Differences between experience and writing

[WisdomBeing]

With the ease of publishing almost anything on the internet, and lack of legal enforcement, people are free to pretty much post anything they want without worrying about liability or accuracy of information. Therefore it is important to check the sources and reliability of information, if anonymous sources, in order to gain a better perspective. There are so-called scholars who often claim a very biased perspective and people believe what they say because of their 'credentials', when they may often have skewed information deliberately or sub-consciously to support their point of view. As Positive Change mentioned, this site gives both sides of the Dorje Shugden controversy so that the reader can make up their own minds and I find that a very rare stance on this topic anywhere online.

[Ensapa]

With the ease of publishing almost anything on the internet, and lack of legal enforcement, people are free to pretty much post anything they want without worrying about liability or accuracy of information. Therefore it is important to check the sources and reliability of information, if anonymous sources, in order to gain a better perspective. There are so-called scholars who often claim a very biased perspective and people believe what they say because of their 'credentials', when they may often have skewed information deliberately or sub-consciously to support their point of view. As Positive Change mentioned, this site gives both sides of the Dorje Shugden controversy so that the reader can make up their own minds and I find that a very rare stance on this topic anywhere online.

From a debate in another forum:

Your argument is mainly suggesting to me, that the issue cannot be decided because both sides have arguments. One can see it that way, however, if one really wants to understand the issue one can investigate what arguments are based on facts and valid and what arguments are misleading, not based on facts and only blur the issue.

Personally I know both sides of the arguments. I was a convinced Shugden follower and I protested against the Dalai Lama. So I know that side very well. Later I opened up and investigated the issue anew, then I realized that the Shugden opponents have their own arguments.

To help myself, I was thinking I should also check sources that are not involved in the conflict so I read accepted, peer-reviewed and published academic research. This helped me a lot to balance my own understanding and what I learned from both sides.

It's co-accidental that academic research goes quite along with the Dalai Lama's point of view.

Because I find academic research enough dispassionate to both sides of the conflict I usually recommend academic research. However, always when I do this, Shugden followers try to slander the researchers as being "biased", "spreading TGIE propaganda" etc. I think this is quite unfair and also deepens the conflict.

IMO, as Buddhist one should be open to listen, to see how the things are, openly investigate and use scriptures and reasoning in order to cultivate a good understanding of things. It's not good to cling too much on the own views or just to repeat "because my lama said".

That's it from my side.

Peer- reviewed research papers are definitely valid? huh? And dont trust Lamas? this guy has serious issues!

[WisdomBeing]

Peer- reviewed research papers are definitely valid? huh? And dont trust Lamas? this guy has serious issues!

I guess for the more intellectually-inclined inquisitive dharma seeker, and perhaps those who may not have a lama, "peer-reviewed research papers" are all they have to give a second or third opinion to someone looking into the topic. Otherwise where do they get validation from? Don't forget that many Westerners do not buy into the "Just because my lama said..." and that is why we are drawn into Buddhism in the first place. That Buddha had said himself that you don't have to accept everything he says and you should check it out and then just accept what makes sense, and what doesn't make sense, to put it aside. It's very logical.

Please don't criticise people for not having full guru devotion as in the east. People are at different levels of spiritual development. If you say 'don't trust lamas' - which lama do you trust anyway? If you have Dalai Lama as one of your gurus and a Shugden lama as another, which do you trust?

Dorje Shugden is a very personal practice. Let's not bash people up just because they do not conform to how we think people should practice/believe etc, otherwise we are just as bad as the anti-Shugden people.

[Ensapa]

Peer- reviewed research papers are definitely valid? huh? And dont trust Lamas? this guy has serious issues!

I guess for the more intellectually-inclined inquisitive dharma seeker, and perhaps those who may not have a lama, "peer-reviewed research papers" are all they have to give a second or third opinion to someone looking into the topic. Otherwise where do they get validation from? Don't forget that many Westerners do not buy into the "Just because my lama said..." and that is why we are drawn into Buddhism in the first place. That Buddha had said himself that you don't have to accept everything he says and you should check it out and then just accept what makes sense, and what doesn't make sense, to put it aside. It's very logical.

Please don't criticise people for not having full guru devotion as in the east. People are at different levels of spiritual development. If you say 'don't trust lamas' - which lama do you trust anyway? If you have Dalai Lama as one of your gurus and a Shugden lama as another, which do you trust?

Dorje Shugden is a very personal practice. Let's not bash people up just because they do not conform to how we think people should practice/believe etc, otherwise we are just as bad as the anti-Shugden people.

In this particular scenario, it does seem a lot to me like the person who posted that reply had every intention of making the peer reviewed papers appear more credible than what the Lamas say. Also, note that he was a former protestor against the Dorje Shugden ban. Perhaps something along the way made him feel bitter about the whole Dorje Shugden experience, and thus he did a 180 degree turn? It also seems that in other threads he would try as hard as possible to make Dorje Shugden and his supporters look bad and when challenged about his sources, he gets defensive.

[DharmaSpace]

Just because everyone goes a certain way does not mean it is correct.

Just because they can write  lot of words enough to overwhelm you doe snot mean it is right or correct. How can we compare an intellectual who writes lamas who have practiced and realised the dharma it does not make any sense whatsoever.

[Ensapa]

Just because everyone goes a certain way does not mean it is correct.

Just because they can write  lot of words enough to overwhelm you doe snot mean it is right or correct. How can we compare an intellectual who writes lamas who have practiced and realised the dharma it does not make any sense whatsoever.

but sadly this is the reality of the situation at the moment and nothing much can be done about this unless we start educating people about why is it that lamas are more credible than the scholars  and present why is it that it is illogical that modern scholars who are not even monks are more credible than the entire generation of Gelug Lamas? The logic is not there at all, but unfortunately to these people, it is logical. The challenge now is to let them know that it cannot be that a few scholars' words can be pitted against the words of all the currently living Gelug Lamas in existence.

[dsiluvu]

Hi all,

I would like to express how much I'm stunned after reading the Wikipedia article about Dorje Shugden.

My surprise come from the fact that I cannot relate what the article says with my experience. For example, what about Kabdje Pabongka Rinpoche being a kind of integrist defending the Gelugpa tradition and willing to destroy the other traditions. I reed "Liberation in the Palm of your Hands" and "The three Principles" and it seems to me that these books were very far from this kind of attitude. The article also quote rumor that Pabonkha Rinpoche supporters destroy Nyingma monasteries and Padmasambhava statues without giving any reference to these affirmations. If this has really happen, which would be a very bad thing, I think the first thing is to give the historical reference material not only rumors. This also doesn't match with what I have seen. In 2005, I was in Katmandu to attend my beloved guru Kabdje Dagom Rinpoche teachings and there was a big statue of Padmasambhava next to him in the monastory temple. I never heard him, nor any Gelugpa lama, speaking negatively of the other traditions. I have always heard the contrary, starting with Dorje Shugden himself who said during an invocation that one must not denigrates or scorns any of the other traditions.

So there is a need for real critical studies on this subject, not only westerner scholar endorsements.

Sorry for my english.

Well if Buddha himself can have enemies like Devadatta having wrong a malicious views of his own Guru... I am sure any one is subject to, and in this case I am not surprised that Je Pabongkha/Dorje Shugden Lamas, have many criticism. Those who have such baseless criticism will eventually shut up or have nothing much to say when the results shows a different picture like what you have experienced Serge.

One thing's for sure, when in doubt or anything always check the person's track record as well as the the one's who criticize and compare notes. Since Buddha/Buddhism encourages the practice of experimenting ourselves/investigating ourselves and experiencing it ourselves, so do it and observe the results and we will get the answers. Since there are those who like to criticize others, see those critics track record, what have they achieved, what kind of person are they? Are they successful? Are they been successful? Are they themselves capable? From there you can judge if their opinion is legit, truthful and sensible. If not I would just ignore them and focus on making what they criticize grow to be even more successful!

As far as I am concern Je Pabongkha Rinpoche has never scorn another sect or religion or another's faith. If anything it has been misinterpreted because how can you teach Lamrim and do the opposite? If there was anything negative said, it is with purest motivation to encourage students to remain loyal and focused on one's own lineage so that there is one path to follow instead of getting all mixed up and not ever reaching any where. It's like if you are learning how to drive, you only have 1 instructor teaching you. Why would you need so many driving teachers to confuse you furher?

I guess those with wrong view will always remain unsatisfied and will try to garner support for their narrow minded thinking. Look if you cannot just follow one Guru and his instructions, what makes you think you can follow two?

I totally disrespect those with wrong views especially when they have received and taken so much from the Dharma and all they do is complain and create schism or worst still doubt their Guru. It shows us who they are and where is their mind, where is their loyalty!

[Ensapa]

Hi all,

I would like to express how much I'm stunned after reading the Wikipedia article about Dorje Shugden.

My surprise come from the fact that I cannot relate what the article says with my experience. For example, what about Kabdje Pabongka Rinpoche being a kind of integrist defending the Gelugpa tradition and willing to destroy the other traditions. I reed "Liberation in the Palm of your Hands" and "The three Principles" and it seems to me that these books were very far from this kind of attitude. The article also quote rumor that Pabonkha Rinpoche supporters destroy Nyingma monasteries and Padmasambhava statues without giving any reference to these affirmations. If this has really happen, which would be a very bad thing, I think the first thing is to give the historical reference material not only rumors. This also doesn't match with what I have seen. In 2005, I was in Katmandu to attend my beloved guru Kabdje Dagom Rinpoche teachings and there was a big statue of Padmasambhava next to him in the monastory temple. I never heard him, nor any Gelugpa lama, speaking negatively of the other traditions. I have always heard the contrary, starting with Dorje Shugden himself who said during an invocation that one must not denigrates or scorns any of the other traditions.

So there is a need for real critical studies on this subject, not only westerner scholar endorsements.

Sorry for my english.

Well if Buddha himself can have enemies like Devadatta having wrong a malicious views of his own Guru... I am sure any one is subject to, and in this case I am not surprised that Je Pabongkha/Dorje Shugden Lamas, have many criticism. Those who have such baseless criticism will eventually shut up or have nothing much to say when the results shows a different picture like what you have experienced Serge.

One thing's for sure, when in doubt or anything always check the person's track record as well as the the one's who criticize and compare notes. Since Buddha/Buddhism encourages the practice of experimenting ourselves/investigating ourselves and experiencing it ourselves, so do it and observe the results and we will get the answers. Since there are those who like to criticize others, see those critics track record, what have they achieved, what kind of person are they? Are they successful? Are they been successful? Are they themselves capable? From there you can judge if their opinion is legit, truthful and sensible. If not I would just ignore them and focus on making what they criticize grow to be even more successful!

As far as I am concern Je Pabongkha Rinpoche has never scorn another sect or religion or another's faith. If anything it has been misinterpreted because how can you teach Lamrim and do the opposite? If there was anything negative said, it is with purest motivation to encourage students to remain loyal and focused on one's own lineage so that there is one path to follow instead of getting all mixed up and not ever reaching any where. It's like if you are learning how to drive, you only have 1 instructor teaching you. Why would you need so many driving teachers to confuse you furher?

I guess those with wrong view will always remain unsatisfied and will try to garner support for their narrow minded thinking. Look if you cannot just follow one Guru and his instructions, what makes you think you can follow two?

I totally disrespect those with wrong views especially when they have received and taken so much from the Dharma and all they do is complain and create schism or worst still doubt their Guru. It shows us who they are and where is their mind, where is their loyalty!

The other thing that I wish to point out is those sectarian rumours were created by people who were jealous of Pabongkha Rinpoche, and the source is never from Gelug Lamas, but from Nyingma or Kagyu Lamas. This incident is mentioned in both the biographies of Changdud Tulku and Kalu Rinpoche, with Changdud saying that he witnessed it, and Kalu saying that he heard of it as a rumor. Obviously, no Gelug Lamas confirmed it ever and what's even odder is how modern scholars tend to overlook that fact. In any case, it is just another case of selective reading.