Condemned in Silence

[DharmaSpace]

I just found this pdf on the net a research paper by Urusla Berznis

http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Condemmed-to-Silence.pdf

Hope this benefits.

[thaimonk]

I just found this pdf on the net a research paper by Urusla Berznis

http://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Condemmed-to-Silence.pdf

Hope this benefits.

Oh it's too bad, cannot open the PDF. Really would be an interesting read.

[WisdomBeing]

I could download the PDF and open it... i was going to paste it here for others' convenience but it's 98 pages... the preface was already interesting and I will paste it here.. hope everyone gets to read the paper...

PREFACE
While gathering material for a book on seminal Buddhist masters of this century I became aware in 1996 that because most belonged to the Gelugpa tradition of Tibetan Buddhism and relied on the religious protector Dorje Shugden, they were suddenly at the center of a raging controversy.

Told by the Dalai Lama to renounce ties with that venerable tradition they were put into a position of either breaking their vows or facing ostracism from the community. These greatest of masters who included one of the two tutors of the Dalai Lama had been central to the
transmission of Buddhism as it traveled from Tibet to India and the rest of the world after 1959. They ensured the integrity of a living wisdom tradition that had been passed on from one adept to another for millennia. I was shocked to hear the ugly allegations against such venerated and highly respected Lamas. I personally knew many of them, had studied with them, and had had a chance to observe them in close proximity over many years. Like most everyone else, I found their gentle kindness, open-mindedness, and inclusive teachings exemplary.

Since every accusation against them contradicted facts, reason, and my own experience, I felt compelled to get to the bottom of the controversy that had generated such extreme views. It was impossible to continue my project without finding an explanation of how such a dramatic shift from the most revered masters to “devil worshipers” could have occurred and, moreover, how it could so completely possess the Tibetan cultural psyche in such a short time. In the process of my work on this book I found that open debate about the subject was
impossible in the exile community and that the conflict was driven by an emotional zeal for the Dalai Lama beyond all rational considerations, suggesting an identity crisis of unexpected proportions. The conditions of exile, the loss of country, home, family and the threat to the established religious world view certainly contributed to the Tibetans’ exaggerated hold onto the one institution left to them, that of Dalai Lamas. However, there seemed something else at work that extended far beyond the Tibetan community to affect Western Tibet supporters as well.

They exhibited similarly irrational responses to the conflict. No matter what approach one brought to the subject, all attempts at rational debate became immediately polarized and turned into a series of outlandish accusations none of which held up under scrutiny.
At the heart of the difficulties complicating this investigation were the unique problems deriving from the fact that Tibetan society remains largely an oral culture. I traveled throughout India and Nepal, the longest visit lasting four months, and talked to hundreds of Tibetans and affected Buddhists, gathering their stories and oral testimony. At the same time I collected relevant documentation of government records, published papers, wall posters -- a common form of communication about controversial subjects -- and circulars of the various social organizations that make up the Tibetan administration. This material forms the background for the book.

Since the Tibetan exile government denies the reality of the conflict it has been instrumental in creating, the issue is presented here from three different perspectives: Part I, from the point of view of Tibetans living in India and Nepal most affected by the conflict; Part II, a historical background and chronological ordering of events surrounding the conflict followed by biographical sketches of the most influential masters of a tradition now being suppressed as a “cult”; and Part III, which examines the issue from an outsider’s point of view. My analysis
traces some of the standard accusations to a basic confusion of religious and political issues. It brings to bear the historical and cultural background to show the dynamics of power relations in the exile community and how they get played out in the international arena through the media.

Crucial to understanding the emotional involvement in this issue of Western Tibet supporters is their need to uphold at all cost today’s icon of universal goodness, made accessible by the media to a world bereft of deep spiritual meaning. Even though the Dalai Lama’s politics come into critical focus, the book is not intended as an attack on him.

Although I am indebted to many scholars and experts on the subject, it would be a disservice at the time of this writing to acknowledge their individual help publicly. The nature of the issue is so sensitive that they must remain unnamed. Even so, I would like to express here my gratitude for their contribution.

[triesa]

Thank you Wisdom being for sharing this. It is such a good read. Obviously Ursula Bernis has done extensive research and interviews from different aspects and angles to present this controversy to the public.

In one of his introduction, he has concluded the differences on Dorje Shugden has to be considered based on political views as below.


"The source of the demonization was oracles (mediums in trance) of the Tibetan exile government
many Tibetans believe to be unreliable. Their prophecies declared Dorje Shugden to be an evil
spirit intent on harming the Dalai Lama and the cause of Tibet42 seen by many as synonymous.
The exile government’s continuing uncompromising stand on this point polarized the issue and
turned any attempt to present a different interpretation, even those made in good faith, into an
attack on the Dalai Lama and, hence, a confirmation of the “prophecies.” Thus, the Dorje
Shugden believed to be evil and the one religious people rely on seem to have nothing
whatsoever to do with each other. They are two different beings with each side believing that the
other invented its own story of Dorje Shugden. They could not be further apart, one a demon,
carrier of seemingly absolute evil, the other believed by most of Tibet’s greatest Buddhist
masters to be an emanation of the Buddha’s wisdom within worldly action. In part, these
different views are the result of dragging into the political arena an esoteric religious practice
that is easily misunderstood, especially when made public in this way. The difference between
the two radically different conceptions of Dorje Shugden also pits two kinds of authority against
each other, one religious the other political. Proclaiming Dorje Shugden an evil spirit denies
more than two hundred acclaimed Tibetan Buddhist masters -- not counting their tens of
thousands of disciples -- their religious qualifications. These are based on the ability to
distinguish between good and evil, the very essence of wisdom. From a Buddhist point of view
this is clearly absurd. It makes sense only from a non-religious context. Hence, the differences
concerning Dorje Shugden have to be considered from a political point of view."

Ursula Bernis also said that one of the aims of his book is to give Tibetans a voice, since they cannot speak out in their own communities without facing serious consequences, intense social pressure, threaats of violence, slander and ostracism. So there are excerpts from many informal conversations and formal interviews he has conducted, and one of which was with Samdhong Rinpoche in 1998. The following question was asked to Samdhong  Rinpoche and his answer showed that he did  have a different perception of HH Dalai Lama. Interesting to see what Samdhong Rinpoche said about how he felt towards HH Dalai Lama some 10 years ago....

Q : What has the ban of Dorje Shugden done to you personally, to your life?

A :  It is interesting how reality shatters your imagined perception. My perception of the inside
workings of the Tibetan exile government has completely changed. My experience of this ban
also has changed my perception of how His Holiness works within Tibetan society. It also
changed my perception about how Western Buddhist centers and supporters of Tibet receive and
give and gather information.

The Tibetan exile government is now perceived as experimenting with a democratic form of
government. The long term aim is to transform Tibet itself into a democratic country. But when
it gets challenged to test the democratic principles, it does not stand up to the challenge at all.
This was demonstrated by how they handled the ban. Usually in democratic countries issues are
introduced through the parliamentary process and then taken up by the upper house and then the
President. In this case and in many other cases it was brought up unilaterally by the Dalai Lama
himself. In 1995 the oracles (mediums) advised him that continued worship of Dorje Shugden is
not constructive for the Dalai Lama or the Tibetan government’s work towards freedom. On
March 10th and 21st, 1996, he publicized these oracular prophecies in a public teaching. Neither
the Assembly, the Cabinet nor the heads of the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions, not even the
head of the Gelugpas were consulted. After the announcement was made, it was endorsed by the
Cabinet and the Assembly and became policy. That is how the Tibetan government works.
Before we did not know these things, because we were not inside the problem. Now we are. So
this is not theoretical to us.

When His Holiness first proclaimed the ban, he took the oracles as reference. “There is
indication that it is harmful to me and Tibetan society, a negative effect for Tibetan society, if
Dorje Shugden worship is continued.” That is how he first put it in 1996. This theme was
immediately taken up by the Tibetan government and its various branches around the world.
When His Holiness was asked by an Indian journalist, the reason for the ban he said was,
“Buddhism is a very profound religion and the worship of Dorje Shugden is denigrating
Buddhism to the level of spirit worship.” He also said that, “Worshipers of Dorje Shugden have
been sectarian throughout history,” when asked by a Western journalist about the reason for the
ban. Here he opted for ecumenical unity between different Tibetan traditions: “The worship of
Dorje Shugden is against the ecumenic spirit.” On more than one occasion in the US and in
Switzerland he even prohibited Western Buddhists [who rely on Dorje Shugden] from attending
his initiations and teachings. From this and many other observations we have made one can say
that whenever he makes announcements and gives reasons, they are more based on the
expediency of the moment than a solid foundation applicable in the West and East both. First he
said worship of the deity in Tibetan society is not good. If that is so, then why prohibit
Westerners from worshiping Dorje Shugden? Going through all these reasons, His Holiness has
given different ones everywhere. He has not given reasons that hold ground or have meaning
everywhere. This has changed my perception about His Holiness.

[Zach]

Samdhong Rinpoche said this ? well this certainly puts him in a different light...Seems he hasnt favoured  HH actions but went along with them maybe out of fear of repercussion ? 

[thaimonk]

Samdhong Rinpoche said this ? well this certainly puts him in a different light...Seems he hasnt favoured  HH actions but went along with them maybe out of fear of repercussion ? 

I think I agree with you. Let's observe what Samdhong Rinpoche does now in retirement.

[triesa]

Thank you Wisdom being for sharing this. It is such a good read. Obviously Ursula Bernis has done extensive research and interviews from different aspects and angles to present this controversy to the public.

In one of his introduction, he has concluded the differences on Dorje Shugden has to be considered based on political views as below.


"The source of the demonization was oracles (mediums in trance) of the Tibetan exile government
many Tibetans believe to be unreliable. Their prophecies declared Dorje Shugden to be an evil
spirit intent on harming the Dalai Lama and the cause of Tibet42 seen by many as synonymous.
The exile government’s continuing uncompromising stand on this point polarized the issue and
turned any attempt to present a different interpretation, even those made in good faith, into an
attack on the Dalai Lama and, hence, a confirmation of the “prophecies.” Thus, the Dorje
Shugden believed to be evil and the one religious people rely on seem to have nothing
whatsoever to do with each other. They are two different beings with each side believing that the
other invented its own story of Dorje Shugden. They could not be further apart, one a demon,
carrier of seemingly absolute evil, the other believed by most of Tibet’s greatest Buddhist
masters to be an emanation of the Buddha’s wisdom within worldly action. In part, these
different views are the result of dragging into the political arena an esoteric religious practice
that is easily misunderstood, especially when made public in this way. The difference between
the two radically different conceptions of Dorje Shugden also pits two kinds of authority against
each other, one religious the other political. Proclaiming Dorje Shugden an evil spirit denies
more than two hundred acclaimed Tibetan Buddhist masters -- not counting their tens of
thousands of disciples -- their religious qualifications. These are based on the ability to
distinguish between good and evil, the very essence of wisdom. From a Buddhist point of view
this is clearly absurd. It makes sense only from a non-religious context. Hence, the differences
concerning Dorje Shugden have to be considered from a political point of view."

Ursula Bernis also said that one of the aims of his book is to give Tibetans a voice, since they cannot speak out in their own communities without facing serious consequences, intense social pressure, threaats of violence, slander and ostracism. So there are excerpts from many informal conversations and formal interviews he has conducted, and one of which was with Samdhong Rinpoche in 1998. The following question was asked to Samdhong  Rinpoche and his answer showed that he did  have a different perception of HH Dalai Lama. Interesting to see what Samdhong Rinpoche said about how he felt towards HH Dalai Lama some 10 years ago....

Q : What has the ban of Dorje Shugden done to you personally, to your life?

A :  It is interesting how reality shatters your imagined perception. My perception of the inside
workings of the Tibetan exile government has completely changed. My experience of this ban
also has changed my perception of how His Holiness works within Tibetan society. It also
changed my perception about how Western Buddhist centers and supporters of Tibet receive and
give and gather information.

The Tibetan exile government is now perceived as experimenting with a democratic form of
government. The long term aim is to transform Tibet itself into a democratic country. But when
it gets challenged to test the democratic principles, it does not stand up to the challenge at all.
This was demonstrated by how they handled the ban. Usually in democratic countries issues are
introduced through the parliamentary process and then taken up by the upper house and then the
President. In this case and in many other cases it was brought up unilaterally by the Dalai Lama
himself. In 1995 the oracles (mediums) advised him that continued worship of Dorje Shugden is
not constructive for the Dalai Lama or the Tibetan government’s work towards freedom. On
March 10th and 21st, 1996, he publicized these oracular prophecies in a public teaching. Neither
the Assembly, the Cabinet nor the heads of the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions, not even the
head of the Gelugpas were consulted. After the announcement was made, it was endorsed by the
Cabinet and the Assembly and became policy. That is how the Tibetan government works.
Before we did not know these things, because we were not inside the problem. Now we are. So
this is not theoretical to us.

When His Holiness first proclaimed the ban, he took the oracles as reference. “There is
indication that it is harmful to me and Tibetan society, a negative effect for Tibetan society, if
Dorje Shugden worship is continued.” That is how he first put it in 1996. This theme was
immediately taken up by the Tibetan government and its various branches around the world.
When His Holiness was asked by an Indian journalist, the reason for the ban he said was,
“Buddhism is a very profound religion and the worship of Dorje Shugden is denigrating
Buddhism to the level of spirit worship.” He also said that, “Worshipers of Dorje Shugden have
been sectarian throughout history,” when asked by a Western journalist about the reason for the
ban. Here he opted for ecumenical unity between different Tibetan traditions: “The worship of
Dorje Shugden is against the ecumenic spirit.” On more than one occasion in the US and in
Switzerland he even prohibited Western Buddhists [who rely on Dorje Shugden] from attending
his initiations and teachings. From this and many other observations we have made one can say
that whenever he makes announcements and gives reasons, they are more based on the
expediency of the moment than a solid foundation applicable in the West and East both. First he
said worship of the deity in Tibetan society is not good. If that is so, then why prohibit
Westerners from worshiping Dorje Shugden? Going through all these reasons, His Holiness has
given different ones everywhere. He has not given reasons that hold ground or have meaning
everywhere. This has changed my perception about His Holiness.

My apology, the above Q & A was actually between Ursula and Geshe Cheme Tsering who has received an Acarya degree from Central
Institute for Higher Tibetan Studies, Sanskrit University, Sarnath, where he studied in the
Nyingma Division and a Lharampa Geshe54 degree from Ganden Shartse.

I had missed out reading this short paragraph and thought the interviews was with Samdhong Rinpoche.  However, Samdhong Rinpoche did make such remarks 3 months before his interview :

Three months before this interview, Samdhong Rinpoche had characterized the workings of the Tibetan exile
government in a very different way. In an interview with the Tibetan language newspaper Tibetan Times, Dharamsala, in
October 1997, circulated widely on audio tape in the exile community, he explained the de facto workings of the Assembly as
ineffective, giving his reasons for this obliquely, in typical Tibetan manner. He said that the last six years of his tenure as the
head and speaker of the Assembly have been ineffective and nothing but a power struggle without achieving any aims. People do
not vote on issues but only look at who is presenting them. This is just a continuation of the old way without any change. Once
representatives are in the assembly, “it seems to be very difficult to continue to be honest, and if you are against the prevailing
winds or flow of the river you lose your seat.” Their independent judgment becomes undermined and they are subject to a strong
force from behind, “like cement or concrete,” he said.

[KhedrubGyatso]

it does seem like the adage -politics and religion don't mix is correct. However, if we are to give weight to accomplished Buddhists masters it should be across the board. This means  that all of them should be wise in maintaining their respective position or decision.

One view to reconcile this anomaly is that both sides are creating causes to support a larger picture which will result in long term benefit for all even if it is necessary for some downside in the interim. This reason would not be a safe one to consider if the contending factions are ordinary beings.HHDL and erudite masters such as HH Trisur Rinpoche and HH Trijang Rinpoche are all attained beings.They all have the same mind of wisdom and compassion and compelled to act to benefit all. They cannot act otherwise.We must have faith in these living Buddhas .At our level ,we cannot figure out their ultimate purpose.

[dsiluvu]

This is truly an interesting BOOK to read!

I am surprised re Samdong Rinpoche's real reaction and thoughts... I guess we can only be sure by observing what he does now.

However, I do share the same thoughts as KG... it will not surprise me that all these attained beings could have premeditated this whole scene to weave everything perfectly together to spread  Dharma/Dorje Shugden 

Would really be good if we could be allowed to get this book up on this site here.