Je Pabongkhapa in the East Tibet (what really happened?)

[yedi]

@ Yedi:

Thanks for your reply. No doubt there had been great achievements by the Great Fifth. But yet he lived the life of a politician. Put aside possible involvement in the East (which I still think existed) there is still the problem of the Jonangpa persecution in Ü and the war against the Kagyud in Tsang. These had for sure been supported and some even started by the Great Fifth. If he is Chenrezig, then there will be a benefit even from such actions. But as we can't see his real nature (well, basically I can't, maybe someone else do can) we have to judge by actions. And at least such actions are exactly of the kind the now 14th Dalai Lama alleges us to do.
But I am no expert on the Great Fifth's life. Anyway, Goldstein's "The Snow Lion and the Dragon" is a good compilation on Tibetan politics through the ages.

Thanks for the book hint, I looked already for something like this and I hope to find it in our library .
It seems to be quite hard to get a clear picture on the Vth Dalai Lama, since he started to become again an important figure for this new religious fight. I got the story with the minister, who had a strong bad influence on the 5th Dalai Lama and had acted in all political questions behind his back, from my abbot. This minister had also arranged the assassination of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen and claimed him when some strange appearances happened to have become an evil spirit. In the first time the Vth Dalai Lama believed to the version with the evil spirit, but later after some successless exorcism had been done, he realised Dragpa Gyaltsen to have become the powerful Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden. For this reason he wrote the famous praise to Dorje Shugden (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=341). As far as I remember the words of my abbot correctly, all issues regarding Dorje Shugden had been fully clarified and solved this time. There had been never a reason, to unpack it again and to declare it as a smoldering conflict since centuries. Actually nobody talked about it, since the Nechung oracle started with the topic in the 60s again.

Although the present Dalai Lama talks a lot about his closeness to the Vth one, it doesn't say automatically that he has also the same qualities like the great Fifth. Of course he might be in a similar situation: as I have heard, the present Dalai Lama lives completely like in a soap bubble and all informations, which he receives, are controlled by his ministers. Probably he gets daily some new fake messages and fake horrible pictures about Dorje Shugden practitioners and believes in a fair crusade.

But as you say, one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way. Sometimes I think about this point if I see some of the results of the schism: Dorje Shugden is now the world most famous Tibetan Buddhist deity. While only less people know about Mahakala or Veshramana or Rahula, even many uninvolved people came across Dorje Shugden. And this schism made also, that our part of Gelug sect is very accepted amongst the Chinese communists and attractive to many Chinese people. Whatever happened in Tibet and China, the Chinese are sentient beings just as well and it's very auspicious for them to have access to the Dharma.

[a friend]

Quote: But as you say, one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

I'm sorry for belatedly jumping into this cold thread.
We already had a huge discussion about this matter with our dearest Beggar, the original owner of the website, now gone to some hidden cave apparently. So I'll just write a few words this time.

Imho, I don't think we should confuse innocent people who come to this website in search of information telling them that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or an emanation of Chenrezig.

It was a convention in the Tibetan political system to call the leaders of the world with the names of deities, the emperor of China being Mañjushri, the leader of Tibet, Chenrezig, and the czar of Russia, Arya Tara.

On the other hand, Buddhas cannot take away our bad karma and our ignorance with their own hands (if they could they would've done it eons ago); they liberate us by teaching us what to practice and what to abandon. There is no way a Buddha would push anybody to persecute others, to hate others, to belittle others. Imagine the confusion if a Buddha did this.

Some give an argument against this, saying that Buddhas can appear as demons, deluded beings and so on. This is true. But when they appear as Buddhas, they act as Buddhas. They never appear as demons and say, I am the Buddha, never.

I think it's not necessary to remind the amount of hatred and anger that this Dalai Lama has unleashed in the Tibetan communities around the world against the Protector's practitioners. Remember how the Dalai Lama himself has personally praised and thanked the persecutors. Remember how the Dalai Lama himself personally insists today in culminating the "cleansing" against the practitioners. Never a Buddha with the appearance and name of a Buddha ever did anything like this. So let's stop confusing others, lest we throw innocent people into bewilderment and disbelief of the Buddhadharma. Let's stop associating the Dalai Lama and his actions with the Great Boddhisattva of Compassion.

Best to all!

[yedi]

Some give an argument against this, saying that Buddhas can appear as demons, deluded beings and so on. This is true. But when they appear as Buddhas, they act as Buddhas. They never appear as demons and say, I am the Buddha, never.

In the danger to repeat old discussions thanks for taking up this subject again, I struggled with it the last days. This argument is indeed the point, which I heard often also from my Gurus and found myself very helpful to keep up my samayas in a correct way. Imho you forgot something important: 'When they appear as Buddhas, they act as Buddhas' - but one has probably not the ability to recognize these actions as the actions of a Buddha because of ones deluded mind. The crucial point is, that we need definitely higher realizations to say clearly: „this is an activity of a Buddha and this not.“ Do we have these realizations? Even my masters as f.e. Gonsar Rinpoche and Kyabje Lati Rinpoche denied to give clear answers in this question. Both seem to prefer some kind of „crazy wisdom master“ explanation. Most interesting I found, when Gonsar Rinpoche compared the Dalai Lama one time with Ananda, when he was asked three times by the Buddha, to stay longer in the world and was three times not able to give a proper answer. This didn't happen, because Ananda was stupid or confused or had made the Buddha ordain nuns or whatsoever. It happened, because he represented in this moment the common karma of the sentient beings of our world. Only due to the lack of merits of the sentient beings, he was not able to give a proper answer to the Buddha, but not because of his personal failure. So it could be also some kind of Pontius Pilatus story.

Another point is, that still many of us have taken initiations by the Dalai Lama before the schism started, as Kalachakra and so on. Especially the initiations of the Annutarayoga Tantra level include strong samayas, which can spoil completely one's own tantric practice, if one doesn't follow them in a correct way. And as usual for these initiations one has to see the Lama as an emanation of the deity, whatever will happen. So it's not the question to see the Dalai Lama as an emanation of Chenresig, Kalachakra, Yamantaka or whatsoever, but to keep up one's visualization in the way one has got in the initiation. And also if one has taken any initiation of Annutarayoga tantra one is learned to see all phenomenas, even a crazy Dalai Lama, Adolf Hitler or the flying-spaghetti-monster (as far as it exists), as an emanation of one's deity and one's Lama.
 
Of course one could argue here, that this view of Annutarayogatantra is not suitable for a common public and just misleading. But even if one doesn't like to respect the samayas of those ones who have taken these initiations, also for smaller vehicles there are good reasons to step gently in the way how we talk about the present Dalai Lama: for example is he a fully ordained monk and as we can study in the Lam Rim Chenmo it produces heavy negative karma to slander a Gelong, even when he shows a very bad behavior. And there is also in general the advise to avoid the four faults of speech, which means lie, gossip, harsh and divisive speech. Whatever the Dalai Lama does, but I fear we have first to look at ourselves.

This doesn't mean at all that we should just shut up, this definitely not. Of course it's very necessary to clear up the dissensions, tell the truth and give support to the suffering people, but imho it's very important for our own practice to stay only with the facts and not to become personal or offending. Otherwise we would do the same mistakes on the other side and in a result we will be unworthy as Buddhists and just involved in a samsaric fight.

[a friend]

Dear Yedi,

We should not confuse people by repeating that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation.
Buddhas have only one way to liberate us: teaching us what we should adopt and what we should abandon.
If we go on repeating that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig, then we are telling people the following: It's just great to persecute others because of their beliefs, it's exactly what the Buddha wants from you, go ahead and persecute, the Buddha is going to praise you, you are going to make the Buddha very happy.

Please, Yedi, things are unfortunate enough for us to add to the confusion. On what purpose? What is the need to go on repeating that? There is no vow of any kind that demands from one to say that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation.

Not to associate the Dalai Lama with Chenrezig is something simple, it doesn't harm anybody, it does not constitute any breaking of any level of vows, and it avoids pushing new, innocent people that start investigating the Buddhadharma to a state of confusion or disbelief.

It would be good too (and this is something that regularly comes up in this forum) to avoid bringing up the Mantrayana level. To use arguments coming from this level not only puts us in immediate danger of breaking  our vows, it's unsuitable to those who did not get there, it might harm their minds and increase their bewilderment.

I do not wish to discuss further this matter. These words are just to request the people of this forum to use caution and common sense, and also to have consideration for all those who are going to listen to our Buddhist voices.

What are we doing to this world if we invite people to think that a Buddha is somebody who incites segregation, persecution, fear, violence, and so on? What are we doing to this pitiful samsara if we destroy the hope that only the Buddhas can bring, by giving a terribly mistaken image of what a Buddha is?

And again, what need is there to do this?

[yedi]

I am very sorry to contradict again, as it seems, that you are somewhat fed up by this topic. But even if there should be no sense in your eyes for this discussion, for me (and probably others) there is, because though I can follow partially your political reasons, from the side of your Dharma reasons I feel not convinced and also somewhat ignored in my arguments. So I hope that I am allowed to continue this discussion in a reasonable and not a dogmatic way.

First to say: nobody stated that the Dalai Lama is Chenresig. It was only said:

one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

This fits to all the root teachings from the smaller vehicles, which we received from our masters, as we know, that there are special skills necessary to say definitely „this is an action of chenresig“ and „this is not an action of chenresig“. Before we have not even reached some kind of yogic perception, we must not give any judgement in this way. Of course we can suggest, that somebody acts or acts not as chenresig while interpreting some signs, but we are definitely not able to make any final decision in this point except we would have reached such a high yogic level. This was the way how I understood this sentence and there was no idea at all, that anybody of us will support now blindly all the actions of DL. But if you insist now on not giving space for any doubts according to our own deluded minds, because you know already very surly, that DL acts not as Chenresig, then this would mean in fact, that you have accomplished such a high yogic peception. Probably you have, but I request your kindly understanding, if I will not believe blindly in it.

Buddhas have only one way to liberate us: teaching us what we should adopt and what we should abandon....
What are we doing to this world if we invite people to think that a Buddha is somebody who incites segregation, persecution, fear, violence, and so on? What are we doing to this pitiful samsara if we destroy the hope that only the Buddhas can bring, by giving a terribly mistaken image of what a Buddha is?

The main goal of Buddhism is not to make the people believe in a world without suffering, but to help the sentient beings to overcome their delusions, which are the origin for their suffering. For this we have to understand the own mind and the phenomenas as that, what they really are. If you reduce the Buddhism just to a way to make people outwardly and temporarly happy or to an ethical how-to-do, then this would mean a heavy misunderstanding of the Buddha's doctrine.

But probably our dissence arises from a different environment and how we perceive it. In those Western countries I know and especially in my monastery I often get the feedback, that people are very happy to find an alternative to the mainstream Hollywood Buddhism and to come in contact with a Dharma, which they can study thoroughfully step by step. Those people don't like to be involved in any Dharma politics and are only interested in this Dharmapala issue, as far as they see their Gurus attacked and of course, because they feel compassion with the persecuted Tibetans. But they don't like to become a part of this schism and for that reason they want to find some solutions how to integrate this issue senseful in their practice. So, in the same way as you fear people could be irritated by a person who is claimed to be a Bodhisattva while acting very contradictory, I fear much more, people could be irritated by feeling forced to take part in this schism in a way which doesn't fit to their understanding of Dharma and how they were taught by their Gurus. And as I already said: I never ever heard one of my Gurus, and I met a lot, saying the DL is not or acts not as Chenresig. There would be also not much meaning for it in Western countries. The medias find always some nice titles for the DL, but there is no great emotional connection with it. Probably this is different for Tibetans and makes our views different?

There is no vow of any kind that demands from one to say that the Dalai Lama is Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation.

The crucial point is not, that anybody must say, DL is an emanation of chenresig. The issue is, that you wants us clearly to say, that he is not and we should not do otherwise.
So if I would agree with you and say DL is not an emanation of chenresig:

• First of all it is simple lying, because as the deluded person as I am, I don't have the capacity to say he is or he is not.
• Second it is divisive speech, because there are a lot of people who believe it and I try to make them loose faith into their Guru. I can say this and this action of DL doesn't fit to my understanding of Buddhism, these are imho facts to discuss. But the question if he is an appearance of chenresig or not is a question of faith of people. The same I will not jump in the question, if Jesus was just a historical appearance or really the son of God. This is not my duty, I care for my own believe.
• Third, this would make me breaking my ordination vow because of taking party after a schism in the Sangha. Before this schism happened I had no problem with the view to believe him being an emanation of chenresig. While refusing it now, I take part against the other one in the intention to destroy their believe.
• Fourth it is a break of root Bodhisattva vows, as I would pretend to have an understanding of emptiness, which I actually not have.
• And Fifth it is a break of my tantric vows while despising my Lama after I received initiation.

I hope, that I could clearly bring out my points. If they should sound unpolite, harsh or whatsoever, this is not in my intention but a result of being not a native speaker. And for the case, that you don't wish to continue this discussion furthermore, I will not expect an answer and we can leave it here. But I didn't like just to stop with a dogmatic 'shut up' because my arguments seem not to fit. We are Gelugpas, we can debate, or not?

[a friend]

Yedi, You say:

The crucial point is not, that anybody must say, DL is an emanation of chenresig. The issue is, that you wants us clearly to say, that he is not and we should not do otherwise.

I thank you so much for stating yourself so clearly that, for you, THAT IS THE ISSUE. Whew! What a relief! So your message is addressed to the person "who wants you clearly to say, that he is not Chenrezi and we should not do otherwise".

Since you invoke a limited knowledge of the language I invite you to read again my messages; you might then realize that I never said that you should say that HE IS NOT.

I will remind you what I did said, and maintain: that for the sake of innocent people that come to this public place without a knowledge or with a limited knowledge of Buddhism we should not go on repeating that the Dalai Lama IS Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation, let alone hinting that he might be acting as Chenrezig in a hidden way, since for obvious reasons this statement has a definite potential for harming their minds.

Nothing prohibits us to refrain from repeating such things. And our silence will not harm ourselves or others.

This has no relation with our samayas, nor the level of our attainments or non attainments.

I just invite us all to abstain from saying what could harm others. The statements in question have this potential to harm by making repulsive the image of the Buddha for some people before they have the opportunity to receive even some basic teachings. It is more than obvious that they will run away from anything Buddhist if they assume that a Buddha can behave in such way.

Yedi, I'm sorry not to answer other points. It's not that I am fed up with the issue, I just consider it so pernicious. Enough harm has been inflicted, I don't want to contribute to more harm.


Thom, hi there. It's undeniable that you gave so much, you were so generous and were betrayed. I'm really sorry every time I remember what you went through. You have been very brave not to have abandoned the Buddhadharma. I admire you for that, for still having the strength for upholding the teachings of Lord Buddha and loving our Lamas. Are you aware of the incredible good fortune that you had, to have unloaded such a mega chunk of negative karma and survived? Now that the tears are in the past, you might start feeling how light you are, after such ordeal. Anyway, even if you are still sore, sooner or later you will encounter the goodness of all the good you've done.

Best to all!

[yedi]

Yedi, You say:

The crucial point is not, that anybody must say, DL is an emanation of chenresig. The issue is, that you wants us clearly to say, that he is not and we should not do otherwise.

I thank you so much for stating yourself so clearly that, for you, THAT IS THE ISSUE. Whew! What a relief! So your message is addressed to the person "who wants you clearly to say, that he is not Chenrezi and we should not do otherwise".

Since you invoke a limited knowledge of the language I invite you to read again my messages; you might then realize that I never said that you should say that HE IS NOT.

okay, slowly we come to the gist of the matter - btw. my knowledge of language is not too limited to understand your postings

Related to the statement "DL being chenresig" there were three possibilities:

1. DL is chenresig (as positive)
2. DL is not chenresig (as negative)
3. We don't know, if DL is or DL is not. (as neutral)

As I already mentioned, nobody stated in the discussion, that DL is Chenresig. The criticized sentence was:

one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

This sentence refers clearly to the third point, which is neutral and treats its object in an agnostic way.
But when you jumped into this discussion, you criticized this neutral statement as well as the positive and that's also what you repeated in your last posting:

we should not go on repeating that the Dalai Lama IS Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation, let alone hinting that he might be acting as Chenrezig in a hidden way

This says clearly, that we should not mention the positive and the neutral version here anymore for whatever reason. So if these two possibilities, positive and neutral, are not valid objects for discussions, than only the negative is left. Even while not saying explicitly, that we have to support your idea that DL is not chenresig, you did it implicitly by excluding all other possibilities. I hope you can follow this simple logical problem and will understand, why I refuse vehemently to become reduced to a statement, which is definitely not in agreement with my own Dharma practice.

I will remind you what I did said, and maintain: that for the sake of innocent people that come to this public place without a knowledge or with a limited knowledge of Buddhism ...

Probably we should focus more on this argument "people outside". Do they really exist in the way as we are using them in our discussion or are they just a good valve to weight our conceptions with some kind of plurality?  For that I will describe you some types of „people outside“ according to my experience as far as it is possible to classify them into groups. Please feel free to compare them  with the „people outside“ you talk about and find out yourself, where the priority is.

• Tibetans, who follow DL blindly whatever he does as their political and spiritual leader by believing him to be chenresig:
  These people will usually not come here and if they come here, they will not read here, and if they read, then only the first two words of the text to find out your way of side. The rest will disappear in a red mist. If they answer, then only in words like f*** and s***. To believe those people being a vessel for any meaningful word is illusory. You will not reach them here and if you write "DL is not chenresig", you will not reach them ever more.

• Western Tibetan Buddhists, who follow DL blindly whatever he does as their spiritual leader by believing him to be chenresig:
  Those people will not come here, because they should not do so. If they come here, then only to find a confirmation for their own view. You can write and proof what you want, they will pick out just those things, which fit to their view. And if they read "DL Lama is not chenresig", they feel just confirmed in their view more then ever.

• Western Tibetan Buddhists from our or other schools, who don't follow blindly the words of DL and feel politic and religion sometimes too much mixed, but still believing in DL might be chenresig in a open or hidden way:
  Those people probably come here and will look for some informations. They believe, that some unpleasant things going on in India, but it's hard to say, what is action and what is reaction. But as soon if they find sentences like "DL is not chenresig" and other things against DL which sound to their ears like flaming, they stop reading while pretending it just for retaliating from the other side.

• Western Tibetan Buddhists from our or other schools, who are completely fed up with any kind of Dharma fight and/or Tibetan issues in general:
  Those people might come here to find some objective informations. But as soon as they see statements, which sound polemic to them as f.e. „DL is not chenresig“ or „DL is not really DL“ and so on, they feel disgusted as it is just fight again and click to another site.

• Interested non-Buddhists who heard about this issue and want to get informed without have taken party:
  Since those people get a lot of irritating and contradictory informations from many different sides, they try to be objective by themselves. In the way „the truth is always in the middle“ they believe that for any fight two parties are necessary and see faults in both sides. If they sympathize, then only with this group, which seem to be more „Buddhist“ for them, what means obviously peacefuller, more respectful and more free from hatred and anger. The sentence „DL is not chenresig“ has no meaning for them, because they don't know much about these things, but they feel the offending character of these words.

• Interested non-Buddhists who dislike the DL for any reason:
  Those people are happy to find any negative information on DL. Unfortunately those people mostly also don't like Tibetan Buddhism and use those informations just to cement their unwholesome views. Their critics if published are often such absurd, that they spoil any reasonable critic and do the opposite work as happened f.e. with the Trimondis. The sentence „DL is not chenresig“ even while not really understandable for them, sounds at least like a welcome affront for their collection of negative informations.

• Western Tibetan Buddhists from our school, who have suffered because of the Dharmapala issue: Those people might visit this site and for them there could be a temporary aid in such sentences „DL is not chenresig“ to overcome their depressions and not to lose faith in the Dharma in general. But as they are practitioners on the way, they should realize after some time, that the problems of samsara are much deeper then to follow the x-time just the way of avoiding negative and searching positive experiences. All those obstacles arose because of the law of karma and if we don't learn how to include all these hindrances in a positive way in our Dharma practice, we will just waste our precious human existence. So, in last consequence there is not much sense in such sentences: „DL is not chenresig“ because it will just deepen our dualistic perception.

• Tibetans from our school, who suffered because of the Dharmapala issue:
  There might be a few really interested Dharma practitioners who have the necessary conditions to visit this site. For those people fits the point above. For the rest, I am sorry to say: the elder ones don't use the internet as they don't have enough knowledge in English language and technics. And the younger ones use the internet only to chat with friends, to download some music and to watch nice girl pics. Sounds hard, but I share with these guys daily the same computer room

To conclude this try of a gross classification according to my personal experience: in all your wonderful, compassionated words for „the people outside“ I can find only a limited, very temporary and worldly aid to a little group of people, who might need it for some time. And I see a lot of damage for a huge group of „people outside“, who unfortunately seem not to fit into your compassion. But as you see, I am open for any discussion

[wang]

Good point Yedi

Please keep on posting in this forum.  I guess you are from Geshe Rabten's monastery?  I like Geshe Rabten so much...

Back on this topic.  To me, Dalai Lama's action is quite not understandable, by cross examine with the Lamrim teaching.  To my observation, those following Dalai Lama 'blindly' are:
1. Lay Tibetan with 100% trust in Dalai Lama('whatever he do must be right', 'willing to die for him for any reason'.  Yes I met that kind of lay Tibetan who said DL is 'our god')
2. Geluk monks with teacher-student relationship (especially young tulku, whatelse can they do?)
3. Geluk senior monks within the institution
4. Non Geluk monks/teachers for whatever reason
5. Westen Tibetan Buddhist for whatever reason(new comer seeing DL as 'god' with a Christian mentality,  following own guru's comment etc.)

And funny point is that, looks most those I met openingly say 'no, this protector is not that bad' are well-educated young geshe'   Maybe that's because they don't have burden as a 'tulku' who inevitably be part of the institution or they don't have student-teacher relationship with Dalai Lama.  And even to these geshe, the most they commented at the end was 'Boddhisatva's intention is not easy for us to guess out', not ruling out  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' as Yedi said.   BTW, those be Tibetan Buddhist for more that a year will know that ''XX is YY Boddhisatva/Buddha'' is very common in Tibetan culture, hence  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' that kind of comment can be viewed as a polite protocol with not much significant meaning.

I once asked my guru if the institution or somebody behave really bad, can I hate them?  His answer is simply 'no hatred in any case, that destroy our merit...'.

[yedi]

Hi wang,

Please keep on posting in this forum.  I guess you are from Geshe Rabten's monastery?  I like Geshe Rabten so much...

...and I guess, you are the winner of the paper chase from all the hints I have spread here

As far as my monastic schedule allows (and as long people get not too much irritated with me ) I like to post here and I would be very happy, if more others would do so. For my idea we spent already enough time in some kind of victims role. There might be victims on a worldly level. But since we are followers of the way of the Victorious One, how we could be really victims?

Back on this topic.  To me, Dalai Lama's action is quite not understandable, by cross examine with the Lamrim teaching.  To my observation, those following Dalai Lama 'blindly' are:
1. Lay Tibetan with 100% trust in Dalai Lama('whatever he do must be right', 'willing to die for him for any reason'.  Yes I met that kind of lay Tibetan who said DL is 'our god')
2. Geluk monks with teacher-student relationship (especially young tulku, whatelse can they do?)
3. Geluk senior monks within the institution
4. Non Geluk monks/teachers for whatever reason
5. Westen Tibetan Buddhist for whatever reason(new comer seeing DL as 'god' with a Christian mentality,  following own guru's comment etc.)

Thanks for extending the Tibetan part of this gross list, I found it myself somewhat lacking since I know myself only very less Tibetans from other schools personally (to be honest, I prefer to make a big bow around them to avoid dissences). Here in the Western countries where I live, there are just very, very few lay Tibetans, who come to teachings at all (you see them mainly on some festivals like Losar or Dalai Lama events, which are always good opportunities to show ones new Tibetan silk chupa) and this is not a question of school. But I met some previous Western hardliner Antishugdenites, who changed in the last years their mind, because they feel more and more fed up with Exile-Tibetans, who tell them with a great self-confidence, which Gurus are right or wrong, who is a right Tulku and who not, who is Buddhist and who not and so on while being themselves even not able to give a proper answer, when asked for such rudimentary things like the Four Noble Truths.

And funny point is that, looks most those I met openingly say 'no, this protector is not that bad' are well-educated young geshe'   Maybe that's because they don't have burden as a 'tulku' who inevitably be part of the institution or they don't have student-teacher relationship with Dalai Lama.  And even to these geshe, the most they commented at the end was 'Boddhisatva's intention is not easy for us to guess out', not ruling out  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' as Yedi said.   BTW, those be Tibetan Buddhist for more that a year will know that ''XX is YY Boddhisatva/Buddha'' is very common in Tibetan culture, hence  ' he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way' that kind of comment can be viewed as a polite protocol with not much significant meaning.

This is exactly the way how I understood such sentences, more or less just as some kind of 'lightning rod' to the danger of failures in the speech and to be sure not to pretend non-existing qualities of myself.

I once asked my guru if the institution or somebody behave really bad, can I hate them?  His answer is simply 'no hatred in any case, that destroy our merit...'.

I had also a similar help all this time by an answer from Kyabje Lati Rinpoche. My question was: 'I heard, if one has trusted in a Guru one time, it can happen, that he starts to act all of a sudden very crazy and then one should not loose faith in him anymore whatever he does. But what to do, if a Guru starts to behave crazy and will not stop anymore?'
This question was still before the schism started and it sounded to most people somewhat funny, so they laughed. But Kyabje Lati Rinpoche became extremely seriously and gave a long, long answer to it. The main points were, that one time having trusted in a Guru, one should never ever loose ones faith anymore. The only possibility one has, is to avoid his nearness, if the irritations are too strong. One is allowed to say, that one doesn't understand his behaviour and one must also not support his activities, if they are not in accordance with the Dharma. But one may never ever start slandering on this Guru or say, that he is not one's Guru anymore and so on.

[yedi]

Dear Dharma friends,

after a few months in retreat I am very happy to see you all alive here and very engaged in posting
So many new stuff to read and I hope you won't mind if I don't feel able to follow that all and will bring up now an old topic again. Anyway, during my retreat time I had the opportunity to study a very interesting book from Mipham Rinpoche which brought some more light to an old interesting question which was posted here last year and couldn't be answered in a real satisfying manner:

Hello all, fellow Shugdenites


I was yesterday talking with a Nyingmapa friend, and we touched on the subject of Je Phabongkhapa (henceforth JP), and he had a view, that JP was actively acting against Nyingmapas in the Eastern Tibet. This was a bit of a shock, since my friend does not have anything against Gelukpas, or even DS-practice! It seems therefore, that even "DS-friendly" Nyingmapas have a very bad view concerning JP, and that while "JP dissing" is the hobby of anti-geluks and anti-shugdenites, similar view seems to be a general Nyingmapa view, entertained even in friendly quarters who do not go dissing JP publicly.

Now of course, he merely had the view or understanding that JP acted against his lineage, but he didn't mention any real details, as seems to always be the case when JP is talked about. It seems, that people just have a general notion about 'evil actions' of JP in the East, but nobody seems quite capable of spelling anything even close to any facts or details. It seems, that it is all just rumours. Now I ask from you all, is there any real proof of any improper action by JP? Considering how many people nowadays dislike and badmouth JP, surely someone would have presented by now some actual proof. Surely. So, could someone please show me?

Surely something must have happened, because so many Nyingmapas think thatwise. Surely there are some real records about it all. There is hardly any nyingma-conspiracy at work, so "something must have been burned, since there is so much smoke". So, where is the fire?

Now, I of course do not expect that anything can be found, since I do not see how Heruka himself could have acted improperly. Nevertheless, I do have a view about what happened in the East. I present it here, so that you all could comment on whether it seems to be based on facts, or sounds reasonable. Personally I feel, that it has the following four good points about it:
- it shows that there was no fire (meaning that JP did not act improperly, but should be praised instead)
- it explains why there is smoke (meaning that Nyingmapas do have something to rant about)
- it seems reasonable and probable
- it accords with the known facts (that is, with those facts that I personally know)

I would appreciate it, if those of you who know more about history, and do have access to various Tibetan sources, could comment on whether my account accords with the known facts. And whether it seems reasonable and probable to you.

In the book "Mipham's Beacon of Certainty" edited and commented by John Whitney Pettit I found the following passage:

"If anything, it was the long-standing tensions between the Gelug-dominated governmment in Central Tibet and the aristocratic powers of Kham that prompted ecumenical scholars of the Sakya, Kagyu, and Nyingma schools to forge a sort of cultural - if not quite political - solidarity. The Nyag rong war (c. 1861-1863) displaced numerous persons, apparently including Mipham himself, and precipitated the invasion of an army from Lhasa, the presence of which seems to have been instrumental in the settling of old scores between Gelug and rival monasteries in Kham. These events resulted in the destruction of several monasteries and the death of certain religious figures and must have impressed upon Mipham - as they certainly did for his teachers Khyentse and Kongtrül - the importance of preserving endangered spiritual traditions.
Because of their close relations with officials in the Lhasa government, the Gelugpas were naturally less inclined to participate in this solidarity, at least on the institutional level. This seems to have been especially true of Gelug scholars from central Tibet, while other's from Mipham's homeland, such as 'Bum gsar dGebshes, numbered among his admirors. ..."

This seems to proof that there was a stronger conflict between Nyingmapas and Gelugpas in Kham in which many Gelugpas obviously didn't be on their best behaviour. And there was also a destruction of Nyingma monasteries and murdering of higher religious figures of Nyingma side by some Gelugpas or probably better to say soldiers who served under the Gelug ruled government in Lhasa. Probabably this incident is the causing fire of the smoke.
The strange point is now while this conflict became related to Je Pabongka who was'nt born yet at this time. Is there any idea? It could be also interesting to know which kind of relationship between Mipham Rinpoche and Je Pabonka as contemporaries existed. As you probably know, Mipham Rinpoche (1846-1912) was a famous Nyingma scholar and yogi, furthermore he was a great knower of Je Tsongkhapa and extremely skilled in debates with the Gelug fraction since he liked to provoke them with some critics. But he was also highly respected amongst many Gelug Lamas and spoke always very respectful about Je Tsongkhapa. Mipham Rinpoche is said to be the founder of the Rime movement (probably not in the way as it is understood nowadays).
For me it would be very interesting to know if those two great scholars and debators met one time and how they did together. And why the aggressions were directed to Je Pabongka although Mipham Rinpoche taught to his disciples the importance of debating with other schools. This could explain a lot because Mipham Rinpoche's position for the Nyingma lineage is absolutely comparable to Je Pabongka for the Gelug.

[Big Uncle]

Regarding Je Pabongkha Rinpoche, I just have one thing to say. If he is so bad as they say he is, why does he keep reincarnating back as a human being? Look at his current incarnation, which is shown on this website.

http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=37

I have been to his Ladrang in Nepal and gained a fortunate blessing from Rinpoche. He is very kind and young. Lately, I heard that he has been traveling to China a lot, perhaps in preparation for a lot of work there. I am sure what they say about his previous life are not true. He probably have converted a lot of Nyingmas with Gelug teachings and hence resulted in a lot jealousy. So what they say about Pabongka Rinpoche is unfounded and this is basically my viewpoint.

[WisdomBeing]

Dear Yedi

Welcome back from your retreat! I have just read through the thread regarding whether the Dalai Lama is chenrezig or not and I just wanted to say that i found your explanation logical and substantive - especially with regards to whether the statement is postive, negative or neutral:

"Related to the statement "DL being chenresig" there were three possibilities:

1. DL is chenresig (as positive)
2. DL is not chenresig (as negative)
3. We don't know, if DL is or DL is not. (as neutral)

As I already mentioned, nobody stated in the discussion, that DL is Chenresig. The criticized sentence was:

one should never forget this aspect, that he might act as Chenresig in a hidden way.

This sentence refers clearly to the third point, which is neutral and treats its object in an agnostic way.
But when you jumped into this discussion, you criticized this neutral statement as well as the positive and that's also what you repeated in your last posting:

we should not go on repeating that the Dalai Lama IS Chenrezig or Chenrezig's emanation, let alone hinting that he might be acting as Chenrezig in a hidden way

This says clearly, that we should not mention the positive and the neutral version here anymore for whatever reason. So if these two possibilities, positive and neutral, are not valid objects for discussions, than only the negative is left. Even while not saying explicitly, that we have to support your idea that DL is not chenresig, you did it implicitly by excluding all other possibilities. I hope you can follow this simple logical problem and will understand, why I refuse vehemently to become reduced to a statement, which is definitely not in agreement with my own Dharma practice."

I personally do not praise the Dalai Lama, though I respect him for what he has achieved for Buddhism, but i will not criticise him - regardless of whether he is Chenrezig or not. I will not criticise him based purely on that Dorje Shugden has advised not to criticise the Dalai Lama and if i have faith in Dorje Shugden, I should follow him advice.

I look forward to reading more from you, Yedi

Actually I've quite enjoyed this thread - learned some history about Nyingmas and Gelugpa...

thanks everyone who contributed.

love
Kate

[Geronimo]

Allegiance to Holy Dorje ShugdenTarget:1,000,000.
Sponsored by: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/allegiance-to-holy-dorje-shugden

Stand up and be counted for your Dharma Protector!

"We the undersigned commit ourselves to the enlightened Dharma Protector, Dorje Shugden. We will remain steadfast without resorting to negative comments or actions towards those who do not agree with us or criticise us.
We will carry out our holy practice peacefully and be REAL Buddhists.
With all the kindness and help that Dorje Shugden has done for my family and I, this is the least I can do for him."


"There are two ways to rely upon Dorje Shugden: in thought and in deed. If we recognize that Dorje Shugden is the embodiment of the Three Jewels, if we remember his kindness in protecting and preserving the Buddhadharma, if we recall how he eliminates obstacles and gathers the necessary conditions for Dharma practitioners, and if with deep faith we develop respect for him and hold these special feelings continually, we are relying upon Dorje Shugden in thought.

With deep faith and conviction in Dorje Shugden we can practise his extensive, middling, or condensed sadhana. After completing a close retreat we can engage in peaceful, increasing, controlling, and wrathful actions and gradually achieve the supreme attainments. By engaging in these practices we can protect others by helping them to eliminate their obstacles and develop wisdom, to find the right conditions for practising Dharma, to fulfil their wishes, and to meet with success in their daily lives. Whenever we engage in any of these deeds with faith we are relying upon Dorje Shugden in deed."
H.H. Kyabje Trijang Dorej Chang Rinpoche

Please join me and sign your allegiance to our Holy Protector.

[WisdomBeing]

Dear Lhakpa Gyeltsen,

Thank you so much for your support.. unfortunately, the groups.to web address seems to have gone into emptiness so i have to revert to the url: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/allegiance-to-holy-dorje-shugden

Many thanks and may everyone stand up and be counted!

Love
Kate

[Geronimo]

afriend,
"
Thom, hi there. It's undeniable that you gave so much, you were so generous and were betrayed. I'm really sorry every time I remember what you went through. You have been very brave not to have abandoned the Buddhadharma. I admire you for that, for still having the strength for upholding the teachings of Lord Buddha and loving our Lamas. Are you aware of the incredible good fortune that you had, to have unloaded such a mega chunk of negative karma and survived? Now that the tears are in the past, you might start feeling how light you are, after such ordeal. Anyway, even if you are still sore, sooner or later you will encounter the goodness of all the good you've done."

I am feeling so much more calmness and happiness. I smile more and basically I would have to say that anger and fear have long gone from my home.
I think I hit that Goodness and hope to have just started bringing more to the dharma.