Are the Buddhas, DalaiLama & Dorje Shugden insane? Or is it divine crazy wisdom?

[honeydakini]

Criticism, judgement and rallying - no matter how right and correct we think we are and how wrong the other side is - doesn't necessarily win the world over. From the outside, we just look political and not engaging in the very thing we are trying to promote: Dharma practice. The world will look at us protesting and criticising other lamas, and think to themselves, "this is what Dharma practice is? This is what DS practitioners do to defend their faith?"

After all, do we really have that many attainments and knowledge to be able to look upon the Lamas and judge what they are doing? Imagine if we did that to all our Lamas? Guru devotion is about believing that the Lamas do have more wisdom, clairvoyance and attainments than us and know what they are doing more than we can understand at this time.

(1) Imagine if Milarepa had said to himself, “damn that Marpa. He shouldn’t act that way! What a horrible Lama, why does he do this to me? He shouldn’t torture me by making me build houses for 12 years! He should teach me Dharma!” Imagine if he had gotten so angry at what seemingly crazy Marpa was doing and just upped and left and given up on Dharma.

(2) Imagine if Naropa had said, “I give up. That stupid Naropa won’t even acknowledge me. I want the Dharma so much and he won’t give it to me after 12 years of following him around. What kind of Guru is that who won’t teach the Dharma??” and then he just upped and left.

(3) Imagine if all the great Lamas sat around lamenting the loss of Tibet and cursed all the Buddhas for not protecting and helping them to keep their country? Imagine if they all sat about and bitched about how uncompassionate Tsongkhapa, Tara and the protectors were for allowing so many millions of Tibetans to be killed during the cultural revolution and their monasteries to be bombed? Imagine if they just eventually decided “you know what, *$&* all this, I don’t need Dharma, the Buddhas are just a bunch of statues that don’t do anything” and they gave up Dharma and went to work as a busboy in New York.

No, all these Lamas and great teachers stuck in it for YEARS, believing that their Gurus and the Buddhas had greater wisdom that would be beneficial. Even if they didn’t understand it or even didn’t agree with it, they at least didn’t criticize or speak badly against the Lamas. They saw and recognized that the success and results of their own Dharma practice wasn’t dependent on what their Lamas or other practitioners were doing, but was entirely from their own side – their effort, patience, generosity, perseverance in their practice, and reflecting their own application of Dharma and the teachings of their Lamas well.

[DharmaDefender]

Criticism, judgement and rallying - no matter how right and correct we think we are and how wrong the other side is - doesn't necessarily win the world over. From the outside, we just look political and not engaging in the very thing we are trying to promote: Dharma practice. The world will look at us protesting and criticising other lamas, and think to themselves, "this is what Dharma practice is? This is what DS practitioners do to defend their faith?"

After all, do we really have that many attainments and knowledge to be able to look upon the Lamas and judge what they are doing? Imagine if we did that to all our Lamas? Guru devotion is about believing that the Lamas do have more wisdom, clairvoyance and attainments than us and know what they are doing more than we can understand at this time.

(1) Imagine if Milarepa had said to himself, “damn that Marpa. He shouldn’t act that way! What a horrible Lama, why does he do this to me? He shouldn’t torture me by making me build houses for 12 years! He should teach me Dharma!” Imagine if he had gotten so angry at what seemingly crazy Marpa was doing and just upped and left and given up on Dharma.

(2) Imagine if Naropa had said, “I give up. That stupid Naropa won’t even acknowledge me. I want the Dharma so much and he won’t give it to me after 12 years of following him around. What kind of Guru is that who won’t teach the Dharma??” and then he just upped and left.

(3) Imagine if all the great Lamas sat around lamenting the loss of Tibet and cursed all the Buddhas for not protecting and helping them to keep their country? Imagine if they all sat about and bitched about how uncompassionate Tsongkhapa, Tara and the protectors were for allowing so many millions of Tibetans to be killed during the cultural revolution and their monasteries to be bombed? Imagine if they just eventually decided “you know what, *$&* all this, I don’t need Dharma, the Buddhas are just a bunch of statues that don’t do anything” and they gave up Dharma and went to work as a busboy in New York.

No, all these Lamas and great teachers stuck in it for YEARS, believing that their Gurus and the Buddhas had greater wisdom that would be beneficial. Even if they didn’t understand it or even didn’t agree with it, they at least didn’t criticize or speak badly against the Lamas. They saw and recognized that the success and results of their own Dharma practice wasn’t dependent on what their Lamas or other practitioners were doing, but was entirely from their own side – their effort, patience, generosity, perseverance in their practice, and reflecting their own application of Dharma and the teachings of their Lamas well.

Best post I've read on here today (barring tk's one!), especially your final paragraph which was so well-put! I think it's the same point many people have been trying to make regarding the WSS/NKT protesting, or A Great Deception not being very well-written. Although the information may be accurate and well-researched, and the WSS/NKT are trying to take a stand, it does make some people wonder what Buddhism really is about. After all, the image of monks and nuns shouting, and picketing their supposed leader doesn't look good. You might add, "Well, neither does the Dalai Lama suppressing a religious practice" but like you've said, do we really have that many attainments and knowledge to be able to look upon the Lamas and judge what they are doing?"

Of course, other people may argue that it is necessary that the WSS/NKT take such a public stand, that they are fighting for our right to practise Dorje Shugden. However, my view is that we retain our own right to practise Dorje Shugden - no one can take that away from us unless we let them. Evidently many Tibetans have let that happen; how can we change that by antagonising them when we call their leader a liar?

[honeydakini]

After all, the image of monks and nuns shouting, and picketing their supposed leader doesn't look good.

Dear Dharma Defender,
I agree with you there.

While i do respect them for standing up and fighting for a practice and Protector which they feel very passionately about, I don't really agree that standing around in their robes shouting and picketing reflects very well on their own practice, lama, teacher or the very protector they are trying to defend.

I hold that the best way we can really reflect and defend our protector well is by our own ardent practice. The best kind of protest is to be
- even better than others,
- even kinder
- even more compassionate
- more knowledgeable on the subject
- develop the skill to share this knowledge with other people so they can make up their own minds rationally, logically and with the facts.

standing about shouting and picketing and using highly emotive rhetoric doesn't bode well for reflecting the calibre of lamas you are learning from nor the very protector and Buddhas you are practising. It will probably only make the world look at you and think, "THIS is how you do your Dharma practice? THIS is what it means to be spiritual? I'd rather not then, thanks."

Sure, I understand the importance of NOT hiding the facts and the importance of telling people what is really going on - how the ban of DS has had a terrible, devastating and very damaging effect on thousands of people around the world. This website alone highlights so much of what is really going on behind the scenes. But we can provide the information factually, provide as much information as we can and encourage people to think for themselves instead of stuffing it down their throat that DS is bad / Dalai Lama is bad and getting emotional / belligerent / angry / offensive about it.

I met many DS lamas before I even knew about the DS ban! (I was very, very new to Dharma then). These Lamas never spoke about politics, they exuded only kindness, compassion, care and everything that the Dharma has taught us to embody and practise. They practised DS but it wasn't a big, central, political ISSUE to talk about. They just did their practices and continued to teach. DS was an important part of their teachings, practices and lineage but it wasn't the ONLY THING they focused on.

When I found out later that *gasp* they were DS practitioners, I thought to myself that if Gurus / people like this are DS practitioners and they do and teach this practice, then it cannot be a bad thing. Hearing all the rhetoric against DS thereafter was not convincing at all because I had seen and experienced for myself what a DS practitioner is really like.

If we practise like these lamas do and really uphold what DS is about, that is the best way, I believe, of shutting up the anti-DS perpetrators and inspiring others to also hold DS as sacred as we do.

[crazycloud]

But we can provide the information factually, provide as much information as we can and encourage people to think for themselves instead of stuffing it down their throat that DS is bad / Dalai Lama is bad and getting emotional / belligerent / angry / offensive about it.

I think we will have to come up with a name for this most pernicious of logical errors. It seems to be quite persistent here of late..... speaking out = being angry.

any suggestions?

[emptymountains]

I think we will have to come up with a name for this most pernicious of logical errors. It seems to be quite persistent here of late..... speaking out = being angry.

I haven't come up with a name for this specific instance, but I would say all this noobian stuff is based on idiot compassion for the Dalai Lama.

I think we seriously need to consider what is the greater good: preserving the Dalai Lama's reputation so that we can get a "free" Tibet out of the deal, or preserving Je Tsongkhapa's tradition so that we can become Buddhas for the benefit of all.

Just think: for 50 years the Dalai Lama has enjoyed a stainless reputation throughout the world, with uncritical press everywhere he goes. It has not secured any land deals with China. Instead, haven't the last 50 years shown us that our 'homeless' Lamas are fully capable of spreading Dharma at a sustainable rate, even now without the Dalai Lama's "seal of approval"?

[DharmaDefender]

speaking out = being angry.

Actually, I don't think anyone here has ever equated speaking out to being angry. There's a way of putting information across that doesn't appear vehement, vitriolic and insulting which tk, Trinley Kelsang and a couple of other names do well. For example, in many of the 'oldies' speaking out against the 'noobs', many have felt attacked not because it was their views being challenged (which most, I believe, welcome), but because they felt the oldies were making it personal, and stirring waters on purpose.

I haven't come up with a name for this specific instance, but I would say all this noobian stuff is based on idiot compassion for the Dalai Lama.

I think we seriously need to consider what is the greater good: preserving the Dalai Lama's reputation so that we can get a "free" Tibet out of the deal, or preserving Je Tsongkhapa's tradition so that we can become Buddhas for the benefit of all.

Just think: for 50 years the Dalai Lama has enjoyed a stainless reputation throughout the world, with uncritical press everywhere he goes. It has not secured any land deals with China. Instead, haven't the last 50 years shown us that our 'homeless' Lamas are fully capable of spreading Dharma at a sustainable rate, even now without the Dalai Lama's "seal of approval"?

It's not about preserving the Dalai Lama's reputation for a free Tibet, but about preserving his reputation so that he may continue to spread the Dharma to others. If his reputation is totally destroyed, how will he be able to spread it? He's the most recognisable face in Tibetan Buddhism, and someone everyone associates with wisdom and compassion. It's because of his image that many people are attracted to the Dharma; destroy that, and perhaps you're destroying many people's chances at even entering the Dharma, never mind the Protector's practice which (a) people may find difficult to accept at first, given his wrathful demeanour (b) the WSS seem to be doing very little to educate people about, aside from the politics.

I'm happy that our 'homeless' Lamas can spread the Dharma so well (even without the Dalai Lama's seal of approval), but it's not for us to judge whether the rate is sustainable or not, because we don't have a handle on all the practitioners in the world.

[emptymountains]

If his reputation is totally destroyed, how will he be able to spread it?

I make this point a third time: The Dalai Lama is destroying his reputation through his very own actions; his reputation is not destroyed by those who would point out the harmful, samsaric nature of his actions.

And, what about preserving the reputation of Shugden Lamas (against the Dalai Lama's slanderous speech) so that they may continue to spread the Dharma to others?

 

[honeydakini]

But we can provide the information factually, provide as much information as we can and encourage people to think for themselves instead of stuffing it down their throat that DS is bad / Dalai Lama is bad and getting emotional / belligerent / angry / offensive about it.

I think we will have to come up with a name for this most pernicious of logical errors. It seems to be quite persistent here of late..... speaking out = being angry.

any suggestions?

I must correct myself (please also read my most recent post on "all this can't we get along stuff" http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=601.0). I do understand (thank you Crazy Cloud for taking the time to respond to my many rather excitable posts) that speaking out does not necessarily equate to being angry.

I was reacting to has seemed to be an attitude that quite blatant in much of the coverage of this issue: i.e. that people ARE reacting in an angry and aggressive way that does not necessarily reflect well on either themselves or the practices they are trying to uphold. I apologise if it has come across as being directly specifically to any individual here, which was not my intention.

I am concerned about views such as those that are being pushed forward in the Great Deception book. While it does provide a lot of very relevant and insightful information, it was written very strongly in a way that I felt, was not merely against the actions and tenents of the Dalai Lama but against the Dalai Lama himself. It frequently comes across as being very personal and, yes, angry and sometimes  almost aggressive.

i apologise again (sorry, here i go repeating again) for overreacting and assuming too quickly, too soon that this was the view held here by others also. But I am concerned that there is quite some exaggeration, rhetoric and overly emotive language being used in the media and also by certain groups in villifying the Dalai Lama himself, rather than to look properly what is going on.

I take heart that this website provides information without necessarily forcing a view down our throats ("i.e. this guy is the bad guy, this guy is the good guy... believe it or else" which can be seen in both pro-shugden and anti-shugden sites/groups) and I hope very much that this forum will continue to be an extension of this for us to provide more information and views for people to think about before just blindly jumping into one extreme view or another.

[Lineageholder]

I am concerned about views such as those that are being pushed forward in the Great Deception book. While it does provide a lot of very relevant and insightful information, it was written very strongly in a way that I felt, was not merely against the actions and tenents of the Dalai Lama but against the Dalai Lama himself. It frequently comes across as being very personal and, yes, angry and sometimes  almost aggressive.

If the Dalai Lama is a fraud (and he is), it should be made known.  The book is against the Dalai Lama because he is destroying the Buddhadharma through mixing with politics and other Lamas will follow his example. 

It is not wise to hide a wolf amongst a flock of sheep as slaughter is the inevitable result.  Perhaps the wolf's real purpose is to benefit the sheep?  I think not!  Wolves are carnivorous beings who are only looking for their next meal.  The Dalai Lama is a power-hungry politician who is looking to extend his influence further. No wise person will entertain the presence of the wolf in sheep's clothing but will 'out' him in order to protect the flock.

The language used is strong, yes, just as mine is.  I don't hate the Dalai Lama but I do want him to stop destroying Je Tsongkhapa's tradition.  Making excuses for the Dalai Lama with mealy-mouthed platitudes and showing respect where none is deserved will not protect the Dharma - rather it hastens its demise through an ignorant conception of what constitutes 'right speech'.

BTW, I don't hate you either  but please stop helping the Dalai Lama to destroy Je Tsongkhapa's tradition by letting him off the hook.

[WisdomBeing]

Lineage holder - i like the way you said 'If the Dalai Lama is a fraud'. That shows that you are willing to at least consider that he isn't.

I quote this recent entry to the guest book from Thomas Canada:
http://www.dorjeshugden.com/Guestbook/
"Tk's attitude of not abandoning Dorje Shugden and not critizising the Dalai Lama is certainly the way to go.

And there defintely is a 'bigger picture', whether it was intended by those at the root of the controversy I doubt.
All the (unjust) blame we (Trijang Rinpoche's followers) presently experience is certainly the result of a collective negative karma of all of us concerned ones.

It is also very true, that Dorje Shugden NEVER says a negative word about the Dalai Lama, but rather admonishes not to loose respect towards him. But of course he also never 'endorses' the witch hunt.

It is a well known characteristic of Doje Shugden's activities, that in course of time he brings even most unfortunate circumstances to finally positive effects for the beings. This is the 'bigger picture' the arises out of the situation due to Dorje Shugden's powerful activities.

When all the criticism started, I also heard Kache Marpo once say that we (our side) would never be able to find the financial resources to propagate the precious name of our protector throughout the world to an extent as it is happening now with the controversy. So he seemed quite happy about the 'publicity'. Nevertheless he also hinted, that in truely 'out-of-hand' circumstances of slander he would sometimes prefer to intervene with his sharp powers, but that Dorje Shugden is always binding him by obliging him to never do any harm to sentient beings."

I personally find the last paragraph of most interest. Why? Because firstly, if Kache Marpo says he is happy about the 'publicity', i am certain that the great King Dorje Shugden would be happier. Secondly, Kache Marpo wanted to intervene when negative words were said which were too much, but Dorje Shugden bound him to not harm sentient beings. It shows Dorje Shugden's tremendous compassion for all - his followers and his detractors, without distinction. Definitely this is the sign of an enlightened Being.

[dsnowlion]

I also heard Kache Marpo once say that we (our side) would never be able to find the financial resources to propagate the precious name of our protector throughout the world to an extent as it is happening now with the controversy. So he seemed quite happy about the 'publicity'. Nevertheless he also hinted, that in truely 'out-of-hand' circumstances of slander he would sometimes prefer to intervene with his sharp powers, but that Dorje Shugden is always binding him by obliging him to never do any harm to sentient beings."

How interesting that Kache Marpo himself says he is "happy" with the "publicity"! Where did you hear this from??? Have you actually witnessed an oracle in trance before? I heard that when the oracle goes in to trance, it is usually in front of a high Lama and no other being/spirit can pretend to be the oracle because of what the Lama represents (Dharma). And most of the Dorje Shugden oracles are created by either Trijang Rinpoche himself or blessed by him. I like what you say because Kache Marpo would definitely have said or done something if the Dalai Lama has ill motive. Some of my monk friends have witnessed DS oracle in trance and have said that DS/Kache Marpo is quick to point out those with ill motive. Ironically up till this day, Kache Marpo/Dorje Shugden or even Trijang Rinpoche, have never mentioned anything in regards to the Dalai Lama's fraudulence and that we should reveal the Dalai Lama's deceptive nature. None of them said any of that but instead always I hear them advising like what TK has said in previous postings "Never to lose faith in the Dalai Lama or the protector" This I believe was Trijang Rinpoche's own words. And if Trijang Rinpoche who is one of the main lineage holder of Dorje Shugden can say that... it makes one think deeper.

Thank you WisdomBeing for that useful info about Kache Marpo. For awhile it made me wonder why? Why are they choosing to keep quiet, continuously spreading the teachings and never advice us against the Dalai Lama. Why do they (Trijang Rinpoche, Gangchen Rinpoche, Dagom Rinpoche etc. all not doing or saying anything? Are they not compassionate towards their own people suffering due to this ban? hmmmm ...

[Lineageholder]

Lineage holder - i like the way you said 'If the Dalai Lama is a fraud'. That shows that you are willing to at least consider that he isn't.

Thanks, but your optimism is premature.  I only said that to save the feelings of some people on this forum.  Now that you mention it directly, I believe he is 100% a fraud, no doubt.

[Lineageholder]

And most of the Dorje Shugden oracles are created by either Trijang Rinpoche himself or blessed by him. I like what you say because Kache Marpo would definitely have said or done something if the Dalai Lama has ill motive.

Don't place your trust in the words of a oracle, they can't be trusted.  The Nechung oracle is a case in point.

I don't need oracles or divination to see what the Dalai Lama is up to.  Rely on your own wisdom and wake up to the truth.  We can trust the words of our Gurus who see things as they are and act in accordance with Dharma.  Those words are in 'A Great Deception':

"There is no greater liar or a person more powerfully deceptive than this in the world today."

[WisdomBeing]

And most of the Dorje Shugden oracles are created by either Trijang Rinpoche himself or blessed by him. I like what you say because Kache Marpo would definitely have said or done something if the Dalai Lama has ill motive.

Don't place your trust in the words of a oracle, they can't be trusted.  The Nechung oracle is a case in point.

I don't need oracles or divination to see what the Dalai Lama is up to.  Rely on your own wisdom and wake up to the truth.  We can trust the words of our Gurus who see things as they are and act in accordance with Dharma.  Those words are in 'A Great Deception':

"There is no greater liar or a person more powerfully deceptive than this in the world today."

I agree with you regarding trusting the words of our Gurus because they act in accordance with the Dharma. It is because I trust my Guru through years of observing and his consistency and he always acts in accordance with the Dharma. As such, I can trust what he says when he advises me not to criticise HH the Dalai Lama. Saying that though, I understand your motivation for highlighting the Dalai Lama's inconsistencies, which is to stand up for our Protector.

With regard to oracles - some Gurus are so humble that they refer their students to the oracles because some of their students sadly do not believe them but will believe what the oracles say. When the oracle confirms what their gurus say, then they believe. For me personally, the word of my Guru is good enough for me but i guess everyone has different levels of trust.

Regarding the Nechung oracle - i cannot comment because I do not know enough about it. However, i have read that the Nechung oracles has made mistakes before - perhaps he makes mistakes because he is NOT an enlightened Protector, therefore he is fallible.

[spacelike]

(1) Imagine if Milarepa had said to himself, “damn that Marpa. He shouldn’t act that way! What a horrible Lama, why does he do this to me? He shouldn’t torture me by making me build houses for 12 years! He should teach me Dharma!” Imagine if he had gotten so angry at what seemingly crazy Marpa was doing and just upped and left and given up on Dharma.

Marpa was Milarepa's Guru.  The Dalai Lama is not my Guru.

(2) Imagine if Naropa had said, “I give up. That stupid Naropa won’t even acknowledge me. I want the Dharma so much and he won’t give it to me after 12 years of following him around. What kind of Guru is that who won’t teach the Dharma??” and then he just upped and left.

Tilopa was Milarepa's Guru.  The Dalai Lama is not my Guru.

(3) Imagine if all the great Lamas sat around lamenting the loss of Tibet and cursed all the Buddhas for not protecting and helping them to keep their country? Imagine if they all sat about and bitched about how uncompassionate Tsongkhapa, Tara and the protectors were for allowing so many millions of Tibetans to be killed during the cultural revolution and their monasteries to be bombed? Imagine if they just eventually decided “you know what, *$&* all this, I don’t need Dharma, the Buddhas are just a bunch of statues that don’t do anything” and they gave up Dharma and went to work as a busboy in New York.

That would have been lamenting the loss of a piece of land.  We are standing up to prevent the loss of a precious spiritual lineage.  Surely everyone on this forum can see there is no analogy here.

All these and similar arguments seem to be based on the idea that we are criticising a spiritual Teacher and refusing to accept his 'skilful means'.  However the unfortunate thing is that in reality the Dalai Lama is a world leader, a politician, and as such should be accountable for his actions. Surely no political leader should be beyond reproach? The Dorje Shugden ban has been enforced using political mechanisms such as the TGIE and the identity cards.  The fact that he's also used his Dharma teachings to promote the ban does not mean it should be regarded as spiritual advice. He travels the world giving talks, sometimes teaching Dharma from Trijang Rinpoche's lineage and sometimes talking about the environment and human rights. If he wants to be taken seriously as a spritual Teacher he should make his role clear. If he doesn't like being criticised, questioned, demonstrated against or having books written about him he shouldn't be a politician.  If his disciples don't like him being criticised they should ask him to stop drawing attention to himself in such a strange manner.  When politicians are cruel and persecute others they are publicly criticised and demonstrated against.  That is the way of the west - that is our culture and our democratic right. 

If you want to stop the damage to his reputation you should write to him and ask him to stop giving the WSS and others these unfortunate facts to report.  If he wasn't doing these things we'd have nothing to say and no reason to say it.  This whole big stink is not our fault.  It's his.  All we're trying to do is reduce the power of his speech to the level of influence it should have.  If people knew the truth, they wouldn't take him so seriously and he wouldn't get away with the ban.  So we're telling the truth.  That's all.  Someone who tells lies is a liar.  Someone who wears robes and inflicts suffering is a hypocrite.  Someone who bans other people's legitimate spiritual practice needs to give religious freedom.  Why does saying these things make us negative?  What's negative about stopping lying or giving religous freedom?  What's negative about encouraging someone to do these things? Should he really need encouragement in these areas from people like us?  What's negative about asking for Buddhism and murky politics to be separated? Is it really so much to ask from the living incarnation of Avalokiteshvara? 

Does the WSS book give Dharma a bad name?  I don't think so as it makes it quite clear DL is not behaving like a Buddhist Teacher.  I think it attempts to distance Buddhism from this person's example by making it clear his political interests and actions are not in accordance with Buddha's instrctions.  If you ask me what looks far worse for the Dharma is so many Buddhists accepting without question DL's actions and holding him up as a pillar of the Dharma when even newspaper journalists can spot he's not behaving like a monk. 

The story of the emperor's new clothes springs to mind.


When it all comes out in the wash I think we'll come off quite well for having said all along 'we're not with him'.