Dalai Lama's New Advice Concerning Dolgyal (Shugden) issued 30th May

[theloneranger]

This just appeared on Phayul news, issued by Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Dharamshala, 30 May 2008. Is it just me or does the Dalai Lama's reasons for the Shugden ban keep changing year after year, month after month  

He states:
3. Especially inappropriate in the context of the well-being of Tibetan society 'so is reason 3, not political or what? Come on you hungry scholar's, take this mumbo jumbo apart peice by piece!!!!!!!!!ROAR!!!!!!

His Holiness the Dalai Lama's Advice Concerning Dolgyal (Shugden)
TibetNet[Saturday, May 31, 2008 11:12]
Dharamshala: Following a long and careful investigation, His Holiness the Dalai Lama has strongly discouraged Tibetan Buddhists from propitiating the fierce spirit known as Dolgyal (Shugden). Although he once practiced Dolgyal propitiation himself, His Holiness renounced the practice in 1975 after discovering the profound historical, social and religious problems associated with it. He did so with the full knowledge and support of his junior tutor, the late Kyabje Trichang Rinpoche through whom His Holiness first became associated with this practice. Even within the Geluk and Sakya schools - the Tibetan Buddhist traditions to which majority of Dolgyal practitioners belong - the propitiation of this spirit has been controversial throughout its history. Historical investigation reveals that Dolgyal practice, which has strong sectarian overtones, has a history of contributing towards a climate of sectarian disharmony in various parts of Tibet, and between various communties of Tibetans. Therefore, from 1975 onwards, His Holiness has regularly made public his views on the inadvisability of this practice and underlined the following three key reasons:

1. The danger of Tibetan Buddhism degenerating into a form of spirit worship: Tibetan Buddhism originally evolved from the authentic and ancient tradition upheld at the great Indian monastic university of Nalanda, a tradition that His Holiness often describes as a complete form of Buddhism. It embodies the original teaching of the Buddha as developed through the rich philosophical, psychological and spiritual insights of such great Buddhist masters as Nagarjuna, Asanga, Vasubandhu, Dignaga and Dharamakirti. Since the great philosopher and logician Shantarakshita was instrumental in the establishment of Buddhism in Tibet in its earliest stages in the 8th century, philosophical enquiry and critical analysis have always been important hallmarks of Tibetan Buddhism. The problem with Dolgyal practice is that it promotes a tendency to consider spirits like Dolgyal (Shugden) as Dharma protectors and moreover to take them as more important than the Buddha himself. If this trend goes unchecked, and innocent people become seduced by cult-like practices of this kind, the danger is that the rich tradition of Tibetan Buddhism may degenerate into the mere propitiation of spirits.

2. Obstacles to the emergence of genuine non-sectarianism: His Holiness has often stated that one of his most important commitments is the promotion of inter-religious understanding and harmony. As part of this endeavour, His Holiness is committed to promoting non-sectarianism in all schools of Tibetan Buddhism. In doing so His Holiness is following the personal examples set by his predecessors, especially the Fifth Dalai Lama and the Thirteenth Dalai Lama. Not only is a non-sectarian approach mutually enriching for all Tibetan Buddhist schools, but it is also the best safeguard against a possible rise of sectarianism that could have damaging consequences for the Tibetan tradition as a whole. Given the acknowledged link between Dolgyal worship and sectarianism, this particular practice remains a fundamental obstacle to fostering a genuine non-sectarian spirit within the Tibetan Buddhist tradition.

3. Especially inappropriate in the context of the well-being of Tibetan society: In the context of the current condition of the Tibetan people in particular, Dolgyal propitiation is especially problematic. Textual and historical research demonstrates that Dogyal propitiation arose out of hostility to the great Fifth Dalai Lama and his government. The Fifth Dalai Lama, who assumed both the spiritual and temporal leadership of Tibet in the 17th century, personally denounced Dolgyal as a malevolent spirit, which arose out of misguided intentions and is detrimental to the welfare of beings in general and the Tibetan government headed by the Dalai Lamas. The Thirteenth Dalai Lama and other respected Tibetan spiritual masters also spoke strongly against this practice. Therefore, in the current context of Tibetan society, where unity among the Tibetan people is vitally important, engaging in this controversial and divisive propitiatory practice is inappropriate.

On the basis of these three reasons, His Holiness has strongly urged his followers to consider carefully the problems of Dolgyal practice and to act accordingly. He has stated that, as someone in a leadership position, it is his responsibility to speak out against the damaging consequences of this kind of spirit worship. Whether or not his advice is heeded, His Holiness has stated, is a matter for the individual. However, since he personally feels strongly about the negativity of this practice, he has requested that those who continue to propitiate Dolgyal, do not attend his formal religious teachings which traditionally require the establishment of a teacher-disciple relationship.

Issued by Office of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, Dharamshala, 30 May 2008 
 

[beggar]

BY TRINLEY KALSANG

Here is a complete response to the main points brought up by the Dalai Lama in this interview.

1.  Dorje Shugden practice is not "religion" it is "spirit worship"

This is plainly insulting to many peoples’ beliefs.  The Dalai Lama travels the world expounding religious tolerance but doesn’t recognize the long lasting precedents set in his own tradition.  The way Dorje Shugden is practiced is no different than any other protector in the Buddhist pantheon.  As is typical, the deity is invoked, offerings are made, mantra is recited and requests are made.  As past and current lamas have recognized Dorje Shugden as a deity worthy of "worship" is enough recognition for their followers.

Many lamas, including the Dalai Lama's own teacher, Trijang Rinpoche, wrote long proofs showing how this deity was special and has a long history of protecting the Dharma as a lama, such as Panchen Sonam Dragpa, who later took the form of a protector as the best way to uphold the practices in this day and age.   The Dalai Lama claims that he follows the "Nalanda Tradition", and this deity somehow contradicts that, yet this deity is considered the abbot of the Nalanda monastery, the great master Shakya Shri.

To claim that this is spirit worship insults not only this deity’s practice itself, but also the way all other protectors that are practiced.  Not only that, many have followed the tradition of recognizing this deity as very special Buddha, and this insults their refuge and beliefs.  Whether Dorje Shugden is a Buddha or not is beyond the scope of public policy.  Nevertheless, many have chosen to follow the beliefs expounded by many lamas pre-dating the Dalai Lama who claimed he is a Buddha.  To insult these beliefs is not religious tolerance.

2.  The Fifth Dalai Lama warned against this evil spirit

In the interview the Dalai Lama doesn’t even provide half of the story.  Namely, the so called evil spirit came from a respected lama, Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen, who was murdered by the Fifth Dalai Lama’s administration.  This is admitted in the Fifth Dalai Lama's own autobiography!  Not only that - there is a lot of evidence the Fifth Dalai Lama wrote a prayer to Dorje Shugden, offered a temple in Lhasa to him called Trode Khangsar that is still there today, and created a statue with his own hands and placed it at a monastery called Phelgyeling.

3.  Many past lamas have considered Dorje Shugden an evil spirit

The Dalai Lama claims a number of Tibetan scholars over the last 300 years have warned against Dorje Shugden.  Yet the evidence he has provided don't even circumstantially make a case against Dorje Shugden.  Most of the works refer to something but don't even spefically mention who or what exactly.  Can we safely assume they refer to Dorje Shugden (aka Dholgyal) even though it is well known there were hundreds of deities or spirits recognized in Tibet?

Specifically:
a.  Fifth Dalai Lama - The evidence given is inconsistent and pre-dates Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen's death.  There are even the unprecedented claims made that Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen was the false reincarnation of Sonam Geleg Palzang!  It is well known and well documented that Panchen Lozang Chokyi Gyaltsen recognized the Fifth Dalai Lama and Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen.  The evidence presented also claims Dholgyal was destroyed, but if that was the case there would have been no development of Dorje Shugden in Tibet!
b.  Phurchok Ngawang Jampa - He doesn't say anything about Shugden or "Dholgyal" in his history of the 4 great monasteries.
c.  Trichen Ngawang Chokden - The evidence by its own admission doesn't even mention Dholgyal specifically.
d.  Yongzin Yeshi Gyaltsen - All he mentions is "new protector" nothing about Shugden or "Dholgyal" in his work.
e.  Ngulchu Dharmabhadra - In a biography written by his nephew there is story that another Lama told him some harm was coming from Dholgyal, but this is not even Ngulchu Dharmabhadra's opinion.  In fact in Ngulchu's collected works there is a question about Dholgyal and Ganden Lha Gyema in which he confirms Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen is Dorje Shugden, appearing as a wrathful Manjushri.


4.  This has remained controversial for the last 300 years

The deity with its practice and the controversy are two separate things.  The current controversy started in the last 30 years, after the Dalai Lama decided to speak publicly about it, although it is a private practice.  Instead of trying to resolve any dispute about this privately, he took into the public sector as a divisive issue.  Dorje Shugden was even practiced by Nyingma adherents for many generations in Gyasumdo, Nepal with no conflict of sects.  This was described in anthropologist Stanley Mumford’s work "Himalayan Dialogue" in which he also observed the controversy unfolding in the late 1970’s:  "Recently the Dalai Lama, as leader of the Tibetan people, has made a historic judgment. He has determined that the guardian deity called Shugs-ldan is not only too dangerous, but he also has promoted a vicious factional rivalry between the Gelugpa and Nyingmapa religious orders." (pages 134-135.  Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1989).

5.  The Dalai Lama did not ban Dorje Shugden practice

The Dalai Lama postured himself so strongly and used loyalty privately to pressure the Tibetan Government in Exile and other important Tibetan lamas that no formal ban was necessary.  The Tibetan Government in Exile and all exiled groups promptly made policies to enforce his views.  Petitions were sent to all Tibetan settlements requiring them to renounce Dorje Shugden in 1996.  In January 2008 he precipitated a vote through demagoguery to castigate anyone who did not sign a petition renouncing any loyalty to Dorje Shugden.  As a result, many monks have been removed from the monasteries.  Also a major hostel, Do Khangtsen, belonging to the monastic college of Ganden Shartse, has completely removed itself from the monastic establishment.  This is unprecedented in the history of the Gelug tradition.

6.  Dorje Shugden practice is sectarian

The accusation that this practice is sectarian certainly incites more sectarian division than any privately recited requests to Dorje Shugden to simply uphold the Gelug tradition.  Gelugpa followers have used Dorje Shugden as a protector the Gelug sect, but that doesn’t mean it is sectarian.  Not only that the ritual aspects are taken from the Sakya tradition, where it was practiced widely until the the 20th century.  The contemporary belief of many is that Dorje Shugden is against Nyingma, yet as mentioned above Dorje Shugden practice has also been done by some Nyingma followers, who were also put under the pressure of the ban to give up the practice, as mentioned in Mumford’s book.

7.  Dorje Shugden practice degenerates Buddhism

The only degeneration that is happening is the conflict which can be easily verified with accounts of the discrimination and disharmony in the Tibetan settlements and monasteries.  The communists destroyed many monasteries, yet the tradition on the inside flourished quite well under the leadership of Trijang and Ling Rinpoche in exile.  What is happening now, with the will to mislead with wrong information and incite disharmony is ruining people’s lives, has caused unprecedented problems in the monasteries in South India and continues to torment practitioners in Tibet, India and all over the world.
 
« Last Edit: Today at 08:23:48 AM by TrinleyKalsang »

[basically]

Hi Trinley Kelsang

Thank you for this comprehensive rebuttal.  Have you sent it to phayul.com who are publishing the DL's new statement?  We know that they will not publish it but at least they may read it!  Please send it to them.

love
Basically

[maryjane]

Ho-hum,  yawn .... next!!!

[beggar]

Please please please, let's not sink down to that level...

With sentences like "filthy propaganda from ..." in your post we do just that.

Then, whatever the outer result, we have lost, lost, lost.

Lost the debate, lost ourselves, lost the chance to benefit.

Can i ask you to please modify, or perhaps best delete your post?

All the posts you refer to, they speak for themselves; no need to imitate them.

Let's undertake the work to research, assemble valuable information and write well with a previously checked motivation.

It's more effort, but also much more worthwhile.

Thanks.

[Dondrup Shugden]

The Dalai Lama issued this advice against the practice of Dorje Shugden on 30 May 2008.  The very comprehensive rebuttals contributed will greatly help us to be in the position to logically answer any defamation against our faith in Dorje Shugden.

Good information to have.