why take refuge in a qualified teacher? can take refuge with our parents and friends also, no need to take refuge with someone who has spent the last 20-30 years of their lives studying and holding the monk vows…We take refuge in them because they do not make mistakes when holding their vows.
The logic itself is very interesting to try and understand the mind of such an individual to the point where he thinks that the sutras and tantras are agreeing with him and totally ignoring the rudimentary, core texts that are the foundations for our practice. It is very easy to twist things around to fit our own laziness and wrong views instead of following what should be interpreted, or the views of an actual teacher.
It is also for this reason that we should always seek the guidance of a proper and qualified teacher so that we do not fall into our own mental deceptions. And of course we need to follow this teacher all the way and not be picky on his advice and teachings or else there will be no point of having a teacher…the reason why we need guidance is because we want to avoid our own pitfalls and holes due to many lifetimes of habituations and laziness to not transform our minds.
Ngari Rinpoche is just one of the many emanations and reincarnations of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen. There are many, many more emanations of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen that are around that are benefitting countless amount of beings and we will never know who might be his incarnation…but definitely will be someone benefitting people on a very grand scale
-
It depends on individual perspectives but in my opinion, I think that by His Holiness speaking against Dorje Shugden, it creates some kind of effects in a way that it attracts more people to practise Dorje Shugden. Because His Holiness is such an influential and famous leader, so wherever His Holiness goes, people follow and so the Dorje Shugden issues have become an attention to the people and medias. So I think that it's a good thing in a way.