Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Samdhong Rinpoche Blames Abbots for Signature Campaign!

It seems that the Abbots of Sera Je, Sera Mey, Gaden Jangtse, Gaden Shartse, Drepung Gomang and Drepung Loseling were recently summoned to Dharamsala by the Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government in Exile, Samdhong Rinpoche.

Unbelievably, Samdhong Rinpoche scolded the Abbots for pushing the signature campaign on all monks to renounce Dorje Shugden in the three great seats of Sera, Ganden and Drepung Monasteries.

He said that their "insistence on the signature campaigns has made personal difficulties for the Dalai Lama."

Could this be Samdhong Rinpoche and the Dalai Lama's attempt to wriggle out of being implicated in the September Indian Supreme Court case, where they are on trial for Deity discrimination? Could it be because the international public are increasingly wary and suspicious of the Dalai Lama undermining others' religious freedoms? By blaming the Abbots, they might let themselves off the hook?

In the short term they may look better in the Indian supreme court and in the court of international opinion, but in the long term this new strategy will likely backfire as it presents irreconcilable contradictions.

Why? Because there are many recorded public tapes of the Dalai Lama available on the mainstream press and the Internet at large where he is very clearly encouraging the Abbots of these three Monasteries to expel and remove all monks who refuse to sign the declaration that they will no longer associate spiritually or materially with Dorje Shugden practitioners.

See videos here.

This indeed is why Shar Ganden and Serpom Norling Monasteries are arising -- communities of monks expelled under the Dalai Lama's orders who are continuing with their practice of Dorje Shugden.

At least we can be thankful that the Abbots are now being scolded instead of praised for their enactment of the oppressive and unlawful signature campaign mandated by the Dalai Lama, ironic (and hypocritical) as this reprimand may be.

See also another article on the subject.


Anonymous said...

thanks for making me laugh - can this get any more silly?

Thom said...

It is beyond sad,embarassing or sad to witness this one man side show attempt to keep his story straight.
I begin to think we need not do anything to reveal this man who appears intent on recanting or professing his guilt. He is condeming himself with his own convoluted statements or Freudian slips.

Anonymous said...

Let’s just bear in mind that the Dalai Lama plays with what he says – himself or through Samdhong Rinpoche.

People might see or hear either the Dalai Lama or Samdhong Rinpoche is blaming the Abbots for the signature campaigns, and maybe this is also what they want to show to the Indian court.

But taking another look, Samdhong Rinpoche is blaming the Abbots for their "insistence on" the signature campaign, and not for the signature campaign itself. In reality he is accepting that the signature campaigns were ordered by the Dalai Lama. Perhaps the Dalai Lama will later explain to the Abbots: that they misinterpreted the DL’s “praises” as an encouragement to “insist” and this insistence caused him personal difficulties.

Then at court the Dalai Lama might argue that he has scolded the Abbots for the signature campaigns. And at the monasteries he can “explain” the Abbots what they misunderstood.

To me this is the typical speech play by the Dalai Lama so it would not surprise me that he ends cheating the Indian court and the Abbots again to get away from any trouble.

Anonymous said...

samdhong due to his age, he is losing his memory and he is making up good story. He should know that their is no way he can hide, the truth is know by all over the world no matter what he says.I wish him luck by trying to cover up someone else mess. I wonder how much did he get paid for doing this?

Anonymous said...

It looks like the usual "hit and run" by the Dalai Lama and the TGIE:

They just say this and that to achieve their worldly political goals, hurting others... then they leave. They ignore others' point of view and provide no clear answers to their attitude. And if someone did not understand them, then just they come back to hit again (and run).

I was trying to understand why they do that? And just thought that these “hits and run” help the Dalai Lama and his successors to check and reassure the Dalai Lama’s power. If anyone does not obey or feel uncomfortable with the Dalai Lama’s “non-sense” “old-man” “crazy” attitudes, perhaps the Dalai Lama wants to know it before retiring. It seems they think people “uncomfortable” with the DL might risk their plan for the Dalai Lama’ succession to by-pass the Chinese.

I really appreciate to have received Dharma not mixed with politics. I will pray so everyone can receive pure Dharma (not mixed with politics.) I think this would be the true path to liberation and the real intention of a Buddha for us.

Thom said...

An excellent opportunity to get our mesage out has presented itself to us this Sunday. Fareed Zakaria wil be interviewing the Dalia Lama @ 10:00a.m. on the 10th of May.
Please consider sending your comments to his FACEBOOK or email to comments your perpective about this man. NOW!
If enough people contact him, he will be affected and perhaps ask him the Big Question.

Tenzin said...

Thom, where did you see this about Fareed Zakaria's interview -- where will it be? And do you have good contact addresses for him?

Anonymous said...


this address is given on one of the facebook pages that seems to be his.

i've already sent him an email with a link to this article.

Thom said...

Dalai Lama (after thinking for a few seconds): “President Bush. I met him personally and liked him very much. He was honest and straightforward, and that is very important. I may not have agreed with all his policies, but I thought he was very honest and a very good leader.”

The Dalai Lama has been shown to be something of a showman and a likely CIA stooge. He has previously gone on record supporting "just" wars like the one in Iraq and the War on Terror.

Unfortunately the Dalai Lama has put his own cause above the cause of humanity. The Dalai gets a great deal of US support (likely financial) for his continued discrediting of the Chinese government on the issues of Tibet. In 2007, Bush presented the Dalai Lama with the Congressional Medal of Freedom for his support of US policies around the world.

The people of Tibet and their treatment are an important issue. However, the people of Iraq, Afghanistan, and all of those countries suffering under the policies of Global Empire (globalization) are no less important.

The Dalai Lama's words are beautiful and his smile is pleasant, but his moral character is lacking. The Dalai Lama writes (if in fact he writes all of his books) about the need for compassion and the negation of selfishness. However, the Dalai Lama has demonstrated an inability to feel or care for other oppressed peoples besides Tibetans.

Real compassion for all people would have meant that the Dalai Lama would have made strong statements against aggressive wars for resources and strategic positioning for empire. Abandoning selflessness would have meant that the Dalai Lama would recognize that the struggles of the Tibetan people should be aligned with the struggles of all oppressed peoples.

One could argue that the Dalai Lama is goofy and incapable of understanding the massive evil of the military industrial complex. But the Dalai Lama is astute at promoting his himself and his cause, therefore it is highly unlikely that the Dalai is a fool. Rather his survival and that of his particular branch of Buddhism has much to do with his intelligence and abilities.

Humanity is in dire need of real moral courage and compassion. Sadly the Dalai Lama has shown himself to be a better showman than person.His words and actions at such a critical time in human history will likely create an unhelpful Karma for himself (if you believe in what he preaches). But more importantly for the world, the Dalai Lama is promoting a Karma (war) that will likely mean that many continue to suffer around the world.

The Dalai Lama has a great Karmic responsibility for his actions.

What kind of man is this that lies as easily as a Misissippis River Boat Gambler Grifting his way down to New Orleans.

Thom said...

CNN) -- The Dalai Lama says the key to stopping violence around the world is to stop "destructive emotion."

In an interview to air Sunday on CNN's "GPS," he tells Fareed Zakaria that he doesn't think even Osama bin Laden wished for violence when he was a child but that it grew of out hatred and frustration.

The Dalai Lama also addressed relations between Tibet and China in the interview, which Zakaria discussed with CNN.

CNN: Why is Tibet such a hot-button issue for China?

Fareed Zakaria: China sees the issue as a separatist movement, as President Lincoln did when the South wanted to secede from the Union. They feel their territorial integrity is being threatened. And Tibetans see their culture, language and religion as being slowly but surely extinguished by the Chinese.

'Fareed Zakaria GPS'
Fareed sits down with the Dalai Lama this week on "GPS."
1 and 5 p.m. ET Sunday

see full schedule »
CNN: So who's right?

Zakaria: Well, that depends on who you ask. You need to look at the history to get a complete picture. It all goes back to Genghis Khan, who captured Tibet in 1207. He united Tibet » with China under the Mongol empire. The Chinese have claimed an unbroken line of sovereignty over Tibet ever since.

The Tibetans, however, reject that claim, saying they have been an independent kingdom for many periods during that time, some centuries long.

That was the situation until 1912, when Tibet declared itself an independent republic. China never recognized it, nor did the U.N. or any major Western power.

CNN: Well, that seems to indicate that China has a point. Does it?

Zakaria: It's not so simple, because although China never recognized an independent Tibet, neither did it exercise any control of Tibet.

That is, until 1950, when Chairman Mao sent the Red Army in to liberate -- as the Chinese saw it -- the Tibetan people from the feudal serfdom they were living under.

However, the Tibetans saw the act as an invasion, and in 1959, the political and spiritual leader of the Tibetan people, the Dalai Lama, fled to India, where he set up a government in exile.

Don't Miss
Zakaria's book: 'The Post-American World'
'Fareed Zakaria GPS'
CNN: So we've been with the current situation since 1959. Why hasn't there been any resolution?

Zakaria: Well, the Chinese are hoping to wait it out. By letting the issue drag on, they are hoping more and more ethnic Han Chinese move into the region and slowly let the Tibetan freedom movement die out.

CNN: Will it work?

Zakaria:That could happen -- and has worked with other regions. But, it could also work the other way.

The Chinese sometimes use force, as they did last year against the Tibetan monks, which causes a huge backlash in Tibet and outside. This has resulted in some Tibetans becoming more strident in their calls for independence and aggressive in their demands.

However, the Dalai Lama has repeatedly said that he does not seek independence, only cultural autonomy, and urged his followers to engage in no violent protests whatsoever. If there were ever a leader of a separatist group whom one could negotiate with, he's it. And once the 72-year-old Dalai Lama passes from the scene, Beijing might have to deal with a far more unpredictable and radical Tibetan movement.

CNN: Do you think granting what the Dalai Lama is asking for makes sense?

Zakaria: If you look at other cases, such as in Turkey and India, granting autonomy to groups that press for it has in the end produced a more stable and peaceful national climate. But that is a lesson the Chinese government will have to learn for itself; it is unlikely to take instruction from outsiders.

CNN: What ultimately causes this age-old mistrust between the Chinese and the Dalai Lama? What's the stumbling block that keeps them from finding resolution?

Zakaria: The Chinese government has always believed that when the Dalai Lama speaks of "autonomy," what he really means is independence, a sovereign nation for Tibet. I asked the Dalai Lama about this, and he denied it vehemently. He insists that Tibetans would truly be content to live within the Chinese system, as citizens of its government, as long as they are allowed to preserve their culture and practice their religion.

It is difficult to see how this gap -- the difference in perception between the two sides -- can be bridged.

E-mail me gps@cnn.com to let me know your thoughts.