Freedom for Tibetans is not likely if the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) continues their double standard politics

By: Tenzin Tsondrue

The opinion piece below was sent to dorjeshugden.com for publication. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to ds@dorjeshugden.com.

In a world driven by differing values, individual needs and often opposing organizational interests, conflicts and controversies are inevitable. Unfortunately this applies to all aspects of life including religion. In fact, religion is always a latent source of quarrels which, if unmanaged, can escalate into full blown hostilities. Therefore a leader and the government of a religious community must make special effort to be fair and be seen to be unbiased and equal in its handling of such conflicts. A defining mark of good government is fairness and the care the leadership takes to neither fall into partisanship by choosing a side to stand with, or to remain apathetic to the plight of another.

This is a concept that the Tibetan government-in-exile, now known as the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), seems unable to grasp or have no respect for, acting instead as if it is still a feudal lordship rather than the liberal government it professes to be. The CTA’s official stance on key issues is found to differ depending on what situation suits its agenda better.

At first glance, it may just seem like the CTA is an inexperienced and incompetent government. But after decades of similar inconsistencies, it is clear that the CTA is not in fact a government of the people and for the people, but a conspiracy of a small elite, using the instrument of government to serve themselves. This would explain why they appear reluctant to apply good governance in situations where there is no personal benefit to them (other than the well being of the people) but are quick to intervene and act ultra vires when there are private objectives to fulfill.

For example, neither the Dalai Lama or the CTA acted swiftly to discourage the spate of over 100 self-immolations around 2010. Instead those incidents were treated as political opportunities for anti-Chinese propaganda and so the CTA refused to advise against them for the longest time, choosing political mileage over the lives of its people. That is not the only example and in fact a number of past events involving the Kagyu, Sakya and Gelug lineages will attest to the CTA’s secret agendas. These examples will expose the fact that what the CTA claims to be policies and guiding principles only apply in some cases and not in others, depending on what is more conducive to their hidden plans.

In its harsh decision to ban the practice of Dorje Shugden, the CTA cited the reasons being Dorje Shuden’s legacy of enmity towards the Dalai Lama line; the ‘sectarian’ nature of the practice that breeds disunity; the malicious intention of the leaders of the practice who are in fact Chinese agents; the ‘spiritual bond’ (samaya) between the Dalai Lama and all Tibetans which if breached would endanger the Dalai Lama’s life, and other similar false justifications. All these reasons seem to allude to the CTA taking steps to protect the overall well-being of the people but we will see that these reasons are hollow because when similar situations arise apart from Shugden, the CTA has acted differently. These contradictions have led to some of the greatest damage being inflicted on the credibility of the Tibetan nation and Tibetan Buddhism in modern history.

1. The Fifth Dalai Lama and the Kagyus

Highlights discrepancies in the way the CTA deals with the Gelugs and the Kagyus

The autobiography of the incomparable scholar Geshe Lhundub Sopa

Following the assassination of King Langdarma in 842 CE, which marked the end of the Tibetan Empire that had originally been established by Namri Songtsen, the region of Tibet fell into many years of civil war. The Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso (a short biography can be found here) instigated a series of military and social campaigns in an attempt to once again unify Tibet under a single leadership. It was during this period that the Fifth Dalai Lama enlisted the help of Gushi Khan, a powerful military leader of the Dzungar Mongols.

In Geshe Lhundub Sopa’s autobiography Like A Waking Dream, he writes that the Dzungar Mongols who supported the Fifth Dalai Lama defeated the army of the King of Tsang, who were patrons of the Karmapa. As a result, the defeated Karmapa (the spiritual head of the Karma Kagyu lineage) was sent to Tsurphu Monastery by the government of the Fifth Dalai Lama.

The Fifth Dalai Lama is widely known as the leader who unified Tibet and became both the religious and temporal leader of the region

The Gelugpa leadership felt that the surrounding landscape of the monastery – the mountains framing the black earth below and the sky above in a triangular fashion, to be highly inauspicious. This triangle resembles the black iron triangle used in Tibetan sorcery to entrap spirits and negative forces. Hence, it was thought that sending the Karmapa there was to condemn him to an unpropitious place.

The black iron triangle is known to be used in rituals that trap and bind negative spirits and energies.

In retaliation, the Kagyus are rumoured to have procured the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair and placed it under the steps at the front entrance of Tsurphu Monastery. This was done deliberately so that all who entered the monastery would have to symbolically step over the Dalai Lama, which was considered a grave insult. This incident is one of many that tells of the historic enmity between the Karma Kagyus and the Fifth Dalai Lama and his government. It is rumoured that the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair is still under the Tsurphu Monastery steps. Even Geshe Sopa had heard of it and he states in his book that he never set foot in that monastery because he was afraid that the rumour might turn out to be true.

At one time I wanted to go to Tsurphu, but somebody told me that I shouldn’t. The person said that in the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, the Kagyupas had gotten some of his hair and put it under the front steps of the monastery. Walking on the steps would be like stepping on the Fifth Dalai Lama’s head. It was probably true. After the Fifth Dalai Lama’s rise to power there was strong animosity between the sects; the Kagyupas probably thought of him as their enemy. They could have gotten some of his hair and done this. Every time I went by that valley and saw the golden roof and the beautiful buildings, I wanted to go, but I never did. I was afraid that it might be true about the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair under those steps.

- Geshé Lhundub Sopa with Paul Donnelly, Like a Waking Dream: The Autobiography of Geshé Lhundub Sopa, Wisdom Publications, Inc. 2012. P.30)

The steps leading to Tsurphu Monastery in Tolung Valley, Tibet. Established by the 1st Gyalwa Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa, it has long been the traditional seat of the Karma Kagyu tradition

Geshe Sopa’s statement indicates that Gelug-Kagyu animosity may still be simmering beneath the surface. Certainly if the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair remains where it was planted, it could be misrepresented as the continuing intention of the Kagyus to put down the lineage of the Dalai Lamas. It hints at an unspoken and subtle feud between the Kagyupas and the Gelug establishment. This is a potentially inflammatory situation and could be harmful to the unity of Tibetans, even though it may not be the intention of present day Kagyus.

Surprisingly the CTA has not done anything about this. The CTA has stated on more than a few occasions that even to oppose the historic Dalai Lamas is tantamount to opposing the present Dalai Lama. We see this clearly in the case where the present Dalai Lama and the CTA have taken it upon themselves to continue open hostilities against Shugden Buddhists today, as the result of an alleged feud between the 17th century Gelugpa sage, Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen and his supposed rival, the Fifth Dalai Lama. Dorje Shugden is the Dharma Protector that is the reincarnation of Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen.

The Dorje Shugden practice is banned today because the CTA claims that as a result of an alleged quarrel some 360 years ago, Shugden Buddhists are enemies of the present Dalai Lama. And seeing that the Dalai Lama is the embodiment of the Tibetan nation and its people, by extension Shugden Buddhists are enemies of the Tibetan people. This ‘fact’ therefore warrants their persecution. Of course this is an absurd proposition and yet the Dalai Lama has stated that he is obliged to continue the legacy of the Fifth Dalai Lama with regards to Shugden. The simple fact that the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair remains under the steps of Tsurphu Monastery and yet the CTA treats this with casual indifference, speaks of their dis-ingenuity. Why act on an alleged centuries-old conflict between Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen and the Dalai Lama’s predecessor and punish Shugden Buddhists today, and not apply the same treatment to the Kagyus? Why penalize one set of people and not the other for what appears to be similar ancient conflicts? And for that matter, why should a progressive government be concerned about old conflicts?

The CTA’s inconsistency in its treatment of Shugden Gelugpas and Karma Kagyus can only be explained by the fact that it is easier for a Gelugpa Dalai Lama and CTA to pick on their own people. On the other hand, they cannot get away with the same treatment with the Karma Kagyus who are not from the same tradition or school of thought. Therefore their actions and decisions are not based on what is right but what suits them and what they can get away with.

2. The CTA’s Silence on Forced Kagyu Conversion

The Gyalwang Drukpa, the spiritual head of the Drukpa Kagyu School

On September 10th 2014, the Gyalwang Drukpa, head of the Drukpa Kagyu lineage published an open letter calling upon Karma Kagyu leaders to end their forced conversion of Drukpa Monasteries and holy sites. These conversions were allegedly done following the instructions of the current 17th Karmapa, His Holiness Ogyen Trinley Dorje , a fact that perturbs the Gyalwang Drukpa given his deep respect for the Karmapa. Both lineages have shared a strong spiritual bond and are even known as Gyalwa Kar-Druk Yab-Sey or “Spiritual Father and Son” as the Gyalwang Drukpas and Gyalwa Karmapas have historically given guidance to whomever of the two was younger. Whilst both schools are closely interrelated, they have maintained their individual lineages, traditions, practices, hierarchies and administrations. However this harmony between the two lineages has been increasingly threatened by the Karma Kagyu’s forced conversions of the Drukpa Kagyus.

The Gyalwang Drukpa’s open letter regarding the forced conversions of Drukpa Monasteries and holy sites (Click to enlarge)

In the interview below, the Gyalwang Drukpa explained that these forced conversions have become increasingly common and not even holy sites like the sect’s Dri-ra Phung monastery, the equivalent of Mecca to the Muslims, have been spared. The Gyalwang Drukpa likened these forced conversions to “killing us [Drukpas]”. In other words it is a serious attempt to force the disintegration of the Drukpa lineage. The Gyalwang Drukpa expressed in the video that he has had to go public to create awareness of the Drukpa lineage’s plight which begs the question, where is the CTA in its duty to preserve unity? Preserving unity is also the CTA’s often quoted justification to wipe out Shugden Buddhists whom the CTA accuses as being ‘sectarian’ and therefore dangerous.

This is not a commentary on the relationship between the Drukpa Kagyu and the Karma Kagyu. This article does not serve to condone the behavior of those monks who have forced their way to overrun Drukpa monasteries, but neither does it seek to malign the Karma Kagyu lineage. Instead it is to highlight the hypocrisy of the CTA in targeting Shugden practitioners, as well as to highlight how the CTA has utterly and completely neglected their duty to create an environment where all lineages can thrive and not at the expense of any sect or tradition.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

The Gyalwang Drukpa explains about the forced conversions during a short interview. From the Drukpa Lineage’s YouTube channel.

The incredible thing to note is that this is not a recent phenomenon and has been taking place for over a decade. And yet neither the Dalai Lama or the CTA have stepped in to ensure that the Drukpa Kagyus are protected from such forced annexations. The Dalai Lama has time and time again presented himself as the spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism who is responsible for the preservation of all Tibetan Buddhist lineages. The CTA was established to supposedly represent the welfare of all Tibetans as well as organizations. Yet both the Dalai Lama and CTA have behaved as if the Tibetan spiritual community is exempt from all laws.

The Gyalwang Drukpa expresses his worries over the issue in a dignified yet authoritative manner, promoting cooperation rather than fighting. He is quoted as saying, “Buddhism is not about conversion. It is about love, compassion, peace and understanding.” This role and statement promoting peace should have been said by the Dalai Lama and reiterated by the CTA. So why does the CTA and Dalai Lama continue to remain silent? Compared to the ban on Dorje Shugden which the CTA actively supports, the CTA’s silence towards these forced conversions betrays its double standards and its targeting of the Gelugpa lineage’s practice of the Wisdom Protector, Dorje Shugden.

It cannot be said that the CTA has a policy of non-intervention in spiritual matters. The CTA’s apathy and disturbing silence in the Drukpa-Karma Kagyu case is in stark contrast to their aggressive advocacy of forced conversions of Shugden Buddhists away from their practice, even to the point of legislating such criminality in parliament. Furthermore, if the CTA appears to be non-interventionist in its approach to the various Tibetan Buddhist schools, this illusion is dissipated when we realize that the CTA has previously actively interfered in Kagyu affairs.

3. A CTA proposal to restructure the Kagyu leadership

In another 2010 interview regarding Kagyu leadership, Gyalwang Drukpa openly dismissed a CTA proposal to restructure the Kagyu leadership and base the appointment of a single leader to all Kagyu sects on a rotational basis. Not only does this interfere with the various Kagyu sects’ self-determination based on centuries of tradition but as the Gyalwang Drukpa explained, this would destroy the harmony between the different Kagyu lineages.

Perhaps that was the intention of the CTA from the beginning. Just as the CTA divided the Gelug lineage by imposing a ban on a pervasive protector practice of the Gelugs, it created division within the Kagyus. By side-stepping proper protocol and acting beyond its authority, the CTA forcibly interfered with leadership issues in the Karma Kagyu lineage, with devastating effect as evidenced by the violence at Rumtek Monastery, the official seat of the Karmapas.

The Violent Rumtek Takeover

Rumtek Monastery lies 24 km from Gangtok, Sikkim (Northern India) and is regarded as the wealthiest of all Tibetan Buddhist monasteries. A few years after the 16th Karmapa passed into clear light in 1981, there were two claimants to the throne. One, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, was discovered by Tai Situ Rinpoche, who was one of the regents of the Karma Kagyu school; the other, Trinley Thaye Dorje, was discovered by the senior regent, Shamar Rinpoche. By tradition, it is the responsibility of Shamar Rinpoche to find and enthrone the next Karmapa but Tai Situ Rinpoche broke with tradition and protocol, and approached the Dalai Lama to endorse his candidate as the rightful Karmapa. It should be stated clearly that the Dalai Lama does not have any authority or influence in the appointment of the highest seat of the Karma Kagyus. Yet in this instance, the Dalai Lama sided with Tai Situ Rinpoche instead of mediating the conflict.

Today there are two 17th Karmapas – Tai Situ Rinpoche enthroned Ogyen Trinley Dorje with the support of the Dalai Lama, the CTA and, ironically, the Chinese government. Meanwhile, Shamar Rinpoche enthroned Trinley Thaye Dorje with the backing of a large percentage of the Karma Kagyus. By intervening in Karma Kagyu affairs then officiating his unwarranted intervention by drawing the CTA into fray, the Dalai Lama’s endorsement of a Karmapa candidate split the Karma Kagyu lineage. His decision sparked violent clashes over Rumtek Monastery, turning a holy site into a battlefield.

Disturbingly, as conflicts between the two parties escalated and continue to persist till this day, neither the Dalai Lama or the CTA have seen fit to step in once again, this time to arbitrate a quarrel which was not intractable until the Dalai Lama’s involvement. Despite the problems caused, the CTA remains recalcitrant. The Karmapa Charitable Trust (the legal and administrative body of Rumtek Monastery) officially declared Karmapa Trinley Thaye Dorje as the heir of the 16th Karmapa and this decision was upheld by the Indian court of law. Instead of respecting that, the Dalai Lama continues to regard Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the rightful Karmapa candidate, and endorses his status by constantly appearing in public and official events with him. The CTA’s refusal to act as a fair, impartial and democratic government is even more disturbing. A true spiritual leader who claims to represent all Tibetan Buddhist traditions should not take sides and act to the disadvantage of any particular lineage. A genuine government of the people would push for peaceful reconciliation. And yet none of these commonsense measures were or have been taken.

The Karmapa Controversy, just like the Dorje Shugden ban, is concrete proof that both the Dalai Lama and CTA do not operate on principles of peace and justice. In both cases, their actions led to results diametrically opposed to what they are supposed to uphold. Both the Dalai Lama and CTA are often heard preaching peace and unity. In fact, the CTA claims that banning the Shugden practice was necessary to safeguard unity amongst the Tibetan people. And yet the CTA’s ban of the Shugden practice and their endorsement of Tai Situ Rinpoche’s candidate split the largest (Gelug) and second largest (Kagyu) Buddhist schools, thereby tearing the entire Tibetan community apart.

4. Tai Situ Rinpoche’s Exile from India

An online transcript of Tai Situ Rinpoche’s speech upon arriving back in India. Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.quietmountain.org/links/situ_rinpoche/situ_return.htm)

In 1994, Shri Narayan Singh filed a criminal complaint to the Chief Magistrate of Delhi alleging Tai Situ Rinpoche to be an agent of the Chinese along with Gyaltsab Rinpoche, and that they were part of a bigger Chinese conspiracy to bring about the disintegration of India.

The complaint alleged that the conspirators planned to do this by bringing about the amalgamation of the Tibetan Autonomous Region of China and the Indian state of Sikkim. Another similar report was allegedly filed by Sri Sridar Rao, an official of the government of Sikkim and was submitted to the Cabinet Secretary of India, T S R Subrahmanyam.

Ogyen Trinley Dorje (left) was found and recognized by Tai Situ Rinpoche (right) and is one of two claimants to the throne of the 17th Karmapa. This claimant, supported by the Chinese, is also supported by the Dalai Lama

Following a series of newspaper articles discussing this, the Indian government decided to ban Tai Situ Rinpoche in August 1994 from re-entering India on national security grounds. The ban was the culmination of a decade-long Indian intelligence investigation of Tai Situ Rinpoche’s activities in China. It seems that the recognition of a Chinese national as the Karmapa by Tai Situ Rinpoche, who was also backed by the Chinese, seemed to be at the heart of this controversy. A Chinese Karmapa would eventually wield tremendous power in Sikkim, where Rumtek (the seat of the Karmapa) lies.

And so, if it is true that the Dalai Lama and CTA were concerned about Chinese spies infiltrating their ranks and sabotaging the Tibetan independence movement, they would have been more reluctant to endorse a Chinese-sponsored Karmapa. Clearly however, Tai Situ Rinpoche and his protégé Ogyen Trinley Dorje’s close ties with China were of no concern to the Dalai Lama and CTA.

However, when it comes to individuals whom the CTA wishes to oppress and marginalize, the individual’s spiritual practice (which in fact precedes the Sino-Tibetan conflict) becomes reason enough for the CTA to label them ‘Chinese agents’. Even to be seen with any Chinese person is tantamount to treason. The CTA even went as far as publishing a hitlist of Shugden lamas and worshipers on their official website, denouncing them as criminals of society for protesting against the Dalai Lama.

Why is there such disparity between the way the CTA views Tai Situ Rinpoche and Ogyen Trinley Dorje, and the way they view all Shugden Buddhists? The only logical conclusion would be that in one situation, the CTA benefits from endorsing a Chinese-backed Karmapa whilst in the other, they do not benefit in any way. By endorsing a Karmapa candidate with confirmed ties to China and supporting Tai Situ Rinpoche whom Indian Intelligence suspects to be an agent of the Chinese government, the CTA proves its own malicious intentions. And this is not to mention the CTA’s complete disregard and respect for India’s security concerns.

5. The Sakyas and the Question of Samaya

The great Sakya Lama Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche (centre), together with the Karmapa Candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje (left) and the Sharmapa (right)

Another interesting point to note is the Dalai Lama’s view that all Tibetans have a spiritual bond with him, and this compels them to obey his every wish. Failure to do so harms the Dalai Lama’s life through the breaking of their samaya with him, or so they are told.

Yet the same policy does not apply to Sakya lamas and the Dalai Lama. The great Sakya Lama Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, recognized by the 13th Dalai Lama as the 18th in the lineage of Chobgye Trichens, was instrumental in the Sharmapa’s recognition of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the rightful 17th Karmapa. During multiple dreams, Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche had visions of the late 16th Karmapa Rangjung Rigpe Dorje circumambulating stupas and even had a relative come to him with a photograph of a child who is supposed to be the reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa. Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche conveyed this to the Sharmapa in 1986, who then went on to recognize Trinley Thaye Dorje as the 17th Karmapa.

His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama (left) receiving Sakya teachings and empowerments from Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche

His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama is actually a student of Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, having received Sakya teachings and empowerments from him. So the question arises: why did the Dalai Lama endorse Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the 17th Karmapa when his own Sakya teacher Chobgye Trinchen Rinpoche recognised Trinley Thaye Dorje instead?

Within Tibetan Buddhism, a student is supposed to follow the advice and actions of his/her teacher, so why didn’t the Dalai Lama abide by Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche’s recognition of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the correct reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa? This is not the first time that the Dalai Lama has gone against the advice or teachings of his teachers. The Dalai Lama also contradicted his main teachers, H.H. Ling Rinpoche and H.H. Trijang Rinpoche, when he abandoned the protector practice and imposed the ban on Dorje Shugden.

So how is it that Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche’s support for a rival Karmapa candidate, the Dalai Lama’s decision to support a candidate apart from the one Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche recognised, and the Dalai Lama’s turning against his own teachers’ practice all do not constitute breaking samaya? But Shugden worshipers’ refusal to obey the diktat of the Dalai Lama (with whom they might have no spiritual bond) is considered breaking samaya? Many Tibetan Buddhist practitioners have firmly-established samayas with their Shugden teachers and none with the Dalai Lama. Yet the CTA insists that ALL Tibetan Buddhists have to follow the Dalai Lama, or they will be accused of breaking samaya. This is completely absurd and shows that the Tibetan leadership are even prepared to distort long-established spiritual traditions to achieve their goals. It also shows the CTA to be nothing but the Dalai Lama’s enforcers, even enforcing something that is evidently wrong, just because the Dalai Lama said so.

Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche (left), the Karmapa candidate Ogyen Trinley Dorje, His Holiness Sakya Trizin (right) and His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama (far right). Interestingly, Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche did NOT recognise Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the rightful Karmapa candidate, and instead recognised Trinley Thaye Dorje

Confounding the issue of samaya and the recognition of the Karmapa is the CTA’s involvement. Seen in the picture above is Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, seated next to Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the opposing candidate for the throne of the Karmapa. Why would Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche sit next to or be seen with the Dalai Lama’s candidate which he himself did not select as the true Karmapa candidate? And when he himself clearly does not think Ogyen Trinley Dorje is the true Karmapa? Some could argue that perhaps Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche actually believes that both candidates are legitimate reincarnations of the Karmapa. This is highly unlikely however – if he did think this were the case, there is nothing to stop him from making a formal pronouncement of Ogyen Trinley Dorje as another legitimate reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa.

Note also that Ogyen Trinley Dorje is seated in between Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche and H.H. Sakya Trizin, the current head of the Sakya lineage, with the Dalai Lama on the far right. This picture highlights the political nature of the CTA and the Dalai Lama’s effort to portray religious harmony between the various Tibetan Buddhist lineages, but this show is obviously forced. Ogyen Trinley Dorje is placed between Sakya lamas, one of whom (Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche) we have already seen supports the opposing Karmapa candidate.

Left to right: Shangpa Kagyu Lama Trinlay Tulku Rinpoche, H.E. Sakya Jetsun Chimey Luding Rinpoche, H.E. Luding Khenchen Rinpoche, 17th Karmapa candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje, H.H. Sakya Trizin, H.E. Ratna Vajra Rinpoche, Dagmo Kusho Tashi Lhakyi (consort of H.H. Sakya Trizin) and Dagmo Kalden Dunkyi (consort of H.E. Ratna Vajra Rinpoche)

Adding to the Sakya involvement within the Karma Kagyu lineage is H.H. Sakya Trizin’s confusing association with both Karmapa candidates. Often seen together with Ogyen Trinley Dorje at the Dalai Lama’s events and teachings, Sakya Trizin has also been seen with the other candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje. In the photo above for example, Sakya Trizin is seated next to the Karmapa candidate not endorsed by the Dalai Lama. Rather than a political photograph, this is more of an intimate setting, with many lamas of both the Sakya and Kagyu lineages coming together. They include Luding Khenchen Rinpoche, head of the Ngor tradition within the Sakya lineage.

H.H. Sakya Trizin is also a student of Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, who identified Trinley Thaye Dorje as the rightful Karmapa reincarnation. Therefore it is logical to assume he supports Trinley Thaye Dorje’s claim to the throne of the Karmapa rather than the Dalai Lama-endorsed Ogyen Trinley Dorje.

Why is it that H.H. Sakya Trizin can be seen with both Karmapa candidates without reprisal from the CTA or the Dalai Lama? Is the Sakya Trizin simply sitting on the fence, not wanting to embroil himself in another lineage’s affairs or is the CTA forcing him into the position of associating with the Dalai Lama’s choice of Ogyen Trinley Dorje over his own guru’s choice of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the correct Karmapa candidate?

H.H. Sakya Trizin recently bestowed a special empowerment to Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the Karmapa candidate recognised by Tai Situ Rinpoche and the Dalai Lama. This contradicts Sakya Trizin’s guru’s acknowledgement of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the Karmapa

In addition to this, Sakya Trizin was recently invited to give an empowerment to Ogyen Trinley Dorje, a candidate not recognized by his own teacher. Did Sakya Trizin really want to give the empowerment or was this due to pressure from the CTA to once again portray religious harmony? Sakya Trizin’s indecision regarding which Karmapa candidate to support can be bewildering to say the least, especially since he has never publicly stated which Karmapa candidate he supports.

It could be argued that H.H. Sakya Trizin is appearing with both Karmapa candidates to remain neutral, even though his own teacher was instrumental in the recognition of one candidate. However, Sakya Trizin has not extended this neutrality to all other sects of Tibetan Buddhism. For despite Sakya Trizin’s “neutrality” regarding the Karmapa candidates, he has clearly and publicly denounced Dorje Shugden practice. This in itself is a double standard – if his aim is to remain neutral in a Karma Kagyu issue because it does not concern the Sakyas, he should also remain neutral on the Dorje Shugden issue which does not concern the Sakyas. In adhering to the CTA’s attitude of non-involvement in the Karmapa dispute, yet publicly denouncing Dorje Shugden, Sakya Trizin allows himself to be influenced with the double standards of the CTA, a stance that is unbecoming of the spiritual head of the indomitable Sakya lineage.

The Nyingma Lama Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche (left) together with Karmapa candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje (right)

Despite the CTA’s strict insistence that all Tibetans loyal to the Dalai Lama are not to associate with anyone who opposes the Dalai Lama even symbolically, Sakya Trizin nevertheless met with the Karmapa candidate not endorsed by the Dalai Lama (Trinley Thaye Dorje) and escaped the CTA’s wrath. Sakya Trizin is not the only high lama who has openly flouted this non-association rule by the CTA.

The present reincarnation of the great Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche also paid a visit to Trinley Thaye Dorje in 2010 and was not rebuked for it. Sakya Trizin and Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche’s disregard for the CTA and the Dalai Lama’s policies are not different from Shugden practitioners’ disregard of the Dalai Lama and CTA’s order to abandon the practice. The difference however, is that Dorje Shugden practitioners are persecuted for disobeying the CTA whereas many like Sakya Trizin and Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche remain untouched. This reflects not only the CTA’s lack of consistency when it comes to reprimanding those who disregard their policies, it also shows that many high lamas regard the Dalai Lama and CTA’s orders to be ridiculous and refuse to be bound by it.

Sogyal Rinpoche (left) leading His Holiness the Dalai Lama (right)

Controversy also exists within the Nyingma lineage specifically surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche who has been the focus of many inquiries. Sogyal Rinpoche has been the subject of numerous lawsuits brought over the years by students and others who have had some associations with Sogyal Rinpoche. Some of the accusations against Sogyal Rinpoche even call into question his authenticity as a high Tibetan lama. Despite the controversies and questions surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche, the Dalai Lama still associates with Sogyal Rinpoche and his religious activities, including the opening of Lerab Ling, a large temple in Montpelier, France in 2008.

Even though these matters have arisen consistently over the years, the Dalai Lama makes no move to disassociate with Sogyal Rinpoche or question his actions. In fact the Dalai Lama’s continuing association with Sogyal Rinpoche is seen by many as an endorsement of Sogyal Rinpoche’s character, and perhaps even a silent rebuttal of accusations against Sogyal Rinpoche. This may be the Dalai Lama’s attempt to once again portray religious tolerance, or it may be the Dalai Lama’s acknowledgement of Sogyal Rinpoche’s instrumentality to the Dalai Lama’s objectives. Whatever the Dalai Lama’s motivations may be, the Dalai Lama does nothing about Sogyal Rinpoche and the controversies surrounding him. This behaviour is markedly different compared to the Dalai Lama’s approach to the ban on Dorje Shugden, where the Dalai Lama emphatically enforces it and denounces lamas or practitioners alike if they continue in the practice of Dorje Shugden.
 
[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

Double Standards & Destabilisation

Rather than highlighting issues within the Kagyu, Nyingma and Sakya lineages, this article seeks to point out the selectivity of the CTA when dealing with Tibetan Buddhist issues, and how their bias and prejudice have the potential to destabilize Tibetan society. On the one hand, the CTA practices a non-involvement policy towards the Kagyupas; on the other hand, the CTA enforces a continued and vigorous campaign against Dorje Shugden. This prejudice appears to have filtered down to the heads of various lineages, and has the potential to create resentment between the different lineages. For example, Sakya Trizin speaks up against the Dorje Shugden practice, but remains indifferent when it comes to the troubles surrounding the Karmapa issue or forced conversion of the Drukpa Kagyus. Outwardly, it may appear that he holds a bias against the Gelugs, and a bias in favour of the Kagyus.

These incidents of indifferent non-involvement at times and aggressive partisanship at other times clearly demonstrate a lack of consistency which is indicative of good government. However, instead of making any effort to be fair and equitable in its management of state affairs, double standards and bias continue to dominate the CTA’s character. If an administration such as the CTA is seen to regularly fail in its duty to its people, how can it expect to receive support from progressive nation states in its campaign to regain control of its homeland? More importantly, how can the Tibetan people and religious leaders even trust the CTA and have enough confidence in them to secure freedom for them?

What is the Dalai Lama and CTA’s real purpose in persisting in such discriminating policies? Is the real intention of the Dalai Lama and CTA to unite their people and pursue a genuine fight for freedom, or is it to divide the Tibetan community for their own selfish agendas? Based on hard facts and analysis of past events, it would seem that the latter is more plausible. This sends an extremely negative image of the Tibetan people and Tibetan Buddhism to the world.

The Dorje Shugden ban; the interference in the Kagyu leadership; the refusal or failure to intercede when a religious sect preys on another, the loose and wrongful distortion of important spiritual traditions such as the upholding of the proper meaning and significance of samaya, and the dangerous self-serving application of laws and policies can only serve to destroy the reputation of the Tibetan people and along with it, their culture and religion. All of these issues should have been resolved quickly by the Dalai Lama and the CTA in a manner befitting an effective leadership based on sound political structure and governance. However, this has not been the case and their double standard politics exposes the real situation – a lack of sound political and religious leadership that has not only created multiple rifts with Tibetan Buddhist society, but their continued policies of non-involvement only further solidify these divisions. Clearly it is the Tibetan leadership that has been creating disharmony among the Tibetan people, hindering their efforts for self-autonomous rule of Tibet or complete freedom, while tarnishing the reputation of the great practice lineages of Tibetan Buddhism for adherents all over the world.

Disclaimer: This article was submitted by a third party author and does not necessarily reflect the official opinion of DorjeShugden.com. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to ds@dorjeshugden.com

Special Announcement from DorjeShugden.com

DorjeShugden.com wishes the Gyalwang Drukpa well and prays that this issue of forced conversion by other lineages is peacefully and swiftly resolved so that the glorious Drukpa lineage is preserved and flourishes. We send our prayers and dedicate the merits from our practice for this to happen.

We also wish the Karma Kagyu lineage well. May the current issues regarding the Karmapa candidates be resolved and the Kagyu lineage become whole once again.

DorjeShugden.com Admin

Related links:

• Self-Immolations Have Failed The Tibetans (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/self-immolations-have-failed-the-tibetans)
• Dalai Lama Recognizes Bon Faith (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/dalai-lama-recognizes-the-bon)
• Tibetan Leadership Publishes Hit List (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/tibetan-leadership-publishes-hit-list)
• Tibetan Leadership Organizes Violence (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/tibetan-leadership-organizes-violence)
• Geshe Lhundub Sopa Speaks About Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/geshe-lhundub-sopa-speaks-about-shugden)
• Will The Karmapa Save Dorje Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/will-the-karmapa-save-dorje-shugden)
• Divine Friends The Karmapa and Trijang Rinpoche (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/divine-friends-the-karmapa-and-trijang-rinpoche)
• What’s The Similarity Between Sharmapa and Shugden’s Dilemma (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/whats-the-similarity-between-sharmapa-and-shugdens-dilemma)
• Karmapa Asked Anti-Shugden Statue to be Removed (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/karmapa)
• True Spiritual Leadership: Karmapa Vs Dalai Lama (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/true-spiritual-leadership-karmapa-vs-dalai-lama)
• Biography of the Fifth Dalai Lama (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/great-masters/enlightened-lamas-series/the-great-fifth-dalai-lama-ngawang-lobsang-gyatso-1617-1682)

There is an old saying, “All is fair in love and war”. Miguel de Cervantes made the comparison in the 1604 play Don Quixote when he wrote, “Love and war are all one. It is lawful to use sleights and stratagems to attain the wished end.” And apparently, the adage applies to Tibetan Buddhism as well.

Since the 17th Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje emerged into the limelight after his dramatic escape from China in the year 2000, he is increasingly seen to be a protégé of the present and 14th Dalai Lama. The relationship of the elder statesman cum spiritual leader with the younger monk goes beyond cordial respect of a leader of one Tibetan Buddhist sect for the head of a rival sect. The two live very close by to one another in Dharamsala and often the younger Karmapa is included when the Dalai Lama grants audiences to delegations and journalists. At other times, the Dalai Lama is heard actively encouraging the media to seek audience with the Karmapa, promoting the latter in very positive and encouraging tones.

The 17th Karmapa, previously deemed an enemy of the Dalai Lama, is told of the Dalai Lama’s succession plans

It is not surprising that speculations are rife that the Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje is a likely successor to the Dalai Lama. A 2012 video captures a conversation between the Dalai Lama and Ling Choktrul Rinpoche, the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama’s senior tutor, and the Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje in which the Dalai Lama can be heard saying,

…and when I die, you will be the ones who will continue my work…

So it is clear how the Dalai Lama feels about the young Karmapa.

[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]

Or watch on server | download video (right click & save file)

As the Dalai Lama has shown deep respect and preference for the Karmapa, it would seem that such reverence is mutual. In 1961, the 16th and previous Karmapa whom Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje is the present incarnation of, hailed the Dalai Lama as a pillar of the Dharma and in adulation, said,

You are the great wish-fulfilling jewel.
Pervading the world with myriad lights,
[May You be] permanent, stable, and unchanging as a diamond,
In the red palace of Lhasa on the golden throne held high by lions…

A few years before that, in 1954, during the momentous meeting between the Dalai Lama and Chairman Mao Zedong, the Dalai Lama was accompanied by a delegate of notable Tibetans whom the Dalai Lama trusted and regarded as important. The 16th Karmapa was amongst them. Indeed, the Dalai Lama regarded the Karmapa as a “close friend” and “a very good human being¹“.

From the book “The Dance of 17 Lives” page 236

From the book “The Dance of 17 Lives” page 237

Seeing that both the Dalai Lama and the Karmapa are emanations of Bodhisattvas, they are then the literal reincarnations of their previous holy lives. In other words, each of them would be the return of the same (singular) and enlightened mind stream and thus, are supposed to be completely omniscient, and should have retained perfect recollection of past knowledge and memories. Therefore, it is only natural to conclude that this affable, mutually respectful and trusting relationship that has been established over centuries and lifetimes is steadfast. But as we shall see, that is in fact not the case.

The 16th Karmapa, Rangjung Rigpe Dorje together with the 14th Dalai Lama

In an interview with the Dalai Lama in 2001 as narrated by Mick Brown in his book, The Dance of 17 Lives, the Dalai Lama inferred that the 16th Karmapa, whom he had on numerous occasions acclaimed as Buddha Akshobhya, was not at all learned and in fact had told lies about the Dalai Lama (ibid 238). In making this statement, the Dalai Lama was responding to rumors he had heard wherein the Karmapa was alleged to have said that the Dalai Lama was a politician and not a genuine lama.

So we see that in fact all is not well, at least for now, between these two great incarnations and emanations of Avalokiteshvara. The erstwhile warmhearted affection for one another seems to have chilled considerably. The question is, how can there be such a dramatic shift in the attitudes of two supposedly ecclesiastical figures towards one another? Both the Karmapa and the Dalai Lama are ‘tulkus’ meaning that they are the undeviating incarnations of the exact same mind-stream that honored and revered one another. How can the divine being that the Dalai Lama trusted be the same one he then accused of lying and the precise one that he now regards as trustworthy again and seems to be promoting as his successor?

In samsara, such drastic swings of opinion are understandable because samsaric beings are supposed to be helplessly subjected to conditions and perceptions; and opinions are driven by what suits the ego best at the time and what serves the hidden agenda most effectively; but surely these human foibles do not apply to enlightened beings that are supposed to have transcended samsara and such gross transpositions in human feelings and emotions. And yet we see that this is not an isolated case and we see that inconsistencies and instabilities in relationships are very much prominent features in Tibetan Buddhism, at least insofar as affairs regulated by the Dalai Lama line of incarnations.

The Dalai Lama as the Fifth almost decimated the Karma Kagyu lineage, forcibly converted monasteries belonging to the Karmapa and the Sharmapa to Gelug practices, and sent the Karmapa into hiding. But as the Fourteenth, he empowers and promotes the same mind-stream embodied in the Karmapa and readies him for even greater power.

The Fifth Dalai Lama rendered the Jonang sect extinct, annexed all their monasteries into the Gelug monasteries, and declared the Jonangs sectarian and its practitioners apostates of the true Dharma. The same mind stream manifesting as the Fourteenth Dalai Lama formally recognized the Jonang as the fifth Tibetan Buddhist sect and calls it a living Buddhist tradition – the complete opposite of what they were previously accused of and persecuted for. So what was heretical becomes a living tradition and custodian of the Buddha Dharma without having to change one iota of its lineage practice.

And nowhere is this contradiction and unpredictability more conspicuous than in the relationship between the Dalai Lama and the Wisdom Buddha, Dorje Shugden. The Dalai Lama’s line of incarnations and Dorje Shugden’s line of incarnations have intertwined since the time of Lama Tsongkapa, who was master to both incarnations of that period – Gendun Drub and Duldzin Drakpa Gyaltsen. In his manifestation as Sonam Gyatso, the 3rd Dalai Lama received teachings from his beloved Guru, Panchen Sonam Drakpa, who a past incarnation of Dorje Shugden.

As Lobsang Gyatso the Great Fifth, the Dalai Lama acknowledged Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen (another past incarnation of Dorje Shugden) as an incarnation of Panchen Sonam Drakpa, an undisputed enlightened mind, and then in the same lifetime declared Dorje Shugden to be a perfidious spirit. Then, just as suddenly, a Praise was written to Dorje Shugden as an enlightened being.

A refrain of this Shakespearian comedy is now being played out, again with the Dalai Lama as the protagonist, this time as the Fourteenth. He too began as an ardent practitioner of Dorje Shugden, wrote a beautiful Praise to Dorje Shugden, commented positively on Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen and then without warning declared the Dorje Shugden practice heretical and its followers sectarian. This sudden reversal of the divinity of Dorje Shugden would be alarming if not for the fact that such vagaries are characteristic and habitual of the Dalai Lama who is the embodiment of two totally contrarian roles, spirituality and politics.

It is not only the Dalai Lama who displays such paradox but many who are in his fold. And we see this clearly in the recent 12th Religious Conference of Four Major Schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon Tradition² during which the heads of the various Tibetan Buddhist schools condemned the practice of Dorje Shugden. Amongst them was the Sakya Trizin whose predecessors had regarded Dorje Shugden as being one in nature with Avalokiteshvara; the Karmapa whose previous incarnations have been both friends and enemies with the Dalai Lama, and who had defended Dorje Shugden in the past³ yet now joins in the condemnation; the Jonangs who were schismatic apostates according to the Dalai Lama but who now lend their role to this drama. All are manifesting forgetfulness and denial of their individual and collective espousals of peaceful ideals, and are brazenly pretending that no one would remember their previous attestations of Dorje Shugden, of the Dalai Lama, and of each other.

The 12th Religious Conference of Four Major Schools of Tibetan Buddhism and Bon Tradition in June 2015 where the practice of Dorje Shudgen was condemned

So what conclusions do we draw from such wild swings in the behavior, thoughts and opinions of supposedly enlightened beings? There can only be two. Either they are mere mortals acting under the convenient guise of Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, each with an agenda that is best served by being friends or foes at different times depending on what the situation calls form.

Or they are truly enlightened beings working towards an invisible objective and operating under a ‘Just War’ code which postulates that the End justifies the Means. The great Indian epic, the Mahabharata, offers such an example of a ‘just war’ where Lord Krishna the wise philosopher, the guide to the lost, the hero of the righteous, the teacher of justice, the friend of the benevolent and the protector of truth, who could have easily prevented a war between the Pandavas and the Kauravas, instead chose war.

Some Dalai Lama apologists have argued that the Dalai Lama’s aggression towards Dorje Shugden is a just war being fought for the betterment of the Buddha Dharma, and done with full consent of the deity Dorje Shugden. Others have said that the Dalai Lama is no more than a ruthless politician who has banned a religion that stands in his way of consolidating total power over the Tibetan people. They cite the Dalai Lama’s own words when he said during his interview with Glenn Mullin,

These monasteries (Jonang) were closed for political reasons, not religious ones, and their closing had nothing to do with sectarianism…⁴.

That is to say that the Dalai Lama (in his past and present incarnations) has no hesitation in destroying a religious order for reasons known only to him, and blame it on that order practicing apostasy and being sectarian. Replace the labels, resume the stratagem and maintain the ruse, and you have the Dorje Shugden Conflict today.

Notes:

1. p236, The Dance of 17 Lives, Mick Brown, Bloomsbury Publishing, 2004.
2. http://tibet.net/2015/06/12th-religious-conference-of-four-major-schools-of-tibetan-buddhism-and-bon-tradition-underway/
3. While the 16th Karmapa was on a pilgrimage in Nepal he stopped at Orgyen Rinpoche’s monastery. As the Karmapa entered the monastery he saw a statue of Guru Dragpo trampling Dorje Shugden. The Karmapa stood in the presence of the statue for a while, then pointed his finger at it and asked “who is the person that said to build this statue? This isn’t Nyingma nor Sakya, certainly not Gelug and not Kagyu either. I didn’t say to build it, this is not one of the deities you can’t rely on (meaning you can rely on Dorje Shugden). Although the time is a little early in the future you will definitely need to rely on this deity.” (Dorje Shugden) No one dared to respond and own responsibility. The Karmapa then said “remove this now.” Immediately a person with an axe and shovel came and removed the offensive statue. Many lamas present at that time definitely remember, a seventy five year old man from Chamdo called Samcho witnessed this event.
4. p 207, the Fourteen Dalai Lamas, Glenn Mullins, 2001

by Brunhild Hekate

In the middle of a whirling palace of black wind… is the Great King with a body red-black in colour, one face two hands, the right holds a club aloft to the sky and the left a skull cup filled with blood and a human heart. On the head a lacquer hat is placed, riding a black horse surrounded by inconceivable emanations… to the Dhamapala King Shugden Tsal, together with attendants… ~ Sakya kangsol, based on an earlier text from the 19th century.

A History of Dorje Shugden in the Sakya Tradition

The Sakya lineage holders are emanations of Avalokiteshvara and Manjushri and their family lineage is famously divine. Practices within the Sakya lineage are passed down from father to the eldest son, ensuring the continuity of the lineage across generations, pure and accurate. Similarly, the practice of Dorje Shugden has been passed down within the Sakya lineage for several generations until recently, when the practice lost its popularity due to political expediency.

Morchen Kunga Lhundrub

Historically, the Sakya School of Tibetan Buddhism has viewed Dorje Shugden as an enlightened being. Dorje Shugden was first practised by the Sakyas in the early 17th century, beginning with the Sakya Kangsol written by Morchen Kunga Lhundrub (1654–1728), who was Sakya’s most precious Tantric and Lamdre Lineage holder. He wrote praises to Dorje Shugden as an enlightened being, and composed some of the earliest descriptions of the iconography and activities of Dorje Shugden and his four cardinal emanations.

Morchen Kunga Lhundrub was also the first to describe Dorje Shugden as being seated on a lion throne. Prior to this, the Sakya Kangsol refers to Dorje Shugden as Dorje Shugden Tanag, or Dorje Shugden Riding a Black Horse, one of the forms of Dorje Shugden unique to the Sakyas.

Paintings, thangkas and murals of Dorje Shugden Tanag were found in Sakya Monastery located in Tsang, Tibet before the turn of the 20th century.

Main temple of Sakya, Lhakang Chenmo

Northern Sakya Seat, Tibet

Southern Sakya Seat, Tibet

The 30th Sakya Throneholder Sonam Rinchen

Dorje Shugden was inducted into the pantheon of Sakya protectors by the 30th Sakya Trizin Sonam Rinchen (1705-1741), who strongly propitiated the form of Dorje Shugden riding a black horse. Sonam Rinchen later placed Dorje Shugden together with two other Protectors, Dorje Setrab and Tsiu Marpo, and these three principle protectors were collectively known as the “Three Kings” (Gyalpo Sum).

Dorje Shugden, one of the Three Kings, is part of the Sakya pantheon of Dharma Protectors

The 31st Sakya Throneholder Sachen Kunga Lodro

Sakya Kunga Lodro

Sachen Kunga Lodro (1729–1783), a great master of the Sakya tradition and the 31st Sakya Trizin, is believed to have been an incarnation of the great Sakya Pandit, Buton Rinchen Drub and Shakya Shri, a Kashmiri Pandit in the line of Sakya masters of Dorje Shugden’s lineage. One of Shakya Shri’s predecessors, an Indian master named Jetari, was also Atisha Dipamkara’s guru.

Sachen Kunga Lodro received all the transmissions of Dorje Shugden, amongst others, from his father, Sonam Rinchen, and it was he who fully culminated the various rituals of Dorje Shugden, combining the lineages received from his father with those of Morchen Kunga Lhundrub. Sachen Kunga Lodro clearly carried on the tradition of his father, praising Dorje Shugden as an enlightened protector, .

Sachen Kunga Lodro also wrote a wrathful torma offering to Dorje Shugden called ‘Swirl of Perfect Sense Offerings‘. This ritual was later used by Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche as part of his ‘Melodious Drum Victorious In All Directions‘, one of the most well-known rituals to Dorje Shugden. Thus, the source of some modern-day Dorje Shugden practices can be traced to the Sakya school. The text written by Kunga Lodro has also been included in the latest edition of the Dorje Shugden bebum, published by Lama Gangchen Rinpoche.

The 32nd Sakya Trizin Wangdu Nyingpo (1763–1809) depicted in this 19th century thangka, with Dharmapala Chitipati (left) and Dharmapala Dorje Shugden (right)

A close up of Dorje Shugden Tanag

The complete thangka. At the top are the principal meditational deities special to Wangdu Nyingpo – Chakrasamvara, Vajrayogini and Hevajra at the upper left and Vajrakila, Hayagriva and Vajrapani at the upper right. To the left is Chitipati, the two dancing skeletons, and to the right is Dorje Shugden Tanag, riding a black horse. Below him is Panjarnata Mahakala with Brahmarupa Mahakala on the left and Shri Devi Dudsolma on the right.

The 37th Sakya Throneholder Kunga Nyingpo

A close up of the 33rd Sakya Throneholder Mahasiddha Pema Dudul from the thangka below

Sachen Kunga Lodro would later go on to fulfil the prophecy of Mahasiddha Pema Dudul, who said in response to the 35th Sakya Throneholder Tashi Rinchen’s question about his future heir:

These days times are so degenerate no-one else is coming, but now Grandpa Shugden himself will definitely come as your son!

By this cryptic statement, Mahasiddha Pema Dudul meant that his grandfather, the great 31st Sakya Trizin Sachen Kunga Lodro, would eventually take rebirth as the son of the 35th Sakya Trizin Tashi Rinchen, thus upholding the most esoteric and precious Sakya teachings to benefit living beings.

In 1850, Sachen Kunga Lodro was indeed reincarnated as Kunga Nyingpo, who went on to ascend the Sakya Throne in 1883 as the 37th Sakya Trizin.

A 19th century Sakya thangka depicting the Five Emanations of Dorje Shugden. At the bottom left is the grandson of Kunga Lodro, the 33rd Sakya Throneholder Pema Dudul (1792–1853) . This form of an enthroned Dorje Shugden is similar to another thangka in Trode Khangsar

The 39th Sakya Throneholder Dragshul Trinley Rinchen

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen, the 39th Sakya Trizin explained in his autobiography that his father, the great Sakyapa Kunga Nyingpo was one with Avalokiteshvara. To prove this, he recounted the story of Mahasiddha Pema Dudul and Tashi Rinchen mentioned above. He then wrote:

The Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden Tsel definitively is Avalokiteshvara. In the scripture of the Nyingma Tantra, Rinchen Nadun says: The one known as Dolgyal is not mistaken on the path to liberation, he is by nature the Great Compassionate One. Hence, the Nyingma tantra quoted that Dorje Shugden and Avalokiteshvara are the same person.

As can be seen throughout his autobiography, Dragshul Trinley Rinchen was also a staunch Dorje Shugden practitioner, with many rituals and offerings to Dorje Shugden recorded in great detail.

His autobiography also notes the occasions when he met Dorje Shugden through an oracle, and it was during one such occasion that Dorje Shugden reminded Dragshul Trinley Rinchen to uphold the Dharma in general and gave some prophecies. Dragshul Trinley Rinchen was a great Sakya master, and is considered one of the most outstanding lineage masters of our time.

The 40th Sakya Throneholder Ngawang Thutob Wangchuk

The 40th Sakya Trizin Ngawang Thutob Wangchuk was born as the heir-apparent to Dragshul Thrinley Rinchen. The biography of the 41st Sakya Trizin names Ngawang Thutob Wangchuk as an emanation of Avalokiteshvara who has the ability to see and speak to Manjushri. As demonstrated on one occasion, the famous and holy Manjushri statue called Jamyang Tsodgyalma did speak to him, instructing him to practise the Guru Yoga of his father (instead of reciting confession prayers) while contemplating the ultimate view, thus merging his mind and the primordial wisdom of his father into one.

The Sakya Lineage

Thus, one can see clearly that Dorje Shugden Tanag has been an important and integral practice of the Sakya Tradition for the past few hundred years. Furthermore, the line of Sakya Throneholders has viewed Dorje Shugden as a fully enlightened being who is one with Avalokiteshvara and Manjushri. However, since the early 20th century, the Dorje Shugden Tanag practice has gradually declined.

The offering rituals for the Three Kings are no longer found in the standard Sakya Protector manuals of Indian and Tibetan monasteries. Neither can paintings or murals of Dorje Shugden Tanag be found in Sakya monasteries. It would appear that since 1996, the Dalai Lama and the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) have successfully pressured the current 41st Sakya Trizin into giving up the practice of Dorje Shugden Tanag. How is it that the Dalai Lama, a Gelugpa monk, can interfere and influence the religious practices of the Sakya School?

H.H. Jigdal Dagchen Sakya (b. 1929)

Today, there are still a few enlightened masters who continue to be bastions of Dorje Shugden’s practice in the Sakya school. One is the Abbot of Ngor monastary, an important branch of the Sakyapas. Another is H.H. Jigdal Dagchen Sakya, the current head of the Phuntsog Phodrang who lives in Seattle, Washington with his descendants.

H.H. Dagchen Rinpoche is the twenty-sixth generation of the Sakya-Khon lineage, and is regarded as an embodiment of Manjushri. He is in line to be the 42nd Sakya Trizin, which means that the lineage of Dorje Shugden Tanag may rise to prominence once again. After all, some of the Sakya Trizins are, without a doubt, emanations of Dorje Shugden!

Thartse Jampa Namka Chime, the abbot of Ngor monastary in the late 18th century and the previous incarnation of Jamyang Kyentse Wangpo.

It is truly unfortunate that the CTA’s political power and influence has affected the teachings and practices upheld by the previous Sakya Trizins. While the Sakyapas may deny the fact that they stopped the practice of Dorje Shugden Tanag in order to maintain good relations with the Dalai Lama and CTA, there is no doubt that for the moment, they have abandoned a practice endorsed by their lineage masters.

An Overview of the Sakya Trizin Line

from the 30th to the 40th Throneholders

His Holiness the 41st Sakya Trizin

Special Mention to the Following Great Masters

Shakya Shri Bhadra

Shakya Shri Bhadra b.1127 – d.1225

Shakya Shri Bhadra (Shakya Shri) was a Kashmiri paṇḍit who was invited to Tibet by Tropu Lotsāwa Rinchen Sengge. He arrived in 1204, at the age of either fifty-nine or seventy-eight, and remained for ten years, leaving in 1214.

Active primarily in Tsang, his significance to Tibetan Buddhism is characterized by his initiating four important lineages of teachings: to Sakya Paṇḍita he taught exoteric philosophy; pith instructions to Tropu Lotsāwa; tantra to Chel Lotsāwa; and Vinaya to Tsang Sowa Sonam Dze.

Shakya Shri was born in Daśobharā, in Kashmir, in 1127 (or 1145). During the earlier stages of his time in Tibet, possibly while still en route to Tropu from Chumik in 1204, he met Sakya Paṇḍita Kunga Gyeltsen, who was on his way to Kyangdur with funeral offerings following the death of his father, Pelchen Opo. Shakya Shri is said to have given him teachings on logic at the time.

During the 1208 summer retreat at Gyangong, he met Sakya Paṇḍita again and served as the upadhyaya in his ordination ceremony. During the 1210 summer retreat at Sakya, he gave Sakya Paṇḍita extensive teachings on Kalachakra, Vinaya, linguistics, poetry, logic and epistemology, and Abhidharma. The two worked on a retranslation of Dharmakirti’s Pramaṇavarttika. From this connection, Shakya Shri is often credited with initiating the tradition of logic in the Sakya school; while some dispute this characterization, his importance to the Sakya tradition was considerable.

Kyabje Trijang Dorje Chang’s ‘Music Delighting an Ocean of Protectors’ also quotes Kyabje Ling Dorje Chang’s previous incarnation, Losang Lungtog Tenzin Trinley’s recognition of Shakya Shri as a previous incarnation of Dorje Shugden. The incarnation lineage is said to be as follows:

• Shakya Shri
• Choku Ozer
• Buton Rinchen Drub
• Panchen Sonam Drub
• Panchen Sonam Dragpa
• Sonam Yeshe Wangpo
• Sonam Geleg Pelsang
• Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen

Atisha Dipamkara

Atisha Dipamkara b.982? – d.1054

The Bengali monk Atisha Dipamkara was of pivotal importance in the second transmission of Buddhism in Tibet. Invited from the Indian monastery-university of Vikramshila to Tibet by the Purang kings, Atisha spent thirteen years in Ngari and U-Tsang.

He is credited with the propagation of the Lamrim and Lojong teachings that later became the core of the Geluk tradition; his composition, the Bodhipathapradipa is a central text for the Lamrim, or Stages of the Path. He was also instrumental in the spread of the cult of Tara in Tibet.

Atisha’s main disciple Dromtonpa founded several important monasteries and gave rise to the Kadam tradition, which was later absorbed by the Gelug and, to some extent, the Sakya and Kagyu traditions.

Buton Rinchen Drub

Buton Rinchen Drub b.1290 – d.1364

Buton Rinchen Drub, a Sakya lama raised in a Nyingma family, was the eleventh abbot of Zhalu Monastery from 1320 to 1356. Some enumerations list him as the first abbot, as he significantly expanded the institution.

He was an important teacher of the Prajnaparamita, a key lineage holder of the Guhyasamaja and Kalachakra tantras as transmitted in the Geluk tradition, and the Kalachakra, Hevajra and Sampuṭa tantras as transmitted in the Sakya tradition.

He is generally credited as the creator of the Tibetan Buddhist canon, the Kangyur and Tengyur, and his History of Buddhism is still widely read. In addition to his Sakya training, he also studied in the Kadam and Kagyu traditions.

Addendum – Importance of Dorje Shugden in the Sakya tradition

Since the great Sakya School of Tibetan Buddhism was founded, the lineage of practice has been passed down through forty-two successive spiritual heads, known as Sakya Trizins. From this list of prestigious masters, six of these heads or throne holders of the tradition stand out for their practice and proliferation of Dorje Shugden. This is a practice that they even spread amongst their innumerable disciples. These throne holders constructed shrines and protector houses to Dorje Shugden, composed prayers to him and taught their students how to engage in the practice. This list includes:

1. His Holiness the 30th Sakya Trizin Sonam Rinchen (1705-1741 CE)
2. His Holiness the 31st Sakya Trizin Sachen Kunga Lodro (1729-1783 CE)
3. His Holiness the 33rd Sakya Trizin Padma Dudul Wangchug (1792-1853 CE)
4. His Holiness the 35th Sakya Trizin Tashi Rinchen (1824-1865 CE)
5. His Holiness the 37th Sakya Trizin Kunga Nyingpo (1850-1899 CE)
6. His Holiness the 39th Sakya Trizin Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936 CE)

The spiritual responsibility of the throne holder is to receive teachings covering the entire Sakya lineage, which consists of the common and esoteric transmissions of the Lam Dre, the Thirteen Golden Dharmas, the Hevajra tantric practices, and many others. These masters are then to proliferate these teachings. If is for this reason that they are considered to be highly learned and accomplished masters. It is through these six throne holders that the entire breadth of the Sakya lineage has descended to this day.

Due to the current political situation, with the Tibetan leadership telling everyone that the practice is bad, people might dismiss these six throne holders as being mistaken about the true nature of Dorje Shugden and their history of promoting the practice. But to come to this conclusion, one would need to assume that these throne holders were just ordinary men who are flawed, ignorant and make mistakes. If we think that, then they are rendered unreliable for spiritual growth. What is the point of going to get teachings from them if what they teach can be wrong?

To make such a dire accusation has far-reaching implications on the lives of everyday practitioners as they may lose confidence in what could well be a ‘flawed’ Sakya lineage. Since the throne holders were wrong, ordinary practitioners may feel it is pointless to continue practicing as the lineage is broken and has no blessings. Following this line of thinking, the Sakya lineage is invalidated because the entire lineage flows through these great throne holders.

According to the Tibetan leadership, Dorje Shugden is a spirit and by worshiping him one is no longer Buddhist. By engaging in his worship you lose the connection to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha because you break the refuge commitment of not worshiping an unenlightened being. This creates the cause for an unfortunate rebirth in the three lower realms. Following this logic, the six throne holders should have taken rebirth in those realms, but that is impossible as they have reincarnated back successively into the same family. The 37th throne holder, Kunga Nyingpo, is said to be the reincarnation of the 31st throneholder, Sachen Kunga Lodro, both of whom are even considered emanations of Dorje Shugden themselves. Some like Sachen Kunga Lodro have also composed lengthy prayers to Dorje Shugden which are still in use today.

It was due to their spiritual attainments that these Sakya throne holders were able to distinguish the nature of formless beings like Dorje Shugden. They did this using logical analysis or using their supernatural clairvoyant abilities. Most probably they used both methods and arrived at the same conclusion – Dorje Shugden is definitely an enlightened being and his practice is beneficial. This is why the throne holders composed extensive prayers to him.

From learning about these great throne holders, their abilities and achievements, great faith arises not only in the throne holders themselves, but also in the practices they taught, such as the practice of the Dharma protector Dorje Shugden.

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936), the 39th Sakya Trizin, was a strong practitioner of Dorje Shugden. Researching his family history, he even proved that his holy father, the 37th Sakya Trizin Kunga Nyingpo (1850–1899), was an emanation of Dorje Shugden.

The 39th Sakya Trizin Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936), head of the Sakya lineage, was a strong practitioner of Dorje Shugden. He is known for spreading the practice of Dorje Shugden within the Sakya tradition.

Click here to download the entire Sakya Dorje Shugden kangsol

 
Related articles:

• Sakya Throne Holders: Sonam Rinchen (1705-1741) & Kunga Lodro (1729-1783)
• Should the Sakya Lineage Be Dissolved?
• The real reason the Sakya Trizin resigned
• A Sakya Tale

Over the past hundred years, the position of Sakya Trizin evolved to alternate between two “houses” or Phodrangs, called Drolma and Phuntsog. Throughout the Sakya tradition, there has been a lineage of Dorje Shugden emanations which can be traced as far back to Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyeltsen (1182-1251), who was one of the five founders of the Sakya tradition.

Kunga Lodro (1729-1783), the 31st Sakya Trizin, was also said to be an emanation of Dorje Shugden. Kunga Lodro was known to have written several significant rituals to Dorje Shugden. In his own biography, he included the quote from the Nyingma Tantra which highlighted that Rinchen Nadun recognised Dorje Shugden as having the same nature as Avalokiteshvara.

Subsequently, Kunga Lodro took rebirth as his own grandson, Kunga Nyingpo (1850-1899), the 37^th Sakya Trizin. How that happened was that in 1849, Tashi Rinchen, the 35^th Sakya Trizin, was without an heir. Desperate, he requested his father, the Mahasiddha Padma Dudul Wangchuk, who was also the 33rd Sakya Trizin, to perform prayers and rituals for him at Mugchung, a Shugden temple, so that he could have a son as soon as possible.

When there was a break in the rituals, Tashi Rinchen asked the Mahasiddha who would be taking rebirth as his son, the Mahasiddha replied, “nowadays because of the degenerate time, nobody else is coming, Grandpa Shugden is coming as your descendent.”

That made Tashi Rinchen very pleased and he began the tradition of offering many butter lamps, and making offerings of music, with the sounds of horns and trumpets echoing from the roof of the temple during the ninth Tibetan month. Barely a year later, the emanation of Dorje Shugden and Avalokiteshvara, Kunga Nyingpo, was born.

From this illustrious lineage, Dragshul Trinley Rinchen was born in 1871 from the Drolma Phodrang, as the son of Kunga Nyingpo. Dragshul Trinley Rinchen received the Lamdre precepts from Kunga Nyingpo and successfully finished tantric retreats at the tender age of 16.

His teachers included his father Kunga Nyingpo, Dorje Drag Rigdzin Thubten Chowang Nyamnyid Dorje, Ngor Khangsar Ngawang Lodro Shenpen Nyingpo and Jamyang Chokyi Lodro. Before he turned 40 years of age, Dragshul Trinley Rinchen met H.H. the 13^th Dalai Lama and was already a respected Dharma teacher in Lhasa. In 1915, he followed his destiny when he became enthroned as the 39^th Sakya Trizin.

As can be expected from such an attained incarnate Master, Dragshul Trinley Rinchen was able to recite certain prayers without even having to learn them. His preference was to spend time in retreat, and he regularly had visions of deities such as Vajrayogini and Tara.

In his own autobiography, Dragshul Trinley Rinchen sought to establish that his father, Kunga Nyingpo, was one with Avalokiteshvara. As Kunga Nyingpo was recognised as an emanation of Dorje Shugden, who was also one with Avalokiteshvara, therefore, by logic, he must also be of the same essence as Avalokiteshvara.

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen also used as a reference the Nyingma Tantra Rinchen Nadun, also referred to by Kunga Lodro in his biography, which had stated that, “The one known as Dolgyal is not mistaken on the path to liberation, he is by nature the Great Compassionate One.”

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen perceived Avalokiteshvara as the Lord of Mandalas, who is a fully enlightened Buddha, which implied that Dorje Shugden is also a fully enlightened Buddha. This shows that it is without doubt that these great Sakya masters – the supreme heads of the Sakya tradition – have consistently viewed Dorje Shugden as an enlightened Dharma Protector over many centuries.

Contrary to the view that Dorje Shugden practitioners are sectarian, Dragshul Trinley Rinchen had stated in his biography that many lamas from different Buddhist traditions had visited him on many different occasions.

Of particular note in the autobiography is the visit by H.H. Pabongkha Rinpoche around 1905, where it was recorded that Dragshul Trinley Rinchen gave Pabongkha Rinpoche several initiations, which included the Four-Face Mahakala empowerment. Pabongkha Rinpoche kept this Four Face Mahakala practice close to his heart, as can be seen in the many rituals of this deity which are referred to in Pabongkha Rinpoche’s collected works.

There was much mutual respect between these two high lamas as Dragshul Trinley Rinchen spoke highly of Pabongkha Rinpoche in his autobiography. Around 1930, Pabongkha Rinpoche, who is a Vajrayogini master himself, sent five monks from Sera Monastery to receive a transmission of a particular Vajrayogini practice from Dragshul Trinley Rinchen.

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen gave several transmissions and initiations around 1915. These included the oral transmission of Swirl of Perfect Sense Offerings, an important ritual of Dorje Shugden written by Kunga Lodro.

It is of particular note that Pabongkha Rinpoche had incorporated practically word for word, the extended fulfillment section of this ritual from the Swirl of Perfect Sense Offerings in his renowned ritual to Dorje Shugden, the Melodious Drum Victorious in All Directions.

To date, there have been no other Dorje Shugden rituals in the Gelug tradition which have been adopted directly from Swirl of Perfect Sense Offerings. Aside from a few unique descriptions of Dorje Shugden and references to other Gelug rituals to Dorje Shugden in Pabongkha Rinpoche’s Melodious Drum, the practice is almost identical to Kunga Lodro’s practice.

To show how important Dorje Shugden was in Dragshul Trinley Rinchen’s practice, his autobiography recorded periodic rituals performed for Dorje Shugden and references to rituals performed at Mug Chung, the Shugden protector house in Sakya. He also recorded the times when Dorje Shugden came into trance through an oracle.

As can be seen in the list below of Sakya Trizins who were Dorje Shugden practitioners, it is completely illogical that the current H.H. Sakya Trizin now says that Dorje Shugden is an unenlightened protector. The only reason must be political, in order to keep the peace with H.H. the Dalai Lama.

A list of the supreme heads of the Sakya Lineage who viewed Dorje Shugden as an enlightened being:

• 30th Sakya Throneholder Sonam Rinchen (1705-1741)
• 31st Throneholder Sachen Kunga Lodro (1729-1783)
• 33rd Throneholder Padma Dudul Wangchug (1792-1853)
• 35th Throneholder Tashi Rinchen (1824-1865)
• 37th Throneholder Kunga Nyingpo (1850-1899)
• 39th Throneholder Dragshul Thinley Rinchen (1871-1936)

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936), the 39th Sakya Trizin, was a strong practitioner of Dorje Shugden. Researching his family history, he even proved that his holy father, the 37th Sakya Trizin Kunga Nyingpo (1850–1899), was an emanation of Dorje Shugden.

The 39th Sakya Trizin Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936), head of the Sakya lineage, was a strong practitioner of Dorje Shugden. He is known for spreading the practice of Dorje Shugden within the Sakya tradition.

Addendum

Zasep Tulku Rinpoche’s autobiography ‘A Tulku’s Journey from Tibet to Canada’, published in 2016, provides historical evidence and irrefutable proof that the Central Tibetan Administration is falsifying the facts when it comes to the practice of the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden.

The autobiography of Zasep Tulku Rinpoche, a high lama of the Gelug lineage, provides accurate historical accounts of the Dorje Shugden practice. Click to enlarge.

The back cover of the book, click to enlarge.

Click to enlarge

Historical accounts show that prior to the politicization of the Dorje Shugden practice by the Central Tibetan Administration, this popular deity was relied upon by Dharma practitioners to help in their spiritual practice. Contrary to detractors’ claims about Dorje Shugden being ‘anti-Dharma’, this Dharma Protector practice was traditionally deemed to be suitable to be practiced alongside the Highest Yoga Tantras.

Click to enlarge

Zasep Rinpoche and his family were able to escape to safety prior to the events of 1959 through the clairvoyance and prophetic advice of Dorje Shugden through one of his oracles, Lama Gelong Chojor Gyamtso.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Oracles of the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden were known for the accuracy of their prophecies due to Dorje Shugden being a fully enlightened deity with perfect clairvoyance. As stated clearly by Zasep Rinpoche in his autobiography ‘A Tulku’s Journey from Tibet to Canada’, Dorje Shugden warned the Tibetans of the impending loss of their homeland but his advice was mostly ignored by the Tibetan government.

The Tibetan government chose to consult the worldly state protector Nechung, and Nechung advised that the Dalai Lama should remain in Tibet where he would be safe. This was mistaken advice, as historical events would later show. Fortunately for Tibetan Buddhists all around the world, Kyabje Trijang Dorje Chang had great faith in Dorje Shugden and consulted the protector for advice on the Dalai Lama’s safety. Dorje Shugden via the Panglung Oracle urgently adviced the Dalai Lama to leave for India immediately and gave the exact escape route. In saving the Dalai Lama from certain harm, Dorje Shugden prevented the destruction of Tibetan Buddhism and preserved the future of the Tibetan culture and people.

Zasep Rinpoche’s account of events concur with monastic records that it was indeed Dorje Shugden who saved the Dalai Lama instead of Nechung, contrary to the claims of the Tibetan leadership.

Click to enlarge

Dorje Shugden’s practice was first established within the Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism. The Sakya Throneholders regarded this Dharma Protector as an enlightened being and Dorje Shugden, together with Dorje Setrab and Tsiu Marpo formed the triune of Sakya Protectors known as Gyalpo Sum. Today, Sakya practitioners claim that Dorje Shugden was never widely practiced by their lineage but history proves otherwise. The undeniable fact is that before the CTA’s religious ban, Dorje Shugden was practiced first by the Sakyas and was later transmitted to the Gelug school where it was practiced by the majority of the Gelugpas.

Click to enlarge

Contrary to the CTA’s claims that Dorje Shugden’s practice is sectarian, Zasep Rinpoche’s autobiography shows how practitioners of all four schools of Tibetan Buddhism lived and practiced together in harmony, especially during the early years of exile in India. It was only when the CTA launched a virulent smear campaign against Dorje Shugden that the general public began to label Dorje Shugden a sectarian practice. In truth, Dorje Shugden’s practice is no more sectarian than the practices of other Dharma Protectors such as Mahakala Bernagchen, Achi Chokyi Drolma or Dorje Legpa, who protect the Karma Kagyu, Drikung Kagyu and Nyingma schools respectively.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

By the 1980s, the Tibetan government had failed to fulfil multiple promises to return the Tibetan people to their homeland. A scapegoat was needed and they made one out of an ancient Buddhist practice, pinning the loss of Tibet and the failure of the Tibetan cause on Dorje Shugden. In his autobiography, Zasep Rinpoche is of the same opinion, stating that “…the [Dorje Shugden] controversy was orchestrated by the Tibetan Central Administration…”

The Tibetan leadership effectively sanctioned witch-hunts on Dorje Shugden practitioners and persecuted them using government instruments, declaring that simply by being a Shugden worshipper, one was effectively an enemy of the Tibetan nation.

As a result of the hatred against Dorje Shugden practitioners instigated by the Tibetan leadership, virtually all Shugden Buddhists had to fear for their lives, or at least for their safety.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Dorje Shugden’s beneficial practice has continued to thrive due to the courage and commitment of high lamas such as Zasep Tulku Rinpoche.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

For centuries, Dorje Shugden has been practiced alongside the highest practices of the Gelug and Sakya lineages. Zasep Tulku Rinpoche’s list of transmission is an indication that the highest scholars viewed the Protector as an enlightened being compatible with their yidam practices.

His Holiness the 41st Sakya Trizin Ngawang Kunga. The Sakya Trizin is considered to be the supreme spiritual head of the Sakya tradition.

 
Originating from the 11th century, the Sakya Lineage has been closely tied with the Khon Family since early times. The Khon Family is also known as one of the “holy families” of Tibet.

One of the Khon family members, Khon Lui Wangpo Sungwa, became a disciple of the great Indian saint Padmasambhava (Guru Rinpoche) in the 8th century. He was amongst the first seven monks to be ordained in Tibet. It was Khon Konchok Gyalpo who built a Sakya monastery in 1073, and thereby established the foundations of the Sakya Tradition in Tibet. Since that time, the Sakya’s unbroken lineage has descended within the Khon family.

The Sakya tradition is one of the four major schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The head of the Sakya lineage in Tibetan is called, “Sakya Trizin”. Its direct translation means the “Sakya Throne Holder”. In keeping with tradition, the Sakya throne is passed down from father to son in the Khon family.

His Holiness the 41st Sakya Trizin Ngawang Kunga

History shows that the propitiation of Dorje Shugden was first practised by the Sakyas. According to some accounts, Dorje Shugden was inducted into the pantheon of Sakya protectors by Sakya Trizin Sonam Rinchen (1705-1741). Later, Sonam Rinchen placed Dorje Shugden together with two other Protectors: Setrab and Tsi’u Marpo. Collectively, they were known as the “Three Kings” (Gyalpo Sum).

In the Sakya texts, Dorje Shugden is known as Dorje Shugden Tanag, or Dorje Shugden Riding a Black Horse which is a unique tradition of the Sakyas. He holds a butcher’s stick upraised in the right hand and a heart in the left, lifted up to the mouth. He is dressed in robes of a monk and wears a gold riding hat. He sits on top of a black horse. (Source: http://www.himalayanart.org/news/post.cfm/a-controversial-tibetan-buddhist-deity)

However in the early 20th century, Dorje Shugden Tanag fell out of favour with the Sakya Tradition in general. Subsequently, his devotees and practices diminished. From the late 20th century onwards, the offering rituals for the “Three Kings” were no longer found in the standard daily use of the Sakya Protectors’ texts in monasteries of India or Tibet.

The Sakya depiction of Dorje Shugden Tanag in paintings can be found as far back as the 1800s. There are approximately half a dozen Sakya paintings known to feature Shugden Tanag as a minor figure within its composition. These are mostly gathered from the first half of the 20th century. There is an ongoing research on this subject. (Source: http://www.himalayanart.org/news/post.cfm/a-controversial-tibetan-buddhist-deity)

There are also several short liturgical works on Dorje Shugden written approximately 200 years ago by the Sakyas. This collection of works is known as the Dorje Shugden Be’u Bum. In one part of the Sakya ritual, Requesting to Annihilate Interfering Forces, the name Dorje Shugden was mentioned.

As mentioned earlier, Sonam Rinchen is said to have composed this ritual. In the biography of his son, Kunga Lodro, the 31st Sakya Throne Holder, Kunga Lodro asserted that the ritual was written by his father. He added that he received the tranmission of the ritual from his father. It is said that the ritual is performed during the Secret Hayagriva puja.

His Holiness the 30th Sakya Trizin Sonam Rinchen (1705-1741 CE)

Although it was Sonam Rinchen who brought the worship of Dorje Shugden Riding a Black Horse to the Sakya community and made it well accepted, it was Kunga Lodro who completely embraced Dorje Shugden’s various other forms and rituals. Apart from receiving all the transmissions and initiations (such as Lamdre) from Sonam Rinchen, Kunga Lodro also received all the lineage practices from Morchen Kunga Lhundrub, who was the heart disciple of Nesar Dorje Chang. In addition, Kunga Lodro became widely regarded as the emanation of Dorje Shugden himself.

Kunga Lodro received many transmissions and initiations from Sonam Rinchen, his father and teacher, including the Guhyasamaja initiation in the tradition of Arya Nagarjuna, transmissions of Manjushri’s mantras, the Drubta Gyatsa collection of a hundred sadhanas, the Sakya Kabum, which is the collected works of the Sakya tradition and several long life initiations. He also studied under the 30th Ngor Khenchen, Jampa Sonam Pelzang (1689-1749), the 33rd Ngor Khenchen, Namkha Samdrub (1696-1754), and the 34th Ngor Khenchen, Pelden Chokyong (1702-1760). From these teachers, he received the Lobshe set of teachings, which are the esoteric presentation of the Lamdre – Path and its Fruit. The Lamdre is the core practice within the Sakyas that merges sutra and the tantric practice of Hevajra and this set of teachings originally descend from the great Indian Mahasiddha Virupa.

In 1741, Kunga Lodro ascended the throne as the 31st Sakya Trizin after the passing of his father. Following this Kunga Lodro also received the Sakya lineage practices from Morchen Kunga Lhundrub (1654-1728). Morchen Kunga Lhundrub was another very important Sakya lineage holder and he a lineage holder of Naropa’s Vajrayogini, a lineage which has since also spread to the Gelug tradition. Morchen Kunga Lhundrub was the heart disciple of Nesar Kunga Lekpai Jungne (1704-1760) or Nesar Dorje Chang, the 37th Abbot of Ngor Ewam Chodan Monastery.

His Holiness the 31st Sakya Trizin Sachen Kunga Lodro (1729-1783 CE)

In his biography, Kunga Lodro wrote that Nesar Dorje Chang has written several writings on Dorje Shugden. As such, Kunga Lodro was well aware of Morchen’s practice of Dorje Shugden. It is stipulated that it was Kunga Lodro himself who successfully combined the five forms of Dorje Shugden with the main figure called, Duldzin or Vinayadhara.

In the Rubin Museum of Art, there is a particular art piece that gives a clear explanation of the five lineages of Dorje Shugden, based on the depiction in a Sakya thangka from the 19th Century. In the thangka, there is an image of the grandson of Sachen Kunga Lodro, the 33rd Throne Holder (1792-1853). It is said that this thangka could have been painted during his reign.

Dorje Shugden is the central figure in the thangka. He is depicted as sitting on a lion throne, holding a vajra club and lasso. The four cardinal emanations are also represented in the thangka. They are the Great Peaceful King (Shizey Gyelchen), the Great Increasing King (Gyenzey Gyelchen), the Great Powerful King (Wangzey Gyelchen) and the Great Wrathful King (Trakzey Gyelchen).

Kunga Lodro’s biography provides a clear perspective of the Sakyas’ practice of Dorje Shugden at that time. The Dorje Shugden Protector practice was prevalent and accepted by the various Tibetan schools in the early 19th century.

Depiction of Dorje Shugden and his four cardinal emanations. From the Rubin Museum of Art.

This reinforces the premise presented by Stan Mumford in his book, Himalayan Dialogue that Dorje Shugden was commonly practiced at that time. Mumford related a story told by a villager of Shamey. It showed a striking similarity to the history of Dorje Shugden as shared by Kunga Lodro in his biography. Although there were some differences in Mumford’s account, the essence of the stories remained the same.

Mumford further recounted that people in Gyasumdo, a village that followed the Nyingma tradition, also propitiated Dorje Shugden. During that time, it was common to find that in every Tibetan household, the image of Guru Rinpoche was placed together with the Protector Dorje Shugden on their altars. In fact, many household heads said that their altars were primarily set up to propitiate the Protector’s practice.

Those who held strong faith in the relationship between Guru Rinpoche and Dorje Shugden would religiously make daily offerings. It is also said that each family owned a Dorje Shugden text written by a lama of their family’s tradition.

Here, we can see that Dorje Shugden was not only practised by high lamas in monasteries. Mumford’s findings show very clearly that Dorje Shugden was also propitiated as a family protector amongst lay people. In fact, Dorje Shugden practice was so common that HIS practice became a crucial part of the daily lives, and not only specific to their religious traditions.

As such, it can be said that while Dorje Shugden was first practised by the Sakyas, this practice was in fact embraced and practised by a wide segment of the community, and even by the different schools of Tibetan Buddhism. Dorje Shugden has been accepted by the Sakyas, Nyingmas and the Gelugpas from as early as the 1800s. It is perfectly logical that Dorje Shugden, being an enlightened being, is impartial and would be a Dharma Protector for all who propitiate him.

Since the great Sakya School of Tibetan Buddhism was founded, the lineage of practice has been passed down through forty-two successive spiritual heads, known as Sakya Trizins. From this list of prestigious masters, six of these heads or throne holders of the tradition stand out for their practice and proliferation of Dorje Shugden. This is a practice that they even spread amongst their innumerable disciples. These throne holders constructed shrines and protector houses to Dorje Shugden, composed prayers to him and taught their students how to engage in the practice. This list includes:

1. His Holiness the 30th Sakya Trizin Sonam Rinchen
   (1705-1741 CE)
2. His Holiness the 31st Sakya Trizin Sachen Kunga Lodro
   (1729-1783 CE)
3. His Holiness the 33rd Sakya Trizin Padma Dudul Wangchug
   (1792-1853 CE)
4. His Holiness the 35th Sakya Trizin Tashi Rinchen
   (1824-1865 CE)
5. His Holiness the 37th Sakya Trizin Kunga Nyingpo
   (1850-1899 CE)
6. His Holiness the 39th Sakya Trizin Dragshul Trinley Rinchen
   (1871–1936 CE)

Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936), the 39th Sakya Trizin, was a strong practitioner of Dorje Shugden. He proved Dorje Shugden to be an enlightened being by using scriptural sources.

The spiritual responsibility of the throne holder is to receive teachings covering the entire Sakya lineage, which consists of the common and esoteric transmissions of the Lam Dre, the Thirteen Golden Dharmas, the Hevajra tantric practices, and many others. These masters are then to proliferate these teachings. If is for this reason that they are considered to be highly learned and accomplished masters. It is through these six throne holders that the entire breadth of the Sakya lineage has descended to this day.

Due to the current political situation, with the Tibetan leadership telling everyone that the practice is bad, people might dismiss these six throne holders as being mistaken about the true nature of Dorje Shugden and their history of promoting the practice. But to come to this conclusion, one would need to assume that these throne holders were just ordinary men who are flawed, ignorant and make mistakes. If we think that, then they are rendered unreliable for spiritual growth. What is the point of going to get teachings from them if what they teach can be wrong?

To make such a dire accusation has far-reaching implications on the lives of everyday practitioners as they may lose confidence in what could well be a ‘flawed’ Sakya lineage. Since the throne holders were wrong, ordinary practitioners may feel it is pointless to continue practicing as the lineage is broken and has no blessings. Following this line of thinking, the Sakya lineage is invalidated because the entire lineage flows through these great throne holders.

The 39th Sakya Trizin Dragshul Trinley Rinchen (1871–1936), head of the Sakya lineage, was a strong practitioner of Dorje Shugden. He is known for spreading the practice of Dorje Shugden within the Sakya tradition.

According to the Tibetan leadership, Dorje Shugden is a spirit and by worshiping him one is no longer Buddhist. By engaging in his worship you lose the connection to the Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha because you break the refuge commitment of not worshiping an unenlightened being. This creates the cause for an unfortunate rebirth in the three lower realms. Following this logic, the six throne holders should have taken rebirth in those realms, but that is impossible as they have reincarnated back successively into the same family. The 37th throne holder, Kunga Nyingpo, is said to be the reincarnation of the 31st throne holder, Sachen Kunga Lodro, both of whom are even considered emanations of Dorje Shugden themselves. Some like Sachen Kunga Lodro have also composed lengthy prayers to Dorje Shugden which are still in use today. The 39th Sakya Trizin Dragshul Trinley Rinchen even proved that Dorje Shugden is an enlightened being, an emanation of Chenrezig, by quoting a Nyingma tantra that speaks about the enlightened nature of Dorje Shugden.

It was due to their spiritual attainments that these Sakya throne holders were able to distinguish the nature of formless beings like Dorje Shugden. They did this using logical analysis or using their supernatural clairvoyant abilities. Most probably they used both methods and arrived at the same conclusion – Dorje Shugden is definitely an enlightened being and his practice is beneficial. This is why the throne holders composed extensive prayers to him.

From learning about these great throne holders, their abilities and achievements, great faith arises not only in the throne holders themselves, but also in the practices they taught, such as the practice of the Dharma protector Dorje Shugden.

Click here to download the entire Sakya Dorje Shugden kangsol

 
References:
1. http://www.himalayanart.org/news/post.cfm/a-controversial-tibetan-buddhist-deity
2. http://www.himalayanart.org/pages/sakya_lineage.cfm
3. http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Throneholders_of_the_Sakya_school
4. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sakya_Trizin
5. http://www.sakya.net/html/sakya-lineage.html [Editor's Note: This link appears to have been removed from the mentioned website)]
6. http://www.paldensakya.org.in/history.html
7. http://www.hhthesakyatrizin.org/
8. Himalayan Dialogue: Tibetan Lamas and Gurung Shamans in Nepal by Stanley R. Mumford, 1989

Addendum

Zasep Tulku Rinpoche’s autobiography ‘A Tulku’s Journey from Tibet to Canada’, published in 2016, provides historical evidence and irrefutable proof that the Central Tibetan Administration is falsifying the facts when it comes to the practice of the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden.

The autobiography of Zasep Tulku Rinpoche, a high lama of the Gelug lineage, provides accurate historical accounts of the Dorje Shugden practice. Click to enlarge.

The back cover of the book, click to enlarge.

Click to enlarge

Historical accounts show that prior to the politicization of the Dorje Shugden practice by the Central Tibetan Administration, this popular deity was relied upon by Dharma practitioners to help in their spiritual practice. Contrary to detractors’ claims about Dorje Shugden being ‘anti-Dharma’, this Dharma Protector practice was traditionally deemed to be suitable to be practiced alongside the Highest Yoga Tantras.

Click to enlarge

Zasep Rinpoche and his family were able to escape to safety prior to the events of 1959 through the clairvoyance and prophetic advice of Dorje Shugden through one of his oracles, Lama Gelong Chojor Gyamtso.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Oracles of the Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden were known for the accuracy of their prophecies due to Dorje Shugden being a fully enlightened deity with perfect clairvoyance. As stated clearly by Zasep Rinpoche in his autobiography ‘A Tulku’s Journey from Tibet to Canada’, Dorje Shugden warned the Tibetans of the impending loss of their homeland but his advice was mostly ignored by the Tibetan government.

The Tibetan government chose to consult the worldly state protector Nechung, and Nechung advised that the Dalai Lama should remain in Tibet where he would be safe. This was mistaken advice, as historical events would later show. Fortunately for Tibetan Buddhists all around the world, Kyabje Trijang Dorje Chang had great faith in Dorje Shugden and consulted the protector for advice on the Dalai Lama’s safety. Dorje Shugden via the Panglung Oracle urgently adviced the Dalai Lama to leave for India immediately and gave the exact escape route. In saving the Dalai Lama from certain harm, Dorje Shugden prevented the destruction of Tibetan Buddhism and preserved the future of the Tibetan culture and people.

Zasep Rinpoche’s account of events concur with monastic records that it was indeed Dorje Shugden who saved the Dalai Lama instead of Nechung, contrary to the claims of the Tibetan leadership.

Click to enlarge

Dorje Shugden’s practice was first established within the Sakya school of Tibetan Buddhism. The Sakya Throneholders regarded this Dharma Protector as an enlightened being and Dorje Shugden, together with Dorje Setrab and Tsiu Marpo formed the triune of Sakya Protectors known as Gyalpo Sum. Today, Sakya practitioners claim that Dorje Shugden was never widely practiced by their lineage but history proves otherwise. The undeniable fact is that before the CTA’s religious ban, Dorje Shugden was practiced first by the Sakyas and was later transmitted to the Gelug school where it was practiced by the majority of the Gelugpas.

Click to enlarge

Contrary to the CTA’s claims that Dorje Shugden’s practice is sectarian, Zasep Rinpoche’s autobiography shows how practitioners of all four schools of Tibetan Buddhism lived and practiced together in harmony, especially during the early years of exile in India. It was only when the CTA launched a virulent smear campaign against Dorje Shugden that the general public began to label Dorje Shugden a sectarian practice. In truth, Dorje Shugden’s practice is no more sectarian than the practices of other Dharma Protectors such as Mahakala Bernagchen, Achi Chokyi Drolma or Dorje Legpa, who protect the Karma Kagyu, Drikung Kagyu and Nyingma schools respectively.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

By the 1980s, the Tibetan government had failed to fulfil multiple promises to return the Tibetan people to their homeland. A scapegoat was needed and they made one out of an ancient Buddhist practice, pinning the loss of Tibet and the failure of the Tibetan cause on Dorje Shugden. In his autobiography, Zasep Rinpoche is of the same opinion, stating that “…the [Dorje Shugden] controversy was orchestrated by the Tibetan Central Administration…”

The Tibetan leadership effectively sanctioned witch-hunts on Dorje Shugden practitioners and persecuted them using government instruments, declaring that simply by being a Shugden worshipper, one was effectively an enemy of the Tibetan nation.

As a result of the hatred against Dorje Shugden practitioners instigated by the Tibetan leadership, virtually all Shugden Buddhists had to fear for their lives, or at least for their safety.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Dorje Shugden’s beneficial practice has continued to thrive due to the courage and commitment of high lamas such as Zasep Tulku Rinpoche.

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

Click to enlarge

For centuries, Dorje Shugden has been practiced alongside the highest practices of the Gelug and Sakya lineages. Zasep Tulku Rinpoche’s list of transmission is an indication that the highest scholars viewed the Protector as an enlightened being compatible with their yidam practices.

 
Related articles:

• Should the Sakya Lineage Be Dissolved?
• Dorje Shugden on a Black Horse
• The real reason the Sakya Trizin resigned
• A Sakya Tale