A problem with a Tibetan Buddhist deity

tenzinchoje

This is something that eventually any Buddhist would encounter. It's about Dorje Shugden, the supposedly demon that the Dalai Lama has banned. I believe that everyone deserves to know both sides of the story and thus, they should at least learn about Dorje Shugden's origins before deciding that that he is bad. I am not going against the Dalai Lama or anything, but shouldnt we as Buddhists have a right investigate and learn before we actually believe in something? 10 out of 10 people out there who are against Dorje Shugden have no idea how he originated and who was his previous incarnation. They only know he's bad because the Dalai Lama says so. There are many resources on him online, so I am hoping that before anyone makes a judgement or decision, please do at least learn about him before deciding.

how

I'm Zen and call me a small minded outsider but I have little current interest in Buddhist folk lore or it's pantheon of past culteral acquisitions. This means I have even less interest in this subject arriving here under the quise of an imploring Dharmic message when it's clearly political.
If you were in a devotional practise with the DL, you'd take his DS teaching as Dharma. If you don't have a devotional relationship with the DL, and were interested in the DS, you're as free to question it as anybody else.

All this really says is you don't like how much influence the DL has over Tibetan leaning Buddhists.

Cory

@tenzinchoje I love the DL, and all of his writings, (at least what I have read) but this seems a little bit too rash for the DL. Are there any documented sources? proof?

lobster

As far as I am aware the DL's position has recently changed on this as it was causing so much suffering for the possessed.
I am quite happy to worship a man with a flying saucer on his head, a Dalai with everything on his head and the headless.

What is your skilful resolution?

Jason

Yeah, we've discussed this a couple of times before, e.g., see Dalai Lama’s talk on Dorje Shugden in Bodhgaya 2012, The infighting over Shugden, etc. Personally, I could care less as I'm content with taking the Buddha's own advice to "be islands unto yourselves, refuges unto yourselves, seeking no external refuge; with the Dhamma as your island, the Dhamma as your refuge, seeking no other refuge" (DN 16), but I agree that people should research things before making judgments.

caz

I don't care what HHDL says it doesn't conform with history so I have no reason to believe him. Also there are many implications from what he suggests.

So I still practice making requests to the Dharmapala to guard and nurture my inner Dharma experiences. Its worked for my Spiritual guides for many years so I have no reason to choose HHDL over them, He is not everyone's Guru as some would think.

Cinorjer

I have to agree that this whole business has been a disaster for the Tibetan public relations, because it seems to be entirely about temple power struggles and caused many Western Buddhists to actually stop and examine what Tibetan Buddhism practice actually is and how it functions.

So was it fair for the Dalai Lama to ban some obscure worship of a dead man/diety in Tibetan Buddhism that nobody had heard of anyway unless they were devoted disciples? Beats me. I do think it's funny how Tibetan Buddhists are heavily invested in Lama worship when it comes to their own particular Tulku, think the Dalai Lama is an enlightened protector, and it's wrong to question anything a Lama says or does...unless that Lama says something you disagree with. Human nature at work.

DairyLama

Cinorjer said:

I do think it's funny how Tibetan Buddhists are heavily invested in Lama worship when it comes to their own particular Tulku, think the Dalai Lama is an enlightened protector, and it's wrong to question anything a Lama says or does...unless that Lama says something you disagree with. Human nature at work.

Yes, even while practising in Tibetan Buddhism I was dubious about the degree of loyalty which seemed to be expected.

trendybuddha

I guess I am more or less a tibetan buddhist, but I think people missunderstand the whole process of loyalty to your Lama. It takes years to build up complete trust, and newcommers seems to invest a lot of trust to a Lama very quickly without investigating everything. It could take up to ten years to achieve trust. I have decided to be a tibetan buddhist on my own terms, that means that I have doubts about some things, I don't really care much about the karmapa controversy since it has not much to do with my practice, all of these things are outter phenomena. That means that they will change anyway, and so maybe we should care more about our minds than controversy. I don't think I would practice Dorje Shugden, but if people want to do that, then I don't care. If it makes them happy, and if they feel more enlightend, then they should definetly do it.

Dandelion

trendybuddha said:

I guess I am more or less a tibetan buddhist, but I think people missunderstand the whole process of loyalty to your Lama. It takes years to build up complete trust, and newcommers seems to invest a lot of trust to a Lama very quickly without investigating everything. It could take up to ten years to achieve trust. I have decided to be a tibetan buddhist on my own terms, that means that I have doubts about some things, I don't really care much about the karmapa controversy since it has not much to do with my practice, all of these things are outter phenomena. That means that they will change anyway, and so maybe we should care more about our minds than controversy. I don't think I would practice Dorje Shugden, but if people want to do that, then I don't care. If it makes them happy, and if they feel more enlightend, then they should definetly do it.

sounds like a good attitude to have in my opinion.

Cinorjer

Yep, anything I say about Tibetan Buddhism as an outsider is probably oversimplified. It's the same thing that happens when people who don't practice Zen try to understand the koan system and emptiness and such.

karasti

I am Tibetan Buddhist as well. @Cinorjer be careful about over-generalizing. Not all TB's act and think the same. I have devotion to no Lama. I practice what I learn with my teacher(who is not a Lama. We do not have a Lama in my state) and mainly stick to the basics of Buddhism. I don't get into the politics or controversy. It has no influence on my practice. I have been a skeptic and questioner my whole life. That won't change just because I decided to become Buddhist. It is quite enough for me to manage how to practice on a daily basis without spending time considering and investigating things I have no interest or concern with.

TheEccentric

If I had found out about DL's behavior when I first started learning about Buddhism I would have turn and fled without looking back.

karasti

Why? HHDL is not Buddhism. He is the leader of one sect of Buddhism. There are people you will disagree with in all areas of life. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is rarely a good practice to adopt. All Christians haven't abandoned their faith because of the behavior of a few. Why are you so angry and focused on the HHDL when you should not be concerned with him and his practice?

Dakini

tenzinchoje said:

This is something that eventually any Buddhist would encounter.

OP, most Buddhists are pretty oblivious to this matter. It's strictly a TB issue. Why would Theravadans or Zennies encounter it? It's completely outside their sphere.

I don't know why this is such a big deal for the DL, but this may have something to do with it;
The DL's first regent, who was extremely corrupt and was later replaced, was a Dorje Shugden worshipper, and after he was deposed, he conspired with the Chinese to take back control. The DL, in his teens at this point, had to denounce him publicly for seeking to undermine his authority by collaborating with the Chinese.

DaftChris

Personally, I think it's all bull. Something like this should not A.) Be of such a manner this controversial, seeing as Dorje, when one examines objectively, has no real power. And B.) Should not be what non-Buddhists view as the face of Tibetan Buddhism.

Something only has power if people give it power and I think people are giving Dorje power over nothing.

TheEccentric

karasti said:

Why? HHDL is not Buddhism. He is the leader of one sect of Buddhism. There are people you will disagree with in all areas of life. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is rarely a good practice to adopt. All Christians haven't abandoned their faith because of the behavior of a few. Why are you so angry and focused on the HHDL when you should not be concerned with him and his practice?

I know that now, that's why I have not turned and fled, but when I first started learning Buddhism I was ignorant on it and like most westerners thought that DL was like the Pope of Buddhism.

vinlyn

karasti said:

Why? HHDL is not Buddhism. He is the leader of one sect of Buddhism. There are people you will disagree with in all areas of life. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is rarely a good practice to adopt. All Christians haven't abandoned their faith because of the behavior of a few. Why are you so angry and focused on the HHDL when you should not be concerned with him and his practice?

Well said. Since I'm Theravadan, I don't much care about all the ins and outs of what HHDL teaches, but I think we ought to recognize that despite our own personal beliefs about what he teaches, more than any one person, he is the face of Buddhism to the non-Buddhist world...and it's been a pretty positive face. Much of the positive view of Buddhism from non-Buddhists is due to HHDL.

vinlyn

DaftChris said:

Personally, I think it's all bull. Something like this should not A.) Be of such a manner this controversial, seeing as Dorje, when one examines objectively, has no real power. And B.) Should not be what non-Buddhists view as the face of Tibetan Buddhism.

Something only has power if people give it power and I think people are giving Dorje power over nothing.

No one can or should attempt to dictate what is "the face" of anything, although dictators certainly attempt to dictate such things. What "the face" of something is, is simply what it is.

tenzinchoje

But what is extremely sad is how many Buddhists out there are not open to discussing about Dorje Shugden or investigating him. This and a few places are the only exceptions, because when i tried to raise my voice about this issue, my account was banned right away. If those Buddhists did, they will know he's not an evil spirit as his practitioners include very highly attained Lamas, one of them being the Dalai Lama's own teacher, Trijang Rinpoche. And the Dalai Lama has outright said that his teacher is wrong...then later changed his mind and said only his teacher can practice.

It is incredibly ironic that this topic cannot even be mentioned in Buddhist forums and people who do are immediately banned without mercy. Where is the compassion? They just follow the Dalai Lama without investigation and thats just going against the Buddha's words...

sean

sorry u got banned and all but it's probably because they are not going to question their teacher. i think you go to hell if you do. i think questioning things and people is great, but that is what you are supposed to do BEFORE you take refuge in a lama. i think that is why people who have taken refuge would not even talk to someone who is saying to question the teacher that they promised not to.

Cinorjer

@tenzinchoje This appears to be a big concern of yours. I take it you are one of the Tibetan Buddhists affected by the Dalai Lama's ban? What effect did this actually have on the Buddhists, besides starting an argument?

tenzinchoje

@sean there are ways of questioning the teacher. Sometimes, the teacher will do something to provoke the students to question and investigate. Also, good teachers encourage their students to question them, like in the Dalai Lama's case. Students have a right to ask and enquire and have respectful debate with their teachers on doubtful subjects or behavior as faith in Buddhism is not blind faith like in the Christian sense but confidence built after finding out that the teacher's teachings are correct at the end. I still respect him very much as the leader of the Tibetans, but it is this ban that has brought a lot of pain to many people, but perhaps, he is doing this for a higher purpose.

@Cinorjer It sent out huge ripples in the Buddhist world. FPMT, Lama Zopa's center, whose founder Lama Yeshe was a Dorje Shugden practitioner and he has conferred Dorje Shugden to many older students. When the ban was decreed, FPMT management quicky expunged all of Lama Yeshe's old students. Imagine being kicked out from your spiritual home just because you want to follow your teacher's instructions! It is also because of this ban that thousands of monks are exiled in Dharamsala. you can read all about it at dorjeshugden's website.

chela

I mean no disrespect here, but it is this type of thing that I want to avoid in my practice. As a westerner who is constantly surrounded by the institutionalization and corruption of Christianity, and having rejected it more on the basis that it is pure blind faith and doesn't speak any relevance to my life, I am avoiding any institutionalization of Buddhism because all I can see is a big 'ole opportunity for political corruption and unethical behavior. This is exactly why I do not seek a formal teacher. I see the Buddha, the Sangha, and the teachings as my teacher.

Silouan

I take exception with references that Christian faith is blind. This implies that confident faith derived from its teachings and practice, reinforced by experience is absent in Christianity. I consider these types of comments as stereotyping all Christians and their varied traditions.

MaryAnne

IMO and speaking only for myself- I see this not as a religious conundrum, but as a political one.
This is the kind of thing that happens when politics - both real (governments) and metaphorically (religious differences/hierarchy) - gets tossed into the religious mixing bowl.

I think the DL is in a position where he can't ignore these political issues, yet takes plenty of heat for his viewpoints on it at the same time. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He can't please everyone all the time. He isn't infallible, and never claimed to be. Politics ruin everything good, everywhere, every time.

chela

@Silouan, I don't mean to stereotype, but this is my own experience with that religion. Yours is obviously different than mine. In my own experience, the main teaching of Christianity is "believe in Jesus as the savior so you can go to heaven when you die." I don't think there is a way to prove this, that is why I call it blind faith. I know there are more teachings than this, but most, if not all, of them depend on some level of interpretation from a teacher (priest, pastor, etc) and they are written in many different voices of peoples with different agendas. This is why the Church is such a big part of Christianity, because there isn't a coherent, core philosophy of living set forth, which is why practice varies so much, depending on what sect/Church you belong to. I'm not saying that Christians have no philosophy, I'm saying that at its core, there is not a coherent philosophy (except what I mentioned and the 10 commandments, which is not a philosophy in and of itself). Christian philosophy is derived from the interpretations set forth by the interpreters, a reason why there is so much in-fighting in Christianity. This is also why Christianity and Buddhism can actually peacefully co-exist: because Christianity lacks a core philosophy, and Buddhism lacks a theistic component.

karasti

@tenzinchoje It is possible that the admins of the forum do not simply follow HHDL blindly and ban anyone who disagrees, and simply that through experience certain topics are always off-topic because of the flame wars and such that break out over them. Admins/mods set the rules for the places they moderate, or at least follow the rules given to them and if the topic has caused significant disruption in the past they may just have made the call that it won't be discussed in order to prevent those problems.

vinlyn

MaryAnne said:

IMO and speaking only for myself- I see this not as a religious conundrum, but as a political one.
This is the kind of thing that happens when politics - both real (governments) and metaphorically (religious differences/hierarchy) - gets tossed into the religious mixing bowl.

I think the DL is in a position where he can't ignore these political issues, yet takes plenty of heat for his viewpoints on it at the same time. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. He can't please everyone all the time. He isn't infallible, and never claimed to be. Politics ruin everything good, everywhere, every time.

I think you're right. I am reminded of when I was kid and the old priest in our parish became too old to function in his role, so a new priest came. Unfortunately, the new priest wanted to change virtually everything just for the sake of change. And many in the parish fought him all the way. After months of bitterness, one morning in his homily he addressed the issues, and while he was mostly wrong because he was creating his own problems, he said something I always remembered: "When you're in charge, 25% of the people are going to love you, 25% of the people are going to hate you, and the other 50% of the people aren't gonna give a damn one way or the other." When I became a school administrator, I found out that his principle was pretty much true (although the percentages vary).

Here on the forum there is a little group of people who are really down -- fairly consistently -- on the HHDL. That's their right, but often their criticisms leave me wondering how does that opinion really affect their practice. They will go on and on about the politics in the Catholic Church, while failing to see they are participating in the same sort of action within Buddhism.

If you don't like the DL, ignore him. Or became a Theravadan or Zen. But for a group of people who often preach about not being judgmental (see the thread on beggars, for example). there's an awfully lot of judging of the DL.

black_tea

If people are interested in DS, then they should explore that avenue. If they don't like DS they don't have to and can go do their own thing. I'm not a Tibetan Buddhist, so this is something that doesn't affect me either way. I have respect for HHDL, but to be honest, he has no impact on my own practice. In the end, people need to worry less about what everyone else is doing, and focus more on what they need to do.

BhikkhuJayasara

tenzinchoje said:

This is something that eventually any Buddhist would encounter.

I only ever encountered this whole thing on new Buddhist. in fact I knew little of Mahayana and Tibetan Buddhism until coming here, makes me feel more solid in my choice of Theravada. Us poor Theravadans often get left out of the party :P

lobster

Are there sufficient practices in any cult to get your placebo fix . . . oops, I meant to say, 'path to enlightenment'?
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/03/04/do-all-cults-like-all-psychotherapies-exploit-the-placebo-effect/

Forgive me Dorje Sugden, I know not, nor care not, what you do . . .
. . . Time to move on?

andyrobyn

Cinorjer said:

Yep, anything I say about Tibetan Buddhism as an outsider is probably oversimplified. It's the same thing that happens when people who don't practice Zen try to understand the koan system and emptiness and such.

Agree, and I adopt this approach too - different strokes for different folks as they say

:nyah:

Silouan

@chela

I understand, but to "believe in Jesus as the savior so you can go to heaven when you die" would be no easy task any way you slice it. According to my Christian background heaven and hell are seen as spiritual states, and since the Kingdom of Heaven is inside and upon you its really about transforming or transfiguring your life right here and right now, so there is no other place to go but inward. If you can't find it now then how can you expect to find it at the time of your death?

As for your comment about Christianity having no philosophy its about as varied as you would even find in Buddhism actually. Also, unless you are an illumined or enlightened being you are going to have to rely on the guidance of those more experienced in spiritual matters. Even the Buddha was taught by elders on his path to enlightenment. He did not necessarily keep everything he was taught, but the experiences certainly had an impact on him. Also, the spiritual books you may read just don't fall out of the sky. There is a history of the transmission of teachings in them.

Anyway, I consider my self a pluralist so I see the validity in both these religious forms of spirituality and in others too. If one speaks to you more and can provide meaning in your life and help bring about a positive change in your life then its fulfilling its purpose and is worthy of respect.

chela

@Silouan, I respect your views, thank you.

Silouan

@chela

Thank you and I will try to follow the example you set. Please forgive me for not truly respecting yours.

Sincerely,
Silouan

FairyFeller

lobster said:

As far as I am aware the DL's position has recently changed on this as it was causing so much suffering for the possessed.
I am quite happy to worship a man with a flying saucer on his head, a Dalai with everything on his head and the headless.

What is your skilful resolution?

I don't worship anybody, maybe that's where I'm going wrong?

I respect/revere people and their opinions but actually worship?

lobster

@FairyFellah
More than worship. Become possessed by.
Internal or external?
You probably worship your self a little too much . . . Or maybe that is just me . . .

Search for deity yoga to find out more . . .
:wave:

vinlyn

FairyFeller said:

lobster said:

I don't worship anybody, maybe that's where I'm going wrong?

I respect/revere people and their opinions but actually worship?

From my perspective, that's where you're going right!

TheEccentric

MaryAnne said:

@TheEccentric.

By the way.... Norton Anti-virus detected and blocked a "highly malicious cookie- possibly an intrusion attempt" when I clicked on those photo links.
You better run a scan if you have a program, as should everyone who clicked on those links.....

Sorry about that I did not get such a response when I clicked on it, I would appreciate it if a moderator could delete that comment please, sorry for any inconvenience

federica

Let's please stick to topic henceforth.

Thanks.