Particularly in the early days of exile, a number of claims were made about the centrality of the practice of Dorje Shugden in Geluk practice, in particular, that the deity was the main protector of the Geluk.

This claim seems to be strongly linked to a doctrine connected with the 19th and 20th century charismatic Geluk teacher Phabongkha Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo, and quite possibly his main teacher Tagphu Dorje Chang who emphasised “one lama, one personal meditation deity, and one protector” as being the essence of Geluk practice. It will therefore be looked at in that context.

One Protector

Quite clearly, as the Geluk tradition was founded by Je Tsongkhapa in the early 15th century and the non-canonical protector deity Dorje Shugden did not manifest until 1657, that deity’s practice could not have been the main protector practice of the Geluk for the first 250 years of the tradition.

The main protectors of the tradition until then, and the plural is important here, seem to have been the following:

• The canonical supramundane protector Karmaraja, locatable in the Yamantaka tantra cycle of the ‘father’ subdivision of the peerless yoga tantras and within that in the practices of Vajrabhairava;
• The canonical supramundane protector Six-Armed Mahakala, locatable in the ‘Vajra Tent’ tantra text in the Heruka cycle of the ‘mother’ subdivision of the peerless yoga tantra division;
• The canonical supramundane deity Vaishravana in the aspect of riding a lion and holding an umbrella in his right hand and a jewel spitting mongoose in his left.
• Later, but still before the appearance of the deity Dorje Shugden, the canonical supramundane deity Palden Lhamo Magzor Gyalmo became a protector of the Geluk. A clear date for this has not yet been established but may well turn out to be after the vision of the 2nd Dalai Lama, where Guru Rinpoche Padmasambhava instructed him to take Palden Lhamo as a personal protector. Certainly by the late 17th and early 18th century, her practice was well established across the Geluk. What is important to note here is that all these are supramundane and that they are shared in common with the other Sarma traditions of Sakya and Kagyu.

None is exclusive to the Geluk. From the surviving collected writings of great teachers in the Geluk tradition, there is documentary evidence of continued interest in the practice of all these deities as dharma protectors right up until the present day.

Some of them also have functions as institutional protectors. For example, Palden Lhamo is the chief protector deity for Ganden Jangtse college and the practice of Palden Lhamo is a chief practice of the protector chapel for Drepung Lhachi, i.e. the totality of that monastery.

Apart from a few, often oblique references criticising the practice by certain lamas, the first surviving documentary evidence we have of the widespread worship of Dorje Shugden in the Geluk comes from the first half of the 20th century and seems due to the activities of Phabongkha Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo.

The 3rd Trijang Rinpoche was collating material in his Labrang before exile, and managed to reconstitute some of his collection in exile, where he wrote quite extensively on the practice of Dorje Shugden. It may be that in the library of his Labrang in Ganden there are original dateable documents from before Phabongkhapa.

Much of the 3rd Trijang’s interesting work on Dorje Shugden is the collation of oral tradition around the practice of the deity. The weight of evidence so far available suggests that the practice of Dorje Shugden as either a worldly oath-bound protector or as an emanation of a fully enlightened being was mainly a private protector practice, with few institutions in the Geluk monasteries doing this as a regular practice.

One obvious example until very recently was the Bomra regional house of Sera Mey college. There were Dorje Shugden shrines in both Sera and Ganden monasteries in old Tibet and in exile, it seems that a three dimensional model of his mandala house had been built at Ganden.

But such is the loss of documentation due to the ravages of the cultural revolution that it is not at all clear how long Dorje Shugden shrines had been established in those monasteries in old Tibet or how well patronised they were in terms of numbers. Both clearly had wealthy sponsors but that does not necessarily equate to numbers.

The evidence that the practice of Dorje Shugden was the main protector of the Geluk simply does not stack up. It seems that for the Geluk as a whole and as an institution, the three then four canonical supramundane deities from the early days have remained the main dharma protectors of the tradition.

One Personal Deity

The one personal deity claimed as central for the Geluk is the practice of the aspect of Vajrayogini that comes through Naropa, known as ‘Naro Khacho’. The practice of Vajrayogini cannot be accessed except through an initiation into a Heruka deity.

Nowadays in Tibetan Buddhism, this seems mainly to be through the system of the five deity Heruka mandala in the tradition of Tilbupa. Looking at the tantra masters in the prayers to the lineage masters of this Vajrayogini lineage produced in the 19th and 20th centuries before coming into exile, Je Tsongkhapa is noticeable by his absence and it would seem that the practice came into the Geluk from the Sakya not through Tsongkhapa.

The issue of who does and who does not get included in lineage prayers is in itself a topic of great interest as until recently it was extremely unlikely that any given tantra practitioner of note really only had one master in the practice. 

More likely he would have studied different aspects of the practice and received different transmissions and oral instructions connected with the practice from a number of tantra masters. This scattering of transmission lineages between teachers is often deliberate, being one way to ensure that transmissions are not severed by untimely death of the only holder.

If we look at the surviving documentary evidence of Tsonghapa’s collected works, it would seem that Je Tsongkhapa had a deep interest in the 32 deity Akshobhyavajra Guhyasamaja tantra system, the 13 deity Vajrabhairava system and the 62 deity Heruka Cakrasamvara system and made these three practices the core of Geluk tantra practice.

Again the plural is significant. It was of these three mandalas that Tsongkhapa had three dimensional models made in a special temple in Ganden, the seat of his tradition. It is these three practices that constitute the core of the ritual training in the two surviving tantra colleges of Gyu Toh and Gyu Med and constituted the core of the tradition at Sey Gyu dratsang at Sey in the Tsang province of old Tibet.

The transmission lineage of this last practice has been badly damaged and it is not clear whether it can be reestablished fully either in exile or in Tibet. But the other two tantric colleges have been successfully reestablished and continue to ensure the survival of these key tantra practices within the Geluk.

In the Geluk it is the recitation of these practices by the tantric monks from these two colleges that is considered the best way to consecrate a temple. Of the three tantras traditionally Guhyasamaja is held as the main practice, Vajrabhairava as a preliminary and obstacle removing practice and the 62 deity Chakrasamvara as an enhancing practice.

Vajrayogini in the form of Naro Khacho is a branch practice off the Cakrasamvara cycle of practices. The tradition holds that if the number of core tantric practices of Je Tsongkhapa is taken as four then the practice of Kalacakra should be taken as the fourth. If it expanded to five then the practice of Mahacakra Guhya(ka)adipati should be added as the fifth.

Again the weight of the evidence seems to show that Naro Khacho Vajrayogini never was the core or sole tantric practice of the Geluk, though much admired and taken up by some individuals as their main personal meditational deity. It seems that from very early on, the main or core personal meditation deity practices of the Geluk were 32 deity Akshobhyavajra Guhyasamaja, 13 deity Vajrabhairava and 62 deity Heruka Cakrasamvara.

As the young Dalai Lama fled Tibet to safety in India, he carried on his back a thangka borrowed from HH Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche. The thangka was of Dorje Shugden. Dorje Shugden protected the Dalai Lama’s party to freedom in India. However, the Dalai Lama has always attributed his escape to Palden Lhamo. This video reveals the truth about the Dalai Lama’s escape

Isolationism was intensified in 2008, when the Dalai Lama started a new phase of persecution against Shugden practitioners. Whilst ostensibly on a religious visit to Drepung Loseling monastery in South India, instead he instigated a political referendum on whether the monastery wanted Shugden monks to remain in their ranks.

He forced the monks to vote by having them select a stick of either red (for Dorje Shugden) or yellow (for the Dalai Lama) colour in a public referendum. Very few monks were brave enough to go against the Dalai Lama and as a result of the ‘referendum’ which was undemocratic and unconstitutional – since when do monks engage in a political vote on a spiritual practice?

Nine hundred monks were expelled from their monasteries. The Dalai Lama himself is on video shamelessly praising the Abbots of the monasteries for expelling the monks. This intensified the schism in the Sangha that the Dalai Lama has instigated with the introduction of the ban in 1996.

Eventually the monks found a home in two new monasteries that were purpose built for them by various Western benefactors, Shar Gaden and Serpom. It was clear that the monastic community was completely split. High walls were erected between the new monasteries and the old to separate the two factions.

The Central Tibetan Administration quickly introduced a process of oath-swearing for Tibetans whereby the had to swear in front of Palden Lhamo not to share material or spiritual resources with Shugden practitioners. Just as the monasteries were divided, this split families and set family members against each other as some swore and some bravely refused.

The suffering that this caused was incredible and further isolated Shugden practitioners, making them pariahs in their own communities. It’s difficult to believe that a so-called ‘Buddhist’ society could countenance this, but out of blind faith in the Dalai Lama, the ordinary people have instigated his evil actions. There are many examples in history where the weak have been influenced by powerful and charismatic dictators to create evil – this unfortunate situation is just another one of those.

All of these actions, instigated by the Dalai Lama, clearly show that he is not a qualified Buddhist Teacher, nor even a Buddhist, as it is a commitment of Buddhism not to harm others.

Editor’s note: DorjeShugden.com does not support the anti-Dalai Lama stance in this article as we believe that the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden are working together to spread Dharma. However, we are publishing this article to show the various different perspectives on this subject.

(Continued in part 3)

Source : http://wisdombuddhadorjeshugden.blogspot.com/2011/11/why-dorje-shugden-practitioners-are-not_17.html

The principal cause of isolationism is ostracism by the Fourteenth Dalai Lama for political reasons. The Dalai Lama has banned the practice of Dorje Shugden, but unlike some religious disagreements where there is a ‘live and let live’ attitude, the Dalai Lama will never allow anyone to remain neutral on the issue.

He has forced Tibetans to swear an oath in front of the Tibetan protectoress Palden Lhamo not to share material or spiritual resources with Shugden practitioners. Thus, it’s not possible to abstain or remain neutral on this issue if you are Tibetan, because if you do not swear an oath, you are excluded from Tibetan society.

This ostracism began very early on, in fact, as soon as the Dalai Lama decided, for incorrect reasons, to stop practising Shugden. He then formed a plan to destroy the practice by exploiting the blind faith of the Tibetan people which has been encouraged by giving many public Kalachakra empowerments. The problems started in 1976 when the Dalai Lama gave up the practice. This caused many problems from the beginning. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso explained how this ostracism began:

Lama Yeshe was the general spiritual director of Manjushri Center, while I had the responsibility of organizing the daily programmes. We were both very happy to have the picture of HH the Dalai Lama on the shrine because we hoped that the people of Manjushri and HH Dalai Lama would develop a good spiritual connection and relationship.

Many times we invited the Dalai Lama to come to Manjushri Centre, although we both knew, even then, that he had rejected the practice of Dorje Shugden. We assumed it was not his real intention because we found it difficult to believe that he really wanted to destroy the practice of Dorje Shugden.

So for a long time we continued to practise Dorje Shugden and kept faith in the Dalai Lama. Then later the situation deteriorated because he intensified his ban on Dorje Shugden worship. I heard that he said in public that those who practise Dorje Shugden cannot be his friend.

Then my mind gradually changed, especially as we received criticism from people who were saying that Manjushri Centre had broken its guru devotion to the Dalai Lama because of our continued practice of Dorje Shugden. As his picture was on our shrine, people believed that he was our root Guru — on the other hand because we practised Dorje Shugden people thought we were against the Dalai Lama. Due to this contradiction we received a lot of criticism.

The Dalai Lama never visited Manjushri Centre because he was displeased that Lama Yeshe and Geshe Kelsang continued to practise Dorje Shugden.

Because the Dalai Lama’s stance on Dorje Shugden was not to allow any religious freedom, Tibetan Buddhism began to polarise into two distinct camps – those who followed the Dalai Lama’s view that Dorje Shugden was a harmful spirit and those who had faith in the traditional Gelugpa lineage view of Je Pabongkhapa and Kyabje Trijang Dorjechang that Dorje Shugden was a protector aspect of Je Tsongkhapa himself.

The Dalai Lama made it clear on many occasions that he wanted to eradicate the practice of Dorje Shugden completely, and so it became a case of ‘if you’re not with me, you’re against me’. This caused a lot of suffering for Shugdenpas who were torn between their faith in the Dalai Lama and their faith in their Lineage Gurus and Shugden himself. They had to make a choice, and no choice was comfortable as it involved the loss of something precious in either case.

(Continued in part 2)

Source : http://wisdombuddhadorjeshugden.blogspot.com/2011/11/why-dorje-shugden-practitioners-are-not.html

(Read Part 1 and Part 2)

Q: What prevents anyone from practising it anyway in his/her privacy?

A: In theory there is nothing to stop people practising ‘in secret’, but as part of his campaign to remove the practice from Tibetan society, each person either has been forced to swear an oath to Palden Lhamo (another powerful Dharma protector) or be ostracised from Tibetan society and be denied travel, food, family relationships and basic human conditions. In effect the Dalai Lama is forcing Tibetans to make a vow to break their previous commitment to their Spiritual Guides to practise Dorje Shugden, or to suffer ostracism if they refuse. The oath is as follows:

I swear on the name of the Dalai Lama and glorious Maxor Gyalmo (Protectress Palden Lhamo) to never venerate and worship Dorje Shugden and to never have any relation on material and other levels with those who worship Dorje Shugden.

The Dalai Lama is seeking to publicly denounce the practice of Dorje Shugden with a view to removing the practice and its adherents from Buddhism; and to oppose this requires public action such as demonstrations. He has already banned the practice in the Tibetan Community in India and moves are afoot to try to force Tibetans living in the West to sign a similar oath to abandon the practice. For example, The Dalai Lama’s sister Pema was recently in Paris starting the forced signature campaign of Tibetans in France, Tibetans in Australia told the demonstrators that they had already signed the oath, and the forced signature campaign is being arranged for Madison, US, next month (July 2008).
The discrimination against Dorje Shugden is already affecting Buddhist traditions in the West. For example, the Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition, which was founded by Lama Yeshe (a very devout Dorje Shugden practitioner, now perhaps turning in his grave), no longer allows any officer, Teacher or Administrator of the organization to be a Shugden practitioner. Also, one of the pre-requisites for requesting ordination in the FPMT is not to be a Shugden practitioner. The irrational ban is spreading like poison through the bloodstream of all Tibetan Buddhist institutions loyal to the Dalai Lama, even Western ones. The aim is the complete eradication of Dorje Shugden practice and the authentic Gelugpa lineage.
The Dalai Lama travels throughout the world talking about tolerance, religious harmony and the need for dialogue with one’s enemies. He speaks sweet words taken from his Teachers, but at the same time he is seeking to humiliate and destroy the reputation of Dorje Shugden practitioners throughout the world such that they will no longer be regarded as Buddhists but as sectarian spirit worshippers. He is destroying the very lineage he is teaching from!
A lot of people think that religion and religious figures are hypocritical. Sadly, the Dalai Lama is busy proving them right. If the Dalai Lama cared anything for Buddhism and its reputation he would not act in such a hypocritical way because in the long term it will destroy the reputation of a religion that many people are increasingly turning to for solving their problems. For the sake of power and influence he is showing a callous disregard for the spiritual lives of others.

Q: What do protesters hope to achieve by going public, and by all accounts, sow, what appears gratuitous discord, amongst the Tibetan community? And apparently undermine the moral and representative authority of the Dalai Lama at a very, very crucial time for him and Tibetans. To the public at large it has all the appearance of a rather self-centred opportunity for these practitioners to embarrass the Dalai Lama, and to gain maximum leverage for their cause, whatever the merits of it may be.

A: What the Western Shugden Society hopes to achieve is dialogue with the Dalai Lama so that the destruction of a pure lineage of Buddhism can be averted. Our wish is for the pure spiritual practice of Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition to remain for many aeons for the benefit of all living beings. We want to persuade the Dalai Lama to reconsider, give religious freedom to Dorje Shugden practitioners in his own community and to stop slandering the practice and practitioners throughout the world.
In short, we want him to stop causing disharmony and gratuitous discord in the Buddhist community by lying about the practice, and for him to give religious freedom. When something as precious as the Buddhist teachings is threatened, something has to be done, which is why the Western Shugden Society is organizing demonstrations against the Dalai Lama. As soon as he agrees to listen, the demonstrations will stop.
Some people have said “why are Westerners protesting when it’s only a problem for Tibetans in India? You’re free to practice, the Dalai Lama isn’t stopping you” Firstly, it’s not just Westerners who are protesting. If you look at the videos and pictures of the protest at Colgate University in New York State, for example, you will see many Tibetans, and many more will be at future demonstrations. Secondly, this is a problem for ALL Shugden practitioners worldwide and is increasingly coming to affect Western practitioners in terms of unchecked slander against Dorje Shugden practitioners. Just as a forest fire may begin in one part of the forest but will eventually spread and destroy everything if it is unchecked, the Dalai Lama is trying to stop all of us from practising Dorje Shugden by using his charisma and good reputation, first in his own community but later worldwide. We must oppose this.
Those of us who are in the New Kadampa Tradition have already suffered from ten years of the Dalai Lama labelling us as a ‘cult’, even mainstream news magazines like Newsweek in April 1997 repeated the misinformation spread by the Dalai Lama: “Nobody would pray to Buddha for better business, but they go to Shugden for such favours – and this is where it has become like spirit worship,” the Dalai Lama told NEWSWEEK. “This is a great pity-a tragedy.”
There are now hundreds of stories throughout the world of people strongly deterred by Tibetan Buddhist groups from coming to or returning to NKT Centers because they are cultists and evil spirit worshippers, and all other sorts of hurtful nonsense. NKT publicity is torn down or defaced, teachers are heckled during their teachings, NKT people have been shouted and spat at in the street, some other Tibetan practitioners wear protective ribbons and make mudras (hand gestures) upon encountering any Kadampas, there is a lot of negative talk about us on the internet, and faith is destroyed.
Yet what has the NKT done wrong except for trying to keep the Gelugpa tradition intact and give Dharma teachings unmixed with politics? What have they done wrong except to stand up to the Dalai Lama for their own and others’ spiritual lives? And it is clear that the source of this bias, disinformation and hostility is none other than the Dalai Lama himself. Tibetan Buddhists who are following the Dalai Lama’s view are practising sectarian discrimination against the NKT in particular and against Dorje Shugden practitioners in general, just as their teacher is.
For example, on the popular E-sangha Buddhist discussion forum it is not permissible to post about Shugden practice or the NKT except to criticise. We are all ‘banned’ from this supposedly Buddhist forum, just as the Dalai Lama would like to ostracise all Shugden practitioners from Buddhism. The Dalai Lama has created all these problems through his sectarianism. This kind of discrimination is not Buddhist and is against the Bodhisattva vows. Therefore, it’s incorrect to say that Western Shugden practitioners are unaffected by the Dalai Lama’s slander of our tradition.
It is not our wish to sow discord amongst the Tibetan community but to heal it by allowing everyone to practice freely. The Dalai Lama is the one sowing discord with his campaign against Dorje Shugden. He is driving a wedge between practitioners and their families and denying basic human conditions unless you renounce the practice. The Dalai Lama is abusing human rights and breaking Indian Law by engaging in Deity discrimination. His actions are clearly uncompassionate and unlawful.
In February 2008, 900 monks were expelled from their monasteries for bravely refusing to give up their practice.
As Geshe Sopa said recently when he travelled from America to join the demonstration in Oxford, what the Dalai Lama is doing is worse than what the Chinese did – the Chinese destroyed the monasteries but they could not divide the monks. The Dalai Lama has succeeded in creating a schism in the monastic community by enforcing a ban that has stirred up disharmony and bitterness.
The protest against the Dalai Lama is not self-centered but is an attempt to draw media attention to this problem. The Western Shugden Society has no choice because the Dalai Lama refuses to discuss this issue even though many attempts have been made to have a meaningful dialogue with him. The WSS is trying to prevent the destruction of Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition and to re-establish the rights of Tibetan practitioners of this Deity who are being oppressed, to allow them to carry out their practice without political interference. Is that really so much to ask?
Posted courtesy of Lineageholder.
(Read Part 1 and Part 2)
(Source: http://wisdombuddhadorjeshugden.blogspot.com/2008/06/frequently-asked-questions-about-dorje_9205.html)

Why the Dalai Lama’s Justifications for the ban of Dorje Shugden are not logical nor true

The justifications the Dalai Lama gives for his ban of the worship of the deity Dorje Shugden vary considerably depending on his audience.

The justification given to the Tibetan public, which destroyed the entire harmony of the Tibetan community, is: “Worshipping this evil deity is a danger for my life and for the freedom of Tibet. If you Tibetans want me to be dammed and don’t care at all about the cause of Tibet, then go ahead with the worship of this deity.”

On the contrary, to Western audiences the Dalai Lama repeatedly says that he issued this ban “In order to save this pure and profound Tibetan Buddhism from degenerating into spirit worship”. And “This ban is applied in order to promote peace and harmony between the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions.”

A further justification that the Dalai Lama sometimes mentions, and which he repeated on his recent visit to New York in July 2008: “This is for my personal gaining of religious freedom. I had the wish to ask Khunu Lama Tenzin Gyaltsen to give me the transmission of the Sangwa-Nyingpo-Tantra, and I consulted my teacher Ling Rinpoche about it, and he responded negatively, saying there is a lot of discussion about it. Actually my teacher was afraid of Dolgyal (Dorje Shugden). Thus I lost my religious freedom.”

What is the reality behind these statements?

Anyone who accepts whatever the Dalai Lama says as literal, infallible, and unquestionable makes no attempt even to question any of these points for a second. However, if an analytical mind investigates the validity of these words of the Dalai Lama, comparing their meaning to reality, a big surprise about the enormous discrepancy between the Dalai Lama’s statements and the factual truth will be inevitable.

Justification for Tibetans:

Worshipping this evil deity is a danger for my life and for the freedom of Tibet……
Dalai Lama

First justification for Westerners:


In order to save this pure and profound Tibetan Buddhism from degenerating into spirit worship……
Dalai Lama

Leaving aside the discrepancy between the justifications used for Tibetans and for Westerners, we can just look at the validity of the points repeatedly given to the Western public:

The fact is that all four schools of Tibetan Buddhism, and in particular the Dalai Lama, his government, and his entourage, intensively rely upon not just one so-called protector deity, but a great number of such deities from various origins. In Tibetan society, hundreds of such deities are regularly worshipped with elaborate rituals. Despite the Dalai Lama claiming to “save this pure and profound Tibetan Buddhism from degenerating into spirit worship”, worship of such deities has never decreased, nor has there been any effort to make it decrease.

On the contrary, since the end of the 1980s a new fervour of worshipping such protector deities has flourished among the Tibetans in exile, and this fervour originates from nowhere else but Dharamsala. Five oracles are regularly invoked at every ceremony around the Dalai Lama, special temples have been built and new rituals and prayers have been composed, a number of them even by the present Dalai Lama himself.
 The traditional trio-photo of the Dalai Lama with his two masters, Kyabje Ling Rinpoche and Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche, on each side has been completely replaced by another trio-photo of the Dalai Lama with the protectors Nechung and Palden Lhamo on each side. Except for the ban on Dorje Shugden, not a single Tibetan god or demon has been discriminated against or abolished, and no other practitioner of any other Tibetan god or demon has been persecuted.

Second justification for Westerners:

This ban is applied in order to promote peace and harmony between the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions.
Dalai Lama

The Dalai Lama implies that the followers of Dorje Shugden are impossible sectarian Gelugpas who can’t stand any other school and thus naturally create disharmony.

The reality is that adherents of Dorje Shugden are like any other Tibetan Buddhist, practising their own Dharma given to them by the great masters of their tradition without causing any trouble to any other fellow Dharma practitioner. There is more than enough evidence to prove this fact. To give just one example:

After Tibetans came into exile, about 1500 Tibetan monks and Lamas of all four Tibetan traditions lived together from 1960 to 1968 in a place called Buxaduar in West Bengal. Among the Gelug and Sakya monks, the majority were practitioners of Dorje Shugden. They lived harmoniously without any problems or tensions with monks from the Nyingma and Kagyu traditions, all sharing the same houses, same food and same prayer gatherings in a true sense of brotherhood.

In general, and especially compared to many other religious groups in the world, the relations between the four Tibetan Buddhist schools is very wholesome and harmonious — for as long as the exile Tibetan government does not mess in their affairs.

A good proof of such brotherhood was recently demonstrated in South India in Bylakuppe, when the monks of Sera Mey Pomra Kamtsen were expelled from the rest of the Sera monastery as well as Tibetan society as a whole due to their refusal to renounce their faith in Dorje Shugden during the forced signature campaigns. In the course of these events, some Tibetan groups in the settlements completely denied these new outcasts any access to Tibetan shops, the monastery’s clinic, or he monastery’s food supplies and distribution. With no nearby source left for purchasing daily living necessities, the Tibetan Camp Number Four, headed by His Eminence Penor Rinpoche, openly welcomed the monks of Pomra Kamtsen to purchase their living necessities such as milk and so on from the camp’s shops and outlets. Camp Number Four is populated by a majority of Nyingmapas, who had no hesitation in helping Gelugpas worshipping Dorje Shugden. Is this not a clear sign of the solidarity of Dharma practitioners that goes far beyond the boundaries of Tibetan Buddhist schools?

Third justification for Westerners:


…… to give me the transmission of the Sangwa-Nyingpo-Tantra. I consulted my teacher Ling Rinpoche about it, and he responded negatively, saying there is a lot of discussion about it. Actually my teacher was afraid of Dolgyal (Dorje Shugden). Thus I lost my religious freedom.
Dalai Lama

The Dalai Lama blames Dorje Shugden for the negative response he received from his teacher Ling Rinpoche concerning his taking the teaching of Sangwa-Nyingpo-Tantra. There is in fact “a lot of discussion” about this Tantra, but these discussions have nothing whatsoever to do with Dorje Shugden.

Many great earlier Tibetan scholars, especially those with a precise knowledge of Sanskrit, such as master Jangchub Woe, translator Goe, translator Chak, great Sakya Pandita, the great master Bhutoen, etc., have classified a number of Tibetan Tantras as lacking the authenticity of being original Indian Buddhist Tantras. These texts, including the Tantra in question, were classified separately. Kyabje Ling Rinpoche’s comment that “there is a lot of discussion about it” refers to these discussions of many earlier and later Tibetan scholars about the authenticity of the Sangwa-Nyingpo-Tantra.

Ling Rinpoche’s answer has therefore nothing to do with Protector Dorje Shugden. Ling Rinpoche had no reason to be afraid of the deity nor any reason to frighten the Dalai Lama about such a deity. Unfortunately, the former Kyabje Ling Rinpoche is no longer among us, but many of his respectable and trusted disciples are still alive.

Source :
From the Dorje Shugden Devotees Charitable & Religious Society in India, July 2008
http://wisdombuddhadorjeshugden.org/dorjeshugden32.php