Freedom for Tibetans is not likely if the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) continues their double standard politics
By: Tenzin Tsondrue
The opinion piece below was sent to dorjeshugden.com for publication. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to ds@dorjeshugden.com.
In a world driven by differing values, individual needs and often opposing organizational interests, conflicts and controversies are inevitable. Unfortunately this applies to all aspects of life including religion. In fact, religion is always a latent source of quarrels which, if unmanaged, can escalate into full blown hostilities. Therefore a leader and the government of a religious community must make special effort to be fair and be seen to be unbiased and equal in its handling of such conflicts. A defining mark of good government is fairness and the care the leadership takes to neither fall into partisanship by choosing a side to stand with, or to remain apathetic to the plight of another.
This is a concept that the Tibetan government-in-exile, now known as the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA), seems unable to grasp or have no respect for, acting instead as if it is still a feudal lordship rather than the liberal government it professes to be. The CTA’s official stance on key issues is found to differ depending on what situation suits its agenda better.
At first glance, it may just seem like the CTA is an inexperienced and incompetent government. But after decades of similar inconsistencies, it is clear that the CTA is not in fact a government of the people and for the people, but a conspiracy of a small elite, using the instrument of government to serve themselves. This would explain why they appear reluctant to apply good governance in situations where there is no personal benefit to them (other than the well being of the people) but are quick to intervene and act ultra vires when there are private objectives to fulfill.
For example, neither the Dalai Lama or the CTA acted swiftly to discourage the spate of over 100 self-immolations around 2010. Instead those incidents were treated as political opportunities for anti-Chinese propaganda and so the CTA refused to advise against them for the longest time, choosing politcial mileage over the lives of its people. That is not the only example and in fact a number of past events involving the Kagyu, Sakya and Gelug lineages will attest to the CTA’s secret agendas. These examples will expose the fact that what the CTA claims to be policies and guiding principles only apply in some cases and not in others, depending on what is more conducive to their hidden plans.
In its harsh decision to ban the practice of Dorje Shugden, the CTA cited the reasons being Dorje Shuden’s legacy of enmity towards the Dalai Lama line; the ‘sectarian’ nature of the practice that breeds disunity; the malicious intention of the leaders of the practice who are in fact Chinese agents; the ‘spiritual bond’ (samaya) between the Dalai Lama and all Tibetans which if breached would endanger the Dalai Lama’s life, and other similar false justifications. All these reasons seem to allude to the CTA taking steps to protect the overall well-being of the people but we will see that these reasons are hollow because when similar situations arise apart from Shugden, the CTA has acted differently. These contradictions have led to some of the greatest damage being inflicted on the credibility of the Tibetan nation and Tibetan Buddhism in modern history.
1. The Fifth Dalai Lama and the Kagyus
Highlights discrepancies in the way the CTA deals with the Gelugs and the Kagyus
The autobiography of the incomparable scholar Geshe Lhundub Sopa
Following the assassination of King Langdarma in 842 CE, which marked the end of the Tibetan Empire that had originally been established by Namri Songtsen, the region of Tibet fell into many years of civil war. The Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Lobsang Gyatso (a short biography can be found here) instigated a series of military and social campaigns in an attempt to once again unify Tibet under a single leadership. It was during this period that the Fifth Dalai Lama enlisted the help of Gushi Khan, a powerful military leader of the Dzungar Mongols.
In Geshe Lhundub Sopa’s autobiography Like A Waking Dream, he writes that the Dzungar Mongols who supported the Fifth Dalai Lama defeated the army of the King of Tsang, who were patrons of the Karmapa. As a result, the defeated Karmapa (the spiritual head of the Karma Kagyu lineage) was sent to Tsurphu Monastery by the government of the Fifth Dalai Lama.
The Fifth Dalai Lama is widely known as the leader who unified Tibet and became both the religious and temporal leader of the region
The Gelugpa leadership felt that the surrounding landscape of the monastery – the mountains framing the black earth below and the sky above in a triangular fashion, to be highly inauspicious. This triangle resembles the black iron triangle used in Tibetan sorcery to entrap spirits and negative forces. Hence, it was thought that sending the Karmapa there was to condemn him to an unpropitious place.
The black iron triangle is known to be used in rituals that trap and bind negative spirits and energies.
In retaliation, the Kagyus are rumoured to have procured the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair and placed it under the steps at the front entrance of Tsurphu Monastery. This was done deliberately so that all who entered the monastery would have to symbolically step over the Dalai Lama, which was considered a grave insult. This incident is one of many that tells of the historic enmity between the Karma Kagyus and the Fifth Dalai Lama and his government. It is rumoured that the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair is still under the Tsurphu Monastery steps. Even Geshe Sopa had heard of it and he states in his book that he never set foot in that monastery because he was afraid that the rumour might turn out to be true.
At one time I wanted to go to Tsurphu, but somebody told me that I shouldn’t. The person said that in the time of the Fifth Dalai Lama, the Kagyupas had gotten some of his hair and put it under the front steps of the monastery. Walking on the steps would be like stepping on the Fifth Dalai Lama’s head. It was probably true. After the Fifth Dalai Lama’s rise to power there was strong animosity between the sects; the Kagyupas probably thought of him as their enemy. They could have gotten some of his hair and done this. Every time I went by that valley and saw the golden roof and the beautiful buildings, I wanted to go, but I never did. I was afraid that it might be true about the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair under those steps.
- Geshé Lhundub Sopa with Paul Donnelly, Like a Waking Dream: The Autobiography of Geshé Lhundub Sopa, Wisdom Publications, Inc. 2012. P.30)
The steps leading to Tsurphu Monastery in Tolung Valley, Tibet. Established by the 1st Gyalwa Karmapa, Dusum Khyenpa, it has long been the traditional seat of the Karma Kagyu tradition
Geshe Sopa’s statement indicates that Gelug-Kagyu animosity may still be simmering beneath the surface. Certainly if the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair remains where it was planted, it could be misrepresented as the continuing intention of the Kagyus to put down the lineage of the Dalai Lamas. It hints at an unspoken and subtle feud between the Kagyupas and the Gelug establishment. This is a potentially inflammatory situation and could be harmful to the unity of Tibetans, even though it may not be the intention of present day Kagyus.
Surprisingly the CTA has not done anything about this. The CTA has stated on more than a few occasions that even to oppose the historic Dalai Lamas is tantamount to opposing the present Dalai Lama. We see this clearly in the case where the present Dalai Lama and the CTA have taken it upon themselves to continue open hostilities against Shugden Buddhists today, as the result of an alleged feud between the 17th century Gelugpa sage, Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen and his supposed rival, the Fifth Dalai Lama. Dorje Shugden is the Dharma Protector that is the reincarnation of Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen.
The Dorje Shugden practice is banned today because the CTA claims that as a result of an alleged quarrel some 360 years ago, Shugden Buddhists are enemies of the present Dalai Lama. And seeing that the Dalai Lama is the embodiment of the Tibetan nation and its people, by extension Shugden Buddhists are enemies of the Tibetan people. This ‘fact’ therefore warrants their persecution. Of course this is an absurd proposition and yet the Dalai Lama has stated that he is obliged to continue the legacy of the Fifth Dalai Lama with regards to Shugden. The simple fact that the Fifth Dalai Lama’s hair remains under the steps of Tsurphu Monastery and yet the CTA treats this with casual indifference, speaks of their dis-ingenuity. Why act on an alleged centuries-old conflict between Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen and the Dalai Lama’s predecessor and punish Shugden Buddhists today, and not apply the same treatment to the Kagyus? Why penalize one set of people and not the other for what appears to be similar ancient conflicts? And for that matter, why should a progressive government be concerned about old conflicts?
The CTA’s inconsistency in its treatment of Shugden Gelugpas and Karma Kagyus can only be explained by the fact that it is easier for a Gelugpa Dalai Lama and CTA to pick on their own people. On the other hand, they cannot get away with the same treatment with the Karma Kagyus who are not from the same tradition or school of thought. Therefore their actions and decisions are not based on what is right but what suits them and what they can get away with.
2. The CTA’s Silence on Forced Kagyu Conversion
The Gyalwang Drukpa, the spiritual head of the Drukpa Kagyu School
On September 10th 2014, the Gyalwang Drukpa, head of the Drukpa Kagyu lineage published an open letter calling upon Karma Kagyu leaders to end their forced conversion of Drukpa Monasteries and holy sites. These conversions were allegedly done following the instructions of the current 17th Karmapa, His Holiness Ogyen Trinley Dorje , a fact that perturbs the Gyalwang Drukpa given his deep respect for the Karmapa. Both lineages have shared a strong spiritual bond and are even known as Gyalwa Kar-Druk Yab-Sey or “Spiritual Father and Son” as the Gyalwang Drukpas and Gyalwa Karmapas have historically given guidance to whomever of the two was younger. Whilst both schools are closely interrelated, they have maintained their individual lineages, traditions, practices, hierarchies and administrations. However this harmony between the two lineages has been increasingly threatened by the Karma Kagyu’s forced conversions of the Drukpa Kagyus.
The Gyalwang Drukpa’s open letter regarding the forced conversions of Drukpa Monasteries and holy sites (Click to enlarge)
In the interview below, the Gyalwang Drukpa explained that these forced conversions have become increasingly common and not even holy sites like the sect’s Dri-ra Phung monastery, the equivalent of Mecca to the Muslims, have been spared. The Gyalwang Drukpa likened these forced conversions to “killing us [Drukpas]”. In other words it is a serious attempt to force the disintegration of the Drukpa lineage. The Gyalwang Drukpa expressed in the video that he has had to go public to create awareness of the Drukpa lineage’s plight which begs the question, where is the CTA in its duty to preserve unity? Preserving unity is also the CTA’s often quoted justification to wipe out Shugden Buddhists whom the CTA accuses as being ‘sectarian’ and therefore dangerous.
This is not a commentary on the relationship between the Drukpa Kagyu and the Karma Kagyu. This article does not serve to condone the behavior of those monks who have forced their way to overrun Drukpa monasteries, but neither does it seek to malign the Karma Kagyu lineage. Instead it is to highlight the hypocrisy of the CTA in targeting Shugden practitioners, as well as to highlight how the CTA has utterly and completely neglected their duty to create an environment where all lineages can thrive and not at the expense of any sect or tradition.
[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]
or watch on our server:
http://video.dorjeshugden.com/videos/kagyu-drugpa-video.flv
The Gyalwang Drukpa explains about the forced conversions during a short interview. From the Drukpa Lineage’s YouTube channel.
The incredible thing to note is that this is not a recent phenomenon and has been taking place for over a decade. And yet neither the Dalai Lama or the CTA have stepped in to ensure that the Drukpa Kagyus are protected from such forced annexations. The Dalai Lama has time and time again presented himself as the spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism who is responsible for the preservation of all Tibetan Buddhist lineages. The CTA was established to supposedly represent the welfare of all Tibetans as well as organizations. Yet both the Dalai Lama and CTA have behaved as if the Tibetan spiritual community is exempt from all laws.
The Gyalwang Drukpa expresses his worries over the issue in a dignified yet authoritative manner, promoting cooperation rather than fighting. He is quoted as saying, “Buddhism is not about conversion. It is about love, compassion, peace and understanding.” This role and statement promoting peace should have been said by the Dalai Lama and reiterated by the CTA. So why does the CTA and Dalai Lama continue to remain silent? Compared to the ban on Dorje Shugden which the CTA actively supports, the CTA’s silence towards these forced conversions betrays its double standards and its targeting of the Gelugpa lineage’s practice of the Wisdom Protector, Dorje Shugden.
It cannot be said that the CTA has a policy of non-intervention in spiritual matters. The CTA’s apathy and disturbing silence in the Drukpa-Karma Kagyu case is in stark contrast to their aggressive advocacy of forced conversions of Shugden Buddhists away from their practice, even to the point of legislating such criminality in parliament. Furthermore, if the CTA appears to be non-interventionist in its approach to the various Tibetan Buddhist schools, this illusion is dissipated when we realize that the CTA has previously actively interfered in Kagyu affairs.
3. A CTA proposal to restructure the Kagyu leadership
In another 2010 interview regarding Kagyu leadership, Gyalwang Drukpa openly dismissed a CTA proposal to restructure the Kagyu leadership and base the appointment of a single leader to all Kagyu sects on a rotational basis. Not only does this interfere with the various Kagyu sects’ self-determination based on centuries of tradition but as the Gyalwang Drukpa explained, this would destroy the harmony between the different Kagyu lineages.
Perhaps that was the intention of the CTA from the beginning. Just as the CTA divided the Gelug lineage by imposing a ban on a pervasive protector practice of the Gelugs, it created division within the Kagyus. By side-stepping proper protocol and acting beyond its authority, the CTA forcibly interfered with leadership issues in the Karma Kagyu lineage, with devastating effect as evidenced by the violence at Rumtek Monastery, the official seat of the Karmapas.
The Violent Rumtek Takeover
Rumtek Monastery lies 24 km from Gangtok, Sikkim (Northern India) and is regarded as the wealthiest of all Tibetan Buddhist monasteries. A few years after the 16th Karmapa passed into clear light in 1981, there were two claimants to the throne. One, Ogyen Trinley Dorje, was discovered by Tai Situ Rinpoche, who was one of the regents of the Karma Kagyu school; the other, Trinley Thaye Dorje, was discovered by the senior regent, Shamar Rinpoche. By tradition, it is the responsibility of Shamar Rinpoche to find and enthrone the next Karmapa but Tai Situ Rinpoche broke with tradition and protocol, and approached the Dalai Lama to endorse his candidate as the rightful Karmapa. It should be stated clearly that the Dalai Lama does not have any authority or influence in the appointment of the highest seat of the Karma Kagyus. Yet in this instance, the Dalai Lama sided with Tai Situ Rinpoche instead of mediating the conflict.
Today there are two 17th Karmapas – Tai Situ Rinpoche enthroned Ogyen Trinley Dorje with the support of the Dalai Lama, the CTA and, ironically, the Chinese government. Meanwhile, Shamar Rinpoche enthroned Trinley Thaye Dorje with the backing of a large percentage of the Karma Kagyus. By intervening in Karma Kagyu affairs then officiating his unwarranted intervention by drawing the CTA into fray, the Dalai Lama’s endorsement of a Karmapa candidate split the Karma Kagyu lineage. His decision sparked violent clashes over Rumtek Monastery, turning a holy site into a battlefield.
Disturbingly, as conflicts between the two parties escalated and continue to persist till this day, neither the Dalai Lama or the CTA have seen fit to step in once again, this time to arbitrate a quarrel which was not intractable until the Dalai Lama’s involvement. Despite the problems caused, the CTA remains recalcitrant. The Karmapa Charitable Trust (the legal and administrative body of Rumtek Monastery) officially declared Karmapa Trinley Thaye Dorje as the heir of the 16th Karmapa and this decision was upheld by the Indian court of law. Instead of respecting that, the Dalai Lama continues to regard Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the rightful Karmapa candidate, and endorses his status by constantly appearing in public and official events with him. The CTA’s refusal to act as a fair, impartial and democratic government is even more disturbing. A true spiritual leader who claims to represent all Tibetan Buddhist traditions should not take sides and act to the disadvantage of any particular lineage. A genuine government of the people would push for peaceful reconciliation. And yet none of these commonsense measures were or have been taken.
The Karmapa Controversy, just like the Dorje Shugden ban, is concrete proof that both the Dalai Lama and CTA do not operate on principles of peace and justice. In both cases, their actions led to results diametrically opposed to what they are supposed to uphold. Both the Dalai Lama and CTA are often heard preaching peace and unity. In fact, the CTA claims that banning the Shugden practice was necessary to safeguard unity amongst the Tibetan people. And yet the CTA’s ban of the Shugden practice and their endorsement of Tai Situ Rinpoche’s candidate split the largest (Gelug) and second largest (Kagyu) Buddhist schools, thereby tearing the entire Tibetan community apart.
4. Tai Situ Rinpoche’s Exile from India
An online transcript of Tai Situ Rinpoche’s speech upon arriving back in India. Click to enlarge. (Source: http://www.quietmountain.org/links/situ_rinpoche/situ_return.htm)
In 1994, Shri Narayan Singh filed a criminal complaint to the Chief Magistrate of Delhi alleging Tai Situ Rinpoche to be an agent of the Chinese along with Gyaltsab Rinpoche, and that they were part of a bigger Chinese conspiracy to bring about the disintegration of India.
The complaint alleged that the conspirators planned to do this by bringing about the amalgamation of the Tibetan Autonomous Region of China and the Indian state of Sikkim. Another similar report was allegedly filed by Sri Sridar Rao, an official of the government of Sikkim and was submitted to the Cabinet Secretary of India, T S R Subrahmanyam.
Ogyen Trinley Dorje (left) was found and recognized by Tai Situ Rinpoche (right) and is one of two claimants to the throne of the 17th Karmapa. This claimant, supported by the Chinese, is also supported by the Dalai Lama
Following a series of newspaper articles discussing this, the Indian government decided to ban Tai Situ Rinpoche in August 1994 from re-entering India on national security grounds. The ban was the culmination of a decade-long Indian intelligence investigation of Tai Situ Rinpoche’s activities in China. It seems that the recognition of a Chinese national as the Karmapa by Tai Situ Rinpoche, who was also backed by the Chinese, seemed to be at the heart of this controversy. A Chinese Karmapa would eventually wield tremendous power in Sikkim, where Rumtek (the seat of the Karmapa) lies.
And so, if it is true that the Dalai Lama and CTA were concerned about Chinese spies infiltrating their ranks and sabotaging the Tibetan independence movement, they would have been more reluctant to endorse a Chinese-sponsored Karmapa. Clearly however, Tai Situ Rinpoche and his protégé Ogyen Trinley Dorje’s close ties with China were of no concern to the Dalai Lama and CTA.
However, when it comes to individuals whom the CTA wishes to oppress and marginalize, the individual’s spiritual practice (which in fact precedes the Sino-Tibetan conflict) becomes reason enough for the CTA to label them ‘Chinese agents’. Even to be seen with any Chinese person is tantamount to treason. The CTA even went as far as publishing a hitlist of Shugden lamas and worshipers on their official website, denouncing them as criminals of society for protesting against the Dalai Lama.
Why is there such disparity between the way the CTA views Tai Situ Rinpoche and Ogyen Trinley Dorje, and the way they view all Shugden Buddhists? The only logical conclusion would be that in one situation, the CTA benefits from endorsing a Chinese-backed Karmapa whilst in the other, they do not benefit in any way. By endorsing a Karmapa candidate with confirmed ties to China and supporting Tai Situ Rinpoche whom Indian Intelligence suspects to be an agent of the Chinese government, the CTA proves its own malicious intentions. And this is not to mention the CTA’s complete disregard and respect for India’s security concerns.
5. The Sakyas and the Question of Samaya
The great Sakya Lama Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche (centre), together with the Karmapa Candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje (left) and the Sharmapa (right)
Another interesting point to note is the Dalai Lama’s view that all Tibetans have a spiritual bond with him, and this compels them to obey his every wish. Failure to do so harms the Dalai Lama’s life through the breaking of their samaya with him, or so they are told.
Yet the same policy does not apply to Sakya lamas and the Dalai Lama. The great Sakya Lama Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, recognized by the 13th Dalai Lama as the 18th in the lineage of Chobgye Trichens, was instrumental in the Sharmapa’s recognition of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the rightful 17th Karmapa. During multiple dreams, Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche had visions of the late 16th Karmapa Rangjung Rigpe Dorje circumambulating stupas and even had a relative come to him with a photograph of a child who is supposed to be the reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa. Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche conveyed this to the Sharmapa in 1986, who then went on to recognize Trinley Thaye Dorje as the 17th Karmapa.
His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama (left) receiving Sakya teachings and empowerments from Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche
His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama is actually a student of Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, having received Sakya teachings and empowerments from him. So the question arises: why did the Dalai Lama endorse Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the 17th Karmapa when his own Sakya teacher Chobgye Trinchen Rinpoche recognised Trinley Thaye Dorje instead?
Within Tibetan Buddhism, a student is supposed to follow the advice and actions of his/her teacher, so why didn’t the Dalai Lama abide by Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche’s recognition of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the correct reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa? This is not the first time that the Dalai Lama has gone against the advice or teachings of his teachers. The Dalai Lama also contradicted his main teachers, H.H. Ling Rinpoche and H.H. Trijang Rinpoche, when he abandoned the protector practice and imposed the ban on Dorje Shugden.
So how is it that Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche’s support for a rival Karmapa candidate, the Dalai Lama’s decision to support a candidate apart from the one Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche recognised, and the Dalai Lama’s turning against his own teachers’ practice all do not constitute breaking samaya? But Shugden worshipers’ refusal to obey the diktat of the Dalai Lama (with whom they might have no spiritual bond) is considered breaking samaya? Many Tibetan Buddhist practitioners have firmly-established samayas with their Shugden teachers and none with the Dalai Lama. Yet the CTA insists that ALL Tibetan Buddhists have to follow the Dalai Lama, or they will be accused of breaking samaya. This is completely absurd and shows that the Tibetan leadership are even prepared to distort long-established spiritual traditions to achieve their goals. It also shows the CTA to be nothing but the Dalai Lama’s enforcers, even enforcing something that is evidently wrong, just because the Dalai Lama said so.
Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche (left), the Karmapa candidate Ogyen Trinley Dorje, His Holiness Sakya Trizin (right) and His Holiness the 14th Dalai Lama (far right). Interestingly, Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche did NOT recognise Ogyen Trinley Dorje as the rightful Karmapa candidate, and instead recognised Trinley Thaye Dorje
Confounding the issue of samaya and the recognition of the Karmapa is the CTA’s involvement. Seen in the picture above is Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, seated next to Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the opposing candidate for the throne of the Karmapa. Why would Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche sit next to or be seen with the Dalai Lama’s candidate which he himself did not select as the true Karmapa candidate? And when he himself clearly does not think Ogyen Trinley Dorje is the true Karmapa? Some could argue that perhaps Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche actually believes that both candidates are legitimate reincarnations of the Karmapa. This is highly unlikely however – if he did think this were the case, there is nothing to stop him from making a formal pronouncement of Ogyen Trinley Dorje as another legitimate reincarnation of the 16th Karmapa.
Note also that Ogyen Trinley Dorje is seated in between Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche and H.H. Sakya Trizin, the current head of the Sakya lineage, with the Dalai Lama on the far right. This picture highlights the political nature of the CTA and the Dalai Lama’s effort to portray religious harmony between the various Tibetan Buddhist lineages, but this show is obviously forced. Ogyen Trinley Dorje is placed between Sakya lamas, one of whom (Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche) we have already seen supports the opposing Karmapa candidate.
Left to right: Shangpa Kagyu Lama Trinlay Tulku Rinpoche, H.E. Sakya Jetsun Chimey Luding Rinpoche, H.E. Luding Khenchen Rinpoche, 17th Karmapa candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje, H.H. Sakya Trizin, H.E. Ratna Vajra Rinpoche, Dagmo Kusho Tashi Lhakyi (consort of H.H. Sakya Trizin) and Dagmo Kalden Dunkyi (consort of H.E. Ratna Vajra Rinpoche)
Adding to the Sakya involvement within the Karma Kagyu lineage is H.H. Sakya Trizin’s confusing association with both Karmapa candidates. Often seen together with Ogyen Trinley Dorje at the Dalai Lama’s events and teachings, Sakya Trizin has also been seen with the other candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje. In the photo above for example, Sakya Trizin is seated next to the Karmapa candidate not endorsed by the Dalai Lama. Rather than a political photograph, this is more of an intimate setting, with many lamas of both the Sakya and Kagyu lineages coming together. They include Luding Khenchen Rinpoche, head of the Ngor tradition within the Sakya lineage.
H.H. Sakya Trizin is also a student of Chobgye Trichen Rinpoche, who identified Trinley Thaye Dorje as the rightful Karmapa reincarnation. Therefore it is logical to assume he supports Trinley Thaye Dorje’s claim to the throne of the Karmapa rather than the Dalai Lama-endorsed Ogyen Trinley Dorje.
Why is it that H.H. Sakya Trizin can be seen with both Karmapa candidates without reprisal from the CTA or the Dalai Lama? Is the Sakya Trizin simply sitting on the fence, not wanting to embroil himself in another lineage’s affairs or is the CTA forcing him into the position of associating with the Dalai Lama’s choice of Ogyen Trinley Dorje over his own guru’s choice of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the correct Karmapa candidate?
H.H. Sakya Trizin recently bestowed a special empowerment to Ogyen Trinley Dorje, the Karmapa candidate recognised by Tai Situ Rinpoche and the Dalai Lama. This contradicts Sakya Trizin’s guru’s acknowledgement of Trinley Thaye Dorje as the Karmapa
In addition to this, Sakya Trizin was recently invited to give an empowerment to Ogyen Trinley Dorje, a candidate not recognized by his own teacher. Did Sakya Trizin really want to give the empowerment or was this due to pressure from the CTA to once again portray religious harmony? Sakya Trizin’s indecision regarding which Karmapa candidate to support can be bewildering to say the least, especially since he has never publicly stated which Karmapa candidate he supports.
It could be argued that H.H. Sakya Trizin is appearing with both Karmapa candidates to remain neutral, even though his own teacher was instrumental in the recognition of one candidate. However, Sakya Trizin has not extended this neutrality to all other sects of Tibetan Buddhism. For despite Sakya Trizin’s “neutrality” regarding the Karmapa candidates, he has clearly and publicly denounced Dorje Shugden practice. This in itself is a double standard – if his aim is to remain neutral in a Karma Kagyu issue because it does not concern the Sakyas, he should also remain neutral on the Dorje Shugden issue which does not concern the Sakyas. In adhering to the CTA’s attitude of non-involvement in the Karmapa dispute, yet publicly denouncing Dorje Shugden, Sakya Trizin allows himself to be influenced with the double standards of the CTA, a stance that is unbecoming of the spiritual head of the indomitable Sakya lineage.
The Nyingma Lama Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche (left) together with Karmapa candidate Trinley Thaye Dorje (right)
Despite the CTA’s strict insistence that all Tibetans loyal to the Dalai Lama are not to associate with anyone who opposes the Dalai Lama even symbolically, Sakya Trizin nevertheless met with the Karmapa candidate not endorsed by the Dalai Lama (Trinley Thaye Dorje) and escaped the CTA’s wrath. Sakya Trizin is not the only high lama who has openly flouted this non-association rule by the CTA.
The present reincarnation of the great Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche also paid a visit to Trinley Thaye Dorje in 2010 and was not rebuked for it. Sakya Trizin and Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche’s disregard for the CTA and the Dalai Lama’s policies are not different from Shugden practitioners’ disregard of the Dalai Lama and CTA’s order to abandon the practice. The difference however, is that Dorje Shugden practitioners are persecuted for disobeying the CTA whereas many like Sakya Trizin and Dilgo Khyentse Yangsi Rinpoche remain untouched. This reflects not only the CTA’s lack of consistency when it comes to reprimanding those who disregard their policies, it also shows that many high lamas regard the Dalai Lama and CTA’s orders to be ridiculous and refuse to be bound by it.
Sogyal Rinpoche (left) leading His Holiness the Dalai Lama (right)
Controversy also exists within the Nyingma lineage specifically surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche who has been the focus of many inquiries. Sogyal Rinpoche has been the subject of numerous lawsuits brought over the years by students and others who have had some associations with Sogyal Rinpoche. Some of the accusations against Sogyal Rinpoche even call into question his authenticity as a high Tibetan lama. Despite the controversies and questions surrounding Sogyal Rinpoche, the Dalai Lama still associates with Sogyal Rinpoche and his religious activities, including the opening of Lerab Ling, a large temple in Montpelier, France in 2008.
Even though these matters have arisen consistently over the years, the Dalai Lama makes no move to disassociate with Sogyal Rinpoche or question his actions. In fact the Dalai Lama’s continuing association with Sogyal Rinpoche is seen by many as an endorsement of Sogyal Rinpoche’s character, and perhaps even a silent rebuttal of accusations against Sogyal Rinpoche. This may be the Dalai Lama’s attempt to once again portray religious tolerance, or it may be the Dalai Lama’s acknowledgement of Sogyal Rinpoche’s instrumentality to the Dalai Lama’s objectives. Whatever the Dalai Lama’s motivations may be, the Dalai Lama does nothing about Sogyal Rinpoche and the controversies surrounding him. This behaviour is markedly different compared to the Dalai Lama’s approach to the ban on Dorje Shugden, where the Dalai Lama emphatically enforces it and denounces lamas or practitioners alike if they continue in the practice of Dorje Shugden.
[There is a video that cannot be displayed in this feed. Visit the blog entry to see the video.]
or watch on our server:
http://video.dorjeshugden.com/videos/sogyal-scandal-video.flv
Double Standards & Destabilisation
Rather than highlighting issues within the Kagyu, Nyingma and Sakya lineages, this article seeks to point out the selectivity of the CTA when dealing with Tibetan Buddhist issues, and how their bias and prejudice have the potential to destabilize Tibetan society. On the one hand, the CTA practices a non-involvement policy towards the Kagyupas; on the other hand, the CTA enforces a continued and vigorous campaign against Dorje Shugden. This prejudice appears to have filtered down to the heads of various lineages, and has the potential to create resentment between the different lineages. For example, Sakya Trizin speaks up against the Dorje Shugden practice, but remains indifferent when it comes to the troubles surrounding the Karmapa issue or forced conversion of the Drukpa Kagyus. Outwardly, it may appear that he holds a bias against the Gelugs, and a bias in favour of the Kagyus.
These incidents of indifferent non-involvement at times and aggressive partisanship at other times clearly demonstrate a lack of consistency which is indicative of good government. However, instead of making any effort to be fair and equitable in its management of state affairs, double standards and bias continue to dominate the CTA’s character. If an administration such as the CTA is seen to regularly fail in its duty to its people, how can it expect to receive support from progressive nation states in its campaign to regain control of its homeland? More importantly, how can the Tibetan people and religious leaders even trust the CTA and have enough confidence in them to secure freedom for them?
What is the Dalai Lama and CTA’s real purpose in persisting in such discriminating policies? Is the real intention of the Dalai Lama and CTA to unite their people and pursue a genuine fight for freedom, or is it to divide the Tibetan community for their own selfish agendas? Based on hard facts and analysis of past events, it would seem that the latter is more plausible. This sends an extremely negative image of the Tibetan people and Tibetan Buddhism to the world.
The Dorje Shugden ban; the interference in the Kagyu leadership; the refusal or failure to intercede when a religious sect preys on another, the loose and wrongful distortion of important spiritual traditions such as the upholding of the proper meaning and significance of samaya, and the dangerous self-serving application of laws and policies can only serve to destroy the reputation of the Tibetan people and along with it, their culture and religion. All of these issues should have been resolved quickly by the Dalai Lama and the CTA in a manner befitting an effective leadership based on sound political structure and governance. However, this has not been the case and their double standard politics exposes the real situation – a lack of sound political and religious leadership that has not only created multiple rifts with Tibetan Buddhist society, but their continued policies of non-involvement only further solidify these divisions. Clearly it is the Tibetan leadership that has been creating disharmony among the Tibetan people, hindering their efforts for self-autonomous rule of Tibet or complete freedom, while tarnishing the reputation of the great practice lineages of Tibetan Buddhism for adherents all over the world.
Disclaimer: This article was submitted by a third party author and does not necessarily reflect the official opinion of DorjeShugden.com. We accept submissions from the public, please send in your articles to ds@dorjeshugden.com
Special Announcement from DorjeShugden.com
DorjeShugden.com wishes the Gyalwang Drukpa well and prays that this issue of forced conversion by other lineages is peacefully and swiftly resolved so that the glorious Drukpa lineage is preserved and flourishes. We send our prayers and dedicate the merits from our practice for this to happen.
We also wish the Karma Kagyu lineage well. May the current issues regarding the Karmapa candidates be resolved and the Kagyu lineage become whole once again.
DorjeShugden.com Admin
Related links:
- Self-Immolations Have Failed The Tibetans (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/self-immolations-have-failed-the-tibetans)
- Dalai Lama Recognizes Bon Faith (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/dalai-lama-recognizes-the-bon)
- Tibetan Leadership Publishes Hit List (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/tibetan-leadership-publishes-hit-list)
- Tibetan Leadership Organizes Violence (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/tibetan-leadership-organizes-violence)
- Geshe Lhundub Sopa Speaks About Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/geshe-lhundub-sopa-speaks-about-shugden)
- Will The Karmapa Save Dorje Shugden (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/will-the-karmapa-save-dorje-shugden)
- Divine Friends The Karmapa and Trijang Rinpoche (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/divine-friends-the-karmapa-and-trijang-rinpoche)
- What’s The Similarity Between Sharmapa and Shugden’s Dilemma (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/whats-the-similarity-between-sharmapa-and-shugdens-dilemma)
- Karmapa Asked Anti-Shugden Statue to be Removed (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/the-controversy/karmapa)
- True Spiritual Leadership: Karmapa Vs Dalai Lama (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/all-articles/features/true-spiritual-leadership-karmapa-vs-dalai-lama)
- Biography of the Fifth Dalai Lama (http://www.dorjeshugden.com/great-masters/enlightened-lamas-series/the-great-fifth-dalai-lama-ngawang-lobsang-gyatso-1617-1682)