Promoting Dorje Shugden. PERIOD.

[honeydakini]

I'm going to just blatantly cut & paste and plagarise DharmaDefender's post here because I think it's brilliant and totally sums up the heart of what, I believe, many of us would like to see happen more and more in the world. Thank you Dharma Defender for reminding us of yet another wonderful and very beautiful reason for being "here" and for our practice of DS. May Dorje Shugden's practice spread through the world and touch many, many beings hearts, lives, spiritual path and practice and bring them far in their attainments.


My point: let's not try and win over the people who already hate Dorje Shugden, and look at the millions of other people who have never heard of him. Many many people don't necessarily believe in the Dalai Lama or have a stance on the issue. Those people don't need to hear about the horridness / holiness of the Dalai Lama, they need to learn about Dorje Shugden. Cement their faith in Dorje Shugden's practice alone (i.e. without the politics) and no matter what anyone says, no one will be able to shake that faith. Nor will they criticise the Dalai Lama and the lamas who support the ban, because they don't know the politics...so either way, their karma, guru samaya and Dorje Shugden 'wins'!

[dsnowlion]

Hear! Hear!

I have so many people I know who has no clue about this controversy because some are so new in Dharma or some don't even have a spiritual path. Some personally just don't care about anything but themselves. What Tibet or the Dalai Lama issue?? "I have my own problems to deal with please" is what I would probably get. They are ordinary people like you and me who first join the Dharma because we have some kind of seeking / problems that needed some urgent answers. They don't really give two hoods if the Dalai Lama is in town/good/bad. Their own problems is overwhelming and I know for sure Dorje Shugden can help them so much. They need Dharma so much. My only wish is that we can all practice openly and tell our friends who Dorje Shugden is, so they can get help and eventually practice Dharma to lessen their own suffering. How wonderful that would be




 

[Lineageholder]

Your actions of promoting the good qualities of Dorje Shugden will be powerless for as long as the Dalai Lama is held to be a spiritual authority in this world.  Most people will believe him, not you.

I'm afraid you're being naive.  Without the WSS' actions to reduce the power of the Dalai Lama, you can't hope to succeed.

[WisdomBeing]

i quote from the guestbook entry by Thomas David Canada:
"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've been posting this liberally around the forum because it is so logical and it is said by the great King's Minister. I trust Dorje Shugden.

WSS has definitely helped to increase the spotlight on this controversy and highlighting the inconsistencies of the Dalai Lama, which have also been highlighted in TK's commentary (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=1425). I don't think anyone disputes that there ARE inconsistencies. We are simply discussing the motivation behind the inconsistencies.

Whatever the motivation, the results are indisputable - that is that Dorje Shugden practice is well known in the world. As 'A Great Deception' has listed - the newspapers and magazines and TV coverage of this controversy is huge and definitely, no PR campaign would have been able to create publicity of this magnitude.
 

[crazycloud]

i quote from the guestbook entry by Thomas David Canada:
"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've been posting this liberally around the forum because it is so logical and it is said by the great King's Minister. I trust Dorje Shugden.

WSS has definitely helped to increase the spotlight on this controversy and highlighting the inconsistencies of the Dalai Lama, which have also been highlighted in TK's commentary (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=1425). I don't think anyone disputes that there ARE inconsistencies. We are simply discussing the motivation behind the inconsistencies.

Whatever the motivation, the results are indisputable - that is that Dorje Shugden practice is well known in the world. As 'A Great Deception' has listed - the newspapers and magazines and TV coverage of this controversy is huge and definitely, no PR campaign would have been able to create publicity of this magnitude.

Hi WisdomB-

You just need to look a little closer at your own post to see what's taking place here.

You say "I trust Dorje Shugden," and I personally find that to be a lovely sentiment, but what are you really entrusting yourself to when you say that?

Thomas Canada, a man you have probably never even met, says on the internet, a place where people generally make up whatever they want to, that he heard Kache Marpo say....

You have not made any attempt to investigate this claim (at least here on the forum). How did this man hear this deity say this? In a vision? In a dream? In a psychotic episode? Through an oracle? If an oracle, how reliable? Are you quite sure it wasn't a malicious minor spirit intent on causing mayhem? There has been abundant evidence that oracles, even the MOST reliable ones, are notoriously inconsistent. (please not, I am not suggesting anything about  Mr. Canada, I have no knowledge that he is unreliable, untruthful etc etc. rather I am trying to point out that you know very little about the source of your information. I am also happy to admit your point may be correct, but this is not the issue here)

So when you look honestly at what you are saying, I think it is "I trust what I read on the internet about what some people who I don't know may or may not have heard from someone who may or may not be reliable, or even existent, for that matter."

If you come over to another point of view, I think you can easily sympathize with those who don't find this to be a credible statement, but rather a statement about what you would like to be true. Moreover, you are "liberally" promoting this statement the provenence, and therefore the veracity of which is completely unknown to you.

I also strongly agree with Trinley Kelsang on the view that publicizing our protector (especially when such generally has him as an object of ridicule and derision) is not the point. Since when is publicity the goal of sincere Dharma practitioners, especially when this publicity destroys the faith of the world in our spiritual guides, lineage lamas and protectors?

We could probably start a big ballyhoo on line about the Dalai Lama being a pedophile, but would you be happy with that? well, it would bring publicity.....but first, it's not true. Secondly, this publicity is not necessary.

Same for our case.

The best publicity campaign is our sincere practice.

(I would like to make an earnest request at this point that you please consider not writing that this means we should not demonstrate, for many of us here this is our sincere practice, comes form a point of view of love, and has shown many many good results which were not acheived by other means. Thank you)

[WisdomBeing]

Hi WisdomB-

You just need to look a little closer at your own post to see what's taking place here.

You say "I trust Dorje Shugden," and I personally find that to be a lovely sentiment, but what are you really entrusting yourself to when you say that?

Thomas Canada, a man you have probably never even met, says on the internet, a place where people generally make up whatever they want to, that he heard Kache Marpo say....

You have not made any attempt to investigate this claim (at least here on the forum). How did this man hear this deity say this? In a vision? In a dream? In a psychotic episode? Through an oracle? If an oracle, how reliable? Are you quite sure it wasn't a malicious minor spirit intent on causing mayhem? There has been abundant evidence that oracles, even the MOST reliable ones, are notoriously inconsistent. (please not, I am not suggesting anything about  Mr. Canada, I have no knowledge that he is unreliable, untruthful etc etc. rather I am trying to point out that you know very little about the source of your information. I am also happy to admit your point may be correct, but this is not the issue here)

So when you look honestly at what you are saying, I think it is "I trust what I read on the internet about what some people who I don't know may or may not have heard from someone who may or may not be reliable, or even existent, for that matter."

If you come over to another point of view, I think you can easily sympathize with those who don't find this to be a credible statement, but rather a statement about what you would like to be true. Moreover, you are "liberally" promoting this statement the provenence, and therefore the veracity of which is completely unknown to you.

I also strongly agree with Trinley Kelsang on the view that publicizing our protector (especially when such generally has him as an object of ridicule and derision) is not the point. Since when is publicity the goal of sincere Dharma practitioners, especially when this publicity destroys the faith of the world in our spiritual guides, lineage lamas and protectors?

We could probably start a big ballyhoo on line about the Dalai Lama being a pedophile, but would you be happy with that? well, it would bring publicity.....but first, it's not true. Secondly, this publicity is not necessary.

Same for our case.

The best publicity campaign is our sincere practice.

(I would like to make an earnest request at this point that you please consider not writing that this means we should not demonstrate, for many of us here this is our sincere practice, comes form a point of view of love, and has shown many many good results which were not acheived by other means. Thank you)

Hi Crazy Cloud,

To answer your questions when I say I trust Dorje Shugden, I mean that I have personally heard statements from Dorje Shugden via an oracle where he has said things which have been confirmed via different oracles at different times, who wouldn't have otherwise known what was said previously. Whether you (or anyone else) believe me doesn't really matter because this is personal and i have no wish to convince you of the veracity of what i believe

Likewise, when you said how do i trust Thomas David Canada, suffice to say that i have investigated and i do.

I do absolutely agree with you that sincere practice is the best publicity. However, without wishing to repeat ad nauseam that Kache Marpo has said that he is happy with the publicity from the controversy, I trust that there is a good reason why there is negative publicity for now.

Regarding your last point re not protesting - i have no intention of advising you not to protest

As publicity via the controversy is good for Dorje Shugden, then please protest away! And i also believe that your desire to demonstrate comes from your love for Dorje Shugden. We just show different ways of our love but we have the same goals and the same love.

Isn't that a great theme for valentine's day

Love
Kate 

[crazycloud]

Hi Crazy Cloud,
To answer your questions when I say I trust Dorje Shugden, I mean that I have personally heard statements from Dorje Shugden via an oracle where he has said things which have been confirmed via different oracles at different times, who wouldn't have otherwise known what was said previously. Whether you (or anyone else) believe me doesn't really matter because this is personal and i have no wish to convince you of the veracity of what i believe

fair enough.

Likewise, when you said how do i trust Thomas David Canada, suffice to say that i have investigated and i do.

he seems like a fine person. I'm glad.

Regarding your last point re not protesting - i have no intention of advising you not to protest

good on ya.

As publicity via the controversy is good for Dorje Shugden, then please protest away!

why thank you very much!

And i also believe that your desire to demonstrate comes from your love for Dorje Shugden. We just show different ways of our love but we have the same goals and the same love.

Isn't that a great theme for valentine's day

aw jeeez........








[/quote]

[Vajraprotector]

I also strongly agree with Trinley Kelsang on the view that publicizing our protector (especially when such generally has him as an object of ridicule and derision) is not the point. Since when is publicity the goal of sincere Dharma practitioners, especially when this publicity destroys the faith of the world in our spiritual guides, lineage lamas and protectors?

How can we judge if this publicity destroys the faith of the world in our spiritual guides, lineage lamas and protectors?

I think it is too much to assume this. I have come to know that many practitioners who upheld their promise to their spiritual guides and endure the hardship of this period of time as practice and a test of their commitment.

Whether or not it destroys the faith, we should see in the long run – only time can tell.

And why can’t publicity be the goal of sincere Dharma practitioners if it helps the world to get to know Dharma. Some people’s interests might not be stirred by the “oh-look-I-am-holy-Buddhist-pracitioner” approach, but perhaps a controversy might catch their attention to Dorje Shugden. Are you saying there’s only one method to promote the Dharma? Then why is it that dorje Shugden has to “die” in an unconventional way and become a protector instead of just promote Dharma by being the great Duldzin and a great lama? He can reincarnate many lifetimes as a great Guru. Why not? Obviously, different times requires different methods and different manifestation to ensure work is done to preserve Je Rinpoche’s teachings.

The best publicity campaign is our sincere practice.

I agree on this, more than anything else. There are many practitioners who had to endure discrimination and being exiled in their own community, and perhaps even physical harm because of this issue. Yet, many of them did not protest in their ROBES, shout at their spiritual leader and accuse him of many things.

Many people claim that Dalai Lama is not their Guru, but Dalai Lama is our LINEAGE GURU. Does it mean that I can be rude to Trijang Rinpoche just because he’s not my guru?

I think in justifying the rights to practice, some might have gone a bit too far. And for some people, especially those who live abroad and under the jurisdiction of the Tibetan government, WHO CAN STOP YOU FROM PRACTISING?

[a friend]

Excuse me but now you are advancing a new argument: that nobody can touch the Dalai Lama because he is your lineage Guru. In what way?
If an individual is a Dorje Shugden practitioner he cannot have the Dalai Lama as Guru in any way, whether he likes it or not. This is per the Dalai Lamas wishes. The Dalai Lama has cut samaya not only with our common Lineage Guru, Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche his root Guru, the Dalai Lama has cut samaya with all of us, practitioners of Dorje Shugden. He does not want us.
So what is this theory, that you have him as Guru against his own will? Beyond the lack of any sense, speak now of disrespect!!! I think it is a disrespect to the Dalai Lama to try an distort what has been his proclaimed desire for years and years. This would be another first time in history: that one can be the disciple of a Guru against the will of the Guru.
And another first: that one proclaims onself the disciple of a Guru and proclaims to the world one is disobeying the Guru, and flaunts it!!! Because if the Dalai Lama is your Guru, there is no way around it: you are disobeying your Guru by practicing the Protector.

So you see, things are not easy. Things are not black and white. I didn´t say all of the previous to confuse your mind, you go and follow your personal Lama and forget about my words or anybody else´s words. But I wonder again, how can we go on discussing without offending those that are indeed following their Lamas? There is a lot of politics in this matter, and we are confusing it for Dharma. So there is unfortunately a lot of opportunity for breaking vows, for offending others.

I want to imitate TK and apologize to anybody that I might offend just by discussing these painful matters.

[honeydakini]

Excuse me but now you are advancing a new argument: that nobody can touch the Dalai Lama because he is your lineage Guru. In what way?
If an individual is a Dorje Shugden practitioner he cannot have the Dalai Lama as Guru in any way, whether he likes it or not. This is per the Dalai Lamas wishes. The Dalai Lama has cut samaya not only with our common Lineage Guru, Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche his root Guru, the Dalai Lama has cut samaya with all of us, practitioners of Dorje Shugden. He does not want us.
So what is this theory, that you have him as Guru against his own will? Beyond the lack of any sense, speak now of disrespect!!! I think it is a disrespect to the Dalai Lama to try an distort what has been his proclaimed desire for years and years. This would be another first time in history: that one can be the disciple of a Guru against the will of the Guru.
And another first: that one proclaims onself the disciple of a Guru and proclaims to the world one is disobeying the Guru, and flaunts it!!! Because if the Dalai Lama is your Guru, there is no way around it: you are disobeying your Guru by practicing the Protector.

So you see, things are not easy. Things are not black and white. I didn´t say all of the previous to confuse your mind, you go and follow your personal Lama and forget about my words or anybody else´s words. But I wonder again, how can we go on discussing without offending those that are indeed following their Lamas? There is a lot of politics in this matter, and we are confusing it for Dharma. So there is unfortunately a lot of opportunity for breaking vows, for offending others.

I want to imitate TK and apologize to anybody that I might offend just by discussing these painful matters.

Following on from that, I have often thought about the dilemma of people who do actually have BOTH Dalai Lama as their Guru as well as another Lama(s) who is/are DS practitioners - who do you follow then? And either way you will break your samaya.

I do agree that what can be contradictory (and which TK does point out very eloquently in his 13 point article), is this very question of breaking samaya with our lineage Gurus. If say my Guru is LAMA X and his lineage of teachers date back to Dalai Lama, Trijang Rinpoche, Pabongkhapa Rinpoche... It is confusing if one (or any) of the Lamas suddenly say "this Practice of ABC" is wrong." If one practice is suddenly wrong, then what makes me so sure anymore that any of the other practices that have been passed down the lineage is also not wrong?

How do we "fix" the situation if one immediate Guru, Lama X says Practice ABC is good, but his immediate Guru above him, the Dalai Lama, says Practice ABC is bad? So who do you follow? If your Guru continues the practice against his Guru's wishes, he is technically "breaking samaya" too isn't it? So where does that leave the disciples who are taking teachings and practices from a teacher with broken samaya with his guru? It follows all the way down that lineage. A break in the transmissions from Guru to disciple messes up the whole thing. Don't the teachers also take a vow/commitment to also never abandon their own samaya to their Gurus as well as the connection with their students until enlightenment! So where does that leave the whole pantheon of teachers now stuck in this conundrum?

That said, as TK has pointed out, why would Dalai Lama or any of the Lamas set us up to fail in this way?! Inevitably, somehow, somewhere, our teachers and their teachers are connected to this lineage, which all seem to be contradicting each other "down the line" - some say a practice is good, some say a practice is bad. There is something way too fishy about the ban, in that it can't just be A Ban, the end. Because the ban in itself - if we look at how it has been proclaimed and the "logic" that has been put forth about it from those implementing the ban - it messes up one of the very pillars of our Refuge and Dharma - guru devotion, samaya.

Yes, i'd like to know - how do we get around all this then??

[emptymountains]

And either way you will break your samaya.

I cannot find the thread right now, but there was a great discussion on the fact that it was the Dalai Lama who broke his samaya with his disciples, not the other way around.

[a friend]

Honeydakini, sorry for asking, but is the DL the only Guru your Guru had? In general a few of our Lamas were direct disciples of Je Pabongkapa, and most of them were disciples of Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche, Trijang Dorjechang, or in the younger generation, disciples of Tsong Rinpoche, Rabten Rinpoche, etc, etc.
Colaterally, because of the prominent activities of DL, they also were receiving different initiations from him. But mostly their root Guru was Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche or his direct disciples.
I don't know of any Lama that has only DL as Guru. This would be very strange case, particularly how would he have the practice of the holy Protector? This is not possible.
So, by inference I can assume that your Lama had another Guru, the one who gave him the Protector's practice. If that is the case, your Lama is not cut from our holy lineage, because surely he would have received it through the Lama who gave him the Protector. What I mean is that he definitely has the conexion with our lineage, through this initiation.
For the other initiations, the ones that he got from DL, he probably should receive them again from a Lama that didn't break samaya with his own root Guru. But in any case, as Emptimountains was saying, it is not him that broke samaya with DL, it's DL that broke samaya with him as disciple. I understand that he still wants to show respect, but he didn't abandon that Lama, rather the Lama abandoned him.
So it is not true that by following the advice of his Lama who gave him the Protector he would be no matter what breaking samaya with somebody. I respect his courage of following the Lama who gave him the Protector, and his decent behaviour of trying to respect the Lama that broke away from him.

No matter what please don't let your faith in your Lama be shaken by our discussions.

[LosangKhyentse]

No matter what please don't let your faith in your Lama be shaken by our discussions.[/color]

What excellent advice. I totally agree. Thank you for helping.

[Atishas cook]

No matter what please don't let your faith in your Lama be shaken by our discussions.[/color]

What excellent advice. I totally agree. Thank you for helping.

absolutely - i second tk's endorsement of a friend's most important point: never lose faith in your Guru for following his holy lineage and relying on his own holy Gurus.  if one of his own Lamas breaks samaya with him and abandons his own lineage Gurus then that Lama has lost his qualification - he is no longer suitable to be relied upon as a lineage Guru and his former disciples would do well to stop relying on this unqualified person.  but it appears that your Lama has not abandoned his lineage or broken his samaya with his valid and qualified lineage Gurus, and so you can rely on him wholeheartedly.

the Dalai Lama has cast himself adrift and is sinking under his own power.  we must try out of compassion to help him - by administering strong medicine, as is now necessary (to mix metaphors!) - but we do not need to go down with him.

[thor]

Honeydakini, sorry for asking, but is the DL the only Guru your Guru had? In general a few of our Lamas were direct disciples of Je Pabongkapa, and most of them were disciples of Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche, Trijang Dorjechang, or in the younger generation, disciples of Tsong Rinpoche, Rabten Rinpoche, etc, etc.
Colaterally, because of the prominent activities of DL, they also were receiving different initiations from him. But mostly their root Guru was Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche or his direct disciples.
I don't know of any Lama that has only DL as Guru. This would be very strange case, particularly how would he have the practice of the holy Protector? This is not possible.
So, by inference I can assume that your Lama had another Guru, the one who gave him the Protector's practice. If that is the case, your Lama is not cut from our holy lineage, because surely he would have received it through the Lama who gave him the Protector. What I mean is that he definitely has the conexion with our lineage, through this initiation.
For the other initiations, the ones that he got from DL, he probably should receive them again from a Lama that didn't break samaya with his own root Guru. But in any case, as Emptimountains was saying, it is not him that broke samaya with DL, it's DL that broke samaya with him as disciple. I understand that he still wants to show respect, but he didn't abandon that Lama, rather the Lama abandoned him.
So it is not true that by following the advice of his Lama who gave him the Protector he would be no matter what breaking samaya with somebody. Only thing I would do if I were him is to stop saying that he is the DL's disciple, because he's not. If he practices the Protector he is not the DL's disciple, whether he likes it or not.
I respect his courage of following the Lama who gave him the Protector, and his decent behaviour of trying to respect the Lama that broke away from him.

No matter what please don't let your faith in your Lama be shaken by our discussions.

How does a Lama break samaya with a disciple?

And I have a hypothetical question: If one has many Lamas, one of which is the Dalai Lama and some of his Lamas are openly practising, some have given up the practice and some are practising in secret while having sworn in at the monastery? Each Lama is showing a different example.