Faith = Believing?

[michaela]

When you have faith in someone, does it mean believing what he said?

Extract from:  http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/his-holiness-advice

"His Holiness the Dalai Lama's Advice Concerning Dolgyal (Shugden)


Following long and careful investigations, His Holiness the Dalai Lama strongly discourages Tibetan Buddhists from propitiating the fierce spirit known as Dolgyal (Shugden). Although he once practised Dolgyal propitiation himself, His Holiness renounced the practice in 1975 after discovering the profound historical, social and religious problems associated with it. He did so with the full knowledge and support of his junior tutor, the late Kyabje Trichang Rinpoche through whom His Holiness first became associated with the practice. Even within the Geluk and Sakya schools - the Tibetan Buddhist traditions to which majority of Dolgyal practitioners belong - the propitiation of this spirit has been controversial throughout its history. Historical investigation reveals that Dolgyal practice, which has strong sectarian overtones, has a history of contributing to a climate of sectarian disharmony in various parts of Tibet, and between various Tibetan communities. Therefore, from 1975 onwards, His Holiness has regularly made public his view that this practice is inadvisable, based on the following three reasons:
 
1. The danger of Tibetan Buddhism degenerating into a form of spirit worship: Tibetan Buddhism originally evolved from the authentic and ancient tradition upheld at the great Indian monastic university of Nalanda, a tradition that His Holiness often describes as a complete form of Buddhism. It embodies the original teaching of the Buddha as developed through the rich philosophical, psychological and spiritual insights of such great Buddhist masters as Nagarjuna, Asanga, Vasubandhu, Dignaga and Dharamakirti. Since the great philosopher and logician Shantarakshita was instrumental in establishing Buddhism in Tibet in its earliest stages in the 8th century, philosophical enquiry and critical analysis have always been important hallmarks of Tibetan Buddhism. The problem with Dolgyal practice is that it presents the spirit Dolgyal (Shugden) as a Dharma protector and what's more tends to promote the spirit as more important than the Buddha himself. If this trend goes unchecked, and innocent people become seduced by cult-like practices of this kind, the danger is that the rich tradition of Tibetan Buddhism may degenerate into the mere propitiation of spirits.
 
2. Obstacles to the emergence of genuine non-sectarianism: His Holiness has often stated that one of his most important commitments is the promotion of inter-religious understanding and harmony. As part of this endeavour, His Holiness is committed to encouraging non-sectarianism in all schools of Tibetan Buddhism. In this His Holiness is following the example set by his predecessors, especially the Fifth Dalai Lama and the Thirteenth Dalai Lama. Not only is a non-sectarian approach mutually enriching for all Tibetan Buddhist schools, but it is also the best safeguard against a rise of sectarianism that could have damaging consequences for the Tibetan tradition as a whole. Given the acknowledged link between Dolgyal worship and sectarianism, this particular practice remains a fundamental obstacle to fostering a genuine non-sectarian spirit within the Tibetan Buddhist tradition.
 
3. Especially inappropriate in relation to the well-being of Tibetan society: Propitiating Dolgyal is particularly troublesome, given the Tibetan people's present difficult circumstances. Textual and historical research demonstrates that the spirit Dolgyal arose out of hostility to the great Fifth Dalai Lama and his government. The Fifth Dalai Lama, who assumed both the spiritual and temporal leadership of Tibet in the 17th century, personally denounced Dolgyal as a malevolent spirit that arose out of misguided intentions and is detrimental to the welfare of beings in general and the Tibetan government headed by the Dalai Lamas in particular. The Thirteenth Dalai Lama and other respected Tibetan spiritual masters have also spoken out strongly against this practice. Therefore, in the current Tibetan context, in which unity among the Tibetan people is vitally important, engaging in this controversial and divisive propitiatory practice is inappropriate.
 
His Holiness has strongly urged his followers to consider carefully the problems of Dolgyal practice on the basis of these three reasons and to act accordingly. He has stated that, as a Buddhist leader with a special concern for the Tibetan people, it is his responsibility to speak out against the damaging consequences of this kind of spirit worship. Whether or not his advice is heeded, His Holiness has made clear, is a matter for the individual. However, since he personally feels strongly about how negative this practice is, he has requested those who continue to propitiate Dolgyal not to attend his formal religious teachings, which traditionally require the establishment of a teacher-disciple relationship."

[michaela]

I found it interesting that if HHDL is judged by ordinary human standard of integrity, his credibility would have been lost long ago.  Instead, he continues to invite praise and respect.

[dsiluvu]

What the Enlightened beings does sometimes is beyond us ordinary beings. Definitely is beyond me! We are definitely ordinary and do not poses the ability to see through what these highly attained Lamas are thinking, planning and is foreseeing... Yes there are many ordinary people out there who has a rigid strict view of how everything needs to be Black or White. Most often the Grey zones are ignored which probably lies most of the real information.

Also you can see through past records and consistent actions that shows the Nature of the Lamas. What are they doing most of the time and how have they benefit others through their work.

When in doubt I guess my best shield is to follow my Guru's advice which is simple and less complicated.

And we all already know that it is best to remain firm in our faiths especially in the most darkest hour. It would be wise for us to follow  'Music Delighting the Ocean of Conquerors', where Kyabje Trijang Dorje Change wrote the following advice knowing clearly, this question will pop up and because the turn of events as such - the BAN will arise... all seems premeditated between HHDL, HH Trinjang Rinpoche and Dorje Shugden if u ask me.


But some who are narrow minded, not understanding this point, consider this Dharmapala to be like an ordinary worldly being and, with supposed faith in the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama, disparage him; or else they indeed admire this great Dharmapala but criticize the Dalai Lama or Panchen Lama. Using either one as a reason not to admire the other and speaking badly about either in any way is the conduct of an ordinary being who, under the influence of attachment and hatred, just tries to help friends and hurt enemies; it obscures the increase of these great holy Aryas' deeds and creates the karmic cause to experience unbearable suffering in the future.
www.dorjeshugden.com/articles/musicdelighting.pdf

And lets take a closer look at the meaning of Trijang Rinpoche's wise words...
But some who are narrow minded, not understanding this point, consider this Dharmapala to be like an ordinary worldly being and, with supposed faith in the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama, disparage him

This one must be dedicated to the Haters - CTA and all the anti-Shugden people.

or else they indeed admire this great Dharmapala but criticize the Dalai Lama or Panchen Lama.

These are for those who is devoted to Dorje Shugden practice but view and perceive  the Dalai Lama as ordinary like them...

either one as a reason not to admire the other and speaking badly about either in any way is the conduct of an ordinary being who, under the influence of attachment and hatred, just tries to help friends and hurt enemies; it obscures the increase of these great holy Aryas' deeds and creates the karmic cause to experience unbearable suffering in the future.

With this kind of statement... what do you think is best we ordinary beings do? ...to remain pure in thoughts on both is pretty obvious. So why should we since what appears in front of us is questionable... well it all boils done to the fact that We are "ordinary". Otherwise we'd be the Gurus.

[michaela]

Dear Dsiluvu

I have read Music Delighting Oceans of Protector word per word, and I am very familiar with the phrases that you quote above.  As you said, in my darkest hour, it helped me to move on.  These explanations have also helped me to keep faith in HHDL and DS.

What I have tried to do with the whole DS issue is to disect from every angle, the role of the CTA, the monasteries, the people who ban Shugdenpas into their stores, houses, places.  It is easy to blame the CTA, the monasteries or the people who carry out the discrimination.  But it seems to me, it always come back where all the problems started.  It was all started when HHDL implemented the ban based on contradictory and incorrect premises about DS.

When we tried to find several historical analogies.   For example:

•   The 3rd Reich had done many bad things to the Jewish.  But when historians looked at the events, it is all come down to Hitler’s delusional view that Aryan race is superior and how with his charisma he influenced many Germans to follow him.  Thus, Hitler is the root of the problem. 

•   Spanish Inquisition - The same applies with Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand of Aragon.  They are the one of unleashed the inquisition against the Jews and Muslims.

•   Tudor Protestant Burning – Bloody Mary is the root of the problem because of her wrong view.
•   And many other historical references

Everytime I read historical accounts of an event, it is always the leaders who bore the responsibilities.  If they did not do what they did (i.e., instilling views, doubts, giving orders, etc.) the disaster would not have happened.  But in the case of Dorje Shugden ban, most of us agree that the ban has caused a lot of sufferings and it is based on incorrect premises.  However, we all believe, I am included, that HHDL is an enlightened being and must have his own reason(s) to establish these contradictory premises to justify his ban.  Sometimes, I feel that I am not being fair here and I have been applying double standards in evaluating these events against other “similar” events in the past.  This has been the thought that bother me the most.

The fact that most people in this forum shift the blame to CTA, monastery administrators, or non-Shugdenpas that carry out the ban is (I think) mainly because they respect and have faith in HHDL or just plain scared to say the obvious or just because it has been the forum rules for us not to say negative things about HHDL.  I also do not want to disparage HHDL, and I have no doubt that he is an enlightened being.  It makes me happy just to see his pictures, his face, or read his books that usually hailed investigation, reasoning and promote compassions towards all beings.

In light of this situation, CTA and monastic communities that ban DS practice and expel Shugden practitioners became our easy targets or scapegoats.  They bore the blame and the implication of our frustrations, although what they do is only carrying out their Lama’s advice in this case HHDL.  I feel that in this case, there is not much different between them and me.  I also carry out DS practice because I have faith in my Lama and this faith is strengthened with further research on DS.  Thus, just as much as I believe in DS, I also believe in HHDL’s good will towards sentient beings.  Thus, if there is not much difference between them and me, why should they bear the blame for the whole situation?

However, I do not doubt about CTA potentials to provide security and abolish faith based discrimination among Tibetan in exile.  Especially now that they have the political mandate to do this - with HHDL's resignation from his political roles.

That is the reason that I post this tricky question whether having faith = Believing?

[Dhiman]

Tibetan Buddhism practises strong guru devotion in which it is difficult to differentiate it with blind faith in the lay mass. Due to heavy publicity, many have found a way of peace through the words of the Dalai Lama and propitiates him as a guru and therefore, follows his instructions to the tee and not even considering understanding the lineage of Dorje Shugden. In a way, they are not really to be blamed since they are just following the instructions of their guru.

However, on a general note, it is pretty much against the Buddhist way when one follows the doctrine bluntly out of their own perception and without reasoning. The teaching on guru devotion has existed since Buddha's time, as well as the need to differentiate it from blind faith.

Buddha, indeed, is so much against blind acceptance of a doctrine that in the Apannaka Sutta (M. I. 400-411) he advises people that, in case they fail to have rational faith in any teacher or doctrine, they should choose their course of life by exercising their pure reason rather than by accepting anything blindly or uncritically. Thus saddha (faith), as conceived in early Buddhism, is in full consonance with the critical attitude adopted by Buddha towards authority.

Extract: Early Buddhism and the Bhagavadg?t?, Page 265.

Prior to his passing, Buddha told his disciples to follow the Dharma and not any teacher or tradition as the Dharma was to guide them. As mentioned in the text, there is no blind faith in Buddhism. All we need is to believe in the possibility of liberation and wise enough to see the suffering in samsaric existence to have the faith to practice - which is for us to see the truth of the Dharma.

I guess the correct way is to understand the nature of the teachings presented and examine its validity through questioning and debate, not idol worshipping.

[Benny]

Quote
Buddha, indeed, is so much against blind acceptance of a doctrine that in the Apannaka Sutta (M. I. 400-411) he advises people that, in case they fail to have rational faith in any teacher or doctrine, they should choose their course of life by exercising their pure reason rather than by accepting anything blindly or uncritically. Thus saddha (faith), as conceived in early Buddhism, is in full consonance with the critical attitude adopted by Buddha towards authority.
Extract: Early Buddhism and the Bhagavadg?t?, Page 265.

I agree with Dihman and the quote posted above. It is in my personal opinion that the fundamental concept of Tibetan Buddhism which is centered on guru devotion, can be perceived as a double edge sword. On one hand it can effectively and efficaciously guide an aspiring devotee towards enlightenment but on the other can be viewed by those uninitiated as encouraging blind faith.

How else can we explain the actions of the Central Tibetan Administration and their followers in reaction to the ban on Dorje Shugden. This clearly proves to the world the effects of having "blind faith" and some have even equated the anti Dorje Shugden followers with the Taliban. The Taliban also believe they we doing the right thing when they blew up the Bamiyan Buddha statutes , carrying out their religious leader's edict that they are declaring a Holy war against enemies of their religion. As such, blind faith and unquestionable devotion to a religious leader can be viewed as a very potent and powerful "weapon" that can be abused if wielded by the wrong hands.
 

[michaela]

I agree with Dihman and the quote posted above. It is in my personal opinion that the fundamental concept of Tibetan Buddhism which is centered on guru devotion, can be perceived as a double edge sword. On one hand it can effectively and efficaciously guide an aspiring devotee towards enlightenment but on the other can be viewed by those uninitiated as encouraging blind faith.
 

You have brought up an interesting point here Benny.  Now, if you have taken refuge Vow towards HHDL.  Then HHDL told you to give up DS practice because he is a spirit.  While you yourself after further investigation is utterly convinced that this is not the case.  You love your Guru and have faith in him.  However, you are dying to argue your point that his advice is not true.

What would you do?

[Karla]

You have brought up an interesting point here Benny.  Now, if you have taken refuge Vow towards HHDL.  Then HHDL told you to give up DS practice because he is a spirit.  While you yourself after further investigation is utterly convinced that this is not the case.  You love your Guru and have faith in him.  However, you are dying to argue your point that his advice is not true.

What would you do?

I would just follow my guru. I just wrote this in another post because you guys seem to keep asking the same questions over and over, just in different ways. Why would you follow him in some points and not follow him in others? It's totally illogical in the practice of guru devotion.

Yes, exactly  Michaela, if you already took vows with His Holiness, then surely it must mean that you trust what he has the ability to help you in any capacity, all the way to enlightenment. Therefore you believe that he will only give you advice and teachings that will lead you to that directly, right? If you didn't believe that, then why take refuge in the first place.  The one day he comes along and tells you something you don't like or you think in your limited way that it is not true. So who is right? Your guru the dalai lama or yourself? If you're right, then why bother even taking vows with him or regarding him as a teacher.

[michaela]

Dear Karla

I think the issue is much deeper than just following the Guru all the way.  I am the lucky one because I only have my Guru and my Guru gave me the practice of DS.  However, in the monastic communities, There are individuals who have more than one Gurus or have taken refuge in more than one guru.  One of the Gurus can tell you not to practice DS because DS is a spirit and the other Guru can tell to practice DS and tell you that DS is an enlightened protector.  If, as the subject of this topic, Faith = Believing... that particular student will be torn and forced to choose.

The basis of choosing itself should be based on logic.  So when you investigate further,  you found out that DS is indeed an enlightened Buddha and not the spirit your other Guru said.  You would like to clarify this with the Guru that told you that DS is a spirit.  However, you cannot do this without being found out and ostracized from the community (in this case if you are a member of particular monastic communities) you risk yourself being expelled if you dare to do this.

This is the very reason why we have this forum... to actually  educate on the truth about DS and the ban.

[samayakeeper]

michaela
•   Quote
When you have faith in someone, does it mean believing what he said?

Extract from:  http://www.dalailama.com/messages/dolgyal-shugden/his-holiness-advice




To have faith in someone eg a doctor would mean I have had some good experiences with the doctor who had medically treated me successfully of my ailments and I had recovered and maybe healed. That faith would make me believe in the same doctor if I had to consult him/her again for and would follow the advice, treatment and medicine given. There are many good doctors who are qualified and adept in providing medical treatment but the doctor I believe in would be someone who explains well and with patience and who cares for my welfare.

As a student-to-be of a spiritual teacher would mean I have checked out this teacher before I requested to be his/her student. The same applies as my analogy of the doctor mentioned here. I may have received many dharma teachings or commitments from different spiritual teachers before I met my root teacher but I only have faith and belief in one spiritual teacher, my root teacher, who has shown me love, generosity and compassion; who with patience and much effort to teach me without pretense nor guile; who with a sound and stable mind teaches me discipline, and who has the wisdom using different methods to help me transform my mind.

These are the ingredients necessary for me to have faith and belief in my root teacher through teachings and actions, not just blind faith. So, if one of my other teachers advised me to stop my practice of Dorje Shugden but my root teacher said otherwise, I just trust and believe in my root teacher.

[diablo1974]

In this time of degeneration age, pure faith is uncommon i would think. So, it has becomes faith and then believe. Even if you believe in something, you still can do it without having complete faith. And if you have done the same thing over and over again without fail...it will eventually becomes a faith that you can rely and hold on for life.

Next, if we have faith doesnt mean tat this faith cannot be leveled down or weaken. Due to the fact that we are in this degenerated age, faith in spirituality has becoming rare but faith in the thre poisons are increasing and never decrease.... Its very sad.

[michaela]

To have faith in someone eg a doctor would mean I have had some good experiences with the doctor who had medically treated me successfully of my ailments and I had recovered and maybe healed. That faith would make me believe in the same doctor if I had to consult him/her again for and would follow the advice, treatment and medicine given. There are many good doctors who are qualified and adept in providing medical treatment but the doctor I believe in would be someone who explains well and with patience and who cares for my welfare.

Dear Samayakeeper

You have brought up an interesting point here.  Does it imply that if you have gone to HHDL and trust that his teaching is good (as most of them are), then suddenly he talked about DS with the above reasoning, you will just believe him without checking (because his other teachings are good so to say?)?

[Ensapa]

Tibetan Buddhism practises strong guru devotion in which it is difficult to differentiate it with blind faith in the lay mass. Due to heavy publicity, many have found a way of peace through the words of the Dalai Lama and propitiates him as a guru and therefore, follows his instructions to the tee and not even considering understanding the lineage of Dorje Shugden. In a way, they are not really to be blamed since they are just following the instructions of their guru.

However, on a general note, it is pretty much against the Buddhist way when one follows the doctrine bluntly out of their own perception and without reasoning. The teaching on guru devotion has existed since Buddha's time, as well as the need to differentiate it from blind faith.

Buddha, indeed, is so much against blind acceptance of a doctrine that in the Apannaka Sutta (M. I. 400-411) he advises people that, in case they fail to have rational faith in any teacher or doctrine, they should choose their course of life by exercising their pure reason rather than by accepting anything blindly or uncritically. Thus saddha (faith), as conceived in early Buddhism, is in full consonance with the critical attitude adopted by Buddha towards authority.

Extract: Early Buddhism and the Bhagavadg?t?, Page 265.

Prior to his passing, Buddha told his disciples to follow the Dharma and not any teacher or tradition as the Dharma was to guide them. As mentioned in the text, there is no blind faith in Buddhism. All we need is to believe in the possibility of liberation and wise enough to see the suffering in samsaric existence to have the faith to practice - which is for us to see the truth of the Dharma.

I guess the correct way is to understand the nature of the teachings presented and examine its validity through questioning and debate, not idol worshipping.

Guru devotion is not having blind faith in your teacher. Guru devotion is to have faith based on the strong reason that whatever your Guru has taught you, benefits you. No real Guru would encourage a personality cult that revolves around the Guru and once in a while he will do things to make you doubt him or make you think twice about worshipping him blindly. To have faith in the Guru is to put his teachings into practice without doubts, not to see him as a god or anything. All real teachers will tell their students to investigate and not blindly believe their teachings because they are confident that what they teach is real. All Gurus encourage investigations and study. Teachers who dont are not real teachers.

Faith in the Buddhist context:

Faith or Saddha is a concept commonly seen in all religions. It plays a very important role in one’s spiritual journey because it is through the power of faith that one is attracted or drawn close to a religious teacher and his teachings. In Buddhism, we also stress a lot on faith. However, the faith in Buddhism is different from other theistic religions which hold that there is a Supreme Creator God who is the Almighty, capable of solving their problems and sufferings. In Buddhism, faith means the trust or confidence of a person towards the Triple Gems after rational examination. The trust is based on experience and understanding.

Faith is considered as a starting point of one’s spiritual journey. It is because of the strong faith of the Bodhisattva (Siddharta) in Truth that He went forth from home to homeless life. His faith that there is a way out from the miseries of existence gave him the strength to overcome all his struggles during his six years of search for truth. Through his faith in Truth, he found the solution to sufferings and reached the supreme goal.

Faith is also very important as an instrument towards the development of one’s wisdom. It helps to supress hindrances, makes the defilements come to a halt and causes the mind to become bright, and not turbid. It sheds away doubts in one’s mind and causes wisdom to arise. Faith, on the other hand, is also a way of refining the crude emotions of human beings through understanding the noble qualities of the Buddha, Dhamma and Sangha. Thus, faith is a necessary cultivation by all Buddhists through wisdom and conduct.

However, the Buddha discouraged mere devotion or blind faith. The Buddha was a teacher who encouraged his disciples to find out the truth through experience and not through blind faith. He encouraged freedom of thought, inquiry and choice. He invited people to ‘Come and See’ (ehi passiko) and left no room for blind faith. He had no closed-fist and He never called himself a ‘Saviour’. His teachings were open to everyone. Throughout his teachings, He stressed the importance of self-effort. In the Kalama Sutta of the Anguttara Nikaya, the Buddha clearly said that one should not accept any view because it is in accordance with one’s own tradition, one’s religious text, or out of respect for the teacher or even because it is logical etc. He advised the Kalamas that they should accept the truth only when they have experienced it and found that it is true and good.

Similarly, in the Alagaddupama Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya, by using the simile of the raft, the Buddha went on further to describe that reality is to be understood through experience and not by mere devotion.

Both instances also describe how we develop faith in our Guru's instructions as well although it seems to only apply to the Buddha's teachings. Its by application of the Guru's instructions and we find it to be beneficial, and faith arises from there. Its not that we trust all of the Guru's instructions because he's a Buddha. Its because his instructions are beneficial, therefore he is the Buddha.