I do see Alexis's point and from that perspective it does make sense why the Dalai Lama instigated a split within the Gelugpas and subsequently devolved the office of the Dalai Lama from political and secular matters. The 14th Dalai Lama is presiding over probably the most difficult period in the history of the Tibetans whose culture has traditionally been linked to Buddhism. In that sense, the fate of the Tibetan people were inextricably tied to the future of Tibetan Buddhism, however, their needs and the strategies required to be deployed in order to preserve both, are very often mutually exclusive. To say that the Dalai Lama has had to meet severely conflicting objectives would be an understatement.
However bad we think the situation might be, the results give a different story. On the religious front, Tibetan Buddhism has spread around the world as has the Dorje Shugden practice. Whether this is the result of the Dalai Lama's extremely skillful and clandestine move is unknown although (I believe it to be) and today we can safely say the Vajrayana Buddhism has survived the Tibetan tragedy. While on the political front there seems to be a stalemate, that fact is that the Dalai Lama's stance has given rise to the CCP having to make great efforts to quell dissensions and as a result Tibetans under Chinese rule are enjoying better living standards and opportunities and increasing freedom to practice their religion. For certain the Dalai Lama has brought some pressure on the Chinese government to review their old policies which led to the liberalizing of their firm grip on religious matters. Now as both the religious and secular flows of affairs of the Tibetans gather their own momentum, the Dalai Lama thought the time was right to severe the inconvenient link between religion and politics.
Not everything is in place of course and there is still much to be done especially for the Tibetans in exile but as a whole, and whether by design or not, Tibetan Buddhism is today being practiced around the world relatively free of political encumbrances. Despite many contradictions and shocking decisions by the Dalai Lama, we must remember Trijang Rinpoche's advice that despite whatever difficulties we may face, we should never discard the practice nor abandon our support for the Dalai Lama. Based on that advice alone, it would appear that there was a higher plan being executed which may not appear logical but nevertheless we should support it as it will be beneficial for the Dharma in the long run.
Curious Vajratruth, so are you saying that if it serves the greater good, it is acceptable to do the following:
1) lie
2) trash talk our lineage Gurus including our own root Guru
3) force people to break their samaya through coercion, signature campaigns, economic withholding and so forth
4) encourage others to destroy peoples homes and shrines
5) cause international schism within the Buddhist community
6) bring the Buddhadharma into disrepute
7) encourage others to stop peaceful protesters by whatever means
put lineage Gurus on 10 most hated enemies of the state and issue death threats to them
9) cause extensive ostracism within an already exiled community
10) and so forth and so on?
Jetsun Geshe Kelsang Gyatso Rinpoche said once that for the last sentient being the Guru would emanate an entire world system and its contents so that they can generate universal compassion and thereby attain enlightenment. There is also the section in Dorje Shugden Kangso saying that to tame disciples displays means beyond ordinary understanding by appearing in many guises such as deluded and insane beings. However....
We are then left with a contemplation of how to have pure view yet interact with the conventions of a situation in a practical way. We may view everything as emanated by the Guru, yet we must avoid what is called 'wrong compassion' (compassion for Holy beings that are not suffering), so in order to generate compassion for the person that appears to be suffering and making mistakes, we have to withdraw our view that they are an emanation and relate to the suffering being that appears, and deal with the situation accordingly.
I can see the various benefits that are appearing as a response to the ban, however, certainly we must understand that the blessings of the Gelug lineage and Dorje Shugden practice would have spread just fine without the need for a ban, and in fact, it was already. Of course, now many people have an acute awareness about Dorje Shugden, however, we must acknowledge it is at such a very heavy cost indeed!! If we look at all the inappropriate bullshit that has happened, how much suffering there has been, how many people have broken their samaya, how many people have lost their faith and abandoned Dharma and so on, how can we think of such things as being the Dalai Lama's skillful means?
We may consider the two views I mentioned earlier, and indeed, it seems you hold these types of pure view of the Dalai Lama, however, from a practical point of view, regardless of whatever benefits we think have come, the actions of the Dalai Lama and his ban-supporters have been totally hypocritical, inappropriate for Buddhists, and completely contradict basic human rights, religious rights, lineage customs, the Dharma, and last but not least, common sense.
Inwardly, we may see the Dalai Lama as Chenrezig, but the aspect and actions of his emanation are conventionally wrong. This emanation has shown the aspect of abandoning the root Guru, so how does a person who's abandoned their root Guru have a blessed lineage to transmit if their very connection to the lineage has been severed?
I mean no disrespect to the Holy beings by sharing my contemplation, but though emanations of my Guru abound, different aspects are demanding the most appropriate response from me, and in this situation, compassion for a sentient being creating huge negative karma and ordering others to do the same is more appropriate than regarding the person as a Holy being.
If my Guru contradicted the Dharma like this, I would tell him his actions are wrong and to stop and heal the situation. The aspect the Guru is showing is an ordinary human being that makes mistakes. In the lamrim we are encouraged to focus exclusively on the good qualities of the Guru and maintain inattentiveness to apparent faults. However, if according to the normal conventions of society the mistakes are way beyond small things that we can easily overlook, it is our duty to confront these mistaken actions.
I have never had a connection to the Dalai Lama, but I have respected the beneficial Dharma actions that he has done. I understand that this situation is particularly challenging for those that regard him as one of their Teachers, but as I have said, if the wrong actions are by convention having a greater negative impact, it is our duty to confront our Teacher and tell them to stop. We may have pure view of the inner aspect, but the outer aspect is an ordinary human being doing wrong actions, and such a being is an object of compassion.
