FPMT - sectarian ?

[vajralight]

from FPMT website:

FPMT POLICY

          o Those in service or teaching in FPMT centers and projects do not engage in the practice of Shugden.
          o Students regularly attending FPMT centers should not practice Shugden.
          o FPMT teachers and key staff should not attend teachings by teachers who are known Shugden practitioners.

Personally I think people working as teachers or staff in FPMT should follow their guidelines. You chose your lineage and stick by it. But to ask anyone coming to classes to NOT practice Dorje Shugden seems an invasion of privacy to me. It seems then that their classes are not open to the general public, or only to those who do not practice Dorje Shugden. (Interestingly then Lama Zopa, Lama Yeshe, Ribur Rinpoche and hundreds of Lama's would not be allowed to follow teachings there or teach there  if we applied this rule before the BAN...)

What do you think ?

Vajra

[emptymountains]

Interestingly then Lama Zopa, Lama Yeshe, Ribur Rinpoche and hundreds of Lama's would not be allowed to follow teachings there or teach there if we applied this rule before the BAN...

"You chose your lineage and stick by it...." Yes, isn't this exactly what hasn't happened?

[honeydakini]

the fact that it's titled as "A POLICY" already makes the whole issue very pedantic and political. Following all the very clear statements that Lama Zopa has made about wishing to abide by His Holiness' wishes, supporting His Holiness' works by not practising DS etc (can be followed or read up on at this thread: http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/index.php?topic=659.0), it would seem that this is just another extension of this. i.e. making it very clear "which side" they are on.

I think in this climate though, this doesn't necessarily mean that's what's happening within; we don't even know if Lama Zopa may be continuing to practise or not and there has been a lot of debate about that. I don't think it's about being sectarian or whatever but more about the political situation at this time re: DS. I guess there are  centres around the world at the moment who are just choosing to announce their chosen outward stance very clearly, for whatever political, financial reasons, though it may not have a particular bearing on what practices are actually being done privately or within the organisation by individuals.

I'm interested to hear what other people think of statements like these from FPMT though.

[Midakpa]

I think the policy applies only to FPMT employees, teachers and REGULAR students. It doesn't say anything about the general public.

All centres have their policies. Usually it is for the student's own good. Thus one has a choice - to follow or not to follow.

I believe that, ultimately, it boils down to our dharma practice. Once we have chosen our root guru, we should go all the way and not have any doubts about his policies. Relying sincerely on one's guru who leads us along the spiritual path, is essential. So if my guru doesn't practice Dorje Shugden, and advises me not to, I wouldn't question him. All attainments come from guru devotion, not which deity or protector one practices.

[Zhalmed Pawo]

Apart from any sectarian issue, there is a major internal problem due to the current policies of the FPMT. Namely, that the most experienced practitioners, who have received DS-practice from the Founder, Lama Yeshe, are now sidelined and told to either forsake their samaya or to get lost. Not only the individual practitioners lose, but also the FPMT as a whole. (There was a wonderful letter by an 'old timer' somewhere here. Everyone should read it.)

Kicking out your most experienced practitioners in order to get a virtual bone from the Master seems to be the name of the game. Short Time Thinking, I'd say. -shudder-

[WisdomBeing]

from FPMT website:

FPMT POLICY

          o Those in service or teaching in FPMT centers and projects do not engage in the practice of Shugden.
          o Students regularly attending FPMT centers should not practice Shugden.
          o FPMT teachers and key staff should not attend teachings by teachers who are known Shugden practitioners.

Personally I think people working as teachers or staff in FPMT should follow their guidelines. You chose your lineage and stick by it. But to ask anyone coming to classes to NOT practice Dorje Shugden seems an invasion of privacy to me. It seems then that their classes are not open to the general public, or only to those who do not practice Dorje Shugden. (Interestingly then Lama Zopa, Lama Yeshe, Ribur Rinpoche and hundreds of Lama's would not be allowed to follow teachings there or teach there  if we applied this rule before the BAN...)

What do you think ?

Vajra

Of course I do not agree with this particular policy BUT I do think that each centre is entitled to set up their own rules. Let's say a centre's policy says that once you join their centre, you shouldn't go to other centres - some people may see that as restrictive and prohibitive or an invasion of personal choice while there are perfectly good reasons behind a policy of sticking to one centre. Would this policy be considered sectarian?

It is for each student to see the policies of their respective centres and decide whether to abide by them or not. If a student wants to practise Shugden, then don't join FPMT.

Incidentally, Lama Zopa is rather inconsistent in his reasons to ban Shugden practice - see his 'Advice Book' (http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=1166).

Firstly, Lama Zopa says that "This does not mean that Pabongka Dechen Nyingpo, His Holiness Trijang Rinpoche, and His Holiness Zong Rinpoche have made mistakes. It does not mean they are wrong. Nor does one have to look at the protector as evil. For us ordinary people it is difficult to judge, because we cannot see these lamas’ minds.

- so contrary to what the Dalai Lama  says, Lama Zopa says that the lineage gurus are NOT wrong and the Protector is NOT evil, and we should not judge Lamas who practise Shugden!

Another side of the teaching is that it is mentioned that the protector is an Arya Bodhisattva, a manifestation of Manjushri. So, then, there is also the risk of our creating very heavy karma in that context. [for having bad thoughts about an enlightened being]

- Lama Zopa is endorsing that Shugden is Manjushri!

In addition, if one has received teachings, initiations, and so forth from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso*, including the practice of Dorje Shugden, there is a way of practicing lam rim in relation to this situation. In the lam rim, it says that the Buddhas – for example, Buddha Vajradhara, Guru Shakyamuni Buddha, and so forth – manifest in ordinary form and guide us to enlightenment. That means they manifest in an ordinary aspect that shows mistakes, such as having delusions, performing mistaken actions, and so on. One can also think in this way about the situation, according to the lam rim. In reality, there is no mistake here, but the guru is showing the aspect of making mistakes, like a movie actor.

- Lama Zopa is saying that although there is a campaign against Shugden practitioners, saying that they are wrong to practise Shugden but actually they are not wrong - they just appear to be wrong.

Do take a read of the 'advice book' article. I though it was quite enlightening.

By the way, this is the letter by an 'old timer' that you were referring to, Zhalmed:
http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=2630

[a friend]

Of course I do not agree with this particular policy BUT I do think that each centre is entitled to set up their own rules.

So why even mention FPMT?
A Dharma Center is not a club. A Dharma Center should not betray the founder´s belief system.
FPMT is been acting in a most incorrect manner. They are not entitled to set up their own rules, they should respect Lama Yeshe´s heritage.

Now, if they changed their name and declared openly that they have nothing to do with Lama Yeshe then they can set up their own rules. But only then.

[Lineageholder]

In addition, if one has received teachings, initiations, and so forth from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso*, including the practice of Dorje Shugden, there is a way of practicing lam rim in relation to this situation. In the lam rim, it says that the Buddhas – for example, Buddha Vajradhara, Guru Shakyamuni Buddha, and so forth – manifest in ordinary form and guide us to enlightenment. That means they manifest in an ordinary aspect that shows mistakes, such as having delusions, performing mistaken actions, and so on. One can also think in this way about the situation, according to the lam rim. In reality, there is no mistake here, but the guru is showing the aspect of making mistakes, like a movie actor.

This is just so wrong and it makes me very sad.   Since when did unfailingly maintaining the lineage of one's Teacher and all the lineage Gurus become 'showing the aspect of performing mistaken actions' but declaring that one's own Gurus are wrong and breaking with tradition become the compassionate actions of a Buddha?  This shows how messed up this situation really is and how lost the FPMT are by endorsing the political actions of the Dalai Lama.

At least publicly, Lama Zopa is showing the aspect of relying upon mistaken logic.  I can only hope that by making such statements Lama Zopa is deliberately drawing attention to the absurdity of the Dorje Shugden ban so that people won't buy into it because otherwise these are pretty crazy statements that would sadden Buddhist logicians like Dignaga and Dharmakirti.

[a friend]

Lineageholder,

You are pointing to something very important.

The ones who are destroying Dharma should not use the sacred knowledges given as personal instructions for one person's mind as their public justification for their own misdeeds.

By doing so they are multiplying the destruction of Dharma, I am so very sorry to say.

[Midakpa]

Thank you, WisdomBeing, for summarising Lama Zopa's views and for providing the links. I read the articles and found the explanations very clear and logical and also very useful for students who still harbour doubts about whether to practise Dorje Shugden or not. I've also reread Yeshe's letter and concur with him regarding the need to have guru devotion and the importance of not criticising other centres. Yeshe speaks from his heart and he really has guru devotion.

Let me quote a few lines from both Lama Zopa and Yeshe which have caught my attention.

Lama Zopa (from the Lama Zopa Advice Book):

1. "For us ordinary people, it is difficult to judge, because we cannot see these Lamas' minds."
2. "So think more carefully about the high lamas' motivation for creating this controversy. Their attitude is like this, and their action is only for work for sentient beings."

Yeshe:

1. "Helping others to keep their samayas clean to their lamas by never criticizing."
2. "I think if Dalai Lama is close to FPMT we should reflect that well by being even more humble, even more gentle, even more kind so we do not stain the name of H.H. the Dalai Lama. We cannot uplift his name or prove our guru devotion to him by putting down anything in regards to Dorje Shugden."
3. "...H.H. has reasons beyond our ordinary minds can conceive."
4. "We shouldn't practice or not practice what the current political situation pressures us to or not to. We should do what our lama says."

In short, when in doubt, trust your lama whom you have chosen to devote yourself to with great respect, in this life and in all your future lifetimes. And practice the essence of Buddha's teachings which are "tolerance, compassion and forgiveness".

[a friend]

This is really the longest way possible.
It's like being forced to go back to kindergarten after accomplishing the effort of getting a Harvard PhD.
Except that if you do this you might be back to the PhD level in some 20 years of work. Whereas to become a Bodhisattva after having become a Foe Destroyer is --they say-- very difficult.
We forget that our own suffering is multipronged: on one hand it represents the maturation of our bad karmas, but on the other hand it's our golden means to develop compassion quite easily with the proper teachings and practice.

[Midakpa]

I'm glad my innocent comment on the essence of Buddha's teachings has led to a discussion of the difference between the Hinayana path and the Mahayana path.  The common paths are followed by both the Hinayanists and the Mahayanists. But the stages of the path of a person of the great scope are uncommon Mahayana paths. I'd like to quote the following passage from "Joyful Path of Good Fortune" by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (1990, 1995: 381-182):

"Those who have attained only liberation have not completed their own purpose and cannot work extensively for the benefit of other living beings because they still have many subtle levels of obstruction. Since Hinayana paths do not include methods for eliminating subtle levels of obstruction, if we wish to become completely free from faults we need to accomplish the Mahayana paths. These alone can eliminate faults completely and develop every good quality. Although all living beings possess the seed of full enlightenment, this seed is brought to perfect fruition only through the complete practice of the Mahayana path.

If this is the case, why did Buddha teach Hinayana paths? Buddha taught these for disciples who cannot immediately follow Mahayana paths, which are more difficult to understand and practice. He taught Hinayana paths as preparations for Mahayana paths. It was his main intention to lead all disciples, Hinayana and Mahayana, to Mahayana paths, and hence to the full enlightenment of Buddhahood."

[Ensapa]

from FPMT website:

FPMT POLICY

          o Those in service or teaching in FPMT centers and projects do not engage in the practice of Shugden.
          o Students regularly attending FPMT centers should not practice Shugden.
          o FPMT teachers and key staff should not attend teachings by teachers who are known Shugden practitioners.

Personally I think people working as teachers or staff in FPMT should follow their guidelines. You chose your lineage and stick by it. But to ask anyone coming to classes to NOT practice Dorje Shugden seems an invasion of privacy to me. It seems then that their classes are not open to the general public, or only to those who do not practice Dorje Shugden. (Interestingly then Lama Zopa, Lama Yeshe, Ribur Rinpoche and hundreds of Lama's would not be allowed to follow teachings there or teach there  if we applied this rule before the BAN...)

What do you think ?

Vajra

Obviously this list refers to the regulars only, such as students, staff and teachers and does not apply to people who are visiting or discovering them. For committed members, for them to implement this rule on them is reasonable, but for them to implement this also on the general public is too much in a way. Firstly, how would they know whether or not that particular member of the public has practiced Dorje Shugden or not, or do they rely on wild guesses? If they rely on wild guesses and they accuse people of practicing Dorje Shugden, they would that not be hurting others and directly contradicting Buddhism in the first place? Why does a Dharma center hurt others for the sake of maintaining their own purity? It sounds pretty weird to me. Also, I wonder why must they make it out so public like this when things like that should only be told to the more committed members. It does not make sense at all, unless they are trying very hard to prove their purity to someone or something. I still find the whole thing funny and ridiculous.

I heard a while back that some FPMT center in some country banned a man from attending their teachings because they suspected him of practicing Dorje Shugden when he told them he visited NKT before, and locked him in the storeroom throughout the teaching. That poor man was sobbing away in the storeroom, wondering what he had did wrong as he dont even know what Dorje Shugden is. Is this the actions of a Dharma center or a center that harms others? What if that said man gave up the Dharma due to that incident? Do they care about that? Is a Dharma center that does not care about people a good Dharma center or a bad one? Do they represent the Buddha's teachings at all? It is quite sad that FPMT became like this. No wonder Lama Osel refused to come back. They are a very bad reflection of their Lamas.