dorjeshugden.com

About Dorje Shugden => General Discussion => Topic started by: Zhalmed Pawo on July 24, 2009, 03:33:39 PM

Title: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Zhalmed Pawo on July 24, 2009, 03:33:39 PM
Hello all, fellow Shugdenites


I was yesterday talking with a Nyingmapa friend, and we touched on the subject of Je Phabongkhapa (henceforth JP), and he had a view, that JP was actively acting against Nyingmapas in the Eastern Tibet. This was a bit of a shock, since my friend does not have anything against Gelukpas, or even DS-practice! It seems therefore, that even "DS-friendly" Nyingmapas have a very bad view concerning JP, and that while "JP dissing" is the hobby of anti-geluks and anti-shugdenites, similar view seems to be a general Nyingmapa view, entertained even in friendly quarters who do not go dissing JP publicly.

Now of course, he merely had the view or understanding that JP acted against his lineage, but he didn't mention any real details, as seems to always be the case when JP is talked about. It seems, that people just have a general notion about 'evil actions' of JP in the East, but nobody seems quite capable of spelling anything even close to any facts or details. It seems, that it is all just rumours. Now I ask from you all, is there any real proof of any improper action by JP? Considering how many people nowadays dislike and badmouth JP, surely someone would have presented by now some actual proof. Surely. So, could someone please show me?

Surely something must have happened, because so many Nyingmapas think thatwise. Surely there are some real records about it all. There is hardly any nyingma-conspiracy at work, so "something must have been burned, since there is so much smoke". So, where is the fire?

Now, I of course do not expect that anything can be found, since I do not see how Heruka himself could have acted improperly. Nevertheless, I do have a view about what happened in the East. I present it here, so that you all could comment on whether it seems to be based on facts, or sounds reasonable. Personally I feel, that it has the following four good points about it:
- it shows that there was no fire (meaning that JP did not act improperly, but should be praised instead)
- it explains why there is smoke (meaning that Nyingmapas do have something to rant about)
- it seems reasonable and probable
- it accords with the known facts (that is, with those facts that I personally know)

I would appreciate it, if those of you who know more about history, and do have access to various Tibetan sources, could comment on whether my account accords with the known facts. And whether it seems reasonable and probable to you.

A Reasonable Account

Back in the Good Old Days, before JP arrived, life was good and predictable. The Gelukpas taught the monks in the monasteries, and the Nyingmapas and Kagyupas taught the householders in the villages. If someone wanted to study Geluk, he ordained and moved to a monastery, and if someone wanted to study something else, there were the local Nyingma and Kagyu Lamas in their gompas, near one's home. Everything was in proper order, and everyone knew his place.

But then one day, one Gelukpa monk, JP, started to teach householders as well, instead of just the monks as had been done previously by the Gelukpas. (This is said about JP in many places. Is this true that pre-JP Gelukpas taught only monks?) And furthermore, this JP, was a very charismatic and skillful teacher, who actually touched the hearts of his audience. People who listened to him, actually transformed, and this increased his popularity immensely - this was not the typical Geluk-scholar lecturing in a dry manner, but a real Lama, moving people. (This is reported by many JP's sudents.) This was a new development, and altered almost everything.

Before I mention what was altered, I ask you to read first the quote in the bottom of my post, by a modern day Western Nyingmapa.

I'll suppose, that while reading that quote, you already guessed what I think was altered by JP: The distribution of lay supporters, and therefore the distribution of money and power.

If indeed it is true, that before JP, the Geluks did not teach householders, the "JP-movement" was surely an utter shock to the existing status quo between the lineages. In a sense, he stepped into the turfs of Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, that is, the laity. Suddenly, beacause of JP, much of the monetary support that had previously went to the Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, were now directed to the Gelukpas. This would have put many Lamas and small gompas into financial trouble. For many small lineages, it could have been disasterous. From their point of view, JP was in fact stealing their students and supporters. One could also easily imagine that many small gompas were in effect bankrupted, and even abandoned, if the locals no longer supported them. Or if the supporting laity shifted their allegiance to Gelukpas, many gompas, that served of course the locals, would have naturally been changed into Geluk gompas. So in this sense, it could truly be said, that JP was stealing gompas as well.

All these shifts seem very reasonable, even natural, if the status quo of lineages, in relation to the laity, was altered by an inspiring Geluk teacher. All this "stealing and converting" could have happened, of course, without any intent or alleged oppression, from JP's side. He simply did what a teacher should do - that is, teach the people. But the experienced or perceived outcome of that, since he was a great and popular teacher who had stepped beyond the established boundaries of Geluk activity, of course, could have been seen as "an act of aggression". JP did in fact step into the turfs of others, he did go where many thought he shouldn't have gone - that is, into the hearts, and therefore also the wallets, of the householders. He could be easily seen as "a destroyer of many non-geluk lineages", eventhough he might have never intend anything on those terms. For after all, JP did break the "unwritten code" between the lineages, and stepped into the midst of laity, and stole their hearts. He shouldn't have, felt many.

Now, of the following statements, I believe the first is true. But just see how easily, with small steps, the whole truth becomes twisted as you progress on the later statements.

1 - JP did what no Geluk had done before, and taught the laity, who responded so enthusiastically, as to move their allegiance to Geluk from their previous lineages. Many Nyingma and Kagyu Lamas lost a lot of the support they had previously used to have.

2 - JP started a movement that converted many people who previously had been supporting their local Nyingma and Kagyu gompas. Many Nyingma and Kagyu Lamas and gompas vere impoverished.

3 - JP converted many Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, and many gompas were deserted or converted into Geluk.

4 - JP began to convert Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, and took their gompas.

5 - JP stole the Nyingma and Kagyu gompas, and converted them to Geluk.

6 - JP acted against the Nyingma and Kagyu, and stole their gompas and converted the people who had previously been Nyingmapas or Kagyupas.

7 - JP started anti-nyingma and anti-kagyu purges, and changed their gompas into Geluk strongholds.

8 - JP hated Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, and oppressed them by stealing their gompas forcefully and converting people into Geluk

See how the story changes, bit by bit. I think those small shifts pretty much explain why many Nyingmapas, and others, feel that JP was not the saint we think he is.

But nevertheless, my main point is, that by starting to teach laity, JP did something of which he should be praised of, but sadly is accused of. So there is no fire. Except of course, the fire of Dharma in the hearts of his students and audience. All he did, was to teach. He just was too good a teacher for his own good, so to speak.

The smoke that there is, is that Nyingmapas understandably do have some uneasy feelings against JP, but it has been blown out of proportion. JP did step on their turf, for sure, but really, the Nyingmapas and Kagyupas do not own the laity, so there is no real reason to be agitated against JP. To say that JP stole something from them, is to say that the Tibetan lay people were earmarked permanently for Nyingma and Kagyu!

I do feel that my account of what happened is reasonable, and accords with the known facts. I hope you all comment, and especially if someone has acces to any relevant Tibetan sources, I'd like to hear about what they say.


blessings,
Harri
_________


Quote

According to Nyingma theory, there is no reliable way to determine which termas are valid. As a result, Tibetans have been quarrelling about termas’ validity for a thousand years. The arguments, often vicious, convince no one. They go around in circles, because they have nothing to new to say. The dispute has rarely gone beyond “You faked it yourself!” “No, I got it from a Buddha!” “Did not!” “Did too!” “You are possessed by a demon!” “No, you are!” This level of argument should be left on the children’s playground.

On this page and the next, I suggest a way out of this deadlock. What I have to say is not traditional. However, I think you may find it sensible.

We need to go back and ask: “Why did we want to know which termas were valid in the first place?”

In Tibet, only a tiny religious elite actually practiced any termas. A main religious activity of lay people was to donate money to holy men. That is supposed to produce merit, resulting in better future lives. For most Tibetans, a key practical question is: which are the holiest men? Giving money to an authentic tertön (revealer of termas) would be the most effective use of funds. Giving money to a false tertön might be worse than useless. As a result, questions of terma validation are intimately tied up with money and power in Tibetan culture. These considerations are irrelevant to most Westerners.

For those who actually practice, the question is “which termas work?” For this, the Tibetan debate is framed wrong. It starts from the assumption that a terma is either true, or false. Apparently, if it is true, practicing it is a sure, quick way to enlightenment. If it is false, practicing it is a sure, quick way to hell. This extreme polarization is unhelpful and silly. It leads to scriptures that are full of advertising hype. They get titles like The Innermost Utterly Unsurpassable Ultra-Double-Top-Secret Essence of Life, The Universe, And Everything. It also leads to the demonization and political persecution of religious competitors.

Termas are never either true, or false. Essentially none of Buddhism is. Buddhism is concerned with methods, not truths. Termas are not factual statements that can be objectively tested. They are practices that can only be evaluated experientially, to see what happens.

In the words of Andreas Doctor, a Western expert on termas:

Recognizing that the final authenticating measure for Treasure [terma] revelation lies beyond what can be objectively verified, it appears a less rewarding exercise to perpetuate a debate of the Treasure along a simplified framework of true or false. Instead, looking beyond the traditional saint-charlatan paradigm may allow for other, more rewarding perspectives . . . (The Tibetan Treasure Literature, p. 50.)

On the next page, I suggest that the right question to ask is “which termas, or other practices, will be most useful for me?” The answer may be different for each of us.

(Source [url]http://approachingaro.org/the-wrong-question[/url] )


Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Alexis on July 24, 2009, 04:51:22 PM
Zhalmed Pawo,

I think you got it quite right!

However, there is no trace, anywhere, of anything like "gelugpas teaching only to monks" in our tradition. If you look at pictures of old tibet of monlam or other ceremonies, you will always find plenty of lay people around. Also, my wife's family received plenty of teachings when they were still in Tibet. If you read biographies and stories from old tibet, you will also notice a close-knit relationship between householders and monks within gelugpa tradition. So that "unwritten code" is somewhat of a fiction like the charges against Je Pabongkha.

If you check Tomo Geshe Rimpoche's bio from the articles section of this website, you will find a similiar story in the events that unfolded in the Tomo valley of Tibet when Rimpoche started teaching there.

Yours,

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Zhalmed Pawo on July 24, 2009, 06:11:54 PM
Alexis, sorry for my imprecise wording - I do of course know that Gelukpa monks taught laity as well, even from the day one, but what I meant, was that the way and manner the laity was taught, had been different from the way monks were taught. There was no "real Lamrim" for the laity, so to speak. It was for the monks only. Until JP happened.

In most traditional Asian Buddhist societies, even today, the laity is taught (by the monks) mainly about basic ethics and generosity towards the Three Jewels, etc. The laity are not expected to do anything really serious. If they want more, they are expected to ordain as monks. (Nyingmapas and Kagyupas are different here, yes.) This is true in Theravada, and so have I understood, in "pre-JP Geluk monasticism" as well. That was the point. JP was in this sense a non-gelukish teacher, reaching for the common man (if tacky expressions are allowed), and something big happened.

This issue is very interesting, and I would like to know in more detail as to what extent Gelukpas actually gave any "real" teachings to the laity. We know from the accounts of JP's monk students, that he gave generously to the laity, but how about the previous Lineage Gurus? How many "householder gelukpas" do we know by name? All that I know of, are post-JP.

Theravada sources tell how Ananthapindika - the Householder clad in white, who gave the very first monastery in the Jeta Grove for the Sangha - was in his death bed, when for the first time he was "given Dharma in he same way as it is given to monks". The idea that there is something like a Common Dharma to everyone, is very recent, it seems, in the monastic traditions of Buddhism. There has been a gap, between the ordained and householders. That gap JP bridged.

But anyway - this or that - it seems that the sin of JP was in his being a too good a teacher. (Or is there more?  :P )
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: emptymountains on July 25, 2009, 09:22:52 AM
I went through Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand and collected together Je Phabongkhapa's statements about Nyingma, Dzogchen, etc. and discuss whether he had a sectarian attitude towards them:

http://dharmaprotector.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/liberation-in-the-palm-of-your-hand-je-phabongkhapa-and-sectarianism/ (http://dharmaprotector.wordpress.com/2009/02/03/liberation-in-the-palm-of-your-hand-je-phabongkhapa-and-sectarianism/)

Please let me know what you think about my conclusions. Thanks!
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Alexis on July 25, 2009, 01:56:22 PM
Congratulations emptymountains,  :)

You make you point very clearly.

I would suggest to you that you make availlable some of your conclusions early on in your introduction (like a line or two), so that readers can have a quick idea of your destination.

Such as : "We want to demonstrate that despite comments like Dreyfus' on Pabongkha, it will be shown that pabongkha was in fact..." or something similar.

Yours is a very welcome initiative. You should make it available in word format and send it to the administrators to be included in the articles sections of this website (or any other website concerning Dorje shugden).

Yours,
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Zhalmed Pawo on July 25, 2009, 02:57:14 PM
Good work emptymountains. As to the quote “apart from the doctrine of Manjughosha Tsongkhapa alone, the views of all Sakyas, Kagyus, Nyingmas and so on are erroneous”, I think this is pretty much true!

But interestingly, it does not follow, that Sakyapas et al could not realize emptiness. This is because one does not need to have the correct philosophical understanding of emptiness to realize emptiness. Throughout the history of Buddhism, people of various schools have realized emptiness eventhough their presentation of emptiness has been something else than that of Je Tsongkhapa's - namely Sarvastivadins, Zen, Yogacarins, Yogacara-Madhyamika, Svatantrika-Madhyamika, and even Prasangika-Madhyamika of Sakyas et al. Je Tsongkhapa's presentation of Prasangika is different from all the others, including Atisha himself! If one would need to have the same view as JT, then even Atisha would have been an ordinary being.

In Tibetan philosophical texts, the JT's view is sometimes called a special Gelukpa presentation of the Madhyamika-Prasangika view, because it is not the same Prasangika that others have. The same view can be found only from some Theravada sources, and perhaps from some Nyingma termas, but not from the writings of realized beings like Sakya Pandita, for instance. It is the best way to explain the correct view of emptiness, I think, but interestingly, other views are adequate also, in practice.

Considering this, Pabonkhapa was telling the truth without being sectarian, or being against any other presentations, or denying their validity. I'm quite sure he thought that Asanga, Atisha and Sakya Pandita were realized beings, eventhough they did not share the view of Je Tsongkhapa.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Alexis on July 25, 2009, 07:19:18 PM
"...Maha-realizations are possible even with a mind only view, no doubt.  Yet why settle for a lesser if two choices are presented to you?  To cut the root of samsara why settle for a dull butter knife?  Seek that bleeding edge wisdom, that flaming excalibur brighter than a hundred torches..."

This is so very true...

Also, one has to remember the times have changed. We are at the end of the Kali yuga. At the time of the Buddha, Chuddhapanthaka became an arahat by sweeping the floor with a broom. The first five disciples of the Buddha became arahats just by hearing the Four Noble Truths from the mouth of the Buddha. Today, I doubt anyone can do that. This is because of the times.

Remember also, Tsongkhapa was not achieving any results by relying other (dull butter knife!) teachings. This is why he was adviced by Manjushri to engage in Purification, accumulation, petitionning his lama and also study extensively madhyamaka litterature in order to perceive emptiness, because other methods and teachings were not usefull anymore. They were no longer antidotes to reification and self-grasping!

All this is because our bodies and minds have changed over time. It is not like before, so we need a special method. All the difficulties relating to the times is also what made Manjushri say to Tsongkhapa that anyone who do no have this practice with five unique features (Solitary Hero Yamantaka) will not be successfull in their dharma practice... this is not because Hevajra or Heruka cannot lead to full enlightenment, it is just that, because of the times and Karma, there are so much obstacles (even to Tulkus!) that the obstacle-clearing and wisdom bestowing practice Yamantaka is now absolutely required to achieve full-enlightenment within a single lifetime in a single body.

In brief, the method (the teatment) has to be fitting to the times we live and the types of minds we have (type of illness). This is what the Gelug ear-whispered lineage offer: a quick, undefiled, undiluded method befitting the times we live in. And that's what Pabongkha taught!

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: emptymountains on July 25, 2009, 07:57:15 PM
Quote
Apart from the doctrine of Manjughosha Tsongkhapa alone, these days the views of all Sakyas, Kagyus, Nyingmas and so on are erroneous. They are not even Svatantra or Cittamatra, let alone the view of Prasanga Madhyamaka—meditating only the nihilist view like tirthikas and Hashang.


I think those two little words put Je Phabongkhapa's thoughts into context. This tells me that he did not believe non-Gelug views had always been erroneous, but that something was happening during his day that was a departure from the views these traditions had taught and practiced in previous generations.

In Clear Light of Bliss (see http://www.dharmaprotector.org/fundamentalwisdom.html (http://www.dharmaprotector.org/fundamentalwisdom.html)), GKG says that the major Gurus of the non-Gelug traditions always taught the Prasangika view.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Alexis on July 25, 2009, 09:15:29 PM
What Je Rimpoche's unique interpretation brings to prasangika view is the union of Dharmakirti's Pramana system with Nagarjuna's Madhyamaka.

In short, Je Rimpoche adds realism to Nagarjuna's philosophy in order for the later not to be interpreted in a nihilistic fashion. Emptiness, Je Rimpoche says, is a feature of real objects. So what is illusory is the object's inherent existence (reification of the objet) rather than the object itself. Others such as Gorampa state that objects are a conventional truth therefore illusory. Je Rimpoche says objects are real, only their intrinsic nature (as posited by us) is illusory. Nagarjuna does not develop this thesis. Nagarjuna however states that samsara is no different than nirvana, so Je Rimpoche interprets this to mean the objects are not illusions, the illusions is the reified identity of the objet.

For an excellent sum-up of all this see Sonam Tackchoe' "The Two Truths Debate" this is a must-read for any serious gelugpa scholar.

http://www.amazon.com/Two-Truths-Debate-Tsongkhapa-Gorampa/dp/0861715012/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1248556622&sr=8-1

Notice this is also one of the main point of philosophical contention between Gelug and other schools. Here, we are taxed as "materialists" for upholding the reality of material objects (conventional truths)!  >:(
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Zhalmed Pawo on July 26, 2009, 12:17:59 PM
Thanks for the book tip, Alexis. Looks very interesting. Have to get it someday soon.

But about the "materialist" thing... hmmm. That actually sounds nice, especially when combined with "a demon worshiper".  From now on, let us all be known as the demon worshiping materialists. Yee-haa!

 :D
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on August 22, 2009, 11:30:53 AM
Quote from: Zhalmed Pawo on July 24, 2009, 03:33:39 PM
Hello all, fellow Shugdenites


I was yesterday talking with a Nyingmapa friend, and we touched on the subject of Je Phabongkhapa (henceforth JP), and he had a view, that JP was actively acting against Nyingmapas in the Eastern Tibet. This was a bit of a shock, since my friend does not have anything against Gelukpas, or even DS-practice! It seems therefore, that even "DS-friendly" Nyingmapas have a very bad view concerning JP, and that while "JP dissing" is the hobby of anti-geluks and anti-shugdenites, similar view seems to be a general Nyingmapa view, entertained even in friendly quarters who do not go dissing JP publicly.


...

1 - JP did what no Geluk had done before, and taught the laity, who responded so enthusiastically, as to move their allegiance to Geluk from their previous lineages. Many Nyingma and Kagyu Lamas lost a lot of the support they had previously used to have.

2 - JP started a movement that converted many people who previously had been supporting their local Nyingma and Kagyu gompas. Many Nyingma and Kagyu Lamas and gompas vere impoverished.

3 - JP converted many Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, and many gompas were deserted or converted into Geluk.

4 - JP began to convert Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, and took their gompas.

5 - JP stole the Nyingma and Kagyu gompas, and converted them to Geluk.

6 - JP acted against the Nyingma and Kagyu, and stole their gompas and converted the people who had previously been Nyingmapas or Kagyupas.

7 - JP started anti-nyingma and anti-kagyu purges, and changed their gompas into Geluk strongholds.

8 - JP hated Nyingmapas and Kagyupas, and oppressed them by stealing their gompas forcefully and converting people into Geluk



I heard this idea of Je Phabongka having destroyed a lot of Nyingma monasteries and persecuted and killed many Nyingma followers the first time from a Western Ngagpa student in 2000. I was very surprised about it and while confronting my Gelug Lama with these accusations, I came to know, that there were never incidents happened like this, but because of the great popularity of Je Phabonka in Tibet, there had been a lot of jealousy and wrong rumors towards him spread around.
When I checked these accusations from Nyingma side, I couldn't find any word of persecution of Nyingmapas in the time of Je Phabongka in Dudjom Rinpoche's historical work The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism. Actually there is one great persecution of Nyingmapas mentioned, but this happened 200 years earlier:

“In 1717 (fire bird year, twelfth cycle) the Dzungsar army severely persecuted the Nyingmapa teaching and monasteries.”
And in its Footnote: “In 1717 the Dzungsars occupied Lhasa and killed Lhazang, the leader of the Qosot Mongols who had previously murdered the regent Sangye Gyamtso and helped the Chinese to remove Dalai Lama VI in 1706. A great persecution of Nyingmapa monasteries followed, resulting in the deaths of Locen Dharmasri, Cangdak Pema Trhinle and others. This is certainly one reason for the shift in Nyingma activity to East Tibet from the eighteenth century onwards. See especially Petech, China and Tibet in the Early XVIIIth Century.”

Regarding the time of Phabongka Rinoche I came to know from diverse sources, that the Nyingma lineage was while this time in Tibet not in its best constitution. The monasteries were described often as out-of-repair with just a few very poor monks inside.
Mipham Rinpoche (1846-1912) wrote:
“During the present day the teaching of the Ancient Translation School has almost become like a painted butter lamp (which emits no light), and there are few who even consider and inquire as to just what are the essential points of our tradition's philosophical system ...”

I couldn't find out yet, what had been the reasons for the unpopularity of Nyingma school in Tibet while this time, but it is obvious, that such social discrepancies between the traditions create dissatisfaction and jealousy. In fact I heard myself talks like - even from higher Nyingma Lamas-  Gelugpas would get always the better resources than Nyingmapas. This had been before so in Tibet and also after exile, when the Gelugpa's Dharma first spread into the West and all Western money flow into their centers.

I suppose, that regarding the accusations against Je Phabongka two incidents became mixed: the poverty and less popularity of Nyingmapas while his time and the persecution of the Nyingmapas 200 years before. The rest may have been done by polemics and rumours spread around. Also the money story related with Dorje Shugden might find it's root here.

Whatsoever, for Nyingmapas who like to complain all the time about the never happened persecution and money story, there is a very interesting chapter in Dudjom Rinpoche's The Nyingma School of Tibetan Buddhism, S. 938 ff.: “On the 'Bad Luck of the Nyingmapa'”  ;)
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Freddy on August 23, 2009, 08:41:08 AM
Please excuse that I didn't read all the posts apart from the first one.

@ Zhalmed Phawo:
As you asked for feedback, here it comes.  :D
Concerning the situation in the East: I am not sure about Kham as this is a region I never delt with. So let's talk about Amdo. A friend of mine is a native Amdowa from Rebgong area. He told me that basically all monestaries (with a few exceptions, I suppose) there are Gelugpa monasteries. But among the laity, there are mainly Nyingmapas and some Bönpos as well. So he seid, his family is a Nyingma-family but if he had wanted to take monastic ordination, he by this would have become a Gelug monk as there simply are no other monasteries. For him this seemed to be quite funny and he doesn't have any problems with these different traditions. And as a really Amdowa of course strongly admires Je Rinpoche  ;) !  He even told me that one of his relatives was a monk at Sera monastery.

Someone lately told me that he was told by a Nyingma lama that even though these problems in Kham appeared when Phabongkha Rinpoche stayed there, Rinpoche himslef did never engage in such things as destroying or converting Nyingmapa monasteries himself. And although I heared a lot of allegations against Rinpoche, I never found any real evidence for his alleged activism against Nyingmapas (I mean, Dalai Lama circle, Dreyfus etc. faked a lot but I don't think these are true).
But there is another thing to be kept in mind: Kham and Amdo (especially Kham) were Nyingma and Kagyud strongholds at the time of the fifth Dalai Lama. And there has also been a strong Bönpo alliance there. And what did the then Dalai Lama do? He asked his Mongol allies to invade these regions and distroy the Kagyud and Bönpo kingdoms there, just as he did in the case of Tsang. So if anyone could be blamed for having engaged in destroying the Nyingma and Kagyud in the East then this is for sure the fifth Dalai Lama himself! (Just remember who destroyed the Jonangpa in Central Tibet.)
Phabongkha Rinpoche at so many occasions said that Nyingma dharma is a proper way to Buddhahood, just refer to Liberation in Our Hands.
And we need to consider that "converting" is not a real matter of religion here. The source of all traditions is Buddha Shakyathuba! It is more likely a matter of material wealth, financial support, and the like. The monasteries ruled the surrounding areas, so converting a Nyingma monastery into a Gelugpa one would mean more influence for Gaden Phodrang. Phabongkha Rinpoche at more than one occasion refused to participate in governmental issues. So what need would be there to "convert" monasteries?
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Freddy on August 23, 2009, 09:14:36 AM
I just checked again: It was not a Nyingmapa but the Gelug Dagyab Kyabgön who said, Phabonghkapa never ectivly partcipated in the destruction or converting of a monastery in Eastern Tibet.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on August 24, 2009, 05:05:07 PM
Quote from: Freddy on August 23, 2009, 08:41:08 AM

Concerning the situation in the East: I am not sure about Kham as this is a region I never delt with. So let's talk about Amdo. A friend of mine is a native Amdowa from Rebgong area. He told me that basically all monestaries (with a few exceptions, I suppose) there are Gelugpa monasteries. But among the laity, there are mainly Nyingmapas and some Bönpos as well. So he seid, his family is a Nyingma-family but if he had wanted to take monastic ordination, he by this would have become a Gelug monk as there simply are no other monasteries. For him this seemed to be quite funny and he doesn't have any problems with these different traditions. And as a really Amdowa of course strongly admires Je Rinpoche  ;) !  He even told me that one of his relatives was a monk at Sera monastery. (...)

This correspondens to the sources which I found. There were great Nyingma masters at the time of Pabhongka Rinpoche, as f.e. Mipham Rinpoche and Düdjom Lingpa, but there were less resources to keep up the Nyingma monasteries. Without support, there were no good teachers, without good teachers there was no attractiveness for students and without attractiveness there was no support. If a Nyingma wanted to get good studies this time, it was quiet common to go to a Gelug monastery.

Quote from: Freddy on August 23, 2009, 08:41:08 AM
And what did the then Dalai Lama do? He asked his Mongol allies to invade these regions and distroy the Kagyud and Bönpo kingdoms there, just as he did in the case of Tsang. So if anyone could be blamed for having engaged in destroying the Nyingma and Kagyud in the East then this is for sure the fifth Dalai Lama himself! (Just remember who destroyed the Jonangpa in Central Tibet.)

As far as I know, the destruction of the Kagyü monasteries happened as a result of some heavy political mistakes of one of the V. Dalai Lama's ministers and not under his own direction. The persecution of the Nyingmapas was another incident and came about 35 years after the V. Dalai Lama's Parinirvana.

I think, we should be very careful in talking about the V. Dalai Lama in a negative way. As he is in the same way part of our transmission lineage like Pabhongka Rinpoche, it doesn't make much sense to me to illuminate the image of the one lineage Guru while throwing mud to the other one. The V. Dalai Lama is also lineage holder of many Nyingma transmissions. And it was him, who wrote a beautiful prayer to Dorje Shugden ...  ;)
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Freddy on August 25, 2009, 08:38:54 AM
@ Yedi:

Thanks for your reply. No doubt there had been great achievements by the Great Fifth. But yet he lived the life of a politician. Put aside possible involvement in the East (which I still think existed) there is still the problem of the Jonangpa persecution in Ü and the war against the Kagyud in Tsang. These had for sure been supported and some even started by the Great Fifth. If he is Chenrezig, then there will be a benefit even from such actions. But as we can't see his real nature (well, basically I can't, maybe someone else do can) we have to judge by actions. And at least such actions are exactly of the kind the now 14th Dalai Lama alleges us to do.
But I am no expert on the Great Fifth's life. Anyway, Goldstein's "The Snow Lion and the Dragon" is a good compilation on Tibetan politics through the ages.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on August 26, 2009, 11:51:33 AM
Quote from: Freddy on August 25, 2009, 08:38:54 AM
@ Yedi:

Thanks for your reply. No doubt there had been great achievements by the Great Fifth. But yet he lived the life of a politician. Put aside possible involvement in the East (which I still think existed) there is still the problem of the Jonangpa persecution in Ü and the war against the Kagyud in Tsang. These had for sure been supported and some even started by the Great Fifth. If he is Chenrezig, then there will be a benefit even from such actions. But as we can't see his real nature (well, basically I can't, maybe someone else do can) we have to judge by actions. And at least such actions are exactly of the kind the now 14th Dalai Lama alleges us to do.
But I am no expert on the Great Fifth's life. Anyway, Goldstein's "The Snow Lion and the Dragon" is a good compilation on Tibetan politics through the ages.


Thanks for the book hint, I looked already for something like this and I hope to find it in our library :).
It seems to be quite hard to get a clear picture on the Vth Dalai Lama, since he started to become again an important figure for this new religious fight. I got the story with the minister, who had a strong bad influence on the 5th Dalai Lama and had acted in all political questions behind his back, from my abbot. This minister had also arranged the assassination of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen and claimed him when some strange appearances happened to have become an evil spirit. In the first time the Vth Dalai Lama believed to the version with the evil spirit, but later after some successless exorcism had been done, he realised Dragpa Gyaltsen to have become the powerful Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden. For this reason he wrote the famous praise to Dorje Shugden (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=341 (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=341)). As far as I remember the words of my abbot correctly, all issues regarding Dorje Shugden had been fully clarified and solved this time. There had been never a reason, to unpack it again and to declare it as a smoldering conflict since centuries. Actually nobody talked about it, since the Nechung oracle started with the topic in the 60s again.

Although the present Dalai Lama talks a lot about his closeness to the Vth one, it doesn't say automatically that he has also the same qualities like the great Fifth. Of course he might be in a similar situation: as I have heard, the present Dalai Lama lives completely like in a soap bubble and all informations, which he receives, are controlled by his ministers. Probably he gets daily some new fake messages and fake horrible pictures about Dorje Shugden practitioners and believes in a fair crusade.

But as you say, one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way. Sometimes I think about this point if I see some of the results of the schism: Dorje Shugden is now the world most famous Tibetan Buddhist deity. While only less people know about Mahakala or Veshramana or Rahula, even many uninvolved people came across Dorje Shugden. And this schism made also, that our part of Gelug sect is very accepted amongst the Chinese communists and attractive to many Chinese people. Whatever happened in Tibet and China, the Chinese are sentient beings just as well and it's very auspicious for them to have access to the Dharma.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: a friend on September 14, 2009, 04:40:47 AM
Quote: But as you say, one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.  

I'm sorry for belatedly jumping into this cold thread.
We already had a huge discussion about this matter with our dearest Beggar, the original owner of the website, now gone to some hidden cave apparently. So I'll just write a few words this time.

Imho, I don't think we should confuse innocent people who come to this website in search of information telling them that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or an emanation of Chenrezig.

It was a convention in the Tibetan political system to call the leaders of the world with the names of deities, the emperor of China being Mañjushri, the leader of Tibet, Chenrezig, and the czar of Russia, Arya Tara.

On the other hand, Buddhas cannot take away our bad karma and our ignorance with their own hands (if they could they would've done it eons ago); they liberate us by teaching us what to practice and what to abandon. There is no way a Buddha would push anybody to persecute others, to hate others, to belittle others. Imagine the confusion if a Buddha did this.

Some give an argument against this, saying that Buddhas can appear as demons, deluded beings and so on. This is true. But when they appear as Buddhas, they act as Buddhas. They never appear as demons and say, I am the Buddha, never.

I think it's not necessary to remind the amount of hatred and anger that this Dalai Lama has unleashed in the Tibetan communities around the world against the Protector's practitioners. Remember how the Dalai Lama himself has personally praised and thanked the persecutors. Remember how the Dalai Lama himself personally insists today in culminating the "cleansing" against the practitioners. Never a Buddha with the appearance and name of a Buddha ever did anything like this. So let's stop confusing others, lest we throw innocent people into bewilderment and disbelief of the Buddhadharma. Let's stop associating the Dalai Lama and his actions with the Great Boddhisattva of Compassion.

Best to all!

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on September 14, 2009, 01:56:03 PM
Quote from: a friend on September 14, 2009, 04:40:47 AM

Some give an argument against this, saying that Buddhas can appear as demons, deluded beings and so on. This is true. But when they appear as Buddhas, they act as Buddhas. They never appear as demons and say, I am the Buddha, never.


In the danger to repeat old discussions thanks for taking up this subject again, I struggled with it the last days. This argument is indeed the point, which I heard often also from my Gurus and found myself very helpful to keep up my samayas in a correct way. Imho you forgot something important: 'When they appear as Buddhas, they act as Buddhas' - but one has probably not the ability to recognize these actions as the actions of a Buddha because of ones deluded mind. The crucial point is, that we need definitely higher realizations to say clearly: „this is an activity of a Buddha and this not.“ Do we have these realizations? Even my masters as f.e. Gonsar Rinpoche and Kyabje Lati Rinpoche denied to give clear answers in this question. Both seem to prefer some kind of „crazy wisdom master“ explanation. Most interesting I found, when Gonsar Rinpoche compared the Dalai Lama one time with Ananda, when he was asked three times by the Buddha, to stay longer in the world and was three times not able to give a proper answer. This didn't happen, because Ananda was stupid or confused or had made the Buddha ordain nuns or whatsoever. It happened, because he represented in this moment the common karma of the sentient beings of our world. Only due to the lack of merits of the sentient beings, he was not able to give a proper answer to the Buddha, but not because of his personal failure. So it could be also some kind of Pontius Pilatus story.

Another point is, that still many of us have taken initiations by the Dalai Lama before the schism started, as Kalachakra and so on. Especially the initiations of the Annutarayoga Tantra level include strong samayas, which can spoil completely one's own tantric practice, if one doesn't follow them in a correct way. And as usual for these initiations one has to see the Lama as an emanation of the deity, whatever will happen. So it's not the question to see the Dalai Lama as an emanation of Chenresig, Kalachakra, Yamantaka or whatsoever, but to keep up one's visualization in the way one has got in the initiation. And also if one has taken any initiation of Annutarayoga tantra one is learned to see all phenomenas, even a crazy Dalai Lama, Adolf Hitler or the flying-spaghetti-monster (as far as it exists), as an emanation of one's deity and one's Lama.
 
Of course one could argue here, that this view of Annutarayogatantra is not suitable for a common public and just misleading. But even if one doesn't like to respect the samayas of those ones who have taken these initiations, also for smaller vehicles there are good reasons to step gently in the way how we talk about the present Dalai Lama: for example is he a fully ordained monk and as we can study in the Lam Rim Chenmo it produces heavy negative karma to slander a Gelong, even when he shows a very bad behavior. And there is also in general the advise to avoid the four faults of speech, which means lie, gossip, harsh and divisive speech. Whatever the Dalai Lama does, but I fear we have first to look at ourselves.

This doesn't mean at all that we should just shut up, this definitely not. Of course it's very necessary to clear up the dissensions, tell the truth and give support to the suffering people, but imho it's very important for our own practice to stay only with the facts and not to become personal or offending. Otherwise we would do the same mistakes on the other side and in a result we will be unworthy as Buddhists and just involved in a samsaric fight.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: a friend on September 15, 2009, 05:20:41 AM
Dear Yedi,

We should not confuse people by repeating that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation.
Buddhas have only one way to liberate us: teaching us what we should adopt and what we should abandon.
If we go on repeating that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig, then we are telling people the following: It's just great to persecute others because of their beliefs, it's exactly what the Buddha wants from you, go ahead and persecute, the Buddha is going to praise you, you are going to make the Buddha very happy.

Please, Yedi, things are unfortunate enough for us to add to the confusion. On what purpose? What is the need to go on repeating that? There is no vow of any kind that demands from one to say that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation.

Not to associate the Dalai Lama with Chenrezig is something simple, it doesn't harm anybody, it does not constitute any breaking of any level of vows, and it avoids pushing new, innocent people that start investigating the Buddhadharma to a state of confusion or disbelief.

It would be good too (and this is something that regularly comes up in this forum) to avoid bringing up the Mantrayana level. To use arguments coming from this level not only puts us in immediate danger of breaking  our vows, it's unsuitable to those who did not get there, it might harm their minds and increase their bewilderment.

I do not wish to discuss further this matter. These words are just to request the people of this forum to use caution and common sense, and also to have consideration for all those who are going to listen to our Buddhist voices.

What are we doing to this world if we invite people to think that a Buddha is somebody who incites segregation, persecution, fear, violence, and so on? What are we doing to this pitiful samsara if we destroy the hope that only the Buddhas can bring, by giving a terribly mistaken image of what a Buddha is?

And again, what need is there to do this?
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on September 15, 2009, 03:28:53 PM
I am very sorry to contradict again, as it seems, that you are somewhat fed up by this topic. But even if there should be no sense in your eyes for this discussion, for me (and probably others) there is, because though I can follow partially your political reasons, from the side of your Dharma reasons I feel not convinced and also somewhat ignored in my arguments. So I hope that I am allowed to continue this discussion in a reasonable and not a dogmatic way.

First to say: nobody stated that the Dalai Lama is Chenresig. It was only said:

one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

This fits to all the root teachings from the smaller vehicles, which we received from our masters, as we know, that there are special skills necessary to say definitely „this is an action of chenresig“ and „this is not an action of chenresig“. Before we have not even reached some kind of yogic perception, we must not give any judgement in this way. Of course we can suggest, that somebody acts or acts not as chenresig while interpreting some signs, but we are definitely not able to make any final decision in this point except we would have reached such a high yogic level. This was the way how I understood this sentence and there was no idea at all, that anybody of us will support now blindly all the actions of DL. But if you insist now on not giving space for any doubts according to our own deluded minds, because you know already very surly, that DL acts not as Chenresig, then this would mean in fact, that you have accomplished such a high yogic peception. Probably you have, but I request your kindly understanding, if I will not believe blindly in it.

Buddhas have only one way to liberate us: teaching us what we should adopt and what we should abandon....
What are we doing to this world if we invite people to think that a Buddha is somebody who incites segregation, persecution, fear, violence, and so on? What are we doing to this pitiful samsara if we destroy the hope that only the Buddhas can bring, by giving a terribly mistaken image of what a Buddha is?

The main goal of Buddhism is not to make the people believe in a world without suffering, but to help the sentient beings to overcome their delusions, which are the origin for their suffering. For this we have to understand the own mind and the phenomenas as that, what they really are. If you reduce the Buddhism just to a way to make people outwardly and temporarly happy or to an ethical how-to-do, then this would mean a heavy misunderstanding of the Buddha's doctrine.

But probably our dissence arises from a different environment and how we perceive it. In those Western countries I know and especially in my monastery I often get the feedback, that people are very happy to find an alternative to the mainstream Hollywood Buddhism and to come in contact with a Dharma, which they can study thoroughfully step by step. Those people don't like to be involved in any Dharma politics and are only interested in this Dharmapala issue, as far as they see their Gurus attacked and of course, because they feel compassion with the persecuted Tibetans. But they don't like to become a part of this schism and for that reason they want to find some solutions how to integrate this issue senseful in their practice. So, in the same way as you fear people could be irritated by a person who is claimed to be a Bodhisattva while acting very contradictory, I fear much more, people could be irritated by feeling forced to take part in this schism in a way which doesn't fit to their understanding of Dharma and how they were taught by their Gurus. And as I already said: I never ever heard one of my Gurus, and I met a lot, saying the DL is not or acts not as Chenresig. There would be also not much meaning for it in Western countries. The medias find always some nice titles for the DL, but there is no great emotional connection with it. Probably this is different for Tibetans and makes our views different?

There is no vow of any kind that demands from one to say that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation.

The crucial point is not, that anybody must say, DL is an emanation of chenresig. The issue is, that you wants us clearly to say, that he is not and we should not do otherwise.
So if I would agree with you and say DL is not an emanation of chenresig:


I hope, that I could clearly bring out my points. If they should sound unpolite, harsh or whatsoever, this is not in my intention but a result of being not a native speaker. And for the case, that you don't wish to continue this discussion furthermore, I will not expect an answer and we can leave it here. But I didn't like just to stop with a dogmatic 'shut up' because my arguments seem not to fit. We are Gelugpas, we can debate, or not? ;)
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: a friend on September 16, 2009, 05:16:39 AM
Yedi, You say:

The crucial point is not, that anybody must say, DL is an emanation of chenresig. The issue is, that you wants us clearly to say, that he is not and we should not do otherwise.  

I thank you so much for stating yourself so clearly that, for you, THAT IS THE ISSUE. Whew! What a relief! So your message is addressed to the person "who wants you clearly to say, that he is not Chenrezi and we should not do otherwise".

Since you invoke a limited knowledge of the language I invite you to read again my messages; you might then realize that I never said that you should say that HE IS NOT.

I will remind you what I did said, and maintain: that for the sake of innocent people that come to this public place without a knowledge or with a limited knowledge of Buddhism we should not go on repeating that the Dalai Lama IS Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation, let alone hinting that he might be acting as Chenrezig in a hidden way, since for obvious reasons this statement has a definite potential for harming their minds.

Nothing prohibits us to refrain from repeating such things. And our silence will not harm ourselves or others.

This has no relation with our samayas, nor the level of our attainments or non attainments.

I just invite us all to abstain from saying what could harm others. The statements in question have this potential to harm by making repulsive the image of the Buddha for some people before they have the opportunity to receive even some basic teachings. It is more than obvious that they will run away from anything Buddhist if they assume that a Buddha can behave in such way.

Yedi, I'm sorry not to answer other points. It's not that I am fed up with the issue, I just consider it so pernicious. Enough harm has been inflicted, I don't want to contribute to more harm.


Thom, hi there. It's undeniable that you gave so much, you were so generous and were betrayed. I'm really sorry every time I remember what you went through. You have been very brave not to have abandoned the Buddhadharma. I admire you for that, for still having the strength for upholding the teachings of Lord Buddha and loving our Lamas. Are you aware of the incredible good fortune that you had, to have unloaded such a mega chunk of negative karma and survived? Now that the tears are in the past, you might start feeling how light you are, after such ordeal. Anyway, even if you are still sore, sooner or later you will encounter the goodness of all the good you've done.

Best to all!

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on September 16, 2009, 04:07:31 PM
Quote from: a friend on September 16, 2009, 05:16:39 AM
Yedi, You say:

The crucial point is not, that anybody must say, DL is an emanation of chenresig. The issue is, that you wants us clearly to say, that he is not and we should not do otherwise.  

I thank you so much for stating yourself so clearly that, for you, THAT IS THE ISSUE. Whew! What a relief! So your message is addressed to the person "who wants you clearly to say, that he is not Chenrezi and we should not do otherwise".

Since you invoke a limited knowledge of the language I invite you to read again my messages; you might then realize that I never said that you should say that HE IS NOT.

okay, slowly we come to the gist of the matter - btw. my knowledge of language is not too limited to understand your postings ;)

Related to the statement "DL being chenresig" there were three possibilities:

1. DL is chenresig (as positive)
2. DL is not chenresig (as negative)
3. We don't know, if DL is or DL is not. (as neutral)

As I already mentioned, nobody stated in the discussion, that DL is Chenresig. The criticized sentence was:

one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

This sentence refers clearly to the third point, which is neutral and treats its object in an agnostic way.
But when you jumped into this discussion, you criticized this neutral statement as well as the positive and that's also what you repeated in your last posting:

we should not go on repeating that the Dalai Lama IS Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation, let alone hinting that he might be acting as Chenrezig in a hidden way

This says clearly, that we should not mention the positive and the neutral version here anymore for whatever reason. So if these two possibilities, positive and neutral, are not valid objects for discussions, than only the negative is left. Even while not saying explicitly, that we have to support your idea that DL is not chenresig, you did it implicitly by excluding all other possibilities. I hope you can follow this simple logical problem and will understand, why I refuse vehemently to become reduced to a statement, which is definitely not in agreement with my own Dharma practice.

I will remind you what I did said, and maintain: that for the sake of innocent people that come to this public place without a knowledge or with a limited knowledge of Buddhism ...

Probably we should focus more on this argument "people outside". Do they really exist in the way as we are using them in our discussion or are they just a good valve to weight our conceptions with some kind of plurality?  For that I will describe you some types of „people outside“ according to my experience as far as it is possible to classify them into groups. Please feel free to compare them  with the „people outside“ you talk about and find out yourself, where the priority is.









To conclude this try of a gross classification according to my personal experience: in all your wonderful, compassionated words for „the people outside“ I can find only a limited, very temporary and worldly aid to a little group of people, who might need it for some time. And I see a lot of damage for a huge group of „people outside“, who unfortunately seem not to fit into your compassion. But as you see, I am open for any discussion :)
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: wang on September 17, 2009, 01:20:54 AM
Good point Yedi ;D

Please keep on posting in this forum.  I guess you are from Geshe Rabten's monastery?  I like Geshe Rabten so much...

Back on this topic.  To me, Dalai Lama's action is quite not understandable, by cross examine with the Lamrim teaching.  To my observation, those following Dalai Lama 'blindly' are:
1. Lay Tibetan with 100% trust in Dalai Lama('whatever he do must be right', 'willing to die for him for any reason'.  Yes I met that kind of lay Tibetan who said DL is 'our god')
2. Geluk monks with teacher-student relationship (especially young tulku, whatelse can they do?)
3. Geluk senior monks within the institution
4. Non Geluk monks/teachers for whatever reason
5. Westen Tibetan Buddhist for whatever reason(new comer seeing DL as 'god' with a Christian mentality,  following own guru's comment etc.)

And funny point is that, looks most those I met openingly say 'no, this protector is not that bad' are well-educated young geshe' :)  Maybe that's because they don't have burden as a 'tulku' who inevitably be part of the institution or they don't have student-teacher relationship with Dalai Lama.  And even to these geshe, the most they commented at the end was 'Boddhisatva's intention is not easy for us to guess out', not ruling out  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' as Yedi said.   BTW, those be Tibetan Buddhist for more that a year will know that ''XX is YY Boddhisatva/Buddha'' is very common in Tibetan culture, hence  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' that kind of comment can be viewed as a polite protocol with not much significant meaning.

I once asked my guru if the institution or somebody behave really bad, can I hate them?  His answer is simply 'no hatred in any case, that destroy our merit...'.

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on September 18, 2009, 11:29:48 AM
Hi wang,

Quote from: wang on September 17, 2009, 01:20:54 AM

Please keep on posting in this forum.  I guess you are from Geshe Rabten's monastery?  I like Geshe Rabten so much...

...and I guess, you are the winner of the paper chase from all the hints I have spread here ;D

As far as my monastic schedule allows (and as long people get not too much irritated with me ;)) I like to post here and I would be very happy, if more others would do so. For my idea we spent already enough time in some kind of victims role. There might be victims on a worldly level. But since we are followers of the way of the Victorious One, how we could be really victims?

Quote from: wang on September 17, 2009, 01:20:54 AM
Back on this topic.  To me, Dalai Lama's action is quite not understandable, by cross examine with the Lamrim teaching.  To my observation, those following Dalai Lama 'blindly' are:
1. Lay Tibetan with 100% trust in Dalai Lama('whatever he do must be right', 'willing to die for him for any reason'.  Yes I met that kind of lay Tibetan who said DL is 'our god')
2. Geluk monks with teacher-student relationship (especially young tulku, whatelse can they do?)
3. Geluk senior monks within the institution
4. Non Geluk monks/teachers for whatever reason
5. Westen Tibetan Buddhist for whatever reason(new comer seeing DL as 'god' with a Christian mentality,  following own guru's comment etc.)

Thanks for extending the Tibetan part of this gross list, I found it myself somewhat lacking since I know myself only very less Tibetans from other schools personally (to be honest, I prefer to make a big bow around them to avoid dissences). Here in the Western countries where I live, there are just very, very few lay Tibetans, who come to teachings at all (you see them mainly on some festivals like Losar or Dalai Lama events, which are always good opportunities to show ones new Tibetan silk chupa) and this is not a question of school. But I met some previous Western hardliner Antishugdenites, who changed in the last years their mind, because they feel more and more fed up with Exile-Tibetans, who tell them with a great self-confidence, which Gurus are right or wrong, who is a right Tulku and who not, who is Buddhist and who not and so on while being themselves even not able to give a proper answer, when asked for such rudimentary things like the Four Noble Truths.

Quote from: wang on September 17, 2009, 01:20:54 AM
And funny point is that, looks most those I met openingly say 'no, this protector is not that bad' are well-educated young geshe' :)  Maybe that's because they don't have burden as a 'tulku' who inevitably be part of the institution or they don't have student-teacher relationship with Dalai Lama.  And even to these geshe, the most they commented at the end was 'Boddhisatva's intention is not easy for us to guess out', not ruling out  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' as Yedi said.   BTW, those be Tibetan Buddhist for more that a year will know that ''XX is YY Boddhisatva/Buddha'' is very common in Tibetan culture, hence  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' that kind of comment can be viewed as a polite protocol with not much significant meaning.

This is exactly the way how I understood such sentences, more or less just as some kind of 'lightning rod' to the danger of failures in the speech and to be sure not to pretend non-existing qualities of myself.

Quote from: wang on September 17, 2009, 01:20:54 AM
I once asked my guru if the institution or somebody behave really bad, can I hate them?  His answer is simply 'no hatred in any case, that destroy our merit...'.

I had also a similar help all this time by an answer from Kyabje Lati Rinpoche. My question was: 'I heard, if one has trusted in a Guru one time, it can happen, that he starts to act all of a sudden very crazy and then one should not loose faith in him anymore whatever he does. But what to do, if a Guru starts to behave crazy and will not stop anymore?'
This question was still before the schism started and it sounded to most people somewhat funny, so they laughed. But Kyabje Lati Rinpoche became extremely seriously and gave a long, long answer to it. The main points were, that one time having trusted in a Guru, one should never ever loose ones faith anymore. The only possibility one has, is to avoid his nearness, if the irritations are too strong. One is allowed to say, that one doesn't understand his behaviour and one must also not support his activities, if they are not in accordance with the Dharma. But one may never ever start slandering on this Guru or say, that he is not one's Guru anymore and so on.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: yedi on March 21, 2010, 02:45:23 PM
Dear Dharma friends,

after a few months in retreat I am very happy to see you all alive here and very engaged in posting 8)
So many new stuff to read and I hope you won't mind if I don't feel able to follow that all and will bring up now an old topic again. Anyway, during my retreat time I had the opportunity to study a very interesting book from Mipham Rinpoche which brought some more light to an old interesting question which was posted here last year and couldn't be answered in a real satisfying manner:

Quote from: Zhalmed Pawo on July 24, 2009, 03:33:39 PM
Hello all, fellow Shugdenites


I was yesterday talking with a Nyingmapa friend, and we touched on the subject of Je Phabongkhapa (henceforth JP), and he had a view, that JP was actively acting against Nyingmapas in the Eastern Tibet. This was a bit of a shock, since my friend does not have anything against Gelukpas, or even DS-practice! It seems therefore, that even "DS-friendly" Nyingmapas have a very bad view concerning JP, and that while "JP dissing" is the hobby of anti-geluks and anti-shugdenites, similar view seems to be a general Nyingmapa view, entertained even in friendly quarters who do not go dissing JP publicly.

Now of course, he merely had the view or understanding that JP acted against his lineage, but he didn't mention any real details, as seems to always be the case when JP is talked about. It seems, that people just have a general notion about 'evil actions' of JP in the East, but nobody seems quite capable of spelling anything even close to any facts or details. It seems, that it is all just rumours. Now I ask from you all, is there any real proof of any improper action by JP? Considering how many people nowadays dislike and badmouth JP, surely someone would have presented by now some actual proof. Surely. So, could someone please show me?

Surely something must have happened, because so many Nyingmapas think thatwise. Surely there are some real records about it all. There is hardly any nyingma-conspiracy at work, so "something must have been burned, since there is so much smoke". So, where is the fire?

Now, I of course do not expect that anything can be found, since I do not see how Heruka himself could have acted improperly. Nevertheless, I do have a view about what happened in the East. I present it here, so that you all could comment on whether it seems to be based on facts, or sounds reasonable. Personally I feel, that it has the following four good points about it:
- it shows that there was no fire (meaning that JP did not act improperly, but should be praised instead)
- it explains why there is smoke (meaning that Nyingmapas do have something to rant about)
- it seems reasonable and probable
- it accords with the known facts (that is, with those facts that I personally know)

I would appreciate it, if those of you who know more about history, and do have access to various Tibetan sources, could comment on whether my account accords with the known facts. And whether it seems reasonable and probable to you.




In the book "Mipham's Beacon of Certainty" edited and commented by John Whitney Pettit I found the following passage:

"If anything, it was the long-standing tensions between the Gelug-dominated governmment in Central Tibet and the aristocratic powers of Kham that prompted ecumenical scholars of the Sakya, Kagyu, and Nyingma schools to forge a sort of cultural - if not quite political - solidarity. The Nyag rong war (c. 1861-1863) displaced numerous persons, apparently including Mipham himself, and precipitated the invasion of an army from Lhasa, the presence of which seems to have been instrumental in the settling of old scores between Gelug and rival monasteries in Kham. These events resulted in the destruction of several monasteries and the death of certain religious figures and must have impressed upon Mipham - as they certainly did for his teachers Khyentse and Kongtrül - the importance of preserving endangered spiritual traditions.
Because of their close relations with officials in the Lhasa government, the Gelugpas were naturally less inclined to participate in this solidarity, at least on the institutional level. This seems to have been especially true of Gelug scholars from central Tibet, while other's from Mipham's homeland, such as 'Bum gsar dGebshes, numbered among his admirors. ..."

This seems to proof that there was a stronger conflict between Nyingmapas and Gelugpas in Kham in which many Gelugpas obviously didn't be on their best behaviour. And there was also a destruction of Nyingma monasteries and murdering of higher religious figures of Nyingma side by some Gelugpas or probably better to say soldiers who served under the Gelug ruled government in Lhasa. Probabably this incident is the causing fire of the smoke.
The strange point is now while this conflict became related to Je Pabongka who was'nt born yet at this time. Is there any idea? It could be also interesting to know which kind of relationship between Mipham Rinpoche and Je Pabonka as contemporaries existed. As you probably know, Mipham Rinpoche (1846-1912) was a famous Nyingma scholar and yogi, furthermore he was a great knower of Je Tsongkhapa and extremely skilled in debates with the Gelug fraction since he liked to provoke them with some critics. But he was also highly respected amongst many Gelug Lamas and spoke always very respectful about Je Tsongkhapa. Mipham Rinpoche is said to be the founder of the Rime movement (probably not in the way as it is understood nowadays).
For me it would be very interesting to know if those two great scholars and debators met one time and how they did together. And why the aggressions were directed to Je Pabongka although Mipham Rinpoche taught to his disciples the importance of debating with other schools. This could explain a lot because Mipham Rinpoche's position for the Nyingma lineage is absolutely comparable to Je Pabongka for the Gelug.

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Big Uncle on March 23, 2010, 01:42:38 PM
Regarding Je Pabongkha Rinpoche, I just have one thing to say. If he is so bad as they say he is, why does he keep reincarnating back as a human being? Look at his current incarnation, which is shown on this website.

http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=37

I have been to his Ladrang in Nepal and gained a fortunate blessing from Rinpoche. He is very kind and young. Lately, I heard that he has been traveling to China a lot, perhaps in preparation for a lot of work there. I am sure what they say about his previous life are not true. He probably have converted a lot of Nyingmas with Gelug teachings and hence resulted in a lot jealousy. So what they say about Pabongka Rinpoche is unfounded and this is basically my viewpoint.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: WisdomBeing on March 30, 2010, 07:00:25 PM
Dear Yedi

Welcome back from your retreat! I have just read through the thread regarding whether the Dalai Lama is chenrezig or not and I just wanted to say that i found your explanation logical and substantive - especially with regards to whether the statement is postive, negative or neutral:

"Related to the statement "DL being chenresig" there were three possibilities:

1. DL is chenresig (as positive)
2. DL is not chenresig (as negative)
3. We don't know, if DL is or DL is not. (as neutral)

As I already mentioned, nobody stated in the discussion, that DL is Chenresig. The criticized sentence was:

one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

This sentence refers clearly to the third point, which is neutral and treats its object in an agnostic way.
But when you jumped into this discussion, you criticized this neutral statement as well as the positive and that's also what you repeated in your last posting:

we should not go on repeating that the Dalai Lama IS Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation, let alone hinting that he might be acting as Chenrezig in a hidden way

This says clearly, that we should not mention the positive and the neutral version here anymore for whatever reason. So if these two possibilities, positive and neutral, are not valid objects for discussions, than only the negative is left. Even while not saying explicitly, that we have to support your idea that DL is not chenresig, you did it implicitly by excluding all other possibilities. I hope you can follow this simple logical problem and will understand, why I refuse vehemently to become reduced to a statement, which is definitely not in agreement with my own Dharma practice."

I personally do not praise the Dalai Lama, though I respect him for what he has achieved for Buddhism, but i will not criticise him - regardless of whether he is Chenrezig or not. I will not criticise him based purely on that Dorje Shugden has advised not to criticise the Dalai Lama and if i have faith in Dorje Shugden, I should follow him advice.

I look forward to reading more from you, Yedi :)

Actually I've quite enjoyed this thread - learned some history about Nyingmas and Gelugpa...

thanks everyone who contributed.

love
Kate
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Geronimo on March 30, 2010, 07:45:16 PM
Allegiance to Holy Dorje Shugden
Target:1,000,000.
Sponsored by: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/allegiance-to-holy-dorje-shugden

Stand up and be counted for your Dharma Protector!

"We the undersigned commit ourselves to the enlightened Dharma Protector, Dorje Shugden. We will remain steadfast without resorting to negative comments or actions towards those who do not agree with us or criticise us.
We will carry out our holy practice peacefully and be REAL Buddhists.
With all the kindness and help that Dorje Shugden has done for my family and I, this is the least I can do for him."


"There are two ways to rely upon Dorje Shugden: in thought and in deed. If we recognize that Dorje Shugden is the embodiment of the Three Jewels, if we remember his kindness in protecting and preserving the Buddhadharma, if we recall how he eliminates obstacles and gathers the necessary conditions for Dharma practitioners, and if with deep faith we develop respect for him and hold these special feelings continually, we are relying upon Dorje Shugden in thought.

With deep faith and conviction in Dorje Shugden we can practise his extensive, middling, or condensed sadhana. After completing a close retreat we can engage in peaceful, increasing, controlling, and wrathful actions and gradually achieve the supreme attainments. By engaging in these practices we can protect others by helping them to eliminate their obstacles and develop wisdom, to find the right conditions for practising Dharma, to fulfil their wishes, and to meet with success in their daily lives. Whenever we engage in any of these deeds with faith we are relying upon Dorje Shugden in deed."
H.H. Kyabje Trijang Dorej Chang Rinpoche

Please join me and sign your allegiance to our Holy Protector.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: WisdomBeing on March 30, 2010, 08:07:12 PM
Dear Lhakpa Gyeltsen,

Thank you so much for your support.. unfortunately, the groups.to web address seems to have gone into emptiness so i have to revert to the url: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/allegiance-to-holy-dorje-shugden

Many thanks and may everyone stand up and be counted! :)

Love
Kate

Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Geronimo on April 02, 2010, 12:24:31 AM
afriend,
"
Thom, hi there. It's undeniable that you gave so much, you were so generous and were betrayed. I'm really sorry every time I remember what you went through. You have been very brave not to have abandoned the Buddhadharma. I admire you for that, for still having the strength for upholding the teachings of Lord Buddha and loving our Lamas. Are you aware of the incredible good fortune that you had, to have unloaded such a mega chunk of negative karma and survived? Now that the tears are in the past, you might start feeling how light you are, after such ordeal. Anyway, even if you are still sore, sooner or later you will encounter the goodness of all the good you've done."

I am feeling so much more calmness and happiness. I smile more and basically I would have to say that anger and fear have long gone from my home.
I think I hit that Goodness and hope to have just started bringing more to the dharma.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: Losang_Tenpa on April 02, 2010, 02:21:47 AM
I rejoice for you and the goodness that you have found Thom. Your journey out of the darkness of your past has been a very valuable teaching for me. You shine now and it is easy to see. I like it. I will still appreciate hearing your wrath when needed, but it is so nice to hear that you and your anger have finally started to part ways.
Title: Re: Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)
Post by: a friend on April 02, 2010, 02:53:07 AM

I join Tenzin Sungrab in the rejoicing with all my heart!
Our holy Protector protects our minds. But he cannot do much without our agreement.
So Thom, good for you!