Something About the 5th and Dorje Shugden

[LosangKhyentse]

Foundations of Tibetan Buddhism

The Gelug Tradition


The Gelug (dge lugs) tradition, also known as the Ganden (dga’ ldan) tradition follows the teachings of the fifteenth-century scholar monk Je Tsongkhapa Lobsang Drakpa (rje tsong kha pa blo bzang grags pa, 1357-1419), who was trained in Sakya, Kagyu, and Kadam traditions. Tsongkhapa, who was born in the far eastern Amdo region of Tsongkha, founded several monasteries in the Lhasa region, chief among them Ganden Namgyaling (dga’ ldan rnam rgyal gling), in 1409, which became his primary seat. His main disciples also founded monasteries in both U and Tsang, creating an institutional foundation for the rapid growth of the tradition in the later part of the 15th century: in 1418 Khedrubje Gelek Pelzang (mkhas grub rje dge legs dpal bzang, 1385-1438) established Pelkor Chode (dpal ’khor chos sde) in Gyantse (rgyal rtse); in 1419 Jamchen Choje Sakya Yeshe (byams chen chos rje shAkya ye shes, 1355-1435) established Sera Tekchenling (se ra theg chen gling) outside of Lhasa; in 1416 Jamyang Choje Tashi Palden (1397-1449) established Drepung Monastery (’bras spungs dgon) outside of Lhasa, and in 1445 Gendun Drub (dge ’dun grub, 1391-1474) established Tashilhunpo (bkra shis lhun po) in Shigatse (gzhis ka rtse).

Like the Kadam tradition which the Gelug supplanted, the Gelug place an emphasis on monastic discipline and scholarship. The Gelug pride themselves on their scholarship of the philosophical texts and on their understanding and explication of the view of the Madhyamaka Prasangika philosophical school. They also maintain a strong, if somewhat less public, tradition of tantric transmission, scholarship, and practice. The Gelugs practice an extensive system of lamrim (lam rim) and lojong (blo ljong), both of which have their origins with Atisha and the Kadampa tradition.

The Gelugs also have a living tradition and lineage of Mahamudra teachings, which are said to have been transmitted to Tsongkhapa via visionary experience of Manjushri. The primary teachings of the Tantrayana studied and practiced in the Gelug are the tantric cycles of Yamantaka, Chakrasamvara, and Guhyasamaja. The Kalachakra Tantra is also commonly practiced among many Gelug practitioners, as is the tantra of Vajrayogini.

Around the year 1530 Gendun Gyatso (dge ’dun rgya mtsho, 1476-1542), the rebirth of Gendun Drub built a personal estate, Ganden Podrang (dga’ ldan pho brang) in Drepung Monastery, and moved there from Tashilhunpo. In 1577 his reincarnation, Sonam Gyatso (bsod nams rgya mtsho, 1543-1588), who was the head of Drepung Monastery, was invited to Mongolia by Altan Khan, leader of the Tumet Mongols. There Altan gave him the title “Dalai Lama” which was retroactively bestowed upon his previous incarnation, making Sonam Gyatso the 3rd. The full title is ghaikhamsigh vcir-a dar-a say-in cogh-tu buyan-tu dalai, meaning “wonderful Vajradhara, good, brilliant, commendable ocean.” Altan and Sonam Gyatso entered into a “patron-priest” relationship (yon mchod) modeled on that of ’Phags pa and Khubilai in the 13th century. For Altan, patronage of the growing Gelug tradition was a way to recreate his forebears’ influence in Tibet; for Sonam Gyatso, the opportunity for Mongol support for his missionary work both inside and outside of Tibet (he had earlier spent time on the Amdo borderlands spreading the Gelug teachings) was surely extremely attractive.

Meanwhile, in Lhasa, the Gelug tradition gained the backing of the ruling families, putting them in clear competition with the Kagyu tradition that was supported by the Ringpung (ring pung) family in Tsang. To counter the stronger Ringpung, in the 17th century the 5th Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobzang Gyatso (ngag dbang blo bzang rgya mtsho, 1617-1682) and his treasurer, Sonam Chopel (bsod nams chos’ phel), who was actively manipulating events, invited the Mongolian leader, Gushri Khan, to bring an army into Tibet and wipe out his rivals. Gushri Khan began his invasion in 1639, overrunning Kham from top to bottom Gushri laid siege to Shigatse for roughly a year, ultimately crushing all resistance and taking control of Tsang. The 5th Dalai Lama also established relations with the nascent Qing Dynasty in China, accepting titles from the Emperor that have been held up as evidence of his acceptance of Tibetan inclusion in the Qing Empire. Despite Chinese claims to the contrary, the the presence of Qing representatives in Lhasa, the Ganden Podrang, the seat of the Dalai Lamas, has been the nominal seat of political power in Tibet, even if for most of the last 400 years real power shifted among a number of players.

Throne-holders of Ganden (dga’ ldan khri pa) are the nominal heads of the Gelug tradition. After Tsongkhapa, the first holder of the golden throne, was his disciple Gyaltsab Darma Rinchen (rgyal tshab rje dar ma rin chen, 1364-1432), followed by Khedrubje.

Often portrayed as quite conservative both doctrinally and politically, there survives in the Gelug tradition a serious tension between the inclusion of officially proscribed teachings. The 5th Dalai Lama famously repressed the Jonang tradition and forcibly converted a number of Jonang, Kagyu, and Nyingma monasteries. Nevertheless many Dalai Lamas and other prominent Gelug hierarchs have engaged in non-Gelug teachings and practices. This has led to a backlash from more conservative members of the tradition, most visibly in the controversy over the deity Dorje Shugden (rdo rje shugs ldan). This Gelug protector deity is embraced by many Gelug followers, said to be charged with keeping the tradition pure (that is, purging the Gelug of those who embrace other, primarily Nyingma, teachings). Seen by many as an attack on the Dalai Lamas from within the tradition, worship of this deity is discouraged by the current Dalai Lama, who, since going into exile and taking on the role of leader of the Tibetan people, has embraced an ecumenical position unacceptable to more conservative-minded Gelug hierarchs.
 

Miranda Adams


from:  http://tibetanlineages.org/foundations/view/11

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
'Interesting' read. Do read.

TK

[a friend]

Seen by many as an attack on the Dalai Lamas from within the tradition, worship of this deity is discouraged by the current Dalai Lama, who, since going into exile and taking on the role of leader of the Tibetan people, has embraced an ecumenical position unacceptable to more conservative-minded Gelug hierarchs.

Speaking of nonsense, this one is a perfect example of the total nonsense from the side of Westerners that, for various motivations, repeat the sayings or inuendos of the Dalai Lama.
Look here: the lady Miranda uses a word: "ecumenical" which has very beautiful resonances in the Western culture, to refer to the Dalai Lama´s position about the different schools. This is laughable were it not so dammaging: ecumenical means to respect all the traditions within Christianity, a very necessary thing to do as opposed to the old ways in that religion, that consisted in the traditions violently persecuting each other. This tolerance has not implied, not until today, that all the traditions are going to be mixed, on the contrary, what the ecumenical movement aspires to is to tolerance and respect among all the living Christian traditions. This by the way is strongly opposed by the fundamentalists.
Now, what the Dalai Lama wants is to impose the policy that any given practitioner should practice all the Tibetan schools, making these disappear in their specificity. This is the opposite of "ecumenical", it's a position aimed to make all the Tibetan traditions melt and disappear in a single one, something that is tantamount to destroying them all, in favor of a new school that will substitute them, the ri mè.
Practically all in the Western's so called academic research on this matter follows this nonsense thread.
Happily our Protector has done something for a great being to be born in the West and counter all this nonsense in Western terms, a beloved member of this Forum.

[Losang_Tenpa]

Happily our Protector has done something for a great being to be born in the West and counter all this nonsense in Western terms, a beloved member of this Forum.

Trinley Kelsang

[Midakpa]

The ecumenical movement (ris med), literally "without partiality", is not new. Quote: "It is a spiritual movement made famous by the great lama Jamyang Khyentse Wangpo as well as Jamgon Kontrul Lodro Thaye, Lama Mipham, Chogyur Lingpa and Patrul Rinpoche. It is characterised by an attitude of respect for all teachings and schools of Buddhism." (Patrul Rinpoche, The Words of My Perfect Teacher,1998:411)

As the Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso has to wear many hats, literally. Different coloured ones. It is part of H.H.'s job. He has also written forewords for dharma books from different Buddhist traditions. I think he has a genuine respect for all religions and has even prayed with leaders of other religions.

[Lineageholder]

I think he has a genuine respect for all religions and has even prayed with leaders of other religions.

But no respect for his Guru or his teachings?  In that case, his 'respect' is merely for show, to bolster his own reputation as being open-minded and ecumenical, and make friends so that his power and influence can increase.

[Middleway]

As the Dalai Lama, Tenzin Gyatso has to wear many hats, literally. Different coloured ones. It is part of H.H.'s job. He has also written forewords for dharma books from different Buddhist traditions. I think he has a genuine respect for all religions and has even prayed with leaders of other religions.

you're kidding right? Since when does persecuting a religion denote respect for it & how can you begin to consider his sincerity as being genuine towards other sects when he's shown himself to be such a two faced liar in regards to his own? This is not the rhetorical question it should be as you clearly haven't considered this. I'd apreciate your considered response before posting more frankly outlandish statements.

[Midakpa]

Through taking sides the mind is distressed,
Whereby you will never know peace.

(Bhavaviveka in "Heart of the Middle Way" (Madhyamaka-hrdaya))

No pun intended. 

[Ensapa]

Often portrayed as quite conservative both doctrinally and politically, there survives in the Gelug tradition a serious tension between the inclusion of officially proscribed teachings. The 5th Dalai Lama famously repressed the Jonang tradition and forcibly converted a number of Jonang, Kagyu, and Nyingma monasteries. Nevertheless many Dalai Lamas and other prominent Gelug hierarchs have engaged in non-Gelug teachings and practices. This has led to a backlash from more conservative members of the tradition, most visibly in the controversy over the deity Dorje Shugden (rdo rje shugs ldan). This Gelug protector deity is embraced by many Gelug followers, said to be charged with keeping the tradition pure (that is, purging the Gelug of those who embrace other, primarily Nyingma, teachings). Seen by many as an attack on the Dalai Lamas from within the tradition, worship of this deity is discouraged by the current Dalai Lama, who, since going into exile and taking on the role of leader of the Tibetan people, has embraced an ecumenical position unacceptable to more conservative-minded Gelug hierarchs.

Thank you TK for the wonderful and unbiased article. It is a far cry from historical articles about the Dalai Lama and on Tibet who are biased, and who portray him as the leader of all schools of Tibetan Buddhism and he has never been sectarian even in his previous reincarnations. If Dorje Shugden is sectarian, then how can the acts of the 5th Dalai Lama be seen as not sectarian? How is it that even the mere rumor that students of  Pabongkha Rinpoche destroyed statues of Guru Rinpoche be said as sectarian, and yet the 5th Dalai Lama forcibly converting the Nyingma, Kagyu, Jonang and Sakya monasteries into Gelug not sectarian? Even more disturbing is, why has most of the scholars such as dreyfus and thurman turn a blind eye to this fact? Why does CTA want to deny this fact? How does practicing the tradition of another tradition nullifies or offsets the closing down and converting their monasteries by force? Unless of course, true sectarianism is seeing a clear and distinct differences between the traditions and acting based on that insecurity to collect them all, totally forgetting that mastering one tradition is the same as mastering all of the traditions.

Thus, we can say that people who run around to gather teachings from various traditions but never mastering any as sectarian because  they do not understand the true nature of the traditions and the Dharma. By this extension, the 5th Dalai Lama is sectarian as he closed down and forcibly converted the monasteries into Gelug. Why is nobody saying that he is sectarian but everyone pounces on Pabongkha? By extension again, if the current Dalai Lama is the same mindstream as the 5th, as he had said so, would that not make him sectarian? Also note that neither the CTA or the Dalai Lama has ever apologized for the forced conversion. Another view is that the 5th Dalai Lama needed to secure these monasteries as Gelug as they are in strategic locations, as to enable him to control Tibet more effectively. Even so, this does not take away the fact that his act is sectarian as he could have still ruled the monasteries without converting them, as he does today.