George Dreyfus was wrong about The Yellow Book

[dharmacrazy79]

So much has happened and so many embroiled in the Dorje Shugden-Dalai Lama saga. It is always beneficial to take a step back and question the source of this entire matter before it spins into further chaos that cause suffering and hinder the growth of pure Dharma.

In one breath, Georges Dreyfus attributed the start of H.H the 14th Dalai Lama’s “displeasure” towards Dorje Shugden as the protector was portrayed in The Yellow Book, as a vengeful and divisive spirit that harms and kills practitioners.  This has unfortunately been accepted as the ‘official line’. Much less audibly, the same Dreyfus weakens his own supposition by his remark that “The sectarian elements of the Yellow Book were not unusual and do not justify or explain the Dalai Lama’s strong reaction”.

The above conflicting views and statements made by Dreyfus is similar to several contradictions that shroud the Dalai Lama’s stance in relation to Dorje Shugden. For one, if the basis for imposing a ban of Dorje Shugden practice is that Dorje Shugden harms and, in some cases, kills, then His Holiness should also impose a strict and non-debatable ban on Yamantaka and exile Ra Lotsawa because Ra Lotsawa is well known for spreading and protecting the Dharma through warfare. In fact, Ra Lotsawa openly claims to have taken the lives of 13 Boddhistavas including Tharmandote, the son of Marpa in the presence of Milerapa because Ra Lotsawa saw the need to prevent the dangerous spread of the teaching whereby practitioners will be able to transfer their consciousness into other people’s body through meditation.

The conclusion that Dorje Shugden is bad because he punishes practitioners for abuse and malpractice of the Dharma, like consort practice at an inappropriate time, would contradict the Buddha’s teachings the culminated in the Boddhisatva Vows which state that it is necessary even to kill if that is what’s necessary to protect the Dharma and its sincere practitioners. Even the Dalai Lama “finds it legitimate for a Kalachakra adept to kill a person under special circumstances, "who are harmful to the [Buddhist] teaching" during a Kalachakra initiation in London, 1985. http://www.trimondi.de/SDLE/Part-2-14.htm


I think we need to practice wisdom when contemplating matters of such importance. Practitioners who abuse and misuse the Dharma that results in harm to self and others results in the ultimate harm to the doctrine of Lama Tsongkhapa, which is the path to the enlightenment of sentient beings.

Timing is everything. So, lets analyze the timing around the events related to The Yellow Book. The book was compiled in year 1970 from the notes taken by Zemey Rinpoche during oral teachings of Trijang Rinpoche. As Trijang Rinpoche is the Junior Tutor of the Dalai Lama, it is very likely the His Holiness was present and would be already aware of the content of these notes in 1970. No concern was expressed about Dorje Shugden then. The Yellow Book was later published in year 1973 and at this point in time, the Dalai Lama still did not express the need to review the practice of Dorje Shugden. Only in year 1976, the Dalai Lama expressed displeasure in Dorje Shugden, which is all too coincidental, as 1976 seem to be quite a year of political discontent for His Holiness. Similarly, if the ban of Dorje Shugden is so necessary whereby it is worthwhile to cause harm and death to practitioners, why did the Dalai Lama only address this matter 6 years after becoming aware?

In conclusion, is the infamous Yellow Book the true basis for the ban of Dorje Shugden is Georges Dreyfus claims? Based on logic, my deduction would be a firm “No”.

[DharmaSpace]

All killing may not be defined as vengeful or negative ~

Buddha as a bodhisattva, killed a conspiring merchant who wanted to murder 499 merchants. This action furthered Buddha's spiritual progress, though Buddha spent one moment in hell.

Hypothetically if someone had assassinated Hitler early in World War 2 then, millions would have been saved, wouldn't that have been an ideal situation and less loss of lives in this entire picture.

Prayer To Sengdongma
The Lion-Faced Dakini

Glorious adamantine Goddess,
Wrathful female with lion’s face,
Whose fire of Gnosis emanates light-rays,
Lion-faced Goddess – to You I bow.
Mantra:
AH KHA SAMA-RANZA SHANDA-RASA MARAYA PHET

Lion-faced Dakini!
Because of the force and power of the recitation of Your Mantra,
Let enemies who torment us teachers, pupils and attendants,
hindering spirits who harm us, obstructive conditions, and in short,
every enduring inauspiciousness, be turned back!
Host of blazing wrathful females!
Smash into dust-motes the body and speech
Of all the nature of hindering foes,
And release their consciousness in Dharma-Dhatu!
Through recitation of Your mantra,
Let me quell all injury,
Achieve my aims just as I wish,
And spread the Doctrine in teaching and practice!

If Sengdongma can destroy 'spirits' and release their consciousness into Dharma Dhatu. So killing can also be beneficial right? If done with the proper motivations. 

The yellow book example is a powerful example of why wait six years.

I have another argument, the Dalai Lama since the first Dalai Lama was enlightened and is an emanation of Avalokiteshvara. Can Avalokiteshvara be wrong? If Avalokiteshvara is wrong then the ban can be wrong.

If Avalokiteshvara is right and correct all along, then from the 6th Dalai Lama till the 13th Dalai Lama they could have chosen to expose Dorje Shugden - that is 250 years, why wait till the 14th Dalai lama to expose the demon?

[icy]

Unfortunately The Yellow Book fell under the wrong hand and was published indiscriminately.  It was Kyabje Zemey Rinpoche’s personal notes not for the public and meant to read be along with Khabje Trijang Rinpoche's Music Delighting an Ocean of Protectors featuring the same cautionary tales as contained in the Yellow Book.  Music Delighting an Ocean of Protectors was published 7 years before The Yellow Book. 

Why the uproar and upheaval 7 years later?  So much was said about bodhisattva killing, but the Dalai Lama is a highly learned person.  This is a borrowed excuse.

George Dreyfus was certainly wrong about The Yellow Book.

[Midakpa]

The main aim of Kyabje Zemey Rinpoche in writing the so-called "Yellow Book" was to preserve and protect the sacred pure lineage of Lama Tsongkhapa. It is well-known that Lord Dorje Shugden arose to safeguard the teachings of Lama Tsongkhapa and the Gelug lineage. So I'm not surprised to hear that wrathful means had been employed against those who had polluted the teachings by mixing them with the practices of other lineages which went against the practices of the Gelug tradition. Unfortunately the contents of the Yellow book were misunderstood and used to undermine the pure intention of Zemey Rinpoche who was merely pointing out the danger of mixing practices and endangering the continuation of the lineage of the great Tsongkhapa.

[maricisun]

Actually the main reason for the Yellow Book is to preserve the teachings of the Gelug tradition of Je Tsongkhapa which Dorje Shugden is the protector of this pure lineage.
Unfortunately  the contents were somehow misunderstood and this causes people to believe that this is the reason for the ban.
If the ban is necessary on Dorje Shugden why wait 7 years after the book was published? 
Are the claims in the Yellow Book the true basis as claimed by George Dreyfus?

For me it is definately a NO!

[gbds3jewels]

This website has talked about the Dorje Shgden-Dalai Lam saga to death. To be honest I do not believe any amount of research into history, text, testimonials, whatever would provide any concrete proof to support one or the other simply because everything is still perspective and what is told/written in the eyes of the beholder.

Even if concrete proof is given, it does not make believers out of people. Jesus can ascend into heaven in front of 1billion people on national tv live broadcast worldwide and immature some people will still think it's just a neat trick. People have always just believed what suits them, what is within their comfort zone.

Is Dreyfus right or wrong, I don't really care, it debatable depends on how good a debater one is and how you want to swing it. Do I think the Yellow is substantial enough a reason to cause the ban of Dorje Shugden practice? Absolutely NOT! I think it's an insult to anyone's intelligence to claim that. 

[rossoneri]

Being the protector of the Gelug lineage, Dorje Shugden is playing a very important role of preserving the teachings of Lama Tsongkhapa, The founder of The Gelug lineage which is path of the middle way which Lama Tsongkhapa himself have compile all the teachings from different schools during his time. Whereby Lama Tsongkhapa think and he is correct not because he is a Buddha but logically Tsongkhapa think that the old treatises which was taught by Nagajurna will be very hard for our generation to able to understand. Imagine how important the role of Dorje Shugden is to protect the teachings for the future generations to come. What we learning now in from the Gelug, if I may say so is the best of the best from all the teachings gathered by the very compassionate and toughtful Lama, which is Lama Tsongkhapa. Which is why is considered is the 2nd Buddha amongst Tibetan.

We do not have to think very deep to be able to know if Dorje Shugden is a devil. Think logically for yourself, if he his a devil why all the Powerful protector like Yamantaka, Kalarupa or perhaps Setrap which is the emanations of Buddha Amitabha fail to destroy merely one devil? Why until today non of the High Lama which we consider them a walking Buddha fail to do so? Just a very simple and logical question.

[vajratruth]

The Yellow Book has been wrongly referred to as evidence of Dorje Shugden's malevolence but in fact the complete opposite is true. An enlightened being may be faced with situations where it has to kill out of compassion. One example is when the preservation of the pure Dharma is threatened where the outcome is the denial of the Buddha's teachings to the multitude who would benefit from it. Another is when a perpetrator of very serious actions that yield tremendous bad karma has to be stopped so that less bad karma is created. In these examples, killing is not done out of anger, jealousy or for a personal gain but from pure compassion.

As a matter of fact, it is within the Bodhisattva's vows that he/she must not turn away from doing whatever is necessary out of compassion. The Dalai Lama himself is fully aware of this as we see in the following comments His Holiness made in the past the occasion of a Kalachakra Tantra in 1985:

In his statement the 14th Dalai Lama finds it legitimate for a Kalachakra adept to kill a person under special circumstances, "who are harmfull to the [Buddhist] teaching". He insists, however,  that this be "motivated by compassion" (Dalai Lama – The Kalachakra Tantra – Rite of Initiation – London, 1985, S. 348 ff.)

Therefore it is impossible, otherwise it would be severely hypocritical, for the Dalai Lama to use the accounts of Dorje Shugden's wrathful methods as reasons to ban the Protector practice. In fact the Dalai Lama himself may have even personally engaged in similar practice. Rad the following account and judge for yourself:

But there can only be one world ruler! In 1976, the year in which the “red pontiff” (Mao Zedong) died, according to the writings of the Tibetans in exile things threatened to take a turn for the worse for the Tibetans. The state oracle had pronounced the gloomiest predictions. Thereupon His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama withdrew into retreat, the longest that he had ever made in India: “An extremely strict practice”, he later commented personally, “which requires complete seclusion over several weeks, linked to a very special teaching of the Fifth Dalai Lama” (Levenson, 1992, p. 242). The result of this “practice” was, as Claude B. Levenson reports, the following: firstly there was “a major earthquake in China with thousands of victims. Then Mao made his final bow upon the mortal stage. This prompted an Indian who was close to the Tibetans to state, 'That’s enough, stop your praying, otherwise the sky will fall on the heads of the Chinese'" (Levenson, 1992, p. 242). In fact, shortly before his death the “Great Chairman” was directly affected by this earthquake. As his personal physician (who was present) reports, the bed shook, the house swayed, and a nearby tin roof rattled fearsomely.
 
Whether or not this was a coincidence, if a secret ritual of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama was conducted to “liberate” Mao Zedong, it can only have been a matter of the voodoo-like killing practices from the Golden Manuscript of the “Great Fifth”. Further, it is clear from the Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s autobiography that on the day of Mao’s death he was busy with the Time Tantra. At that time [1976], the Kundun says. „I was in Ladakh, part of the remote Indian province of Jammu and Kashmir, where I was conducting a Kalachakra initiation. On the second the ceremony’s three days, Mao died. And the third day, it rained all morning. But, in the afternoon, there appeared one of the most beautiful rainbows I have ever seen. I was certain  that it must be a good omen” (Dalai Lama XIV, 1990, 222)

Source: http://www.trimondi.de/SDLE/Part-2-14.htm

[diamond girl]

This is interesting. This Georgie Dreyfus guy should be shot for irresponsible insinuations which has led to misunderstandings and misgivings. He should think with his head before talking.

The fact that it took 6 years for HHDL to "react" to the Yellow Book as the reason for the Ban is total rubbish. Given the reasons for the Ban as given by the HHDL, the reasons are so critical so why wait 6 years?

The political climate at that time was sensitive and the government in exile lost position against the religious section. There was no unity and the religious sect was monks who still worshiped Dorje Shugden. By using the Yellow Book at that time seemed like a good facade to trigger up a political situation. And it is sad to say Dorje Shugden was the "escape goat" for a sensitive, disunited, political Tibet.

[WisdomBeing]

why would people listen to someone like George Dreyfus who is more of an academician than at Dharma scholar, as opposed to the great Gelugpa lamas of HH Pabongkha Rinpoche, HH Trijang Rinpoche, HE Gangchen Rinpoche, Lama Yeshe, Rabten Rinpoche and the esteemed lineage goes on.

As said by others, it is not unusual for prayers to be violent against those who contaminate the Dharma. If everything was accepted at face value, no wrathful deity would ever be acceptable as they would be holding implements of mass destruction and violence.

The Yellow book is definitely a scapegoat as Diamond girl says. As is Dorje Shugden.

Mere distractions and sleight of hand for the failures of the then Tibetan-government-in-exile and now CTA.

[Big Uncle]

Well, the Dalai Lama almost never says anything about the Yellow Book anymore these days. Instead, he always says that the protector deity harms or shortens his life and harms Tibetan independence. These of course are easily debatable. The question of the Yellow Book is sensitive as the stories contained within require proper explanation of why Dorje Shugden. Fortunately, we do have a relatively good article the discusses this matter.

As for the point of the academician like Dreyfus, he is merely pointing out what he observed at his time according to what he knew. He is after all, a westerner, an outsider and may not be accessible to everything. What he wrote may just be what he observed at that time. The fact remains is that the Dalai Lama did react adversely to the publication of the Yellow Book and it did seemed to have caused the ban but from public statements, the Dalai Lama almost never mentioned the book after that. Therefore, the Yellow Book is perhaps irrelevant at this time.