Call for debate
Tara Centre
Hello,
My name is Labsum and I am a monk in the NKT. I have been following the
Dorje Shugdan debate and it seems to focus around 3 questions:-
1. Is Dorje Shugdan a Buddha?
2. Is the practice of Dorje Shugdan harmful?
3. Does the Dalai Lama have the power to suppress this practice?
At the moment for beings such as myself the first question - is Dorje
Shugdan a Buddha? - is unanswerable. Only when our mind is pure will
we be able to recognize who is a Buddha and who is not.
The answer to the third question- does the Dalai Lama have the power to
suppress this practice- seems to depend on the second question- whether
or not it is harmful. I believe that no-one would claim that the Dalai
Lama has the right to suppress this practice if it is harmless.
So we need to know clearly- is this practice harmful? As far as I can
tell, this is the only real issue in this debate. For myself this is
beyond my current understanding - I can see no link between my prayers
to Dorje Shugdan and the Dalai Lama's health or the Tibetan cause, as is
being implied. However, I accept that because I can't see it does not
mean it is not there. This matter needs to be resolved by those with
greater wisdom and insight. I feel this matter should be resolved in
open debate between Geshe Kelsang Gyatso and the Dalai Lama, and laid to
rest once and for all.
I'm sure I cannot be alone in wishing for this debate. The reason for
this is that all parties concerned are being harmed and the reputation
of Buddhism is being destroyed while this argument continues. A debate
would give both parties a chance to lay down their evidence and
arguments.
One problem which has been clouding this whole debate is that there
seems to be much confusion about followers of Dorje Shugdan and people
in the NKT. We are either being stereotyped as shaven-headed morons
sharing a communal brain cell blindly engaged in spirit worship, or a
select group of scheming masterminds out to destroy the Dalai Lama and
then take over the world..... (slight exaggeration, but not by much).
It seems people try to destroy this practice not on evidence or logic
but by slandering the practitioners. For myself, I can say I am just a
'normal' person trying to practise Buddha's teachings by following my
Guru's instructions. I've been involved in the NKT for 4 years and all
practitioners I've had contact with have given me great confidence that
they are exactly the same in this resepct.
People seem to feel we are stubborn by continuing to practice Dorje
Shugdan against the Dalai Lama's wishes. My heart commitment, as is
every Buddhist's, is not to harm others - therefore if the Dalai Lama
proved the practice of Dorje Shugdan was harming others then I would
give it up. I continue to rely on Dorje Shugdan because the Dalai Lama
has not provided this evidence - I have nothing but his word. I need
more than the Dalai Lama's word - Buddha himself said you should test my
teachings and not rely on my word alone - yet by wishing to test the
Dalai Lama's evidence we appear unreasonable! Why do some people feel
the Dalai Lama's word is unquestionable while Buddha said even his own
words should be questioned?
I have not given up my reliance on Dorje Shugdan not just because of a
lack of evidence, but because it goes against my own experience. I can
say that since I have been practicing Dorje Shugdan my faith in
Buddhadharma and my wish to help others through practicing Buddha's
teaching has definitely increased, and I know for a fact that my
material wealth, and all the other worldy things it's claimed we pray
for have not (I can provide evidence in the form of a bank statement!).
Finally, the main reason I rely on Dorje Shugdan is because it was
taught by my Spiritual Guide and his Spiritual Guide - Trijang Rinpoche
(also the Dalai Lama's root guru). I try to view both of these Lama's
as inseparable from Buddha in accordance with '50 Verses'. As every
Buddhist knows: reliance on your Spiritual Guide is the root of the
path.
So it seems I (and everyone in the NKT) am being critized for continuing
a practice which came from my Spiritual Guide, has helped me enormously
in terms of spiritual development and there is no evidence to suggest it
causes any harm. This is why I continue to practice - NOT out of some
strange desire to annoy the Dalai Lama! Please try to understand that I
and other practitioners continue to pray to Dorje Shugdan because it
helps our spiritual development. This is our own direct experience. It
is like somebody telling you a colour is red when you can see very
clearly it's blue, and then they refuse to provide clear explanations as
to why you are wrong! However, this does not mean that Dorje Shugdan
practitioners are closed minded. If I am doing something that could
harm others then I want to know about it. Yet, so far nobody has given
any clear explanation of why this practice is harmful. I feel only the
Dalai Lama is able to do this: only he knows his reasons for suppressing
this practice.
So, PLEASE, PLEASE can we have a debate where all the facts are laid on
the table. My understanding is that Geshe Kelsang has offered a debate
previously. I beg the Dalai Lama to accept, although I understand he
has declined in the past.
If the Dalai Lama won this debate then many people would definitely stop
practising Dorje Shugdan who currently do so. Therefore if the Dalai
Lama wants people to stop doing this practice then the quickest and
easiest way would be to show that it is harmful in an open debate. Why
has he not done so?
If anybody shares these feelings and wishes for a debate please let it
be known: maybe if enough people ask then one will take place.
Sincerely,
Labsum
Robin Faichney
Tara Centre wrote:
>
> If the Dalai Lama won this debate...
How would it be decided who had won?
Robin Faichney
john pettit
Robin Faichney wrote:
>
> Tara Centre wrote:
> >
> > If the Dalai Lama won this debate...
>
> How would it be decided who had won?
The majority of Tibetan scholars and Lamas, especially those with a
well-balanced knowledge of Tibetan history, think DS is a harmful spirit
which arose in dubious circumstances as described in C. Fynn's earlier
posts. The other side, based on recent historical revisionism, says he
is a Buddha. So we have a situation which, I believe, is known in
Buddhist logic as "chos can mi gcig pa" (anekadharmin?) or the absence
of a common subject of debate. Since whether a non-human entity is a
Buddha or not is essentially beyond our ken, we have no way of settling
this controversy as it stands. We can only appeal to scriptural
authority or the personal authority of trusted persons such as HHDL. And
since both parties cannot agree upon what or whom constitutes valid
scriptural or personal authority in the matter, any debate will
inevitably come to an impasse.
Thus tere does not seem to be any meaningful ground for debate, unless
perhaps the pro-DS side is willing to consider the weight of
textual-historical evidence, which is clearly not in their favor. As the
NKT spokespeople take anything their teachers and lineage lamas have
ever said to be infallible gospel truth and are thoroughly disinclined
to seriously consider any evidence which might conduce to cognitive
dissonance, the proposal for debate seems a sham.
Alex Wilding
Tara Centre wrote in message <67bc1r$hqf$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk>...
>
>Hello,
>
>My name is Labsum and I am a monk in the NKT.
Oh, not ANOTHER one! Jeez!
>I have been following the
>Dorje Shugdan debate
What you are also transparently doing is following the instruction (which
evidently is filtering through the NKT machine) to make this (IMO
ridiculous) suggestion.
Everything else you write has already been flogged to death here.
Impatiently yours,
________________________________
Alex Wilding, Translation (Ge->En)
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~alex_w/
Tel +44 (0)411 33 64 85
Fax +44 (0)1492 585163
Randy J
Robin Faichney <r.j.fa...@delete.stirling.ac.uk> wrote in article
<349947...@delete.stirling.ac.uk>...
> Tara Centre wrote:
> >
> > If the Dalai Lama won this debate...
>
> How would it be decided who had won?
and wouldn't the buddhist response be to say,
"i offer you the victory"
then
"no, i offer YOU the victory"
"no, YOU!"
"no, YOU" etc. etc.
KTD
I know I have my garbage filter set for ANYTHING with "Shugdan" in it.
You have been battering this newsgroup for months now with this topic.
GET A CLUE WILL YOU?- you've reached anyone who cares, and if you
haven't convertd them to your point of view by now, IT AIN'T GONNA
HAPPEN.
move on. grow up.
amitabha
>>
>> How would it be decided who had won?
>
This is a reply to John Pettit:
>The majority of Tibetan scholars and Lamas,
First, who's counted? Second, a booklist with page references to
back you up is a basic tecnique in the academic circles I've moved
in.
especially those with a
>well-balanced knowledge of Tibetan history,
I suspect "well-balanced" means "agrees with me" Dharma teaches
that we need to move through such childish attachment.
think DS is a harmful spirit
>which arose in dubious circumstances as described in C. Fynn's earlier
>posts.
Yes, very dubious. Didn't HH the 5th's ministers order the murder
of the great Lama and emanation of Manjushri, Ngatrul Dragpa
Gyaltsen, who then arose as Dorje Shugden?
By the way you will be happy to hear that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso
doesn't make a point of this in his brief account of the life of
Ngatrul Dragpa Gyaltsen. He merely says `Ngatrul Dragpa
Gyaltsen died at a relatively young age' (Heart Jewel p90, Tharpa
Publications, 1990.) This could be used by you as an example of a
"well-balanced" history (see above) if you're stuck for one.
The other side, based on recent historical revisionism, says he
>is a Buddha.
"recent historical revisionism" - posh way of saying "looking back
at things and fiddling around to find a past that you want to see",
for those of you who are wondering.
What's recent? Late twentieth century or mid? Or earlier? This
generation of Lamas or the one before that, or the one before that,
or the one before that?
"revisionism" Please give me one reason why a bunch of humble lamas
have suddenly started to fiddle with the past and I'll give you ten
why HHDL has. You start.
So we have a situation which, I believe, is known in
>Buddhist logic as "chos can mi gcig pa" (anekadharmin?) or the absence
>of a common subject of debate.
Sounds chicken to me......
Since whether a non-human entity is a
>Buddha or not is essentially beyond our ken, we have no way of settling
>this controversy as it stands.
I understand that according to Buddhadharma we do have ways of
realizing objects of knowledge currently hidden to us. This is very
important because currently most dharma objects (eg. compassion and
emptiness) are hidden to us. If we had no way of realizing them
we'd stay stupid and remain in pain stuck in Samsara. I don't like
that thought. The whole practice of dharma involves a process of
realization, which means progressing from ignorance to wisdom.
We can only appeal to scriptural
>authority or the personal authority of trusted persons such as HHDL.
Having said we can't know/discover the truth about Dorje Shugden
you now give 2 methods for doing so, illogical or what?
a) we can appeal to scriptural authority
b) or the personal authority of trusted persons such as HHDL.
There is a third way. We can increase our understanding and wisdom
by depending on logical reasoning. By contemplating correct reasons
we can develop valid minds directly realizing the object that we
wish to know more about. We can work out what is true and what is
false and what the actual nature of Dorje Shugden is. Incidentally,
this is a method clearly explained by Geshe Kelsang to his
disciples in Understanding the Mind (in particular p53-60)
(Understanding the Mind, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, Tharpa, London 1993)
Isn't it strange that the Lama most denigrated for brainwashing his
students gives such a clear account of how to develop thoroughly
reliable wisdom minds of our own? And that the followers of HHDL
are the ones claiming we cannot know these things ourself but must
have them revealed to us by our Teacher.
And
>since both parties cannot agree upon what or whom constitutes valid
>scriptural or personal authority in the matter, any debate will
>inevitably come to an impasse.
>
Looks like I am confident I have a method to know things I
currently don't know, and you don't think there is such a method. I
think this means I have received instructions for abandoning
samsara whereas you have not. I am sorry. Thinking like this you
will remain as helpless to solve this issue as you say you are,
whereas I and NKT students who have received these instructions
will carry on saying we can solve this problem. I think this is the
real meaning of "impasse" - you not believing we have the mental
technology to think it through.
In addition to sheer logical reasoning, we can develop our wisdom
by relying upon our traditional Buddhist practises, for example by
accummulating positive energy or merit so our minds are capable of
grasping more than they do at the moment; purifying negativity that
prevents us from clear thinking; receiving blessings by relying
sincerely upon our Spiritual Guide (this will work for you and for
me even though our Spiritual Guides are different.)
In particular we can rely upon the wisdom Buddha Je Tsongkhapa and
engage in the practce of receiving wisdom attainments in
conjunction with reciting migtsema prayer.
if you are a gelugpa you should know how to do these things, it is
our heart practise. If you are not a gelugpa then you will have
your own wisdom practises you can use. If you are not a practising
Buddhist then you will never have had the experience of developing
wisdom in this way and probably think such a method does not exist.
I know it does from direct experience. Compared to the wisdom
Buddha Je Tsongkhapa I am an exceedingly, very, unbelievably stupid
and ignorant person and I depend upon every method I have been
taught to become less stupid. They work and using these methods is
the very essence of Buddhadharma, as I said before. Deny they work
and you will have to explain to me how someone changes from
ignorance to wisdom, samsara to enlightenment.
>Thus tere does not seem to be any meaningful ground for debate,
I just found us some
unless
>perhaps the pro-DS side
I think you mis-understnad debate very badly. in debate we start
with one view, and our friend with another. As we debate, the flaws
in one or usually both views are revealed. What previously was two
personal ideas becomes one shared slightly more valid view. Then we
develop more personal views, then more debate. Our shared
understanding becomes more and more valid, one day it will be
reliable understanding and we can depend on it to free us from pain
and conflict. Ask any NKT Teacher Training Programme Student to
debate with you and they will. It's what we do on Monday mornings,
every Monday morning, in many different languages, all over the
world. It's why NKT students know that debate can reconcile and
bring conclusions and that if its a good debate, the joy of
developing wisdom outweighs the fact that your own idea has
changed.
is willing to consider the weight of
>textual-historical evidence,
Wisdom doean't weigh anything
because mind is formless
(NB this is an example of logical reasoning as mentioned above
It possesses the 3 modes:
1. property of the subject
2. forward pervasion
3. reverse pervasion
etc, etc but then you should know all this because in paragraph
one you talk with apparent authority about Buddhist logic)
>which is clearly not in their favor.
Kunsar Rinpoche states clearly in `A short history of Dorje
Shugden` (sorry no publishing House, no year of publication,
no ISBN. I hear this poor Lama is in hiding and can't get these
things together) that "DS has taken the form of Dharmapala at the
time of the 5th Dalai Lama. Until then, he appeared in the form of
many outstanding masters of Buddhist history. His actual 'maker' or
origin is Manjushri".
I throw this in as something that clearly is in our favour.
Isn't it a serious human issue that holy Lamas are hiding from
their King? What's going to happen when organizations from Amnesty
International through to the Human Rights Watch gets going on this?
Are you sure you want to carry on defendng this type of behaviour?
As the
>NKT spokespeople
NKT spokespeople implies appointed to say what someone tells them
to trot out. No-one has asked me to write this. I am doing it
because I want to point out that we can resolve this conflict
and that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso is the one saying that we can and
you etc are the ones saying that we can't.
Furthermore, the phrase "NKT spokesperson" is a stereotyoe. I am
not a type. I am an individual. Buddhadharma teaches us that no 2
people are the same because who we are depends upon our previous
actions, and no 2 people have performed exactly the same
actions.
Stereotyping is easy. It is cutting. It is a put-me-down. It is the
tool of oppressors the world over. Ask anyone educated in the
social sciences with an interest in the politics of oppression and
they will agree with me. If you can't find anyone to ask I will
give you personal introduction to a few professional academics, who
can chat to you about it.
take anything their teachers and lineage lamas have
>ever said
I don't know everything my Teacher and lineage gurus have ever
said. I wouldn't be so presumptuous to say I did.
>to be infallible gospel truth
infallible means
1. Not liable to be deceived or mistaken; incapable of error
2. Not liable to fail; unfailing;sure;certain
(OED vol 1 p1065, OUP, Oxford, 1973)
If my root and lineage gurus are liable to be deceived or mistaken
how the heck can they lead me to enlightenment?
If previous gelugpas have attained enlightenment then the gelugpa
root and lineage gurus are infallible.
If my root Guru amd my root Guru's root Guru is not infallible then
there is no Buddhahood in this lineage. I will stand by this
conclusion but you must prove it to me.
and are thoroughly disinclined
>to seriously consider
I have just announced my intention to seriously consider. Now its
up to you to take me at my word. Otherwise you and others cannot
keep reiterating that NKT students are being bloody minded.
>any evidence which might conduce to
I will accept correct logical reasoning.
cognitive
>dissonance,
Sounds nice; give me some
>the proposal for debate seems a sham.
You are trying to make it sound like a sham. My question to
everyone is why?
I can think of 4 reasons:
1. You don't want a debate because you don't want to change your
mind
2. You don't want to debate because you don't think you should have
to change your mind
3. You don't want a debate because you don't want to change my mind
4. You don't want a debate because you don't think you can change
my mind.
None of these reasons is valid. Please debate. We are waiting for
HHDL to debate.
All the best
Ani Gema
Resident Teacher
Amitabha Centre
cf...@dircon.co.uk
Some people have asked for evidence that DS does harm.
The following (which has been posted here before )
is an example of something written by one of the foremost
proponents of Dorje Shugden, Zeme Tulku Lobsang Palden
(Dze smad bLo bzang dPal ldan) - a disciple of
Phabongkha and Trijang Rinpoche.
This can be found in his book: "The Oral Instruction of the Intelligent
Father" (pha-rgod bla-ma'i zhal-lung // Mthu an stobs kyi che ba'i bstan
srun chen po Rdo-rje-sugs-ldan-rtsal gyi byun ba brjod pa pha rgod bla
ma'i zal gyi bdud tsi'i chu khur brtsegs sin 'jigs run glog zags
'gyu ba'i sprin nag 'khrugs pa'i na ro.) published in Delhi 1973
Library of Congress catalouge # BQ4890.R37 D93 00
This passage is all about the harm that DS will do to
Gelugpas who also practice Nyingma teachings.
===
THE LATE ZEME RINPOCHE ON SHUGDEN:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
<<
"I praise to you - the protector of the Yellow Hat tradition You
destroy like a pile of dust; Great adapts, high officials and
ordinary people; Who defile and corrupt the Gelug order."
With this quotation from the praise to Dorjee Shugden, Kyabje
Yongzin Trijang Dorjeechang told me some highly interesting
accounts which he had not written for publication.
As is clear from the above mentioned praise, the protector has
punished those who corrupted the Gelug order. The symptoms were
clear with various episodes of punishments from the king,
entanglement with the law and untimely death for many powerful
lame regents, incarnate tulkus, highly adept scholars, high
officials and rich and powerful people.
While being followers of Lama Tsongkhapa tradition, they have
corrupted it with other tenets and traditions. Since Kyabje
Rinpoche told me about these with great compassion it is very
precious for me. With these accounts as the basis, I compiled
other reliable material and added to the Ocean of Praise to the
Protector.
THE PANCHEN LAMAS
======================
All knowing Losang Palden Choekyi Dakpa was the lord of the
Doctrine and from a very young age proved himself as an eminent
scholar. He thus had great potential to serve the Dharma and
sentient beings. But he did not make the flawless and well
established teachings of the Dharma Raja Lama Tsongkhapa as his
principal practice. But instead he studied many treasure texts
of Nyingma order and did meditation on those teachings. These
were mentioned in his autobiography. Dorjee Shugden repeatedly
asked him not to do that. He got annoyed with the deity and
performed a wrathful and despicable ritual to burn it. Along
with other ingredients he put a thanka of deity in the fire.
But the fire could not consume the thanka. Then he took out the
thanka and put it under the steps of his door in Tashi Lhunpo.
Because of those actions, the Panchen Rinpoche became ill and
eventually passed away in the water-sheep year of the 15th
rapjung when he was only thirty years of age. In this way the
Panchen Rinpoche was unsuccessful in his Dharma propagation
deeds.
His successor, Panchen losang Thubten Choekyi Nyima Gelek
Namgyal too faced a great deal of problems (as a consequence).
Because of misunderstanding between his monastery and the
Tibetan Government, he had to escape to Mongolia. Later he
wished to come back to U- Tsang, but there were unsurmountable
hurdles and he could not succeed. At the age of fifty five, in
the year fire-ox, he passed away in Kyigudo. A year before he
passed away, Je Phaphongkha Rinpoche Dechen Nyingpo came to pay
his respects. During that meeting, the Panchen Rinpoche told
Phaphongkha Rinpoche that since Phaphongkha Rinpoche was the
incarnation of Lodo Balpa, the Tashi Lhunpo monastery naturally
had respect and faith in him The Panchen Rinpoche asked him to
give teachings and also asked him to take out the thanka of
Shugden deity which was buried by the previous Panchen
Rinpoche. In accordance with the instructions of the Panchen
Rinpoche, Je phaphongkha went to Tashi Lhunpo monastery in the
year of iron-dragon of the 16th rapjung. There he gave many
religious sermons including the lamrim teachings. He also took
out the thanka of the Shugden deity and put it in a shrine in
the Tashi Lhunpo and worshipped it. Phaphongkha Rinpoche
composed a text which was a kind of agreement and understanding
between the monastery and the deity.
The next Panchen Rinpoche, Panchen Losang Thinley Lhundup
Choekyi Gyaltsen was born in Amdo. He displayed various
remarkable deeds which were clear signals of his greatness.
When he came to U-Tsang, certain impediments delayed his
enthronement. Soon after his arrival to Tashi Lhunpo, he
composed a prayer to Dorjee Shugden which helped creating
harmony between the deity and the Panchen Rinpoche. However,
later things changed. There was a statue of Shugden in a shrine
in the palace. When it was seen by the spiritual tutor of the
Panchen Rinpoche, Yongzin Kachen Ang Nyima, he told one of the
attendants to take out the devil's statue from there. When it
was referred to the Panchen Rinpoche, he told the attendant to
keep it where the teacher could not see. The tutor disliked
Shugden and often told the Panchen Rinpoche that they practice
pure kadampa tradition and that if he sought many deities, it
could ruin him. The tutor banned the usual practice of
propitiating Gyalchen Shugden at Tashi Lhunpo and the oracle
karma, too, was banned from invoking the deity. The special
invocation during the new year was also banned. Since then many
bad omen occurred one after the other. A battle broke between
the Shikatse soldiers and the Tashi Lhunpo subjects. The Tutor
Ang Nyima himself fell from his horse two times. Several
ominous incidents happened during the opening ceremony of the
new palace, Dechen Phodrang. Because of these, they had to
restore the practice of worshipping Gyalchen Shugden. On the
invitation of China, the Panchen Rinpoche left for China in the
wood-horse year. Soon after the Panchen Rinpoche had departed
from Tsang, unprecedented flood rushed from Gyaltse. The
flooding totally washed away Kunkyobling, the main residential
complex for many Panchen Lamas. Yongzin Ang Nyima could not
return home and finally succumbed to an insect bite. Because
the Panchen Rinpoche did not practice a pure philosophical
tenet, unending disasters followed one after the other.
TEHOR ZIG-GYAB RINPOCHE
=======================
Tehor Zig-gyab Rinpoche worshipped Dorjee Shugden as the Chief
of all deities. He completed his Dharma education at Tashi
Lhunpo and earned the coveted Kachen degree. Then he went to
Kham and propagated the Dharma and became very popular there.
He again came back to Tashi Lhunpo and paid his respect to
Panchen Losang Thubten Choekyi Nyima. The Panchen Lama became
very fond of this scholar and asked him to be the abbot of
Kunkyobling. Later the Panchen Lama gave his text of Nyingmapa
teachings and some rituals tools. Due to that reason, he
studied various Nyingmapa teachings. During that time a
Nyingmapa tantric practitioner called Kyungtul came to see him.
This visiter told him that if he learned Nyingma teachings he
could become famous like the 5th Dalai Lama. So Zig-gyab
Rinpoche decided to get teachings on Rinchen Terzod from the
tantric master. Dorjee Shugden on several occasions asked him
not to study and meditate on Nyingmapa teachings. And if he did
not heed to the deity's advice, the Rinpoche would suffer from
many hardships and could even shorten his life span. But
Zig-gyab Rinpoche did not pay any attention. One day Dorjee
Shugden was greatly annoyed and told the Rinpoche that, "I may
not pierce you with my deadly claws, but if I did, I cannot
take them out." In this way the deity persuaded the Rinpoche to
uphold a pure Gelug tradition. But the latter did not pay any
heed and said that he has to abide but the instructions of his
Lama. Zig- gyab Rinpoche rented a house near Lhasa and received
many Nyingma teachings and transmissions from the tantric
master, Kyungtul. Gyalchen Shugden created a variety of
miracles in their presence. So they decided to do a retreat.
During that time Prime Minister Sheta Paljor Dorjee suddenly
became very ill. So he requested for Zig-gyab Rinpoche to
bestow an initiation for him. When the Rinpoche returned home
after giving the initiation, he became very ill and after one
day he passed away. If Zig-gyab Rinpoche did not practice
Nyingmapa teachings and remained a proper practitioner of the
pure-gold like Gelug tradition, he could have a long life and
his meritorious deeds could have spread far and wide. Kyabje
Trijang Dorjeechang told me these accounts who in turn has
heard from Tehor Losang Gyatso, an attendant of Zig-gyab
Rinpoche until his last days.
PHAGPA LHA
============
Phagpa Lha Losang Thubten Mepham Tsultrim Gyaltsen was a great
scholar and as such he should have upheld and propagated pure
Gelugpa tradition. But he corrupted his philosophical stand and
moral conduct and consequently lost his monk's vow. He thus had
to face the punishment by His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Thubten
Gyatso; and he was deprived of his religious and political
powers. Later he lived in his house in Chamdo. One day while he
was on his way to the toilet, he fell down and a broken bicycle
piece pierced near his male organ and no amount of medication
was of any help. After a long illness he succumbed to the
injury. He had to face these difficulties, because he annoyed
the deity Dorjee Shugden. When Je Phaphongkha was on his tour
of the Kham area, he stayed over night at Phagpa Lha's house.
During the night he had a very ominous dream in relation to his
host. Je Phaphongkha told about the dream to his secretary,
Dema Losang Dorjee. All these accounts were told to my ever
kind teacher, Kyabje Yongzin Trijang Dorjeechang by Chamdo
Gyara Rinpoche.
THE RETING RINPOCHE
======================
Regent Reting Rinpoche had to suffer punishment with the Gyalpo's
order. The misfortune was caused by the miraculous power of the
Dharma protector great Dorjee Shugden. Let me explain. The
fourth Reting Rinpoche, Ngawang Yeshi Tenpai Gyaltsen, offered
the entire possession of Reting Ladang to the Tibetan
Government and requested His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama,
Thubten Gyatso, not to search for the future Reting
reincarnation. But His Holiness Thubten Gyatso returned
everything back to the Ladang and asked them to search for the
reincarnation. Accordingly the search party found the
reincarnation in a simple family in Dakpo. This Rinpoche had
made his foot prints on rocks. I saw one in the Reting
monastery. One day while his mother was away the soup started
boiling and overflowed from the earthen pot. So he closed the
pot with his shoe lace. He displayed such miraculous powers
while he was only a child. On the advice of His Holiness
Thubten Gyatso, he was recognized as the 5th Reting Rinpoche
and named Thubten Jampel Yeshi Gyaltsen. He was admitted to
Sera Je College where he completed his religious education.
When H.H. Thubten Gyatso visited the Reting monastery in the
water- monkey year, it seemed that he left some instructions to
Reting Rinpoche concerning the governance of the nation.
His Holiness the Thirteenth Dalai Lama passed away in the
water-bird year. For about two months the Prime Minister and
the Kashag held the responsibility of the Government. After
that the General Assembly nominated the Reting Rinpoche, Gaden
throne Holder Yeshi Palden and Yongzin Phurchok Jamgon Rinpoche
for the regency. The Reting Rinpoche's name was confirmed with
traditional tests were done in front of Lord Avaloketeshvara in
the Potala Palace. Accordingly he was enthroned as the Regent
on the 10th day of the first month of the wood-dog year. Thus
he held the responsibility to head the Gaden Phodrang, the
Tibetan Government. He took particular interest in the
construction of the tomb of the thirteenth Dalai Lama and the
search for the next reincarnation. He personally went to the
precious lake and saw the visions which gave clear signals of
the reincarnation. He then recognized and enthroned the right
reincarnation of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. Those were indeed
some of his wonderful deeds.
On the fourth day of the tenth month of the earth-hare year,
the Reting Rinpoche did the hair cutting ceremony of His
Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama. In the last month of that year,
he resigned from the post of regency after seven years of
service. He had the traditional responsibility to uphold pure
Kadampa tradition. His own monastery was the seat of Dromton
Gyalpai Jungne. Moreover since the first Reting Rinpoche,
Trichen Ngawang Chokden, tutor of His Holiness Kelsang Gyatso,
the subsequent reincarnations preserved and propagated pure
Gelug tradition. Many illustrious Gelug masters including Je
Phaphongka exhorted and persuaded him to maintain and promote
the stainless tradition of the great Lama Tsongkhapa. But the
Reting Rinpoche did not pay any heed and he sought a number of
hidden-treasure teachings of the Nyingma order from Tsenyi
Tulku of Chamdo. He also received full transmission on
Dzongchen from Sangay Dorjee [Chattral Rinpoche]. Thus the
Reting Rinpoche departed from the tradition of his masters.
The final misfortune began to show up when the Reting Rinpoche
had disagreement with the then Regent, Tadak. The government
found evidence that the Reting Rinpoche had plotted against the
life of the Regent Tadak. So, Kalon Surkhang Wangchen Gelek and
Kalon Lhalu Gyurme Tsewang Dorjee went to the Reting monastery
along with their force and arrested the Reting Rinpoche. Headed
by Tsenyi Tulku, many monks from the Sere Je college revolted
against the Tibetan government with arms. As the tension grew
between the Sera Je College and the government, the latter
increased its force and an intense fighting continued for days.
Under the command of Kalsang Tsultrim, the government army
fired at the Reting monastery and caused much destruction.
When the Reting Rinpoche and his friend Khardo Tulku was
interrogated by the General Assembly, the latter confessed that
they were guilty. The Reting Rinpoche also acknowledged his
mistakes and pleaded for a chance to confess to the Regent
himself. The appeal was sent through the Kashag with the
endorsement of the General Assembly. But the appeal was
rejected. The Reting Rinpoche was kept in Sharchen Chog under
tight security with the officials, Lhungshar Orgyen Namdol and
Rupon Kalsang Damdul in command. While he was in confinement,
he suddenly passed away in the night on the 17th of the third
month. No outsider had any knowledge of the cause of his death.
KHARDO TULKU
============
A similar case can be narrated about Khardo Tulku Kelsang
Thubten Nyendak. Initially he sought teachings from Je
Phaphongkha. But later, he corrupted his philosophical view and
practice. He received many Nyingma teachings from Tsenyi Tulku
along with the Reting Rinpoche. He was arrested with the Reting
Rinpoche on the charges of plotting against the life of the
then Regent Tadak. Later he was imprisoned in a dark cell with
his legs in chains. After four years in jail, he was released
during the amnesty announced when His Holiness the 14th Dalai
Lama was enthroned. After that he was free to live according to
his wish, but soon he was passed away. So in short, all his
deeds were unsuccessful which was purely due to the miraculous
power of Dorjee Shugden.
TATSAK RINPOCHE
==================
In accordance with the prophecy of the deities and lamas,
Kundeling Tatsak Rinpoche Losang Thupten Jigme Gyaltsen was
recognized as the reincarnation of his predecessor. He
completed his religious education from the Gomang College of
Drepung monastery. He had the traditional responsibilities to
practice and promote a pure Gelug order. But he departed far
away from the stainless system of Gelug practice and received
treasure text teachings from Lhatsun Rinpoche and received
certain corrupted initiations known as the father's experience
and the mother's dream which originated from Mongolia. These
activities greatly annoyed the king of Gelug Dharma protectors,
Dorjee Shugden, and as such Tatsak Rinpoche was accordingly
punished.
One day he suffered an acute pain in his chest. After
consulting many deities and lama, he was told that it was
caused by Dorjee Shugden. So, the oracle of the deity was
invited and with invocation, he confessed his mistakes with the
support of Lhatsun Rinpoche. It was of no help and in that
place Lhatsun Rinpoche was scolded for his impure practice.
Tatsak Rinpoche's illness was more serious and he in much pain.
So he sent Kundeling Oser Gyaltsen to invite Kyabje Trijang
Dorjeechang. Another appeal was made via Kyabje Trijang
Rinpoche. I personally witnessed the event. During that time
the great Dorjee Shugden said that since he had committed
himself to protect the Gelug doctrine, there wasn't much he
could do. However, when such evolved Gelug master is
supporting, he would see what could be done. But mainly the
whole thing depended on how Tatsak Rinpoche behaved. The deity
then asked Tatsak Rinpoche, "What will you do in the future ?"
Tatsak Rinpoche wept bitterly and replied that he confessed his
past mistakes and promised that henceforth he will stop the
practice of Nyingma teachings. After that he recovered to some
extent. Because he did not keep his promise, his health
deteriorated again. Tatsak Rinpoche then left for India for
medical treatment and as well as for the purpose of pilgrimage.
He went to a big hospital in Calcutta for treatment. Even that
was of no avail and he passed away.
JE PHAPHONGKHA
==================
Our very kind and exalted master Phaphongkha Dechen Nyingpo,
the holder of the vajra, too, received transmission on the
secret Hayagriva and the Great Exposition on Pure Vision by the
Dalai Lama from Dagri Rinpoche Thinley Pema Kunsang Chogyal,
great mahasidhi Ose Thekchog Dorjee, Gungtul Rinpoche Khenrap
Palden Tanpai Nyima, Menyak Rekhu Rinpoche Lobsang Chodak
Gyatso and others during his early life. Moreover he received
initiation on Dupthap Dojoi Bhum-sang from Gungtul Rinpoche.
Later Je Phaphongkha received many transmissions and teaching
from Nyingma tradition. In those days he used to have strange
dreams. Sometimes he saw in his dreams bearded monks and at
other times grandly robed monks showing unhappy moods. One
night he slept on the bed which was on the east of the room,
but when he woke up he found himself on the bed which was on
the west side of the room. One night when he was not able to
sleep he heard some strange and ominous voices of a woman and
another person shouting alternately around mid-night. The noise
seemed to be coming from a distant place coming closer to his
home, finally he saw a red hand sticking through the curtain.
He thought it was due to the miraculous power of Dorjee
Shugden. He confessed and asked to be forgiven and the noise
returned the way it came.
In the water-mouse year, when the Chinese troops had already
entered Tibet, the Tibetan Government decided to do some
religious service for the peace and safety of the nation. With
the instruction from His Holiness the Dalai Lama, JePhaphongkha
gave the transmission Kagyur in the Gaden Hall. Soon after that
teaching, he was so seriously ill that he almost passed away.
The sickness was due to certain poison. When he recovered, his
whole body had become bluish. Dorjee Shugden also used other
means to persuade Je Phaphongkha to practice and propagate pure
Gelug tradition free of defilements. Finally he stopped taking
and practicing Nyingma teachings and did not propagate what he
had learned. He kept his promise and maintained pure Gelug
tradition.
Therefore, during the later part of his life, his Dharma deeds
spread even to places outside Tibet like China and Mongolia.
SURKHANG PEMA WANGCHEN
=============================
Now let me reveal some accounts of powerful officials who
received wrathful punishment from Dorjee Shugden. Surkhang Pema
Wangchen became a Cabinet Secretary, because of his corrupted
view and conduct his life was short lived. He was born in a
noble family which had special links with the deity. From a
very young age he was highly talented and well versed in
Tibetan language. He was proficient in Chinese language too. If
you read his Tibetan poetry, it is enchanting.
He was referred to as a pundit. At the age of fourteen, he
entered the public service and soon afterwards got promotion.
Because of his talent, His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama became
fond of him and posted him to the rank of the Cabinet
Secretary. That was indeed a great honor for him and obviously
a great achievement in worldly affairs.
But he did not keep his family tradition of the practice of
Dorjee Shugden worship nor did he maintain a pure Gelug
tradition. In the Surkhang family, they worshipped Dorjee
Shugden on every special occasion. They observed the
propitiating of the deity on the eight day of every new year.
When invoking the deity, very special offerings were made on
that day. The family used to invite all their relations for the
occasion, and after the worship they had a great feast. So, he
had the responsibility to practice Gelug teachings and worship
Dorjee Shugden. But his views and practice were corrupted and
he showed much interest in the Nyingma teachings. Because of
his influence, his father Sonam Wangchen sought teaching on the
`treasure-text' from Nyarong Terton Sogyal and due to that he
died suddenly at the age of thirty seven.
Pema Wangchen sought many Nyingma initiations and teachings
from Lama Pawo Rinpoche. He also sought many other Nyingma
Lamas, including lama Tenzin Dakpa from whom he received a
great deal of Dzongchen teachings. He reprinted `Yonten Dzod'
which was written by Kunkhen Longchen. Pema Wangchen had a good
relationship with Geshe Sharab Rinpoche. Since this Geshe was a
scholar of pure Gelug order, he refuted certain thesis written
by Lama Tenzin Dakpa. Owing to Pema Wangchen's persuasion, the
Geshe did not complete his composition. In that place, the
Geshe advised Pema Wangchen by way of some beautiful poems that
the latter should follow the flawless doctrine of the Dharma
Raja Lama Tsongkhapa.
The Geshe further added that he was not sectarian and his
instructions were proper. But Pema Wangchen was adamant and
paid no heed to what the Geshe said. Because he did not enter
the proper path and abandon the wrong one he fell ill as a
result. So with the invocation of Dorjee Shugden the advice was
sought for treating the sickness.
Dharma protector Dorjee Shugden told him to make the statues of
Lama Tsongkhapa and his two chief disciples. He was also asked
to do many ritual services. On top of that the deity advised
him to eliminate the wrong path and exhorted the need to enter
the proper way. As he did not act in accordance with those
instructions he suffered from another disease. This time he got
sores on his body. Thamcho Palden, the physician to H.H. the
Dalai Lama, treated him. When one sore was cured another
appeared and the pain was excruciating. In the mean time, his
son, too, died due to the same disease. Pema Wangchen suffered
with the pain and misery of that disease for about a year.
With the help of some Lamas, he confessed to Dorjee Shugden
many times.
One time the deity was invoked and Pema Wangchen confessed. But
the deity declared his final decision. Dorjee Shugden said that
he was helpless. People like him, highly educated and holding
high post in the government, but who did not practice pure
Gelug tradition could harm Gaden Phodrang, the Tibetan
government as well as the Gelug doctrine. All his efforts,
taking medical treatment, performing religious services and
engaging in every possible means proved of no help. The
punishment of Dharma protector Dorjee Shugden struck and he
died at the age of twenty two.
LHALU JIGME WANGYAL
=======================
Originally the Lhalu family practiced pure Gelug tradition. But
Lhalu Jigme Namgyal entered Nyingma order and practiced the
teaching to the best of his ability. His spiritual master was a
tantric practitioner who lived in Bari retreat. Along with
himself, Jigme Namgyal's mother also received a good deal of
Nyingma teachings. But the master committed adultery with his
mother. Yangzom Tsering of Shetra was married to Lhalu Jigme
Namgyal. She had much faith in the Gelug doctrine and
worshipped Dorjee Shugden as the protector. So there remained a
discord between the husband and wife. When he was young he
suffered from a disease and was infested with lice. The pain
and misery were immense and finally through numerous miracles
of the deity he had to take the long path to the life beyond.
Soon his son Phuntsok Rabgyal also died and Yangzom Tsering was
left behind. There was no heir to continue the family.
TSEPON LUNGSHAR
====================
The staff working for the Lhalu family collectively made an
application to the Tibetan government stressing the problems in
that family. So with instruction from H. H. the 13th Dalai
Lama, Tsepon Lungshar was appointed incharge of the Lhalu
family.
Since the lady in the family, Yangzom Tsering was true to her
faith and the deity, there was a clash of faith with Tsepon
Lungshar. The man practiced an impure faith as he had heard a
great deal of Nyingmapa teachings and received their
initiations. Since Lungshar was fairly dogmatic about the
Nyingma faith, the lady had to shift the statue of Dorjee
Shugden from their house to Tashi Choeling.
Later Tsepon Lungshar was ill for a long time. They saw many
evil omens during that time. One day a vulture actually landed
on their house top which was considered very ominous.
He consulted many great lamas and was told to do many ritual
services including Lama Chopa offerings. The later part of
Lungshar's life became more tense as he was caught up in
political intrigues. He had some differences with certain
cabinet ministers regarding the governance of the nation. So
with the support of some officials, he formed his own group and
wrote to the Regent, the Prime minister and the Kashag about
their proposals. Along with that letter he made allegations
against Trimon Kalon. According to another version, Kendung
Lobsang Tenkyong and Tsepon Lungshar were jointly commissioned
to look after the provisions for the enlarged Tibetan military.
The National Assembly had outlined the source of income for the
military.
According to that stipulation, the commission scrutinised the
estates of the ministers and other high officials. They made
good progress, but later they were accused of partiality and
favoritism. His colleague Kendung Lobsang Tenkyong, passed away
in the mean time. During that political back-stabbing, Lungshar
was arrested and put behind the bars. His eye balls were taken
out and in their place boiling oil was poured. The intensity of
his pain and misery were beyond imagination. The last few years
in he prison were most pathetic. Finally he died in prison.
KALON TRIMON NORBU WANGYAL
================================
Kalon Trimon Norbu Wangyal got into the public service during
the reign of His Holiness the 13th Dalai Lama. He was very
efficient and was therefore promoted to higher posts in the
bureaucracy. Soon he was raised to the rank of Tsepon. He was
chief of the army when the Chinese troops were ousted from
Tibet in the water-mouse year and his outstanding job during
the time was rewarded. He became knowledgeable in the art of
administrations and politics.
His Holiness Thubten Gyatso was very pleased with Kalon
Trimon.So later he was appointed as the Governor of Domey with
the rank of cabinet minister. He was by all accounts crowned
with great success and honor.
Despite his official title and success, he had great faith in
the Nyingma tradition and sought various teachings from many
Nyingma lamas. He maintained them as his principal practice.
These activities annoyed the Gelug Dharma protector Dorjee
Shugden and consequently Kalon Trimon became insane. Even when
he still had the title of a minister, he did many crazy things.
One time he went to the market place and started beating all
the cymbals that were arranged for sale. One day he wore a
while lower garment which usually used by Nyingmapas and red
upper shawl. In those garments he went straight to see the then
regent Reting Rinpoche. The regent said in a mater of jest
that he was in the dress of a treasure-test master. And asked
what treasure he had. Since he had many sons, he said, " I have
the treasure of human beings."
So he was out of his senses and did not know what was right and
what was wrong. Not only did he suffer, the life for his wife
and children were very hard. He did not care for the family
property and wealth. He wasted them like anything. So the boys
had to leave the home with whatever share they could get. In
the process, Kalon Trimon literally became a poor man heavily
indebted and at last he had to leave this world.
>>
Alex Wilding
There are a few things I keep reading which puzzle me.
>reliable wisdom minds
>wisdom Buddha Je Tsongkhapa
(I think you refer to your protector also as a 'wisdom Buddha')
>the practce of receiving wisdom attainments
What word are you translating as 'wisdom'? What is a 'wisdom Buddha' as
opposed to a 'Buddha'? I would guess at "shes rab sangs rgyas", but I can't
say I know the term.
>NKT Teacher Training Programme
It is well known that the NKT machine generates "teachers" at a phenomenal
rate as compared with other more traditional Buddhist systems. I've met one,
and he is a nice chap who appears to know the contents of your leader's
books quite well. But I wonder, in view of the high teacher generation rate,
how long the study course is? What scriptures or other texts are studied?
How long is the reading list? Are there exams? Who moderates them? Is
retreat included in the training, and if so, how much? Leaving both content
and style aside for the moment, does the quantity of material studied
correspond perhaps to a GCSE? Or does it perhaps approach the commitment
required for an A-level?
Yours curiously,
cf...@dircon.co.uk
On 19 Dec 1997 04:22:49 GMT, amitabha <amit...@rmplc.co.uk> wrote:
> Second, a booklist
Here's a start:
================================================================
Author: Sans-rgyas-rdo-rje, Bya-bral.
Title: The rain of adamant fire : a holy discourse
based upon scriptures and reason, annihilating
the poisonous seeds of the wicked speech of Dzeme
Trulku Lobsang Palden (Dze-smad Sprul-sku Blo-bzan-
dpal-ldan) / by Chatral Sangyey Dorje
Byabral Sans-rgyas-rdo-rje).
Published: Gangtok : Sherab Gyaltsen, 1979.
Description: 201 p. ; 25 cm.
Subjects, Library of Congress:
Dze-smad Blo-bzan-dpal-ldan, 1927- Mthu dan
stobs kyis che ba'i bstan srun chen po Rdo-rje-sugs-ldan-rtsal
gyi byun ba brjod pa.
Buddhism--Tibet--Controversial literature.
Dge-lugs-pa (Sect)--Doctrines.
Other titles: Dze smad g'yo rdzun klan ka'i lan Lun rigs
rdo rje'i me char
Notes: Cover title: Dze smad g'yo rdzun klan ka'i lan
Lun rigs rdo rje'i me char ...
In Tibetan; pref. in English.
Summary: Refutation of some controversial points raised
by Dze-smad
==============================================================
Author: Dhongthog, T. G.
Title: Ma bcos dnos 'brel brjod pa dus kyi sbran char =
The timely shower : expression of an unaltered reality /
Gdon- thog Bstan-pa'i-rgyal-mtshan gyis brtsams.
Published: Delhi : T. G. Dhongthog Rinpoche, 1974.
Description: <2>, 160 p. ; 19 cm.
Subjects, Library of Congress (Use s=):
Sa-skya-pa lamas--Biography.
Religion and politics--Tibet.
Tibetan language--Texts.
Other titles: The timely shower.
Notes: In Tibetan. Composed as a refutation of Dze-smad
Blo-bzan-dpal-ldan's Mthu an stobs kyi che ba'i bstan srun chen
po Rdo-rje-sugs-ldan-rtsal gyi byun ba brjod pa pha rgod bla
ma'i zal gyi bdud tsi'i chu khur brtsegs sin 'jigs run glog zags
'gyu ba'i sprin nag 'khrugs pa'i na ro.
==========================================================
Author: Dhongthog, T. G.
Title: Gdon lan lun rigs thog mda'i rtsod zlog ma bcos
dnos 'brel brjod pa dus kyi me Ice zes bya ba dge /
Tre-hor Gdon-thog Sprul-sku
Nag-dban-theg-mchog-bstan-pa'i-rgyal-mtshan
gyis sbyar ba'o.
Published: Delhi : Dhongthog, 1979.
Description: 154 p. ; 19 cm.
Subjects, Library of Congress:
Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho. Gdon lan lun rigs thog mda'.
Dge-lugs-pa (Sect)--Doctrines.
Notes: Cover title: Ma bcos dnos 'brel brjod pa dus kyi
me Ice;
spine title: The timely flame.
In Tibetan.
Summary: On the relationships between the philosophical
and religious traditions in Tibet; defense of the
author's Dnos 'brel brjod pa dus kyi sbran char
(1974) against criticisms levelled by
Yon-tan-rgya-mtsho in his Gdon lan lun rigs thog
mda'
=======================================================
BQ4890.R37 B78 1980
bsTan 'dzin rGya mtso, Dalai Lama XVI, 1935-
"dge lugs pa'i chos skyong rgyal chen shugs ldan bkag 'gog
gnang ba'i bka' lob ma bcos sor bzhag / gong sa skyabs mgon
t'a la'i blama mchog nas",
Cover Title: "Critical Remarks on Various Recent Polemic Writings
on the Protective Deity rDor rje Shugs ldan, and
the Relations Between the Various Buddhist
Traditions in Tibet"
Thimpu: 'Brug cZhung Kun spel sDe tsan, :1980.
========================================================
BQ7610 .T47 1977
Author: lDan ma bLo bzang rDo rJe and others.
Title: "Heresy and Intersectarian Relations in Tibet:
The thought of rJe Pha bong kha"
"Three texts reflecting the views of Pha bong kha pa
bDe chen sNying po on the questions of heresies and
intersectarian relations in Tibet"
New Delhi: Ngawang Topgyay
========================================================
BQ7920 .T47 1978
Title: "Three dGe lugs pa Historical Works :
Biographies of the Successive Occupants of
the rDo rje sLob dpon of the Tantric College
of bKra shis lhun po and PaN chen bsod nam
Grags pa, An Account of the Protective Deityr
Do rje Shugs ldan, and A History of the
bKa' gdams pa Traditions."
New Delhi : Ngawang Gelek Demo 1978
===========================================================
BQ4890.R372 J36 1984
"'jam mgon bstan srung rgyal chen
rdo rje shugs ldan rtsal gyi be bum:
The collected rituals for performing all tasks through
the propitiation of the great protective deity of the teachings
of Tsongkhapa, Manjushri re-embodied, rdo rje shugs ldan."
2 Vols. New Delhi : Mongolian Lama Guru Deva, 1984.
============================================================
BQ4890.R37 D93 00
Dze smad bLo bzang dPal ldan, 1927-
"mthu dang stobs kyis che bai bstan srung chen po
rdo rje shugs ldan rtshal gyi byung ba brjod pa"
Delhi 1973
========================================================
BQ7634.Y65 1980
Yon tan rGya mtso.
"brgal lan kun khyab 'brug sgra: gdong thog sprul ku la gdams pa
brgal la kun khyab snyan pa'i sgra zhes bya ba bzhugs so /
Rejoinder to gDong thog bsTan pa'i rGyal mtsan's Dus kyi Me
lcce On the True Tenets of the dGe lugs pa Tradition and the
rDo rje Shugs ldan"
New Delhi: bstan 'dzin dge legs,1980.
==========================================================
BQ7634.Y66
Yon tan rGya mtso.
"gdong lan lung rigs thog ma: A Refutation of T. G. Dhongthog's
Criticisms of Dzeme Rimpoche's Defence of Gelukpa Doctrines"
Cover Title in Tibetan: "gyi na pa zhig gi blo sprin rum las
'ogs gyi na pa zhig gi blo'i sprin rum las 'ongs pa'i gdong lan
lung dang rigs pa'i thog mda"
New Delhi: Yonten Gyatso, 1979.
============================================================
There is MORE THAN a chapter on rDo rje Shugs ldan in:
Nebesky-Wojkowitz, R. de. "Oracles and Demons of Tibet"
London/The Hauge, Mouton and Co. 1956
Martin ELLISON
I have snipped the test of the article as it was very long. But it did
lead me to wonder (reading the text as a purely historical account)
about the politics of Tibet, especially under the Regency, and the role
of the Dorje Shugden cult within it. The account that you quoted does
seem to suggest that there were pro-DS and anti-DS factions and that the
pro-DS faction were associated with the Regent and against the reform
movement. (And hence, arguably, that the pro-DS faction contributed to
the Chinese takeover).
None of this is however argues for or against whether the practice of
venerating Dorje Shugden has good or bad effects on the practitioner.
As I am not a student of Tibetan history (or, for that matter, a
practitioner of Tibetan Buddhism), I do not claim to speak from any
position of authority on this matter. But I believe that it does raise
some interesting questions.
cf...@dircon.co.uk wrote:
>
> Some people have asked for evidence that DS does harm.
> The following (which has been posted here before )
> is an example of something written by one of the foremost
> proponents of Dorje Shugden, Zeme Tulku Lobsang Palden
> (Dze smad bLo bzang dPal ldan) - a disciple of
> Phabongkha and Trijang Rinpoche.
>
> This can be found in his book: "The Oral Instruction of the Intelligent
> Father" (pha-rgod bla-ma'i zhal-lung // Mthu an stobs kyi che ba'i bstan
> srun chen po Rdo-rje-sugs-ldan-rtsal gyi byun ba brjod pa pha rgod bla
> ma'i zal gyi bdud tsi'i chu khur brtsegs sin 'jigs run glog zags
> 'gyu ba'i sprin nag 'khrugs pa'i na ro.) published in Delhi 1973
> Library of Congress catalouge # BQ4890.R37 D93 00
>
> This passage is all about the harm that DS will do to
> Gelugpas who also practice Nyingma teachings.
>...
Tara Centre
Hello,
Once again I'd like to explain my reasons for wishing to see a debate
between Geshe Kelsang and HHDL, re: Does the practice of Dorje Shugdan
cause harm to living beings?
After I first suggested a debate, Robin asked how a winner could be
determined and John replied that it was impossible to determine a winner
as you simply have to rely on high Lamas to tell you who is/is not a
Buddha and at the moment they are in disagreement. Hence the debate
would be one merely of personal opinion with no objective evidence, thus
no way to decide a winner. This question has arisen only because I was
not clear that I wished for debate not on whether Dorje Shugdan is a
Buddha, but whether practising Dorje Shugdan causes harm to living
beings.
It may be argued that we cannot resolve the question of whether Dorje
Shugdan practice causes harm until we answer the question of whether or
not he is an evil spirit, and thus again have no ground for debate.
However, if this is the case then we must ask is it reasonable for the
Dalai Lama to suppress this practice using his political power if it is
just a matter of his opinion against that of other practitioners? This
is definitely a breech of freedom, inflicting one's own opinion over
others. What criteria can we use to establish his opinion as more
valid? His study and knowledge of Dharma? - (there are many Tibetan
scholars just as learned); his fame and popularity? - (then we may as
well ask the Spice Girls for their input into this debate if this is the
criteria for establishing someone's wisdom!); the fact that he is the
political head of Tibet? (that would mean that all politicians are
qualified to guide us on the Spiritual path - scarey thought, no?)
However, I believe this question - does practising Dorje Shugdan cause
harm? - is not merely personal opinion but can be debated.
The Dalai Lama has stated that practising Dorje Shugdan (cause) harms
the Tibetan cause and his personal health (effect). This can be
debated.
Buddha taught there are 4 factors that need to be present for a complete
karmic action. The object of the action, the intention, the preparation
and the completion.
The Object
When I engage in Dorje Shugdan practice, the object of my practice is
the wrathful Wisdom Buddha Dorje Shugdan, inseparable from Manjushri.
Some people claim that this is not the object- that DS is an evil
spirit. HOWEVER, this is not the object that appears to my mind. From
my side I am making prayers to all the Buddhas in the aspect of Dorje
Shugdan. All the Buddhas know that these prayers are intended for them
and will therefore accept them. An evil spirit will know they are not
intended for it. Because of the nature and words of the prayers, they
can only be fulfilled by a Buddha. *The object of my action is a
Buddha*
The Intention
This has 3 parts :- i) correct discrimination; ii) determination; iii)
if the action is virtuous then there must be a virtuous mental factor
present, or if it is non-virtuous there must be delusion present.
Correct discrimination means I identify the visualized Dorje Shugdan in
front of me as the embodiment of all the Buddhas appearing as wrathful
Manjushri.
Determination means I must be determined to make prayers to Dorje
Shugdan.
We set motivation at the very beginning of the puja by generating refuge
and bodhichitta. This makes the intention virtuous. I am performing
this action with the wish to become a Buddha, solely in order to benefit
all living beings until samsara ends.
Preparation refers to our preparations for the practice and completion
refers to our actually doing the practice.
The main point I am making is that the Dalai Lama says that this
practice causes suffering. Yet if the practice is done as described (as
how all Dorje Shugdan practitioners should perform the practice) - then
the action is virtuous, because the object of the action is a Buddha,
and the intention (which is the principal factor in determining whether
an action leads to happiness or suffering) of renunciation and
bodhichitta is virtuous - ie. will lead to happiness in the future. How
is it possible for a virtuous action to lead to suffering?
So the Dalai Lama's claims that performing this practice causes harm
contradicts Buddha's teachings on karma, i.e. that virtuous actions are
the direct cause of happiness. This is more than sufficient ground for
debate.
So again, if you wish for debate please let your feelings become known.
I ask for debate so that this issue can be resolved as quickly as
possible, either way. John seems to think that Dorje Shugdan
practitioners are scared of 'cognitive dissonance' (ie. a sore head
through 2 conflicting ideas) and will not consider any opposing
arguments. I say once more that this is not the case. Speaking for
myself, I have complete faith in this practice, but I would want to know
if I was doing any practice that harms living beings. If it was proved
to me that any of my practices caused harm to others then as a Buddhist
(my heart commitment being not to harm others), I would stop
immediately. No Dorje Shugdan practitioner is running away from debate,
we've laid our cards on the table.
Thank you.
Love and best wishes
Labsum
Don Martin
In article <67d9oq$im5$1...@heliodor.xara.net>,
ale...@globalnet.co.uk ("Alex Wilding") wrote:
> Leaving both content
> and style aside for the moment, does the quantity of material studied
> correspond perhaps to a GCSE? Or does it perhaps approach the commitment
> required for an A-level?
****** Or perhaps, (more pertinently), an NVQ?
;-)
--
Don, Trying to live like a sword
The Born-Again Buddhist. in water, but behaving more
(....and again and again) like a thick plank.
Don Martin
In article <67csqp$kta$1...@panther.rmplc.co.uk>,
amit...@rmplc.co.uk (amitabha) wrote:
> >The majority of Tibetan scholars and Lamas,
>
>
> First, who's counted? ..
****** Without wishing to appear partisan,on the evidence which
has been presented to this ng, it does seem that the VAST majority
of Tibetan scholars and Lamas who have something to say on this
issue do not agree with the nkt view.
Don Martin
In article <3499F66D...@columbia.edu>,
jw...@columbia.edu (john pettit) wrote:
>and are thoroughly disinclined
> to seriously consider any evidence which might conduce to cognitive
> dissonance,
****** What a lovely turn of phrase.
cf...@dircon.co.uk
On Fri, 19 Dec 1997 19:51:35 +1100, Martin ELLISON <mar...@mpce.mq.edu.au> wrote:
> I have snipped the test of the article as it was very long. But it did
> lead me to wonder (reading the text as a purely historical account)
> about the politics of Tibet, especially under the Regency, and the role
> of the Dorje Shugden cult within it. The account that you quoted does
> seem to suggest that there were pro-DS and anti-DS factions and that the
> pro-DS faction were associated with the Regent and against the reform
> movement. (And hence, arguably, that the pro-DS faction contributed to
> the Chinese takeover).
Remembering of course that there were two regents during this period -
Reting Rinpoche (who later met a bad end) and Taktra Rinpoche.
Tibetans seem to have wildly differing opinions of Reting.
Most sources in western languages do not reflect these divergent
views and paint him in a bad light - I suspect this may be due to when
these accounts were written and who the informants were.
amitabha
"Alex Wilding" <ale...@globalnet.co.uk> wrote:
>There are a few things I keep reading which puzzle me.
>>reliable wisdom minds
>>wisdom Buddha Je Tsongkhapa
>(I think you refer to your protector also as a 'wisdom Buddha')
>
Dear Alex,
Thanks for your reply. Just briefly: I used the phrase `Wisdom Buddha Je
Tsongkhapa` it indicates that Je Tsongkhapa is an emanation of the Buddha
Manjushri, manifestation of the wisdom of all the Buddhas. I used the
phrase `wisdom Protector` ti indicate that Dorje Shugden is likewise am
emanation of Buddha Manjushri.
Sorry, I thought this would be clear. I will take more care in the future
to be precise.
I am quite interested in language use and how we generate meaning through
our choice of words. I should have said this in my previous posting! I am
very sorry I did not. For this reason I would like to look at your
language in this posting, because I think to do so is valuable in
bringing about reconciliation between all members of the Buddhist
community and helping us understand if and how we are causing divisions
between ourselves.
Before I begin I would like to say clearly that I value goo communication
between people. Buddha spoke out of compassion for living beings, No
other motive. As I understand it, Buddha indicated four ways of
accummulating non-virtue that is associated with our speech. This is not
meant to be alecture! I'm just making my own starting point as clear as
possible, because I would like you and others to find this as interesting
as I do. As I understand it the 4 non-virtuous speech actions are: lying,
divisive speech, hurtful speech and idle gossip. I am an ordained nun and
I very much appreciste the practcie of moral discipline. In my posting to
John Pettit I think I used both divisive and hurtful speech and I am
sorry for it. What I realize I should do instead is try to show how in
some subtle ways we are being divisive and hurtful to each other. I am
going to use your posting to do this, just because it is what has
inspired me to do this. In doing so I am not getting at you personally
and am not making out that your posting is more devisive or hurtful than
anyone else's. So here goes:-
NKT Teacher Training Programme (TTP)
Sentence 1
>It is well known that the NKT machine generates "teachers" at a phenomenal
>rate as compared with other more traditional Buddhist systems.
What I would like to do is dismantle your sentence. As you may know not
only our vocabulary but also our syntax and so forth all contribute to
the production of meanings.
It seems to me that the Buddhist community is currently producing
unpleasant meanings; maybe this intentional, out of malice, but maybe it
is unintentional, because we aren't really looking closely at ourselves
(ie practising moral discipline) when writing things down.
First lets look at the phrase "the NKT machine".
"machine" is a non-human thing. I am taking " machine" as the noun and
"NKT" as the adjective. This non-human thing (noun) "generates". How does
it generate? "At a phenomenal rate". At the level of choice of vocabulary
we are being offered the concept of a fast production line ie. "machine"
which generates "objects" at a phenomenal rate.
What is disturbing about this concept is the lack of human agency and
involvement, which is even more disturbing because what this "machine" is
generating is "teachers".
So now we come to the object - "teachers". The machine is a
teacher-producing machine, but the teachers it produces are not actual
teachers but only teachers in inverted commas.
The sentence is concluded with a comparison between the singular noun
("machine") and the plural noun "systems. There is a qualitive difference
between machine and system, but the significant point is that this second
noun is qualified by four adjectives.
The first noun, "machine" was qualified bu only one adjective (NKT)
The second noun "systems" is primarily qualified by the word "Buddhist"
(ie. it is juxtaposed to the noun itself). On the one hand we have the
pattern "NKT (adjective) machine" and on the other a mirroring pattern
"Buddhist (adjective) systems".
This sets up a conceptual comparison not only between "machine" and
"systems" but also between "NKT" and "Buddhist". It puts the two notions
into opposite camps.
The other adjectives form an associated trio. "Traditional" in particular
resonates against "machine". We don't usually talk about
"traditional" machines. More importantly, it puts the concept of
traditional into comparison with the concept of "NKT" through the same
process of adjectival patterning mentioned earlier.
Lastly, we can look at how this sentence begins. It begons with an
assertion "it is well known that" which endows what follows with the
status of an alrady understood and established fact.
So having thoroughly investigated the sentence's subtle features, oyu
sub-text, we can look at it at the level of actual text.
Overall, the sentence says that it is well-known that the NKT
organisation produces quasi-teachers very quickly whereas other Buddhist
traditions do not produce them so quickly.
Please forgive me for contradicting you, but what I think we have here is
an interesting thesis rather than an established fact. I am genuine wen
I say that I think it is an interesting thesis. i think for example that
it would make an unusual and fertile small research project for someone
doing for example an MA on contemporary Buddhist movements in a US
university. Some filed research would be necessary to collect data. I
woyuld be very happy if someone undertaking such a projecvt wanted to
visit here and use this TTP as a case study, say staying for one semester
before going to visit a different Buddhist organisation. One would hve
to analyse the existing qualifications of a new TTP student and generate
some way of assessing whether or not say being an Oxford graduate with a
doctorate in the Natural Sciences (to describe but one of the TTP
students here) accelerates one's 'rate' of becoming a dharma teacher or
slows it down. One could analyse the proportion of residents at the
centre who are TTP students and the proportion of TTP students who are
dharma teachers. I think it would be genuinely interesting to someone in
that field.
But I do not think so far that this kind of research has taken place. I
myself am a graduate of both British and American Universities and have
also taught in both. I could make the following statement"It is
well-known that the standard of graduate education in the States is lower
than that of an undergraduate in a British University". However this
would remain at the level of assertion and personal opinion - some might
even say prejudice - unless I had something concrete and analytical to
back it up. I could also make the following statement "It is well-known
that the standard of achievement on a B.A. in Education is lower than
that on an NKT TTP." However despite the fact that this is also my
personal experience my making such a statement would still remain at the
level of assertion and personal opinion - and again some might even say
prejudice - unless I had something concrete and analytical to back it up.
I hope I had now made my point about the first sentence. At the
sub-textual and ordinary levels I think this is an example of both
divisive and hurtful speech and I think it is an example of basic
prejudice and ignorance. This is not intended as a personal insult. It
is intended to help us all understand why this debate is not really
getting anywhere and why bad feeling between people seems to be
increasing. I am no better or worse than anyone else. I just have the
good fortune to be able to point this out.
Let's go on to the rest of this posting.
But I wonder, in view of the high teacher generation rate,
>how long the study course is? What scriptures or other texts are studied?
>How long is the reading list? Are there exams? Who moderates them? Is
>retreat included in the training, and if so, how much? Leaving both content
>and style aside for the moment, does the quantity of material studied
>correspond perhaps to a GCSE? Or does it perhaps approach the commitment
>required for an A-level?
>
If someone actually had the knowledge and understanding that the
authoritative opening "It is well-known that..." seems to suggest, then
that someone would not be asking these basic questions about the NKT TTP.
It is late now. Someone (Mike Austin?) did a posting on why Buddhists
are spending so much time on the NET and when do they fit their practice
in.
I'd like to say to him that I try to restrict my use of the NET or e mail
etc to after 10pm and before 7am. This way I find that I can still put
in a full day's meditation and contemplation, pat the dog, speak to
visitors and counsel my students. If anyone is finding it hard to put in
their daily practice then you might find this a helpful method. Or has
anyone else got any other methods they'd like to share about keeping
their minds happy and undistracted?
Anyhow, I digress. What I meant to say is, it's late now, so I'll finish
here. But if you really want to know what kind of beast (please no more
machines) the NKT TTP is, then ask away and I'll try to give you same
answers.
All the best
Gema
cf...@dircon.co.uk
On 19 Dec 1997 10:47:03 GMT, ta...@mail.rmplc.co.uk (Tara Centre) wrote:
>Hello,
>Once again I'd like to explain my reasons for wishing to see a debate
>between Geshe Kelsang and HHDL,
Actually a debate has been going on between people with different
views on Shugden for many years. The list of some of the polemical
works on this matter which I posted in the thread with the subject
line "Re: No grounds for debate (Was: Re: Call for debate)" is
ample proof of this.
I'd like to suggest that the publication of such works is the proper
means for such a debate to continue. Very few people would actually
get to witness such debate if conducted face to face and few would be
in a position to immediatly judge the validity of the arguments.
This is particularly true of westerners. If we are to be in a position
to fairly judge the rather complicated arguments and historical
matters involved in all this it would first be necessary for the
important documentary evidence (on both sides) which is available
to be translated into a language which most of us can understand.
Given the amount of this material and complexity of the issue it would
be no small task.to do this. (I'm a little surprised that so far no aspiring
PhD student has yet made a stab at summarizing this material as it
would certainly make a fascinating dissertation and really needs a
dispassionate academic approach.) Without all the evidence before
us most people are simply judging this based on what they think of
HHDL and GKG.
In Ven Geshe Kelsang Gyatso' s latest posting
["Replies to Chris Fynn - PART ONE"] he has written:
" As you know Chattral Sangay Dorje and Geshe Yonten Gyatso
engaged in a written debate on Dorje Shugden, both of their books
have been published. These books have never been the cause of
disharmony between Nyingmapa and Gelugpa practitioners. Chattral
Sangay Dorje’s book is very beneficial for Nyingmapa practitioners,
giving them encouragement and confidence for their practice, while
Geshe Yonten Gyatso’s book is likewise beneficial for the Gelugpa
practitioner. So here there is no problem, they are scholars
debating with each other to clarify certain issues with a good motivation."
In that post Geshe-la has also reffered to the writings of Dhongtog Tulku
Tenpai Gyaltsen favourably.
So I am suggesting this is the best way for such a debate to continue.
Press campaigns, name calling in the media and demonstrations
with banners are going to get nowhere. Although they attract a lot
of attention I think that these methods only get peoples backs up making
rational discussion and a solution of some kind more difficult.
If someone really wants to help clarify this issue in the minds of western
Buddhists then perhaps a good start could be made by seeing that books
like those by the venerable lamas Dhontog Tenpa'i Gyaltsen,
Chattral Sangay Dorje and Geshe Yonten Gyatso get translated
into English.
- Chris
cf...@dircon.co.uk
Alex Wilding
Dear Gema,
I am flattered that the density of my prose is such that my few lines were
felt worthy of such lengthy analysis. I do try to say as much as possible in
a few words, but am not always successful. Thank you!
Most of the implications you teased from what you were kind enough to call
the "subtle features" of my words were indeed intentional, although I did
not have any intention, when I used the phrase "as compared with other more
traditional Buddhist systems" of implying that the NKT is not any kind of
Buddhist organisation. I only wished to imply that it is one with unusual
and novel features which might appear to call for explanation.
I would like to note that I am duly impressed that one of your co-students
is
>an Oxford graduate with a
>doctorate in the Natural Sciences
and that you yourself are
>a graduate of both British and American Universities.
Well done!
I feel that your suggestion that
>something concrete and analytical
is needed in this discussion is precisely to the point. That was the reason
for my concrete and specific questions, which unfortunately are still
unanswered. My questions were:
1) What word are you translating as 'wisdom' in phrases such as "reliable
wisdom minds" or "the practce of receiving wisdom attainments"?
2) How long is the study course?
3) What scriptures or other texts are studied?
4) How long is the reading list?
5) Are there exams?
6) Who moderates them?
7) Is retreat included in the training, and if so, how much?
8) Leaving both content and style aside for the moment, does the quantity of
material studied
correspond perhaps to a GCSE? Or does it perhaps approach the commitment
required for an A-level?
Yours still curiously
________________________________
Alex Wilding, MA (Oxon., Natural Sciences), MPhil (Leics., History and
Phenomenology of Religion), PGCE, AMIEE, also not bad at the country blues
guitar but can't sing or dance, sorry, just thought I'd mention some of
these in passing.
Avyorth Rolinson
amitabha wrote in message .......
On 26th Nov I posted that G Kelsang Gyatso and the NKT accepted Dzogchen as
pure Buddhadharma after Jim Belither had posted that GKG saw no problem with
the practice and teachings of Dzogchen. I also mentioned :
I'm sure that there will be several people who are relieved that the
>teachings and practice of Dzogchen are now 'kosher' ala NKT. Not least the
>car load of NKT disciples from Amitabha NKT Centre who'd surreptitiously
>come up to Bristol to take Dzogchen empowerment and teachings at the local
>Sakya Centre recently. Now they can openly discuss these teachings and
>practices at the NKT Centre. IMO this is a really good step forward.
On the 19th Dec I wrote the following in response to Claire (aka Gema) chief
teacher at ABC:
>". I state
>again that I and another ex-NKT disciple met some residents from A Butlins
>Camp here in Bristol on a Saturday a few weeks ago. I live around the
corner
>from the Sakya Centre and we bumped into each other. I was told by them
that
>they'd come up to Bristol for the Dzogchen empowerment and teachings, and
>that they'd thoroughly enjoyed it and were now going back to the Centre.
This evening I received a phone call from 'X' one of the residents at ABC
who'd been in Bristol at the Sakya Centre. 'X' is a friend whom I've know
since we were residents together at Tara NKT Centre from 1993 to '95. I
moved to Manjushri NKT Centre, he to Amitabha NKT Centre.
'X' was very disturbed and aggitated that I'd mentioned having met him and
some others on their outing to the Sakya Centre - although I'd not mentioned
his or anyone's names. Apparently Claire aka Gema had found out that he had
been one of the NKT students at the Sakay Centre. He'd been 'asked' to phone
me and ask me to post a note saying that he (and the others) had NOT taken
any Dzogchen empowerment whatsoever! I and my friend (also ex-NKT) had
obviously misunderstood his blissful and enthusiastic discussion as he
explained why he was up in Bristol. And 'anyway Dzogchen was only a very
very small part of the teaching', he told me again and again. 'And anyway
it's absolutely no big deal whatsoever.' The conversation lasted almost 1
1/2hours.
So here I am posting, as requested by my friend 'X', that he has told me
that he and the other NKT students with him that ill-fated Saturday in
Bristol did not take, receive or otherwise a Dzogchen empowerment.
Now, you may be asking yourself, what's the big deal? G Kelsang Gyatso has
apparently acknowledged that Dzogchen is pure Buddhadharma. Likewise we are
told again and again that the NKT is non-sectarian. So some students travel
up to Bristol on a Saturday morning to receive teachings on Buddhadharma
from a lama. Wow, all buddhists rejoice in their effort and good fortune!
Right?
Apparently not! And why not? Why such a big deal requiring Claire aka Gema
to post that nobody at ABC has Dzogchen empowerment? Why such a big deal
that my friend is tracked down and 'asked' to phone me up requesting me to
post that he says he didn't take Dzogchen empowerment?
My friend is a teacher with the NKT. He really enjoys it. He has a genuine
interest in Buddhadharma. He is a kind and considerate person. Perhaps if it
were believed that he had taken Dzogchen empowerment then he'd not be
allowed to teach anymore - I don't know the answer to that one. All I know
is that my friend phoned me up this evening in a very troubled state, and
that it's important to him that I make this posting.
I can only suppose that protecting the pure buddhadharma of GKG from
Dzogchen is of such importance.
Anyone considering accepting the words of the NKT spin-doctors really needs
to think very carefully indeed - IMO.
Yours in the Dh (ark)
Avyorth