You tube- The Good, the Bad and the Ugly Faces of the Dorje Shugden Controversy

[Ensapa]

Things would definitely be better without the ban on Dorje Shugden. But if it was not for this ban, Dorje Shugden would not be such a hot topic around the world.

When people want to know more about Tibetan Buddhism and Google search it, Dorje Shugden would appear, allowing them to know more and understand. They making their own stand of whether they are for the ban or against it.

With the ban, it has also made Dorje Shugden being brought up at many occasions planting some Dharmic seeds for the viewers and readers about Dorje Shugden even if they are against the practice.

Not only that. The Dalai Lama has also opened himself up for criticism as anyone who wants to dig dirt on him would surely talk about Dorje Shugden and how the ban was unjust, as the reasons for it are flimsy and everyone can see that. No matter how 'bad' Dorje Shugden is, there should not be a ban of this magnitude. it does more harm than good to everyone involved. In the end, it is the Dorje Shugden practitioners who benefit the most as the ban accelerates their Dharma practice as it makes them put in more effort in their Dharma practice.

[Rinchen]

Not only that. The Dalai Lama has also opened himself up for criticism as anyone who wants to dig dirt on him would surely talk about Dorje Shugden and how the ban was unjust, as the reasons for it are flimsy and everyone can see that. No matter how 'bad' Dorje Shugden is, there should not be a ban of this magnitude. it does more harm than good to everyone involved. In the end, it is the Dorje Shugden practitioners who benefit the most as the ban accelerates their Dharma practice as it makes them put in more effort in their Dharma practice.

The ban of the magnitude of it would be a little extreme, and if there really is, how are we suppose to judge and measure it? Another reason that I think the Dalai Lama did not put a magnitude limit to where the criticisms can reach is because that if that is put in placed by the Dalai Lama, it would not justify to the ban he has put on Dorje Shugden as it does help to cover not allowing the freedom of speech for the critics. By doing this, wouldn't the Dalai Lama mean that the whole ban is a smokescreen for something? (Which we all know that it is a smokescreen now)

[Ensapa]

The ban of the magnitude of it would be a little extreme, and if there really is, how are we suppose to judge and measure it? Another reason that I think the Dalai Lama did not put a magnitude limit to where the criticisms can reach is because that if that is put in placed by the Dalai Lama, it would not justify to the ban he has put on Dorje Shugden as it does help to cover not allowing the freedom of speech for the critics. By doing this, wouldn't the Dalai Lama mean that the whole ban is a smokescreen for something? (Which we all know that it is a smokescreen now)

well, the ban could have been carried out in a way where it meets the Dalai Lama's requirements and not go overboard to the point where Dorje Shugden practitioners are violently evicted from their homes and have their properties destroyed, denied medical treatment and are not allowed to purchase goods from the the stores. I do not believe that those steps are necessary at all in any way and that whoever who believes that they are are not even Buddhist to begin with no matter how much they claim to love the Dalai Lama.

[Pilgrim]

I'm still a newbie and there's much I don't know about but I tend to agree with the viewpoints of Ensapa and Rinchen.

By "banning" Dorje Shugden, H.H. Dalai Lama has propelled Dorje Shugden onto the world stage, especially in China where DS's presence is sorely needed, even if it means HHDL will take on the "ugly" role in front of Buddhists all around the world. Isn't that a move of compassion and selflessness?

As for those who take it upon themselves to do harm to DS practitioners, I greatly doubt that HHDL actually told them explicitly to deliver violence. Everyone has a choice and true dharma practitioners should know better than to interfere with other people's practice. If anyone wants to exercise the ban, they should apply it to themselves, full stop. Which means, this whole "ban" is a perfect exercise to separate those who really practice dharma from those who only desire to politicise dharma.

Then again, these are only the views of a newbie...

[Rinchen]

That is precisely the point. It is just pointless to be controlling the extends of the ban because there definitely will be people that will ignore these "rules" that are set. Hence, what for allow the chances for more bad karma to be created when they can stop it? Hence, they do not create any limit then the people will not be able to create more negative karma.