Is This Productive Or Counter-productive To The Shugden Cause?

[Big Uncle]

I actually think that the nun was courageous and she stood for all suffering Shugden practitioners. I don't think she did anything wrong here by filming this video. However, the video puts the Dalai Lama in a bad light as he was unduly wrathful about this matter.

But I do think that Jamyang Norbu was also right as she did not attempt to engage in a discussion with the Dalai Lama about the nature of Dorje Shugden. "If Dorje Shugden is a spirit, are you saying that Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche and Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche were wrong? If they were wrong, then many of their other teachings could have been wrong too." You know, ask the Dalai Lama engaging questions instead of just saying the Dalai Lama is lying. Repeating a litany of accusations does not really solidify our case against the Dalai Lama either. If I am watching this from a neutral perspective, I am not convinced that the Dalai Lama is lying but it does make me suspect that the video was meant to frame the Dalai lama and put him in a spot.

I do hope someone from the International Shugden Society reads this and if there were to be any future encounters with the Dalai Lama, that person should be ready to politely but firmly engage the Dalai Lama in a convincing discussion/debate that would spur the viewer to think. That would REALLY further our Shugden cause. But kudos for a good first attempt anyway.

[vajrastorm]

A second look at the video in which the nun came face to face with the Dalai Lama and handed him a message from the Western Shugden Committee, while requesting gently for freedom of religion for Shugden practitioners, shows up more telling details. There was a security team with the Dalai Lama; but, when his private security urged him to leave, the Dalai Lama came back to address the nun directly , pointed his finger at her, and said "No "several times. He also went on to say: "This is not religion. I know the Buddha's teaching. This is worship of a spirit".

In lieu of this, I see the whole scene differently from what Norbu has portrayed here. It is not a nun aggressively threatening the Dalai Lama and endangering him by her aggressive approach. It is rather a much needed direct peaceful appeal, by a gentle nun, to the Dalai Lama to lift the ban, after all other peaceful efforts to request a peaceful meeting with Dalai Lama to  seek his views ,discuss and negotiate the lifting of the ban had failed.

Meanwhile, every failed attempt to meet the Dalai Lama, every failed attempt to peacefully negotiate the lifting of the ban, means more  and extended suffering for the poor Shugden practitioners, especially in India, who have suffered long and terribly from the violent actions and harsh measures taken against them by the Tibetan government and their supporters since the imposition of the ban.

The Western Shugden members had no other recourse. This one opportunity was the best. The Western and international media were present. The world would now know about the terrible consequence of the enforcement of the ban on Shugden. The world would now understand why the ban on Shugden practice has  to be lifted. The West which respects freedom of religion would surely now sympathize with the cause of Shugden practitioners to have the ban lifted quickly.

So there is no question that the Western Shugden nun did the right thing to give a voice to the cause of lifitng of the ban, for the sake of  Shugden practitioners,who have suffered in silence all this while.

Yet I am not saying anything against the Dalai Lama, for I know he is Chenrezig and his seemingly unacceptable behavior and speech against Shugden, including his ban on Shugden, are things which I believe will be explained when the right time comes for them to be explained.

[yontenjamyang]

From the article and the excerpt provided I get the impression that Jamyang Norbu seems to care more for the Tibetan cause than religious freedom; even though he supports religious freedom and is critical of the Dalai Lama on this subject. However, he maintains his hopes of independence for Tibet and hence he feels anger when he perceive the Dalai Lama being insulted.

To me he is an epitome of Tibetans who cares more about Tibet and its cause than spiritual truths. The mentality is that the Dalai Lama is the God King, a buddha and he is always right. Seeing that their God King being insulted by an "inji, never mind a sangha is hard to swallow for Jamyang Norbu. This perceived insult to the Dalai Lama is what he is angry about. Hence, his view is not correct as he is just a "rightist Tibetan", no offense.

What the nun was doing when confronting the Dalai Lama was to pass him the same message as the placards and slogans at the demonstration/rally and to achieve the effects, in the eyes of the international press, the Dalai Lama "bullying" a small nun. I think that was successfully achieved. We must realise that the demonstrations were held in the US for the US and international audience and not for Tibetans. So when the Dalai Lama answered back and even showed anger to the "inji" nun; it was a public opinion victory against the ban.

It is then important to explain to the international audience what this purported "lie" is. What the Dalai Lama is lying about? How this ban is against religious freedom? What are the sufferings of the Tibetans at the hands of the CTA? Why the very government that is suppose to protect its' own people cause so much suffering?

This to me it a very well orchestrated confrontation. I think the ISC new what it is doing.

[Dondrup Shugden]

Very interesting article, showing very specifically that in everything and event there are two sides to a story.

At the end of reading all the comments, there is really no right or wrong but what needs to be done to lift the ban.

The right thing these days internationally is Human rights.  Shugdenpas are asking for their right to worship Dorje Shugden.

[grandmapele]

The ways of the West is very different from the ways of the East. The westerners are very much more vocal and believe in addressing a wrong publicly. The redress must be seen publicly for it to be effective. The Easterners believe in a more subtle and subdued approach where dignity must be preserved. Both are not wrong, just a difference in opinion. It would of course, be wonderful if there is a foolproof way of getting a redress for the wrong done. But as this is Samsara, it will be very hard to find the perfect way, if it is there.