Part Five: Disputing Pico Iyer's version of events regarding the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden

Fifth and final part of setting the record straight on Pico Iyer's book, Open Road, The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama.

On the false view of non-sectarianism

p 121

In effect, he seemed to be bringing out into the world two sometimes unrelated treasures, each of them explosive, one was Tibet and it’s particular culture, often hard to translate into other tongues, and the other was his brand of Buddhism. To mass general audiences, he always stressed “on crazy wisdom,” as you could call it, because philosophy seemed a way to cut through all the divisions to some universal human core. (“Sectarianism is poison,” he writes in an unusual violent statement in his second autobiography.) When he spoke of Nalanda Buddhism, “in honor of ancient Buddhism University in India from which his tradition’s great philosophers had emerged, he was essentially suggesting that reason and universality could offer places where Gelug practitioner and Kagyu, eastern Tibetan and central, American and Chinese could come together.

“His brand of Buddhism” is a very interesting phrase because that's what it is. What the Dalai Lama is promoting is his very own version of Buddhism, a sort of amalgamation of the traditional Tibetan Buddhist schools of Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya and Gelugpa. He has referred to it a couple of times now, most recently in Nottingham in May 2008.

What is 'Nalanda Buddhism'? In this context, it is quite simply the Dalai Lama's break with tradition. He advertises it as tradition by using the name of a famous monastic university in India and quoting the names of great Masters such as Nagarjuna, but the truth is that the Dalai Lama is now his own tradition. He wasn't the Head of any school of Tibetan Buddhism so he created his own tradition. He calls it 'rigme' or “non-denominational”. It seems that to arrive at this tradition you pick which bits of Tibetan Buddhism you like (principally Dzogchen teachings) and graft on a bit of philosophy. You also throw out any unique quality of each existing Tibetan Buddhist tradition (such as the traditionally chosen Karmapa or the Buddhist Deity Dorje Shugden), and that is when the problems start.

Divide and rule is the method of this tradition, producing a non-denominational mish-mash of the Dalai Lama's making, masquerading as mainstream Buddhism through the power of his celebrity.

The Dalai Lama has a very strange idea of non-sectarianism. He says “sectarianism is poison” but his idea of sectarianism is practising one spiritual tradition purely. Therefore, to be non-sectarian, one has to receive teachings from all Buddhist schools and practise each one. In an interview in Nottingham in May 2008 he said:

“My approach is promotion of non-sectarian. I myself receive teaching from all different Tibetan Buddhist sect”

If each tradition of Tibetan Buddhism has a complete path to enlightenment, why do we need to receive teachings from all of them? Surely it is fine to practise one while maintaining respect and good relationships with the others? This is true non-sectarianism.

What the Dalai Lama calls non-sectarianism is mixing traditions. What the Dalai Lama calls the “Nalanda Tradition” is his attempt to merge all the schools of Tibetan Buddhism together under his leadership. Therefore, for “Nalanda Tradition” read “tradition of Buddhism created by the Dalai Lama by merging the present traditions of Tibetan Buddhism under a false premise of non-sectarianism that allows the Dalai Lama to do as he pleases.”

Pico Iyer says:

....he was essentially suggesting that reason and universality could offer places where Gelug practitioner and Kagyu, eastern Tibetan and central, American and Chinese could come together.

No, he was essentially suggesting that there could be a tradition of Buddhism that the Dalai Lama has created and is the supreme leader of, and that encompasses all Buddhists. This is what the Dalai Lama has worked for: supreme religious and political power. He's a politician in the robes of a monk, causing confusion by that very dichotomy; posing as a religious authority when he is not the head of any school of Buddhism, speaking words like 'religious freedom' and 'harmony' while he destroys both.

For Buddhist practitioners to come together is very simple. We don’t all need just one tradition of Buddhism that everyone can subscribe to – we simply need to be left alone with the religious freedom to practise our individual traditions as our Gurus have taught us, while respecting without discrimination the differences and uniqueness of the different sects of Buddhism.

We also need a certain Dalai Lama to stop sowing words of disharmony in the Buddhist community and creating schisms where they ought not to be.

Click here for Part One, Part Two, Part Three and Part Four.

Posted courtesy of Lineage Holder.

Part Four: Disputing Pico Iyer's version of events regarding the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden

Part Four of setting the record straight on Pico Iyer's book, Open Road, The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama.

Religious Harmony?

Page 138.....
On and on the passionate tirade went, like nothing so much as a prosecuting lawyer’s final summation. Some people began to look at their watches. Always he was working for harmony between the schools for Tibetan Buddhism the Dalai Lama said. Yet a Shugden teacher had said that if a Gelug practitioner follows a Nyimgma teaching, he will be killed by the Shugden deity. What did this have to do with the clear philosophy laid out by Lord Buddha? And if you looked at the Nalanda teaching, the great work of the Indian philosophers Shantideva and Nagarjuna, which he was explicating now, what did that have to do with propitiating deities?

The Dalai Lama is lying again. In what way is he working for harmony between the schools of Tibetan Buddhism when he has split the Kagyu tradition because of his interfering in the traditional choice of Karmarpa and split the Gelugpa tradition over the Dorje Shugden issue? It seems that whenever the Dalai Lama takes an interest in something, it is disharmony, not harmony, that follows.

He created disharmony between Nyingmas and Gelugpas within the Tibetan diaspora, and between the NKT and other Buddhist groups in the West, by demonizing Dorje Shugden practitioners and dismissing them as a cult. The story of monks being expelled from their monasteries and the segregation wall at Ganden is now well documented.

Now even the FPMT, a supposedly Western Buddhist organization that should know better, has banned Dorje Shugden practitioners from receiving teachings from Lama Zopa. This is blatant discrimination and a horrible mix of religion and politics. How can this new “Restriction”, as they call it, possibly lead to harmony between schools of Buddhism?

It is completely superstitious to say that if a Gelugpa practitioner follows a Nyingma teaching that Dorje Shugden will harm them! He's not some jealous guardian but a Buddha who helps all living beings. How can a Buddha harm others? The present problem in Tibetan society with Dorje Shugden has been created by the Dalai Lama who believed the infamous Yellow Book written by Zemey Rinpoche. This book -- written 50 years ago by just one Dorje Shugden practitioner and denounced by many others -- was simply a collection of superstitious Tibetan folk tales; but the supposedly rational Dalai Lama believed these and began systematically destroying Dorje Shugden practice. If he had not, there would be no problems of disharmony.

The Dalai Lama seems to believe whatever he reads, whether it's the early pronouncements of the 5th Dalai Lama that Dorje Shugden is a harmful spirit (the 5th Dalai Lama later changed his mind) or the contents of the Yellow Book. It's a great shame that he doesn't believe his ownSpiritual Guide's book, Music Delighting the Ocean of Protectors, in which Trijang Rinpoche gives clear, logical reasons why Dorje Shugden is a Buddha. If he believed this book, there would be no problems!

Finally, on the note of the Buddhist philosophers, what does the great work of Shantideva and Nagarjuna have to do with propitiating spirits like Nechung, which the Dalai Lama does whenever he needs guidance on a political decision?

The fifth and final part of this book review coming soon.

Click here for Part One, Part Two, and Part Three.

Posted courtesy of Lineageholder.

Frequently asked questions about Dorje Shugden and the Dalai Lama, Part Two

Q: What are the politics behind the ban by the Dalai Lama and what may have prompted him to issue such a ban?
In 1961 the Dalai Lama tried to become the supreme head of Tibetan Buddhism by merging all the schools of Buddhism into one (a position never held by any previous Dalai Lama). This move was opposed by many. From the Western Shugden Society booklet: “The Tibetan Situation Today, Surprising Hidden News”:

As soon as you arrived to India as a refugee you made a plan to transform the four traditions of Tibetan Buddhism—Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu and Gelug—into one single tradition called Rigme (Non Lineage) tradition. This was your method to destroy the pure lineages of the Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu and Gelug and make you alone the head of all of them by establishing a new tradition. In this way you now have complete power and control of everything at a spiritual, political and material level.

At that time, the Tso Kha Chusum (“Thirteen Groups of Tibetans”) were against your plan and because of this for many years the Tibetan community lost their harmony and peace. Finally, the leader of the Tso Kha Chusum, Gungthang Tsultrim, was murdered by a shotgun. Tibetan people believe that Gungthang Tsultrim was killed by people working for you. Later, some other important members of the Tso Kha Chusum suddenly died, and people believed your organizations created the conditions for their death.

At that time he had so much opposition that he had to abandon his ambition, but it seems he did not give it up. For example, he later meddled with the internal spiritual affairs of the Kagyus, going against their tradition and choosing his own Karmapa, which has led to a well-documented schism, conflict and opposition to him amongst those who follow the Sharmapa and want to preserve the autonomy of the Kagyu lineage. The most likely reason for his issuing a ban on the Protector of Tsongkhapa’s tradition is to weaken the Gelugpas, thus bringing them under his power as well.

There is no doubt that he is trying to destroy the autonomy of the four different schools of Tibetan Buddhism. The only school he has not directly meddled with is the Sakyas, probably as there are too few of them to oppose him.

He is getting away with this by appealing to a liberal West, calling his approach “ecumenical” or “inclusive” whereas those who want to keep to their own tradition are “sectarian” or “exclusive”. The reality is that he is dispensing with centuries of authentic time-honored tradition and starting his own tradition so that he can be the head of it, stomping over people’s freedom of worship to do so

In other words, it is likely that he is banning Dorje Shugden out of a political motivation to increase his power and influence. This could be the only justification for saying that his own Teachers (who were universally beloved in Tibetan society just 30 years ago) were wrong and banning the practice. How sad!

The reasons he gives to convince people to support him are that relying upon Dorje Shugden amounts to spirit worship. This then leads to many paradoxes (explained in detail on this website and elsewhere); not least of which is that, if it were true, his own Teachers would be non-Buddhists for taking refuge in a spirit! It would invalidate the whole Gelugpa lineage and what could be said, then, for his own Buddhist education? However, the greatness of the deeds and teachings of these Lamas attests to their state of realization, which would not be possible if they were non-Buddhists relying on a spirit. The only conclusion we can come to is that the Dalai Lama is definitely wrong!

Trijang Rinpoche also gives many valid reasons why Dorje Shugden is a Buddha which can be read here. In summary, Dorje Shugden is a Buddha because he is the incarnation of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen who himself is from a long line of enlightened Masters including Manjushri. Since all these incarnations practised pure moral discipline for centuries, how would it be possible for Dragpa Gyaltsen to be reborn as a spirit? This would contradict the law of karma and imply that ethical conduct can lead to lower rebirth. Either that, or it would mean that an enlightened being could degenerate from the state of enlightenment and become a hungry ghost! All of these are the absurd consequences of holding Dorje Shugden to be a spirit.

The Dalai Lama has also repeatedly claimed that Dorje Shugden harms his health and the cause of Tibetan independence. He seems to be playing this down more recently because, again, it is ludicrous. If Dorje Shugden is harming his health, how is he a healthy-looking 72-year old? Also, one of the benefits of Buddhist refuge is that one is not harmed by demons or other evil influences. If the Dalai Lama is being harmed, he must be a non-Buddhist. Furthermore he abandoned the cause of Tibetan independence a long time ago, so how can Dorje Shugden harm it more than the Dalai Lama has by completely letting it go?

Check here to see if any of the Dalai Lama’s other reasons are valid.

On what authority does the Dalai Lama do these things?

The Dalai Lama has banned the practice of Dorje Shugden, but on what authority?

Since the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, the position of Dalai Lama has most definitely been a political one. No one would dispute that the Dalai Lama is the political leader of Tibet and head of the Tibetan Government in Exile, but what of his religious authority? Does he have the right and authority to ban the practice of a religious deity, as he has with Dorje Shugden, or to endorse a candidate to be the next Karmarpa thereby causing a schism in the Kagyu tradition?

The Dalai Lama is not the head of any of the four traditions of Tibetan Buddhism – the Nyingmas, Kagyus, Sakyas and Gelugpas. Each sect of Tibetan Buddhism has its own head. Many people mistakenly think that the Dalai Lama is the head of Tibetan Buddhism, or at least of the Gelugpa school, but if he is not head of any of the individual schools of Tibetan Buddhism, how can he be head of the whole Tradition? There is no 'Pope' of Tibetan Buddhism.

The confusion about the Dalai Lama's religious authority lies in the fact that he is a politician who is also a monk. When the Dalai Lama speaks, is it a politician who is speaking or is it a spiritual leader? No-one is quite sure, but clearly it can't be both because the aims of politics and religion are opposite and contradictory. It's not safe for a monk to do the job of politician unless the monk is stronger than the politician. If not, the monk becomes a politician who abuses religion for worldly goals rather than a religious leader who uses power and influence to accomplish spiritual goals.

Unfortunately, in the case of the Dalai Lama, it appears that the politician is uppermost. His actions are causing suffering to millions of Buddhists of the Tibetan lineage. There is one main reason why the Dalai Lama has banned the practice of Dorje Shugden; because it is politically advantageous for him to do so. He is playing the dangerous game of using religion to serve politics. His 'religious' reasons for banning this Deity are a smoke screen that hide a political agenda. Since 1961 the Dalai Lama has had the wish to unite all the schools of Tibetan Buddhism under his leadership. In an open letter to the Dalai Lama in 2001, the International Karma Kagyu Organization wrote:

In 1961 the Tibetan government in exile proposed to merge the four Tibetan schools into one religious body headed by Your Holiness. This policy inflicted serious spiritual suffering on much of the Tibetan exile community. Rallying behind Karmapa's authority, thirteen Tibetan settlements challenged the Exile Government's plan and as a consequence the whole scheme was abandoned. Later in the seventies Karmapa came under blame because he had chosen to defend the autonomy of the three other lineages.

"This policy inflicted serious spiritual suffering on much of the Tibetan exile community". This is also true for the Dorje Shugden ban. The scheme to merge the schools together may have seemed to be abandoned but His Holiness has not changed his ambitions; he still wants to be the supreme spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism. To this end he has split the Kagyu tradition in the Karmapa controversy and has also split the Gelugpa tradition over the issue of Dorje Shugden.

Frighteningly, he is supported by most Tibetans and many Westerners in these actions who argue that 'Tibetans must be united at this time in order to achieve a free or autonomous Tibet'. If it is generally felt that Tibetans must be united, the Dalai Lama can justify the removal of anything that he feels might divide them, such as different religious practices and traditions. When the Dalai Lama does this he claims that these practices are 'sectarian'. There doesn't have to be anything wrong with 'sectarian'; that which is sectarian is that which is characteristic of a sect. A sect is simply a religious denomination.

Difference is not normally a problem. It's only a problem if differences are used to stir up disharmony, as the Dalai Lama has by demonising practitioners of Dorje Shugden. Different sects of Buddhism can engage in different practices but still respect each other. Why can't Dorje Shugden practitioners live happily side by side with those who do not practise Dorje Shugden? This was the case before the Dalai Lama spoke out against the Protector and linked the practice to such emotive subjects as his health and the cause of Tibetan independence. In this way, he made a harmless practice that gives great spiritual benefit into a threat.

In these spiritually degenerate times, religion is serving the needs of politics. Unfortunately, the Dalai Lama's fame and charisma is so great that no one questions his actions. Buddhadharma is either being destroyed due to attachment to Tibetan nationality or because the Dalai Lama wants supreme power – not just political but also religious, and is operating a 'divide and rule' policy. Either way, Buddhadharma is being destroyed; this will be the ugly result of the Dalai Lama's actions.

What gives him the authority to make pronouncements about someone else's spiritual practice? It is normal in Buddhism to follow the views, intentions and practices of a respected Spiritual Teacher, but the Dalai Lama has proclaimed his tutor Trijang Rinpoche 'wrong' for promoting the practice of the Wisdom Buddha Dorje Shugden. In doing so he has cast doubt on the whole Gelug lineage and is now operating autonomously without any legitimate spiritual authority.

By instigating a grossly biased 'referendum' on Shugden and having monks who refuse to give up the practice expelled from their monasteries he has caused a deep schism in the Gelugpa tradition. Who is questioning his actions? Who will stop him? Many Tibetans will accept anything he says because he is their leader and the great majority of Westerners are so blinded by his smiling visage in the media and his public image as a 'simple monk' and 'man of peace' that they will also go along with what he says. He can do no wrong.

The destruction of Buddha Shakyamuni's holy teachings through the distorted views and mistaken actions of the world's most charming and famous Buddhist is an intolerable situation. It's an 'inside job', but how is it that nobody has thought to ask "on whose authority is he doing this?" It is an indictment of our collective intellects in this age of celebrity, where style reigns over substance, that more people are not asking this question.

Posted courtesy of Lineageholder.