Author Topic: Are the Buddhas, DalaiLama & Dorje Shugden insane? Or is it divine crazy wisdom?  (Read 24269 times)

Middleway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
It's a very strange fruit found in Asia. And it's very much an acquired taste - stinks like an over ripe corpse in a drain.

Some people may follow the ban and NOT continue eating it, but many more who don't care much about the ban may try the fruit and like it.

Therefore, the fruit ban, which actually publicises the fruit, may result in an increase of people who like it.

This is vague.  Lets get precise.  We need to consider the ban in terms of it's existence as a substantial cause, because then we can determine what effect it will produce.

If the ban is the substantial cause of the flourishing of the banned thing, then a ban on an object will only give rise to the flourishing of that object - which is patently ridiculous.  Consider the following:

In your example the ban on the durians could be seen as a condition for some people to discover & subsequently enjoy the fruit, but it could not be seen as a substantial cause of that enjoyment or the subsequent spreading of that enjoyment by those people to others.  This is the important point we must grasp here, the misunderstanding of which leads to your wrong view & harmful inaction.  The substantial cause is always the same 'substance or type' as the effect.  So the substantial cause of someone coming to enjoy durians could be them enjoying it, or something similar to it, in the past, maybe in a past life. But the effect of the ban would be the same substance or type as the ban - ie it would bring about a decline in the consumption of durians. If the durians were to suddenly take off as a treasured delicacy world wide, this would be because of the enjoyment of the people who discovered it, as supported by other conditions such as democracy, which is also not supported by undemocratic bans!

The ban on Dorje Shugden practice may bring the practice to some people's attention, but it is not a substantial cause of it flourishing.  The substantial cause of the practice flourishing is faith in the practice.  This faith inspires an individual to practice sincerely, set a good example to others, work to make the practice available to others etc.  However the effect that the ban, as a substantial cause,  gives rise to is a reduction in the practice. With this clarity we can see that while it is possible for someone to become a Dorje Shugden practitioner by hearing about the ban in the media, investigating it further & subsequently developing faith in Dorje Shugden (spelling it out like that makes it sound unlikely eh?), the ban is not the substantial cause of that faith.  It is opposite in nature - going in the opposite direction.  It is out of faith that our hypothetical person will have the opportunity to go to a Dharma Centre, meet with qualified Teachers etc.  The ban is a substantial cause of none of this and it's only a condition (in this specific imaginary instance) in very small part.

The ban is not even a necessary condition for the flourishing of Dorje Shugden practice, like water is a necessary condition for the  effect of a plant to arise from its substantial cause of a seed. If you remove the ban then you do not remove the faith of the practitioners, you do not do anything to slow or prevent any of the conditions which promote the growth of Dorje Shugden practice world wide.  In fact it is easy to see how the ban much more readily brings about conditions which are conducive to the destruction of faith (how many people do you know like that hypothetical person in the example just given?  How many people do you know who have lost their faith since the ban?).  Given the harmful & unnecessary nature of a ban, why would we then support it or consider it beneficial simply because of the unlikely event of someone hearing about, investigating & developing faith in the practice through hearing of the ban?

You use the word 'may' (& 'possibly' - sends shivers down my spine!  I wouldn't trust my lineage to a 'possibly'!) a lot, which in itself shows on some level you know the ban is not a substantial cause of the growth of the practice.  So you have to ask what is.  In what circumstances would those effects actually arise & when would they not?  What is the cause, that is to say the substantial cause of someone meeting with & engaging in Dorje Shugden practice?  What are merely conditions?  What are necessary conditions?  And what are their opposites?  Your lack of clarity is dangerous.  Someone might believe that water is the substantial cause of wheat growing & so end up starving to death!  Or someone may think that the presence of Jews in a country is the cause of that country's misfortunes & so try & exterminate them.  It is very important we are clear about causes & their effects.  Proximity does not prove causation, & it certainly doesn't prove substantive cause, which is what we need to be crystal clear about.

Given that the ban is not a necessary condition for the substantial cause of faith to arise, but is a substantial cause of the destruction of the lineage, we should act to oppose the ban.  I'd add that given that the ban stinks like a durian, we should act to oppose it wrathfully!

All this is very interesting as it shows how a simple misunderstanding can bring about huge disruption.  We need to eradicate our ignorance of the precise meaning of the Dharma through debates like these.  Again - I greatly appreciate this opportunity to reduce & finally eradicate my own.

BTW:

Extending your reasoning it would be a good idea to ban Buddhadharma altogether as that will make it flourish. Does that sound sensible?

Excellent reasoning - spot on.

Big Uncle

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1995
This is absurd!

Dalai Lama can't do nothing to Dorje Shugden practitioners around the world. He can't and the silly TGIE can't do nothing as well! If he could, we all wouldn't be able to openly discuss this on the Internet. I can practice whatever  I want and I choose to practice Dorje Shugden!

The Dalai Lama knows this. I am sure! So what is he doing with the ban and lying about it and creating such a big fuss? What for? Doesn't he have better things to do?  Thank god, he isn't like some crazy people we know that starts killing minorities or like how the Pagan Romans use to feed the Christians to the tigers. Aren't we much better off? I know! I know! We aren't but look, Dalai Lama won't stop! I can guarantee you this, as he age and his time is coming, he will push for this ban even stronger and harder. But we won't stop defending our precious protector too! So no silly TGIE is going to tell us what I can or cannot practice or what I can or cannot propagate because they have no jurisdiction in where i live.

By the way, the Christian is huge and everywhere despite the harsher persecution than what the Dalai Lama is dishing out. So don't say Dorje Shugden practice will die out because of the petty ban that is currently being enforced by TGIE and amongst the few uneducated Tibetans.

It is just too bad. Dorje Shugden will outlive all of us and he will be much bigger! He will benefit so many and so many will enter the Dharma because of him. The Dharma will experience a last renaissance, just before it dies out completely as predicted by Buddha Shakyamuni.

Middleway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
This is absurd!

If you could please take a moment to show me what is absurd in my argument by giving specific responses to the parts you find to be wrong.  Then I think we might get somewhere.  As it is I feel responding to your most recent post would be a waste of time, as although your reasoning is full of holes, pointing them out would just illicit another surge of ill considered words.

Thank you.

P.S - I've changed my mind - there's one thing I can't let pass - that is Lineageholders statement:

As an aside, I believe that in the 16th century, during King Henry VIII's time, he was considered a God King too and he (and several kings after him) decided to wipe out Catholicism. Of course there was much strife and suffering for Catholics in olde Englande then but today, Catholicism is alive and well in England. Likewise, I believe Dorje Shugden's practice will prevail - because Dorje Shugden himself has said that his time is coming, and you know what? I believe him :)

And your statement:

By the way, the Christian is huge and everywhere despite the harsher persecution than what the Dalai Lama is dishing out. So don't say Dorje Shugden practice will die out because of the petty ban that is currently being enforced by TGIE and amongst the few uneducated Tibetans.

I don't want to comment on these statements, just highlight them for the world to see.  They are so irrational that they require no comment to point it out.  As such they oppose the 'don't protest, there is a bigger picture' point of view better than anything I could say.

Middleway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Sorry - that first quote was from WisdomBeing.

Middleway

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
Second quote even (sheesh...)

DSFriend

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 955
I find what is said here to be good lessons. "Criticism, judgement and rallying - no matter how right and correct we think we are and how wrong the other side is - doesn't necessarily win the world over."

Do take a read.

Criticism, judgement and rallying - no matter how right and correct we think we are and how wrong the other side is - doesn't necessarily win the world over. From the outside, we just look political and not engaging in the very thing we are trying to promote: Dharma practice. The world will look at us protesting and criticising other lamas, and think to themselves, "this is what Dharma practice is? This is what DS practitioners do to defend their faith?"

After all, do we really have that many attainments and knowledge to be able to look upon the Lamas and judge what they are doing? Imagine if we did that to all our Lamas? Guru devotion is about believing that the Lamas do have more wisdom, clairvoyance and attainments than us and know what they are doing more than we can understand at this time.

(1) Imagine if Milarepa had said to himself, “damn that Marpa. He shouldn’t act that way! What a horrible Lama, why does he do this to me? He shouldn’t torture me by making me build houses for 12 years! He should teach me Dharma!” Imagine if he had gotten so angry at what seemingly crazy Marpa was doing and just upped and left and given up on Dharma.

(2) Imagine if Naropa had said, “I give up. That stupid Naropa won’t even acknowledge me. I want the Dharma so much and he won’t give it to me after 12 years of following him around. What kind of Guru is that who won’t teach the Dharma??” and then he just upped and left.

(3) Imagine if all the great Lamas sat around lamenting the loss of Tibet and cursed all the Buddhas for not protecting and helping them to keep their country? Imagine if they all sat about and bitched about how uncompassionate Tsongkhapa, Tara and the protectors were for allowing so many millions of Tibetans to be killed during the cultural revolution and their monasteries to be bombed? Imagine if they just eventually decided “you know what, *$&* all this, I don’t need Dharma, the Buddhas are just a bunch of statues that don’t do anything” and they gave up Dharma and went to work as a busboy in New York.

No, all these Lamas and great teachers stuck in it for YEARS, believing that their Gurus and the Buddhas had greater wisdom that would be beneficial. Even if they didn’t understand it or even didn’t agree with it, they at least didn’t criticize or speak badly against the Lamas. They saw and recognized that the success and results of their own Dharma practice wasn’t dependent on what their Lamas or other practitioners were doing, but was entirely from their own side – their effort, patience, generosity, perseverance in their practice, and reflecting their own application of Dharma and the teachings of their Lamas well.

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
Criticism, judgement and rallying - no matter how right and correct we think we are and how wrong the other side is - doesn't necessarily win the world over. From the outside, we just look political and not engaging in the very thing we are trying to promote: Dharma practice. The world will look at us protesting and criticising other lamas, and think to themselves, "this is what Dharma practice is? This is what DS practitioners do to defend their faith?"
But sadly, this is what the anti Dorje Shugden belueve and continue to act upon the belief. On places where open discussion is allowed on Dorje Shugden, they keep on attacking Dorje Shugden, but when it comes to being here in this forum, they do not dare to challenge. It also serves as a very bad example for fellow Buddhists of other traditions, and gives the impression that Tibetan Buddhists are very fragmented and very political. 

After all, do we really have that many attainments and knowledge to be able to look upon the Lamas and judge what they are doing? Imagine if we did that to all our Lamas? Guru devotion is about believing that the Lamas do have more wisdom, clairvoyance and attainments than us and know what they are doing more than we can understand at this time.
Some people, surprisingly believe that they do. Guru devotion is also about knowing our own limitation and that the only way to do that is to devote ourselves to a Guru and surrendering our delusions and self grasping to him. But these people usually say "But i'm kagyu and not gelug, so me criticising Pabongkha dosent affect me!" and they call themselves not sectarian.

(1) Imagine if Milarepa had said to himself, “damn that Marpa. He shouldn’t act that way! What a horrible Lama, why does he do this to me? He shouldn’t torture me by making me build houses for 12 years! He should teach me Dharma!” Imagine if he had gotten so angry at what seemingly crazy Marpa was doing and just upped and left and given up on Dharma.
At this age, this is a very common thing. At this day and age, Milarepa would not only have left Marpa, but would have also put up posters and set up a website saying that Marpa is a fake guru, how Gurus cannot be as nasty and mean as that, and how gurus are supposed to be compassionate, and therefore he is a fake guru, etc. And then start a support group: healing center for students who are the victims of Marpa, and then put Marpa on the press as a fake and abusive guru.

(2) Imagine if Naropa had said, “I give up. That stupid Naropa won’t even acknowledge me. I want the Dharma so much and he won’t give it to me after 12 years of following him around. What kind of Guru is that who won’t teach the Dharma??” and then he just upped and left.
Then we would have no Mahamudra at all and Tilopa would just say too bad and move on.

(3) Imagine if all the great Lamas sat around lamenting the loss of Tibet and cursed all the Buddhas for not protecting and helping them to keep their country? Imagine if they all sat about and bitched about how uncompassionate Tsongkhapa, Tara and the protectors were for allowing so many millions of Tibetans to be killed during the cultural revolution and their monasteries to be bombed? Imagine if they just eventually decided “you know what, *$&* all this, I don’t need Dharma, the Buddhas are just a bunch of statues that don’t do anything” and they gave up Dharma and went to work as a busboy in New York.
I mean who wants to be inspired by a bunch of whiny losers? There is a reason why people respect Lamas -- because of their fortitude and their strength in spreading the teachings.

No, all these Lamas and great teachers stuck in it for YEARS, believing that their Gurus and the Buddhas had greater wisdom that would be beneficial. Even if they didn’t understand it or even didn’t agree with it, they at least didn’t criticize or speak badly against the Lamas. They saw and recognized that the success and results of their own Dharma practice wasn’t dependent on what their Lamas or other practitioners were doing, but was entirely from their own side – their effort, patience, generosity, perseverance in their practice, and reflecting their own application of Dharma and the teachings of their Lamas well.
Dharma practice is not really about who is on the right or wrong camp -- it is about results and transforming the mind and being a kinder person, and applying the teachings into practice. So many Lamas practice Dorje Shugden and has gained results. Any of those who are gelug and went against the practice and gain results and are famous at the same time? I have not seen any yet. It is through perseverance and loyalty that the Dharma can actually spread and last.

This is a very thought provoking post, especially on the part where loyalty is important. Without loyalty, there would be no lineage masters, and without the lineage masters, there would be no teachings. Guru devotion is still more important than the Dalai Lama's camp and it still brings a lot more attainments and benefits, so why choose to betray the Guru?

Big Uncle

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1995
This is absurd!

If you could please take a moment to show me what is absurd in my argument by giving specific responses to the parts you find to be wrong.  Then I think we might get somewhere.  As it is I feel responding to your most recent post would be a waste of time, as although your reasoning is full of holes, pointing them out would just illicit another surge of ill considered words.

Thank you.

P.S - I've changed my mind - there's one thing I can't let pass - that is Lineageholders statement:

As an aside, I believe that in the 16th century, during King Henry VIII's time, he was considered a God King too and he (and several kings after him) decided to wipe out Catholicism. Of course there was much strife and suffering for Catholics in olde Englande then but today, Catholicism is alive and well in England. Likewise, I believe Dorje Shugden's practice will prevail - because Dorje Shugden himself has said that his time is coming, and you know what? I believe him :)

And your statement:

By the way, the Christian is huge and everywhere despite the harsher persecution than what the Dalai Lama is dishing out. So don't say Dorje Shugden practice will die out because of the petty ban that is currently being enforced by TGIE and amongst the few uneducated Tibetans.

I don't want to comment on these statements, just highlight them for the world to see.  They are so irrational that they require no comment to point it out.  As such they oppose the 'don't protest, there is a bigger picture' point of view better than anything I could say.

Thank you for your feedback but why is our opinion irrational? The Dalai Lama and the CTA has no jurisdiction outside of India and it appears that Dorje Shugden movement within China and the rest of the world seems to be getting bigger and bigger instead or shrinking. We have given our reasonings but you apparently have not. We would very much welcome your comment on this. Thank you.

Although the comments we made over 2 years now but I believe that the situation on the Dorje Shugden ban is relaxing a little and I think the Dalai Lama is focussing on other matters and from a recent comment, he was even slightly jovial when he mentioned that the Dorje Shugden movement is growing in many places and he took the time to name specific countries. This is highly unusual and I think groundbreaking.

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email
I find some of the older posts quite interesting so I'll reply to it with my own reasonings.


No worries, I wasn't thinking along those lines & I doubt if anyone else was.

In regard to your other point - I personally find the strongest arguments for the wrathful actions which you find unsavory or inappropriate to be those that explain how, regardless of the DL's motives, it is appropriate to oppose him wrathfully. You'll find those arguments in some other recent threads on this topic. One argument I haven't seen, but is very likely there somewhere, is that it is actually a downfall of our Bodhisattva vows not to use wrathful actions where appropriate.  We can debate over when 'appropriate' is I guess, but I don't think a fear over judging someone's actions because they're widely regarded to be holy is a valid reason to end that debate before it begins.
The bodhisattva vow of using wrath when appropriate applies to a situation where having wrath would benefit the majority. In this case, even though a lot of people practice Dorje Shugden, the numbers are not more than the amount of Dalai Lama's fans and students that will be damaged if we damage his reputation. To this, no matter how hard i try to reason, i feel that this vow does not apply in this situation. I dont think that damaging the samaya and faith of others to lift the Dorje Shugden ban is Buddhist or justifiable, but I do support the protests that has been staged against the Dalai Lama as it made people think twice, and to let people see another side of the story. On that ground, I support the protests.

BTW - if I'd caught Buddha Shakyamuni in that previous life - knife in hand - about to kill that fella - I'd have stopped him!  & I think I would have been right to do so.
In Buddha Shakyamuni's case, one dead psychotic killer is better than many dead innocent people. It was one against many and if i was him, I would have killed the psychotic killer all the same. It would have prevented the killer from acting out on his interest to kill.

I do not support that the protests and 'wrath' was done under the context of the bodhisattva vows because it is just not logical to see it as that way. however, one benefit of the protests is that 1) Dorje Shugden gets some media attention and it prompts journalists and curious people to investigate about Dorje Shugden, and 2) It makes people think deeper, that the "perfect" Dalai Lama also has his flaws and problems. There has been this misconception for so long that the Dalai Lama is perfect because he is Chenrenzig on earth, but as a Buddhist monk and Gelugpa scholar, I do not think he would like the idea of being hero worshipped at all, so perhaps, the protests are also part of a scene of a huge play. I would say that the protests help break people's delusional view about the Dalai Lama, and the protests are good because it causes people to think and to re-evaluate their positions on the Dalai Lama. On that point, I support the protests and say that they are beneficial.

dsiluvu

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1272
Yes this is a rather old post and debate made some time ago...never the less it is interesting and well here is what I think of it now... 2 years after...

Actually I do support the peaceful protest... I thought it was rather good to bring about media attention on the issues and no doubt because of the protest (which was instructed by Geshela)... has created many curious about Dorje Shugden, put Dorje SHugden on the media light and it has also created many doubts in people's mind... some which I know are the very students of NKT. Perhaps this is why the newer students of NKT are actually pretty sheltered about this issue when asked and they would rather not talk about it because their center's Guru claims they do not dwell in politics. This I find funny because well ermmm everyone knows that NKT was pivotal in this. So my question is... how come it is some what swept under the carpet now? Shouldn't this be discussed openly to clear away doubts and misconceptions of newer students so tht their faith in the protector be even stronger? I would encourage this. 

Yes I do support the protest but I do not support the use those degrading name calling words like... Dalai Lama is a lier"/ power hungry/ a fake etc etc. This is because such harsh words that shows condemnation of another, puting others down is really not quite Buddhist even though we know the motivation is probably to just arose the opposition n to gain some attention. However, I think by putting any Guru's down from anyone is a huge no no for it is breaking our basic vows. So I would have personally find another way/words of putting it... u can instead talk about TGIE/CTA they are not sangha and they are the ones who would take HHDL words and execute how they please...

Secondly puting another Guru down... you actually disturb a lot of people/students mind and that is again creating the causes for one self in future not being able to receive the Dharma with conducive conditions.

Whether we believe we are right and His Holiness is wrong does not matter to karma... for there is repercussions to face if HHDL is Chenrezig which I believe He is so still.... and why take the risk? Why because look at the consistency of his actions... the only weird and negative thing HHDL has done that caused so much trauma is this Dorje Shugden issue which blew all our minds away... so the question is WHY, what's the reason behind this? And the more I look at it, the more I am likened to agree with this websites' wise stand together with out Guru's guru HH Trijang Rinpoche's advice to remain neutral and not take sides for it may appear that HHDL is in conflict with Dorje Shugden... an "illusory play" and yes I do agree so because now after 2 years... look at how much HHDL tone has changed and probably no 15th Dalai Lama, he is has resigned frm politics and now the Tibetan govt in exile claims to be democratic ( a laugh).  But still the change does give us a clearer picture of the future. And definitely I am confident it is one where Dorje Shugden practice will prevail even stronger as we witness it growing in and many parts of the world i.e China.

Hence we dig deep and if we really cannot come to a conclusion why not just agree to disagree. I do not think we have the clairvoyant to judge such highly attained beings.. if we do then we would be HHDL already. Let the high Lamas say and do it, it does not mean we the students should act and parrot them... they are in a different league I think, and we would never really know just what is it they are up to. 

I guess my point is whether HHDL is right or wrong, before we judge we really need to see everything on a bigger scale, and if we do not like it, still we do not need to say negative things because HHDL is after all a "monk" - are we? I am not siding HHDL, all I am saying I would have done it differently that is all.

Ensapa

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4124
    • Email

I must correct myself (please also read my most recent post on "all this can't we get along stuff" http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=601.0). I do understand (thank you Crazy Cloud for taking the time to respond to my many rather excitable posts) that speaking out does not necessarily equate to being angry.

I was reacting to has seemed to be an attitude that quite blatant in much of the coverage of this issue: i.e. that people ARE reacting in an angry and aggressive way that does not necessarily reflect well on either themselves or the practices they are trying to uphold. I apologise if it has come across as being directly specifically to any individual here, which was not my intention.
Well, I do think that at this stage that the WSS people are, very obviously, angry about the Dalai Lama and the ban and they are not at all happy about him. They have been creating many rumors about the Dalai Lama that is not true, and it seems that their campaign against the Dalai Lama was motivated by hatred after all. Disappointing, but  what is new in samsara? After all, their appearance has been predicted by Trijang Rinpoche.

I am concerned about views such as those that are being pushed forward in the Great Deception book. While it does provide a lot of very relevant and insightful information, it was written very strongly in a way that I felt, was not merely against the actions and tenents of the Dalai Lama but against the Dalai Lama himself. It frequently comes across as being very personal and, yes, angry and sometimes  almost aggressive.
A great deception is a very interesting book indeed, with many facts that is relevant to the ban. However, more often than not, I find that most of its contents tend to skew towards being anti Dalai Lama instead of discussing about it from a neutral standpoint. If the facts were discussed from a neutral standpoint, then it would have been far more credible.

i apologise again (sorry, here i go repeating again) for overreacting and assuming too quickly, too soon that this was the view held here by others also. But I am concerned that there is quite some exaggeration, rhetoric and overly emotive language being used in the media and also by certain groups in villifying the Dalai Lama himself, rather than to look properly what is going on.
I have always believed that the approach that we should use to lift the ban is to provide information for people to judge and learn themselves rather than having to go to the level of having intense hatred against the Dalai Lama. I dont feel that it is Buddhist at all but the protests did work its magic and the CTA were forced to be more careful so something worked.

I take heart that this website provides information without necessarily forcing a view down our throats ("i.e. this guy is the bad guy, this guy is the good guy... believe it or else" which can be seen in both pro-shugden and anti-shugden sites/groups) and I hope very much that this forum will continue to be an extension of this for us to provide more information and views for people to think about before just blindly jumping into one extreme view or another.
The best thing about this forum is that, this forum goes in accordance with the view that Trijang Rinpoche has taught, that is we follow a neutral POV where we do not generate hate towards the Dalai Lama or towards Dorje Shugden. I have full faith in my Guru and by extension, our Lineage masters and Trijang Dorjechang is one of them. Does not make sense if I trust his teachings but not this aspect.


To be honest, I am not comfortable with all the hate against the Dalai Lama and all the anger that WSS has shown, but it did have results and I am happy with the results, but do note that this approach will upset more people than benefitting them in the long run.