Interesting statement within HHDL's statement

[Ensapa]

Now let me address the subject of Dolgyal. There is a tradition amongst some of saying; 'Yes, we must follow the Dalai Lama's orders. Now if the suggestion is that it is a case of following someone just because they are a figure of authority, I do not agree. Even when dealing with the instruction of the Buddha, we are taught not to follow it blindly. If upon investigation it turns out to be a statement that is acceptable literally, then we should act upon it. If not, then we must interpret the meaning. Therefore, if someone, without giving any thought to the reasons behind what I say, wants to follow it just because I have said it, I would tend to feel that that is neither in the spirit of the Buddhist way of doing things. It is particularly at variance with the Mahayana approach. The issue here is not just whether people should be following my instruction or not. There are reasons to be considered here. I have drawn attention to things that have been overlooked. However, people must be aware of the reasons for my doing that.

....since there are no concrete evidence of Dorje Shugden being a negative being, because all the "evidence" can be easily swept off, and not only that, many of the anti Dorje Shugden crusaders more often than not fail to disprove of any doubts that arise, for they are biased and cannot see the point clearly from a neutral position. The saddest part of all this is that most of his followers do not know the real reason for following and just follows for the sake of it. How to tell? just ask any of them and they will only say they do not wish to talk about it, that we should just follow HHDL. They cannot explain! How can that be said that they are aware? How can they be aware when they only know biased information from only one side? I sense another case of selective reading here.

[Big Uncle]

Well, since the Dalai Lama welcomes people to challenge the Dorje Shugden ban and not just take it blindly, then we should examine the ban carefully and see it for what it is.

Arguments for and against the practice

Views of the 14th Dalai Lama
Further information: Dorje Shugden
The 14th Dalai Lama is asking people who want to take Tantric initiation from him to let go of the practice of Dorje Shugden, giving three main reasons:

The Dalai Lama identifies Dorje Shugden as a "spirit", and claims that the tradition of propitiation associated with Shugden elevates this spirit to being equal or superior to the Buddha. He states that encouraging the worship of Dorje Shugden could contribute to reducing Tibetan Buddhism to a form of superstitious spirit worship.

The Dalai Lama states that there is an "acknowledged link" between worship of Dorje Shugden and sectarianism between the various Tibetan Buddhist schools. The Dalai Lama believes non-sectarianism is "his most important commitment", and that the worship of Dorje Shugden may be a barrier to this commitment to non-sectarianism.

The Dalai Lama says that Dorje Shugden has a long history of antagonistic attitude to the Dalai Lamas and the Tibetan Government they have headed since the time of the 5th Dalai Lama. He identifies the 5th and 13th Dalai Lamas as having specifically spoken out against Dorje Shugden as a threat "to the welfare of beings in general and the Tibetan government headed by the Dalai Lamas in particular". He states that in light of the current difficult situation endured by the Tibetan people, it is particularly important to resist the worship of Dorje Shugden as a potentially divisive practice.

The Dalai Lama stated conclusively, "I have explained the reasons why I am against the veneration of Shugden and given my sources in a very detailed manner." The Foundation for the Preservation of the Mahayana Tradition (FPMT) explains the official advice of the Dalai Lama based on the three points above:

The Dalai Lama has strongly urged his followers to consider carefully the problems of Dolgyal practice on the basis of these three reasons and to act accordingly. He has stated that, as a Buddhist leader with a special concern for the Tibetan people, 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 made clear, is a matter for the individual. However, since he personally feels strongly about how negative this practice is, he has requested those who continue to propitiate Dolgyal not to attend his formal religious teachings, which traditionally require the establishment of a teacher-disciple relationship.

Replies from Shugden practitioners
Responding to the above three points, some members of the Western Shugden Society (a campaigning group established in 2008) replied:
   
The practice of Dorje Shugden is not spirit worship because Dorje Shugden is viewed as the embodiment of Manjushri, the Buddha of Wisdom and because Dorje Shugden practitioners practice the complete Dharma of Buddha Shakyamuni. Moreover, if the Dalai Lama's reason were true, it would mean that the teachings he is giving himself are non-Buddhist as many of these come from his teachers who were faithful Dorje Shugden practitioners.

There is no evidence to support the claim that they are promoting sectarianism. All they are requesting is the freedom to practice the tradition without being ostracized. For example, regarding the Dalai Lama's public teachings, even "declared non-Buddhists are permitted to attend even his most esoteric Buddhist rituals," but Buddhist Dorje Shugden practitioners are excluded.

If another political leader were to say someone's spiritual practice was affecting the government headed by that leader and so should be stopped, this would be considered dictatorial and unacceptable. In the same way, it is not correct to say that those who pray to Dorje Shugden for the protection of their Dharma realizations in any way is detrimental to the government headed by the Dalai Lama.

Pro-Dorje Shugden Lamas such as Geshe Kelsang Gyatso have asked the Dalai Lama to present valid reasons supporting his claims and, in the absence of any response, have continued to engage in the practice.[30] They continue to rely on teachers such as Trijang Rinpoche, who taught that Dorje Shugden is a Buddha. Trijang Rinpoche, the junior tutor and "root guru" of the current Dalai Lama, is seen by the FPMT and others as "One of the foremost Tibetan Buddhist masters of our time". Remarking on this debate in his text on Dorje Shugden Trijang Rinpoche stated:

Yet all this talk is nothing but babbling speculation. Why? Because this great guardian of the teachings is well known to be the precious supreme emanation from Drepung monastery's upper house, Dragpa Gyaltsen, arising in a wrathful aspect. The proof is unmistaken. Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen, as is taught in the lineage, was the final birth in a reincarnation lineage that included the Mahasiddha Birwawa, the great Kashmiri Pandit Shakya Shri, the omniscient Buton, Duldzin Dragpa Gyaltsen, Panchen Sonam Dragpa, and so forth; this is proven by valid scriptural quotation and reasoning. These great beings, from a definitive point of view, were already fully enlightened, and even to common appearances, every one of them was a holy being that attained high states of realization. What worse karma could there be than denying this and asserting that he was born in the preta (spirit) realm?

[Zach]

Now let me address the subject of Dolgyal. There is a tradition amongst some of saying; 'Yes, we must follow the Dalai Lama's orders. Now if the suggestion is that it is a case of following someone just because they are a figure of authority, I do not agree. Even when dealing with the instruction of the Buddha, we are taught not to follow it blindly. If upon investigation it turns out to be a statement that is acceptable literally, then we should act upon it. If not, then we must interpret the meaning. Therefore, if someone, without giving any thought to the reasons behind what I say, wants to follow it just because I have said it, I would tend to feel that that is neither in the spirit of the Buddhist way of doing things. It is particularly at variance with the Mahayana approach. The issue here is not just whether people should be following my instruction or not. There are reasons to be considered here. I have drawn attention to things that have been overlooked. However, people must be aware of the reasons for my doing that.

....since there are no concrete evidence of Dorje Shugden being a negative being, because all the "evidence" can be easily swept off, and not only that, many of the anti Dorje Shugden crusaders more often than not fail to disprove of any doubts that arise, for they are biased and cannot see the point clearly from a neutral position. The saddest part of all this is that most of his followers do not know the real reason for following and just follows for the sake of it. How to tell? just ask any of them and they will only say they do not wish to talk about it, that we should just follow HHDL. They cannot explain! How can that be said that they are aware? How can they be aware when they only know biased information from only one side? I sense another case of selective reading here.

When and where did he say this ? 

[Ensapa]

Now let me address the subject of Dolgyal. There is a tradition amongst some of saying; 'Yes, we must follow the Dalai Lama's orders. Now if the suggestion is that it is a case of following someone just because they are a figure of authority, I do not agree. Even when dealing with the instruction of the Buddha, we are taught not to follow it blindly. If upon investigation it turns out to be a statement that is acceptable literally, then we should act upon it. If not, then we must interpret the meaning. Therefore, if someone, without giving any thought to the reasons behind what I say, wants to follow it just because I have said it, I would tend to feel that that is neither in the spirit of the Buddhist way of doing things. It is particularly at variance with the Mahayana approach. The issue here is not just whether people should be following my instruction or not. There are reasons to be considered here. I have drawn attention to things that have been overlooked. However, people must be aware of the reasons for my doing that.

....since there are no concrete evidence of Dorje Shugden being a negative being, because all the "evidence" can be easily swept off, and not only that, many of the anti Dorje Shugden crusaders more often than not fail to disprove of any doubts that arise, for they are biased and cannot see the point clearly from a neutral position. The saddest part of all this is that most of his followers do not know the real reason for following and just follows for the sake of it. How to tell? just ask any of them and they will only say they do not wish to talk about it, that we should just follow HHDL. They cannot explain! How can that be said that they are aware? How can they be aware when they only know biased information from only one side? I sense another case of selective reading here.

When and where did he say this ? 

Hi Zach, it is from HHDL's website: http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/speeches-by-his-holiness/gelug-conference

copy the first sentence, and google it, or copy the first sentence and find it in the article as it is actually very long, but for most, lack concrete evidence.

The article is much longer, and i was going through it to mine some information. There is actually a lot of interesting information in the articles about Dorje Shugden on the website, but when you know Tibetan history from an unbiased point of view, all of them seem insubstancial. Its really to understand more of why HHDL implemented the ban, but in between you'll find many interesting statements and pointers that contradict HHDL's stance on Dorje Shugden. If we take time to examine them, there are actually a lot of information there that contradicts with what is written in history elsewhere and perhaps, the more intelligent individuals would take this as a sign of sorts?

I love going through those articles because I truly want to understand what the ban is all about, and i do read between the lines to find out what is going on. And more often than not, what I find tend to be quite surprising and baffling!

[Zach]

Interesting. 

[yontenjamyang]

It is the basis of Buddha's teachings to critically examine the teachings and make one's own conclusion. For me I find the the definitive answers in the prayers of Dorje Shugden.

I quote HE Geshe Kelsang Gyatso.

"The confusion arises as the function of Dorje Shugden as a Dharmapala, or 'Dharma Protector', is to protect the Gelug lineage, and especially the Ganden Oral Lineage. According to anti-Shugden proponents who believe the words of the Dalai Lama, the practice of Dorje Shugden includes a promise not even to touch a Nyingma scripture and that he will kill those who violate this vow. Dorje Shugden practitioners cannot find one mention of these words in the collected praises to him. On the contrary Dorje Shugden's function is to protect all living beings from their own delusions and can never harm any living being – as it says in the extensive fulfilling and restoring ritual of the Dharma Protector, the great king Dorje Shugden, in conjunction with Mahakala, Kalarupa, Kalindewi and other Dharma Protectors:

Even though you display the manner of a fearsome being
Amidst a mass of turbulent, blazing fire,
You never move even slightly from the peaceful state of love and compassion.

– Extensive Prayers to Dorje Shugden

and

You said "I will protect as a wealth of merit for all beings
The sublime, stainless essence of the Buddhas' teachings."

– Extensive Prayers to Dorje Shugden

Geshe Kelsang Gyatso claims that Dorje Shugden is an enlightened being who could never harm any living being: "Some people believe that if Gelugpa practitioners practice Nyingma teachings, Dorje Shugden will harm them, but this is completely wrong. We never believe this. Impossible." He adds:

HH the Dalai Lama says: "That cult is actually destroying the freedom of religious thought. Say I want to practise Nyingma. They say this Protector will harm me." This is also completely untrue. We would like to ask HH the Dalai Lama: who are these Shugden practitioners saying these meaningless things? His words are causing disharmony between Shugden practitioners and Nyingma practitioners. Why is HH the Dalai Lama creating this new problem? Until now there have been no problems between Gelugpas and Nyingmapas, and there has been no arguing or criticism. Some scholars debate with each other, such as the well-known Gelugpa scholar Yonten Gyatso and Dongthog Tulku, a scholar from another tradition, who conducted a debate by letter over a number of years. They have written many books replying to each other’s assertions, but this does not mean they are criticising each other. They are simply clarifying the doctrines of their own traditions, with good motivation. There is nothing wrong with this.

I would like to ask: what is the problem between the Nyingma and Gelug traditions? There is none. The majority of people from both traditions naturally live in harmony, so why is HH the Dalai Lama destroying this harmony by saying things like "Shugdens say you should not even touch a Nyingma document"? Although we concentrate on our own tradition we respect all other Buddhist traditions, including the Nyingma, and we rejoice very much in their sincere practice.

"Conservative" Gelugpas may find such language congenial to their views, while "liberals" are more likely to stress the arbitrary nature of such sectarian divisions. Dorje Shugden practitioners have never been considered sectarian. According to Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, the words in the Dorje Shugden prayers are not directed at living beings themselves, nor at other traditions, but at the delusions or negative minds of living beings:

The stainless sun of Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition
Shines throughout the sky of samsara and nirvana,
Eliminating the darkness of inferior and wrong paths;
Please cause its light to spread and bring good fortune to all living beings.

– Brief Prayers to Dorje Shugden

In this context, ‘paths’ do not mean external paths that lead from one place to another. We do not need to study external paths as we can see them directly with our eyes. ‘Paths’ here refer to internal paths, which are by nature our actions. Actions of body, speech and mind that are motivated by ignorance are wrong paths because they lead to suffering, and actions that are motivated by wisdom are correct paths—or spiritual paths—because they lead to happiness.

Because there are different levels of happiness, such as the happiness of liberation and enlightenment, there are different levels of spiritual paths, such as the path to liberation and the path to enlightenment... Moreover, because there are different levels of suffering, such as the sufferings of humans, animals, and hell beings, there are different levels of wrong paths, such as those that lead to rebirth as a human being, animal or hell being. By studying the different types of paths presented by Buddha we can distinguish between correct and incorrect paths, and thereby avoid incorrect paths.

—Geshe Kelsang Gyatso"

[Positive Change]

Now let me address the subject of Dolgyal. There is a tradition amongst some of saying; 'Yes, we must follow the Dalai Lama's orders. Now if the suggestion is that it is a case of following someone just because they are a figure of authority, I do not agree. Even when dealing with the instruction of the Buddha, we are taught not to follow it blindly. If upon investigation it turns out to be a statement that is acceptable literally, then we should act upon it. If not, then we must interpret the meaning. Therefore, if someone, without giving any thought to the reasons behind what I say, wants to follow it just because I have said it, I would tend to feel that that is neither in the spirit of the Buddhist way of doing things. It is particularly at variance with the Mahayana approach. The issue here is not just whether people should be following my instruction or not. There are reasons to be considered here. I have drawn attention to things that have been overlooked. However, people must be aware of the reasons for my doing that.

....since there are no concrete evidence of Dorje Shugden being a negative being, because all the "evidence" can be easily swept off, and not only that, many of the anti Dorje Shugden crusaders more often than not fail to disprove of any doubts that arise, for they are biased and cannot see the point clearly from a neutral position. The saddest part of all this is that most of his followers do not know the real reason for following and just follows for the sake of it. How to tell? just ask any of them and they will only say they do not wish to talk about it, that we should just follow HHDL. They cannot explain! How can that be said that they are aware? How can they be aware when they only know biased information from only one side? I sense another case of selective reading here.

Thank you Ensapa for bringing this to the forefront. It is interesting to note that HHDL has always, even with his seemingly "absolute" stance with regards to the ban, left it to the contemplation of others with this regards. HHDL is truly teaching us an invaluable lesson that is the crux of our Buddhist faith... to follow blindly or to follow with well thought out conviction.

If one were to really peel back the layers of this ban, it is pure and utter nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense that a ban should be in place apart from HHDL saying so. There is no fact or reason beyond any reasonable doubt that any of the claims HHDL has reiterate over and over holds any water. So what does one do?

If we were to follow the scriptures, we need to research, contemplate and come to our very own conclusions. Whether we choose to follow or not follow HHDL with regards to the ban is entirely up to oneself. Thus the real fault, I personally find is, the fact that the enforcement of the ban which defies any logic or basis. Meaning, if one were to, for whatever personal reasons follow the advice of HHDL with regards to stopping the practice of Dorje Shugden, it should be a exactly that, a personal reason and not "force" someone else to not practice purely because one has decided not to.

It is a very childish aspect whereby, just because I have stopped, you must to. It is precisely this attitude that has given rise to such pain and anguish. And where does this basis stem from? Ignorance and selfishness... Even if the practice of Dorje Shudgen was indeed wrong, the way it has been enforced makes it even worse!

[dsiluvu]

Now let me address the subject of Dolgyal. There is a tradition amongst some of saying; 'Yes, we must follow the Dalai Lama's orders. Now if the suggestion is that it is a case of following someone just because they are a figure of authority, I do not agree. Even when dealing with the instruction of the Buddha, we are taught not to follow it blindly. If upon investigation it turns out to be a statement that is acceptable literally, then we should act upon it. If not, then we must interpret the meaning. Therefore, if someone, without giving any thought to the reasons behind what I say, wants to follow it just because I have said it, I would tend to feel that that is neither in the spirit of the Buddhist way of doing things. It is particularly at variance with the Mahayana approach. The issue here is not just whether people should be following my instruction or not. There are reasons to be considered here. I have drawn attention to things that have been overlooked. However, people must be aware of the reasons for my doing that.

This is a rather interesting change of tune from His Holiness! Perhaps there is some light bursting through at the end of the tunnel! Thanks Ensapa for highlighting this.

I think His Holiness is somehow hinting that the practice of Dorje Shugden is a personal choice and one should not just take on His advice and instructions so literally... perhaps this is a cue to CTA to lift the BAN?

What has been said and done, has been done and Shugdenpas are now separated. However, this little subtle note could be the key to some form of hope that the aggression and opression towards Shugdenpas ought to stop! Obviously it would even be better if His Holiness said that there is NO BAN! And that whether or not Sugden practitioners or not, all should be treated equally following "Human Rights" constitution of Freedom of religion/faith.

If His Holiness remains a firm stand against Shugdenpas not coming to his teachings or receiving any initiations from him, then that is from His own personal side not to accept Shugden practicing students and has nothing to do with the welfare and well being of the Tibetan Shugdenpas. I am sure they would not mind not going for His Holiness teachings as they have Trijang Rinpoche. But to lift the BAN... that is something align to the very issues Tibetans are requesting China to consider - to give autonomy - yes please give first before you can receive... it is part of the Buddhist spirit... give us our spiritual autonomy and please do abide in the democratic constitution to protect your people dear CTA!

When you kill and cut a Shugden practitioner, isn't their blood the same colour as your CTA???
May the BAN be lifted soon!   

[shugdenprotect]

As indicated in the extract from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, HH happily and readily teach the Dharma to anyone who is open to hear it. It is mentioned that HH would even give the sacred Kalachakra initiations to non-Buddhists who may not actually engage in the practice because the initiation is intended to be a blessing to those present. HH has shown consistent compassion, wisdom and skillfulness in His action except for matters related to Dorje Shugden.

The thought that comes to mind is; there must be something extremely special about Dorje Shugden that requires "special treatment".

The intimate lifetime-after-lifetime inter-relation between The Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden has been mentioned in previous thread comments. The inter-relation between these two enlightened beings has been the basis for concluding that HH and Dorje Shugden works closely to protect, preserve and spread pure Dharma. I would like to add to this conclusion my recent reading about Kalachakra initiation.

As we know, HH the 14th Dalai Lama is a strong advocate of the Kalachakra initiation, having given more than 30 initiations this lifetime. However, what we may not all know is that Buton Rinchen, one of Dorje Shugden’s previous incarnations, had considerable influence on the later development of the Gelug tradition of Kalachakra. So, HH’s most promoted initiation links back to Dorje Shugden because it is the most protective initiation for this period! 

So, the 14th Dalai Lama may state that He does not encourage the practice of Dorje Shugden but HH is strongly giving initiation that indirectly links back to Lord Shugden.

[vajratruth]

From the very beginning of his sentence, the HHDL is preparing us for his real reason and motivation for imposing the Dorje Shugden. HHDL wants to confirm that his statements to follows are his specific instructions on Dorje Shugden and is to govern how we should act.

There is no question that HHDL is telling people NOT to follow what appears to be his instructions on Dorje Shugden blindly. HHDL stresses that it is more important for us to gain deep understanding rather than just follow. We are to check and investigate.
 
By drawing attention to “authority” as in the previous sentence and followed by his mention of the Buddha, I take it to mean that HHDL is reminding us that the primary authority of all things Buddhism is Shakyamuni Buddha himself. Shakyamuni always stressed that his teachings should not taken as law, but more as a code of discipline that a practitioner should impose on himself based on proper understanding.

It was the Buddha who first advised man to exercise his reason instead of himself to be driven meekly like dumb cattle, following the dogma of religion or instructions of a leader.

The followers of the Buddha were advised not to believe anything without considering it properly. In the Kalama Sutta,the Buddha gave the following guidelines:

'Do not accept anything based upon mere reports, traditions or hearsay,
Nor upon the authority of religious texts,
Nor upon mere reasons and arguments,
Nor upon one's own inference,
Nor upon anything which appears to be true,
Nor upon one's own speculative opinion,
Nor upon another's seeming ability,
Nor upon the consideration: '
This is our Teacher.'

'But, when you know for yourselves the certain things are unwholesome and bad: tending to harm yourself of others, reject them.
'And when you know for yourselves that certain things are wholesome and good: conducive to the spiritual welfare of yourself as well as others, accept and follow them.'

Therefore HHDL is directly saying that if his instructions on Dorje Shugden is based merely on his authority and his own reasoning and arguments that Dorje Shugden is an evil spirit, and it is an obstacle to the Tibetan cause, we are to reject it.

The very basis of the Buddha’s teachings is to do no harm and so how can we possibly go along with the ban when very clearly, it is harmful not only in the damage and oppression that we will bring upon Shugden practitioners by imposing the ban, but also the harm we bring to ourselves by breaking  our samaya with our own Guru who gave us the practice.

If we are not to follow HHDL ‘s view then what we are supposed to do instead is to look deeply to find the real objective behind HHDL’s decision for the ban.

The ban is the forceful creation of an external factor, which on face value appears to be an obstacle to our practice. However when we really look into it, the entire samsaric world is a huge repository of factors that oppose our practice. Could it be that HHDL’s reason for the ban (other than leveraging on scandal as the fastest means to get Dorje Shugden’s name to spread) is for practitioners to develop the correct attitude of relying on one’s faith for spiritual development rather than conducive external factors?

The Buddha says, 'If anyone were to speak ill of me, my teaching and my disciples, do not be upset or perturbed, for this kind of reaction will only cause you harm. On the other hand, if anyone were to speak well of me, my teaching and my disciples, do not be over-joyed, thrilled or elated, for this kind of reaction will only be an obstacle in forming a correct judgment. If you are elated, you cannot judge whether the qualities praised are real and actually found in us.' (Brahma Jala Sutta)

[Ensapa]

Now let me address the subject of Dolgyal. There is a tradition amongst some of saying; 'Yes, we must follow the Dalai Lama's orders. Now if the suggestion is that it is a case of following someone just because they are a figure of authority, I do not agree. Even when dealing with the instruction of the Buddha, we are taught not to follow it blindly. If upon investigation it turns out to be a statement that is acceptable literally, then we should act upon it. If not, then we must interpret the meaning. Therefore, if someone, without giving any thought to the reasons behind what I say, wants to follow it just because I have said it, I would tend to feel that that is neither in the spirit of the Buddhist way of doing things. It is particularly at variance with the Mahayana approach. The issue here is not just whether people should be following my instruction or not. There are reasons to be considered here. I have drawn attention to things that have been overlooked. However, people must be aware of the reasons for my doing that.

This is a rather interesting change of tune from His Holiness! Perhaps there is some light bursting through at the end of the tunnel! Thanks Ensapa for highlighting this.

I think His Holiness is somehow hinting that the practice of Dorje Shugden is a personal choice and one should not just take on His advice and instructions so literally... perhaps this is a cue to CTA to lift the BAN?

What has been said and done, has been done and Shugdenpas are now separated. However, this little subtle note could be the key to some form of hope that the aggression and opression towards Shugdenpas ought to stop! Obviously it would even be better if His Holiness said that there is NO BAN! And that whether or not Sugden practitioners or not, all should be treated equally following "Human Rights" constitution of Freedom of religion/faith.

If His Holiness remains a firm stand against Shugdenpas not coming to his teachings or receiving any initiations from him, then that is from His own personal side not to accept Shugden practicing students and has nothing to do with the welfare and well being of the Tibetan Shugdenpas. I am sure they would not mind not going for His Holiness teachings as they have Trijang Rinpoche. But to lift the BAN... that is something align to the very issues Tibetans are requesting China to consider - to give autonomy - yes please give first before you can receive... it is part of the Buddhist spirit... give us our spiritual autonomy and please do abide in the democratic constitution to protect your people dear CTA!

When you kill and cut a Shugden practitioner, isn't their blood the same colour as your CTA???
May the BAN be lifted soon!

His Holiness has made this statement many years ago, but sadly due to selective reading, many people skip or fail to absorb that part where they are supposed to find for information rather than just blindly believing it as nothing usually happens if the belief is based on because the person who spoke those words is an authoritative figure, like the Dalai Lama. It's a very dangerous attitude to hold on to, it would be akin to a child eating just meat and avoiding vegetables in totality, and that child's body will become very sickly and weak. That would be the same as the spiritual practice of those who practice selective reading. Perhaps, their real goal for the Dharma was just to find some peace and to find a way to escape their current secular life, which they perceive to be bad, damaging and complex when in reality, it is just because they are unwilling to either step out of their comfort zone or at least enlarge it to encompass others. As demonstrated time and time again, selective reading can cause more misunderstandings rather than a focus because most of a time, having just one sentenced removed from a text can change its meaning drastically. What more is there to say about the Lama's instructions?

 Even if the ban remains as a religious ban, it should not be directed to a path where people are actually harmed and suffering because of the ban. It is actually up to the CTA to implement the ban in such a way that people are not harmed or damaged, or killed, but the ban still remains effective. CTA's failure to implement the ban in the correct way, where people are not harmed generates the negative karma for them to push the Dalai Lama away from them. In addition to that, they also harm the spirituality of other practitioners by encouraging their tendency to not investigate and check, but merely wait for others to convince and explain as opposed to leaning and study and finding things out from different angles. So, in effect, the CTA is working against the Dalai Lama's advice and spreading the very misinformation HHDL wishes for all of us to not fall into.

[DharmaSpace]

Kalama Sutta - 
Ma anussavena.
  Do not believe something just because it has been passed along and retold for many generations. [Simpler: Do not be led by what you are told.]
Ma paramparaya.
  Do not believe something merely because it has become a traditional practice. [Do not be led by whatever has been handed down from past generations.]
Ma itikiraya.
  Do not believe something simply because it is well-known everywhere. [Do not be led by hearsay or common opinion.]
Ma Pitakasampadanena.
  Do not believe something just because it is cited in a text. [Do not be led by what the scriptures say]
Ma takkahetu.
  Do not believe something solely on the grounds of logical reasoning. [Do not be led by mere logic.]
Ma nayahetu.
  Do not believe something merely because it accords with your philosophy. [Do not be led by mere deduction or inference.]
Ma akaraparivitakkena.
  Do not believe something because it appeals to "common sense". [Do not be led by considering only outward appearance.]
Ma ditthinijjhanakkhantiya.
  Do not believe something just because you like the idea. [Do not be led by preconceived notions (and the theory reflected as an approval)]
Ma bhabbarupataya.
  Do not believe something because the speaker seems trustworthy. [Do not be led by what seems acceptable; do not be led by what some seeming believable one says.]
Ma samano no garu ti.
  Do not believe something thinking, "This is what our teacher says". [Do not be led by what your teacher tells you is so.]

I have always liked this sutta from the Buddha himself, which helps us to inquire about whether a concept or idea is true or not. And many people should do an investigation first before deciding that DOrje Shugden is a demon or its worshippers kill people and etc etc. They should go to Shar Gaden and Serpom to see how gentle the monks are really. No difference from monks of any other tradition.

Spiritual practice is so essential do not mistake the forest for the trees, we should not simply believe things we  have heard or read from others we need to check it out first and that is exactly what the Dalai Lama is telling us to do.

[Vajraprotector]

I found something interesting that the Dalai Lama had said regarding checking the teachings before accepting them. Seems that he has even written a book on this subject! Why would he tell people to investigate the teachings before accepting them on one hand and tell people to just believe that Dorje Shugden is bad on the other hand? There must be a reason!

---------

During his 1986 visit to Digne in France, the Dalai Lama said, ‘I give to you a general presentation of the doctrine, which is very important and much more difficult than presenting a particular technique of meditation.’ He stressed the manner in which we should receive the teaching of the Buddha by recalling his words, quoted in this book: ‘0 monks and wise men, as we prove gold by rubbing it, cutting it, and melting it, in this way judge my words and if you accept them let it not be simply from respect.’ So the attitude that the Buddha himself recommends is independent, personal investigation of his teaching. As soon as the teaching is offered, we must examine it carefully and objectively in order to know if it can be adopted or not. If we accept it, we do so because we feel it is right and beneficial, and not for any other reason.

We can be guided in this examination by the Four Reliances described in the Mahayana Lamkara Sutra, which His Holiness the Dalai Lama explains in ‘The Key of the Madhyamika’. We must first realise that we should not blindly believe in what a teacher says because we admire him or because he has a great reputation; we must base our belief on the teaching itself. The master is important and necessary, yes, because it is through the master who transmits the tradition that we are able to receive it. But the teaching takes precedence and should be judged on its content. Listeners have the responsibility to accept the teaching and put it into practice,
and must analyse and reflect upon it ourselves. We cannot relinquish this responsibility.

The Second Reliance warns us against the tendency to let ourselves be influenced by the beautiful language or perfect form of a discourse. We must judge a teaching only on its profound content.

‘Interpretable’ meaning, noted in the Third Reliance, describes certain teachings of the Buddha or those of some great non-doctrinaire masters, who may sometimes use indirect means in order to bring certain people to a realisation they could not have reached by a direct teaching. These discourses are spoken out of compassion in response to different needs. If we want to find the truth of such a teaching, we will not stop at its provisional meaning but will search for its profound and direct meaning. When we have found the definitive meaning of the teaching, we must go beyond intellectual understanding and arrive at a nonconceptual grasp of its essence through meditation.

Reflection, investigation, and analysis carried out in this way, and the experience that follows, constitute the general attitude to adopt towards the teachings. Because we are not born Buddhist, we become Buddhist only through this kind of understanding. This is the first aspect in our approach to Buddhism.

However, it is not enough to have a general understanding of the teaching. This is the necessary foundation; from this base we put the teaching into practice by specific meditative techniques which will allow us to realise it. At this time the importance of a teacher becomes foremost in the choice of the path we are to follow. In this, the help and advice of an experienced person are essential.

[Ensapa]

I dont know if you guys noticed, but I do notice that every time the Dalai Lama talks about Dorje Shugden, he would also advice people at the same time to check the teachings, including his own findings about the Dharma in general. Perhaps, HHDL is trying to plant subconcious seeds in the minds of people to investigate more about Dorje Shugden and then only decide what to do next? those who blindly 'accept' the Dalai Lama's 'advice' to turn away and against Dorje Shugden is pure proof that they do not take heed of the Dalai Lama's advice one bit, they are just after something exotic, or that they only want quick blessings and think that the only way to get quick blessings is to be in the Dalai Lama's camp.