Monks fight polls to protect their Dharma

[WisdomBeing]

What do you think of this? Should monks be involved in politics? The Sikkim area has been a centre of controversy for a long time due to its strategic border geolocation. Spiritually, it has also been controversial because of the tussle for 17th Karmapa position between Karmapa Trinley Thaye Dorje and Karmapa Ogyen Trinley Dorje.

The 14th Shamarpa, reincarnation Mipham Chokyi Lodro had earlier in an interview to this reporter had said, “Politics should not interfere in religoius matters. Shamarpa said, ”Frankly, the then Sikkim Chief Minister N B Bhandari made a mistake by interfering in religious matters of the Rumtek Monastery. That was the turning point in the history of the selection and reinstatement of the 17th Gyalwang Karmapa. The controversies have since kept on.” (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=1687.0)

There are quite a few articles on this issue on this website... here's one http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=3008.0

Have a read and share what you think?


Monks fight polls to protect their Dharma
http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/monks-fight-polls-to-protect-their-dharma-114040600234_1.html
Press Trust of India  |  Gangtok  April 6, 2014

Election fever has gripped even the Buddhist monks in Sikkim as spiritual discourses in monasteries take a political turn with three Lamas entering the poll fray.

More than 2900 monks from over 100 monasteries all over the hilly state will choose one among three Lamas who are contesting for 'Sangha' seat in the Sikkim Assembly, unique to the state.

Interestingly, like other candidates these monks are also affiliated to different political parties and run campaigns soliciting votes in mountainside monasteries.

Draped in maroon robes, the candidates don't shout political slogans, put up posters or raise flags but opt for quiet meetings with monk voters.

Only monks can vote and contest in the reserved 'Sangha' seat.

"My first priority after winning the election would be to make Sikkim an international centre for Buddhist learning," Palden Lachungpa, who is fighting on a ticket by the ruling Sikkim Democratic Front (SDF), told PTI.

The state goes to poll on April 12.

The monastic order also wants the 17th Karmapa, spiritual leader of Kagyu order of Tibet Buddhism, to stay in Rumtek monastery, the largest and most important seat of Buddhism in Sikkim.

Citing security concerns, the union Home Ministry has restricted Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the Karmapa, to travel to Sikkim.

SDF has promised to pursue the issue with the Centre and bring the monks their guru.

As most monasteries are nestled in peaceful hill forests with rivers flowing nearby, hydropower projects are also an issue with the monks.

Dechen Lama, a senior monk, complains that a power project in West Sikkim is disturbing spiritual activities in Tashiding monastery.

"Below the hill they are drilling to make a tunnel for hydropower project. As the monastry is on the top of that hill, our peace and tranquility gets disturbed. We want our representative to raise this issue," he told PTI.

[dsiluvu]

That is interesting. I will not say it is all that bad... I think if the monks motivation is good and they have the intention to help their people as well as to spread the Buddha Dharma like what this monk said:

"My first priority after winning the election would be to make Sikkim an international centre for Buddhist learning," Palden Lachungpa, who is fighting on a ticket by the ruling Sikkim Democratic Front (SDF), told PTI.

I would rejoice and say why not? But of course if the monk turns devious and start creating schism and disharmony like the Tibetan Leadership is doing now to their own people who are Dorje Shugden practitioners. But I think there will some form of higher authority who would not allow these kind of issues in China.

As long as they will help the Tibetans improve on the spiritual side and welfare and benefit many people, then it is useful for them to have a voice BUT if is to cause more friction, disanctions, disharmony... then NO! They should never be involve... Buddha was never involve in politics... otherwise why did he ran away from His palace to become a monk?

[DharmaDefender]

Whilst Im happy to hear Sikkims got the presence of mind to accept religion into their administration, rather than get involved in politics themselves, I think itd be far more effective for the monks to teach the Dharma to the politicians, so the politicians carry out their work with a more Dharmic motivation. Coz

(1) the winning monk will be new to politics which means they wont be very effective

(2) what good will one ordained voice do in the Sikkim Assembly versus all of the other crooked, experienced politicians who will be playing a nasty game no doubt, because their self-serving? Its like saying Ill run as an MP. Even if I win, Id hardly be able to influence ol Dave to be pro-Tibet, pro-Shugden etc.

Its sad their now spending time campaigning as opposed to engaging in practice.

Having said all of that, I hope the Sharmapa has made that clear to the Dalai Lama because theres no reason why a Gelug lama ought to interfere in Kagyu matters, other than for political reasons.

[Jacob]

I would have to agree with dsiluvu, there is two sides to that decision and it all boils down to whomever has the best intentions for the public. I have never agreed to religion mixing with politics but like I said if the people who are in power have the right motivation and intentions to benefit the people I would have no objections. In any case if someone were to be given that much power to make decisions for the country can turn devious and dirty easily, only with the right mindset and strong mentality would someone only be up for it.

But with those that are currently in power right now abusing their positions to create violence in order to get what they want then obviously no. There will always be someone voting againsts your decisions, but if your decisions weigh out the good more than the bad and with the right motivation there is nothing wrong there except someone who is trying their best to make a difference to benefit people.

I guess in a way if monks were to become involved in politics it should be those that are qualified or highly educated that has presented great abilities of leadership and clear motivation to spread the dharma. There should be thorough background checks before standing as candidate and candidates should be recommended not volunteered. There would always be loop holes in the system found through by sneaky people, but if highly attained monks or dharma teachers are elected as candidates no matter I'm sure it would still benefit people at the least.

[yontenjamyang]

There is no way that politics and Buddhism should mix. Politic is samsara and the direct opposite of goals the Sangha's goals in Buddhism.Even the institution of the Dalai Lama fails in my opinion in this degenerate age in mixing politics and Buddhism. In just does not work. It is better to appoint the Sangha positions well regarded Lamas than to have the monks vie for the positions in an elections.
I disagree with some of you in this thread about motivations as we cannot know the true motivations of a candidate. That is why the Buddha created the Vinaya for the Sangha. He wants to separate the Sangha from the lay. And politics are definitely lay.

[DharmaDefender]

There is no way that politics and Buddhism should mix. Politic is samsara and the direct opposite of goals the Sangha's goals in Buddhism.Even the institution of the Dalai Lama fails in my opinion in this degenerate age in mixing politics and Buddhism. In just does not work. It is better to appoint the Sangha positions well regarded Lamas than to have the monks vie for the positions in an elections.
I disagree with some of you in this thread about motivations as we cannot know the true motivations of a candidate. That is why the Buddha created the Vinaya for the Sangha. He wants to separate the Sangha from the lay. And politics are definitely lay.

Well lets debate on that then yontenjamyang. We cannot know the true motivations of a candidate and therefore we should separate the sangha from politics. Since we cannot know the true motivations of a candidate, does that mean we should take the Dalai Lamas actions against Dorje Shugden on face value? Its all politics and theres no hidden motivation or deeper meaning? FYI the institution of the Dalai Lama has long existed before this current one, and for many lifetimes the institution was highly effective in protecting and promoting Buddhism throughout Tibet. So I wouldnt be so quick to dismiss the effectiveness of a hierarchical system in disseminating the Dharma.

Whats the difference by the way in appointing sangha positions, as opposed to having monks vie for the position? Dont get me wrong, I agree with you that campaigning is a waste of time and politics is contrary to the Vinaya. But Imma just saying, when you appoint someone, thats favouritism to a degree and clearly against the concept of non-duality.

[Freyr Aesiragnorak]

In my opinion, monks or even nuns for that matter should not be involved in politics, as it is very samaric and would not be in line with the Vinaya, or how little I know of it. The monastics should be left to their practice, while it is actually the laity that should support the monastics, and one way of doing this could be through politics. But there is little chance of support in this day an age. I have personally seen how people use Dharma as a way to create their own egotistical and twisted empire rather than creating conducive conditions for people to progress spiritually.

However, we do live in Samara, so we are sure to be bound by it in some way or another. Engaging in politics can be beneficial to the Dharma, but in what way and how much is another issue, one that we may not be able to see clearly at the moment. As DharmaDefender has mentioned the institution of the Dalai Lama has been effective in spreading and preserving the Dharma in Tibet in the past.

[Tenzin Malgyur]

I am of the same opinion with you, Freyr. Members of the sangha should not be involved in politics at all. As we are all aware of, politics could not be separated from the elements of lies, scheming and lots of pursuing of worldly matters.
I believe monks and nuns should uphold their vows and renounciation and carry on their noble task of teaching and spreading the words of Lord Buddha.

[gbds3jewels]

My first thoughts were no, monks should not be involved in politics. However, time has changed and perhaps Buddhism needs to adapt. Everywhere I look, Buddhism talks about impermanence. Perhaps that also means the mechanics and methods of practice are also impermanent and will inevitably change.

I once read a quote supposedly by HHTDL saying "If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change". So I think the preconception most people have that monks cannot do this or cannot do that is a misconception.

To my knowledge monks were not supposed to touch female either but I have seen HHTDL held many women and it didn't seems to garner much criticism at all. It has become an acceptable sight.

[fruven]

There is no way that politics and Buddhism should mix. Politic is samsara and the direct opposite of goals the Sangha's goals in Buddhism.Even the institution of the Dalai Lama fails in my opinion in this degenerate age in mixing politics and Buddhism. In just does not work. It is better to appoint the Sangha positions well regarded Lamas than to have the monks vie for the positions in an elections.
I disagree with some of you in this thread about motivations as we cannot know the true motivations of a candidate. That is why the Buddha created the Vinaya for the Sangha. He wants to separate the Sangha from the lay. And politics are definitely lay.

There is no way that politics and Buddhism should mix. Politic is samsara and the direct opposite of goals the Sangha's goals in Buddhism.Even the institution of the Dalai Lama fails in my opinion in this degenerate age in mixing politics and Buddhism. In just does not work. It is better to appoint the Sangha positions well regarded Lamas than to have the monks vie for the positions in an elections.
I disagree with some of you in this thread about motivations as we cannot know the true motivations of a candidate. That is why the Buddha created the Vinaya for the Sangha. He wants to separate the Sangha from the lay. And politics are definitely lay.

Well lets debate on that then yontenjamyang. We cannot know the true motivations of a candidate and therefore we should separate the sangha from politics. Since we cannot know the true motivations of a candidate, does that mean we should take the Dalai Lamas actions against Dorje Shugden on face value? Its all politics and theres no hidden motivation or deeper meaning? FYI the institution of the Dalai Lama has long existed before this current one, and for many lifetimes the institution was highly effective in protecting and promoting Buddhism throughout Tibet. So I wouldnt be so quick to dismiss the effectiveness of a hierarchical system in disseminating the Dharma.

Whats the difference by the way in appointing sangha positions, as opposed to having monks vie for the position? Dont get me wrong, I agree with you that campaigning is a waste of time and politics is contrary to the Vinaya. But Imma just saying, when you appoint someone, thats favouritism to a degree and clearly against the concept of non-duality.

Mixing religions and politics is not good because the motivation is worldly. At the same time Dalai Lama institution has not failed which has benefited the Tibetans many generations. I wouldn't label what the Dalai Lama did has failed. The Dalai Lama is enlightened. Be he in politics or not his motivation is supreme, samsaric unenlightened beings ie politicians do not affect him. That is the difference between the Dalai Lama versus monks who are still practicing towards to enlightenment. If monks get involve in politics he won't have time pursue his spiritually path of training. Dalai Lama has completed his training, there is no more learning for him, he will benefit others wherever and position he is in, of course, as an enlightened being he will benefit in ways that counter conventional wisdom which says not mixing religions with politics.

Many time has been mentioned here we cannot just copy how our guru act and get away with it eg touching a female. It doesn't affect our guru, but does it affect you? If there is no positive benefit of joining the monastic order there won't be monks in the first place which is simply not true.

[Kim Hyun Jae]

The word "fight" imply disharmony, disagreement, none acceptance of the general opinion of everyone and it is not dharmic. How can a "fight" be in harmony within one's mind. It distraught the mind and upsets our emotions and bring upon worries and forces us to take side?

When the sangha were forced to choose between the continuation of their practice of Dorje Shugden, did most of them choose to leave their monastery to move away in peace, left everything behind in acceptance or did they "fight"?

If we have love for the dharma, we would choose to go in peace and harmony against fighting.