Quote
dspak08
Dear Tenzin,

The Dorje Shugden issue itself is a huge debate, one ....

If yes, I would first like to take up the question of pure view....

Dear Dspak,
with respect to Shugden, the point why I mentioned these points is to make clear that there is quite a different perspective on this, not only by Tibetans and Western Buddhists following Tibetan Buddhism but also by neutral academic scholars. The view about Shugden as being rather harmful or at least not enlightened is shared by the vast majority of the Tibetan Buddhist masters and monastics. This I stated mainly to correct the wrong statements with respect to NKT/WSS that HHDL is the “cruel and evil” being, an “oppressor of religious freedom” and the like. These accusations come from a very fundamentalist and narrow minded perspective, and they were made by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso himself, it is also he who created the slogans “Dalai Lama don’t lie” implying wrongly that having a different view constitutes a lie. By stating these and former points I made already, I wished to broaden that perspective, and to put the NKT/GKG/WSS claims into another context of understanding.

I agree that there are fundamentalists at both sides, but the story NKT/WSS is offering is a misinterpretation of the facts, and it is strongly based on narrow minded views which in turn are based on non-knowledge. HHDL once said, that fundamentalism is mainly based on a lack of knowledge. This understanding is proofed for me when observing the NKT/WSS protests and their baseless or contorted accusations against those which oppose their views. OK that’s it and we can leave it with this. It is clear that we won’t find agreement in this.

As the moderator didn’t disagree to discuss “pure view”, I pick up this theological issue.

It is nice to hear that the emphasize on this and the understanding has come under change within NKT. From an outer perspective I am inclined to confirm this, because the use of “pure view”-reasoning to undermine criticism with respect to NKT in the present debate in the internet is not that present any more as it was in the past and happens very seldom, I think I encountered it only two or three times.

With respect to your explanation I agree in general. A perspective I wish to add is, that there is a object side and a subject side, and also the object side is pure in the sense of lacking inherent existence, faults are pure in lacking inherent existence, however objects (or faults) are conventional phenomena which perform functions.

At the moment there is not more to say on this from my side. I am happy to hear that these teachings are now presented in a more differentiated way.

Best wishes, t



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/29/2008 08:22PM by Tenzin Peljor.

Hi, I am a Tibetan practitioner and am happy to share my views with you. First of all, there is a long and controversial history with this group. Because of the tolerant nature of most Buddhist organizations, and especially the Tibetan lineages, not many people will speak about this because of the controversy.

I for one, did attend for a short time, one of their centers. I found them to be fine, but I did notice, while I did not know why, at the time, that they were rather secretive, even defensive. At least the members I met. In addition, they are really an entity unto themselves. That part bothered me and I found out about the controversy and then I understood. I would not practice with them.

Let me say this. Trust your gut. You said you were starting to have questions or reservations: isn't your gut the best indicator that something MAY be wrong, or just not for you? If you want to read about it, just google them. I did have a friend who went to one of their groups and the senior Tibtean teacher did say some very negative things about the Dalai Lama. I had previously warned my friend NOT to go there, that was my advice to him, but he did not listen. When I heard what that teacher had said, I knew that I would never, ever, be part of that group or send any of my friends or people who were interested in Tibetan Buddhism go there.

The Buddha told people not to just believe, but to question. Your gut seems to be telling you that something doesn't feel right. I think that's a pretty definitive sign. Warm wishes, Rangdrol

Just to let you know there is an explanation on the background on the Shugden dispute and NKT's involvement by Prof. Williams, who has been quoted quite often in different research I encountered. He kindly allowed be to offer it to the public. I felt it as being very enlightening. Maybe it is also helpful to others. for those interested see:

A quick note on Dorje Shugden (rDo rje shugs ldan)

Best wishes. tp

Tenzin Peljor -- if the Prof Williams you are referring to is Paul Williams of Bristol University, UK -- I would not attach too much significance to his view. He teaches Tibetan Buddhism but a few years ago converted to Roman Catholicism -- apparently after trying for a long time to get to grips with basic meditation. I have also been told that his Tibetan language skills are somewhat limited.

Dear Pema,
I guess you are a NKT follower.

Among NKT and NKT follower's tactics are to denounce or slander anybody which does not confirm the pov of the organisation. Even the NKT secretary's NKT 'truth' - site didn't hesitate to slander David N. Kay's research on NKT (which is well accepted and often quoted among scholars, and has two pretty good reviews) as "heavily biased", 'academic' research, and referred to him as a 'disgruntled' ex-member. They wrote literally about his research and him:

Quote
NKT 'truth' site
heavily biased "academic" book by David Kay (who had his own disgruntled history with the NKT when he briefly attended meditation classes in
Lancaster)

On Wikipedia a NKT follower claimed about Mr. Kay he came to NKT as a "emotionally unstable" person. The same has been done with Prof. Dreyfus and others, e.g. Mrs. Bunting from The Guardian, the latter is also being "accused" to have been converted to Catholicism. As if such a religious belief makes those persons and their works invalid or somewhat less reliable or awkward. The same slander has been done also with Prof. von Brück. (Not to speak about NKT's treatment of HHDL or former members or critics.)

There is the saying:" If you have no argument, slander your opponent." This is what I see in your post.

Prof. Williams is a well respected and often quoted scholar and Professor. As he is very familiar with Tibetan Buddhism and a well-known scholar - I don't know how familiar he is with Tibetan but I guess 100% better than NKT members who have almost no idea about even a single letter - his opinion and views matter, at least for me, who tries to avoid to believe too much the NKT leadership's narrow minded policies and distorted views and claims.

-----------------------------------

Dear Rangdrol, I agree with you. The problem with the gut was for me, that one of the first "teachings" in NKT was: "our feelings are not reliable", "we are completely confused" and so on, they undermined the trust in my intuition (my self-confidence) until I didn't believe myself, my gut or intuition any more but only NKT and its leader, because He is the perfectly "fully accomplished Spiritual Guide", he knows, he sees the three times, so I entrusted my life into the organisation (the version of Buddhism they offered) and their views (or GKG's views). Quite stupid, but as a newcomer who has no idea about Buddhism one can easily get caught in the very skilfull "recruiting system" of NKT 'missioners'....

Best wishes.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/2008 10:02PM by Tenzin Peljor.

Tenzin Peljor,
I am certainly not an NKT follower. My main teacher these days is Lama Tsultrim Allione and I am also linked with Cheogyal Namkhai Norbu. Opposite end of the TB spectrum from the NKT. I want no part whatsoever in TB protector wars. I was equally critical of the Dzogchen Community attitude during the first bout of Shudenitis as I was of the NKT chanting Shugden puja outside the Dalai Lama's venues when he was in London. I am sceptical about Paul Williams because I know beyond doubt that he converted to RC-ism -- it not an accusation, its a fact -- which to me seems utterly bizarre when he had all those years of experience with the Vajrayana.

pema:

It isn't useful to attack someone personally as you have done on this thread.

Whether someone converted to one religion or another isn't relevant to the topic.

Dear Pema,
sorry if I offended you. I can see you had already 100 posts here and it is quite likely that I was too quick with my judgement and projected something onto you, which was not true. For this I honestly apologize!

Still the points to put down a scholar due to his beliefs as not reliable is not a good manner. The reasoning sound exactly as I know it from NKT.

About students of Tsultrim Allione I heard only good things. It makes me wonder what someone makes sceptical about the scholarly abilities of a respected professor just because for him Buddhism didn't work or he found him more close to Christianity. For me there is nothing "utterly bizarre" in this nor does this weaken his abilities and knowledge. Religion is something very personal and it is clear that there are different religions because there are different types of beings.

As far as I know, Namkhai Norbu Rinpoche is himself a scholar and he respects academic scholars and all religions, he is a very open person. I wonder what these teachers would say about such types of conclusions:

Because he "converted (from Tibetan Buddhism) to RC-ism" he seems to be "utterly bizarre" and one should not give "too much significance to his view".

I wonder also from where your knowledge about his Tibetan skills derives.

However, my apology for "I guess you are a NKT follower." I think other points are still relevant to think of.
Best wishes.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/04/2008 01:49AM by Tenzin Peljor.

Hi there,
just to let you know since some weeks the BBC documentary about the NKT "An Unholy Row" is available in the internet.
The 30 minutes documentary includes interviews with Kelsang Gyatso*, his present successor, Kelsang Khyenrab, HH the Dalai Lama, Geshe Tashi Tsering, a precise analysis by Stephen Batchelor about the structure and potential problems of NKT and interviews with four former members.

An Unholy Row - BBC Documentary on Tibet Online TV

Its worthwhile watching it.

Regards, tp
*I decided to restrain to use the term Geshe any more with respect to Kelsang Gyatso, because his own monastery Sera Je Dratsang denies that he holds a Geshe degree, as well as Newsweek and a documentary by the TGIE deny that he possess this degree. His own different explanations contradict one another and until today he could not explain which type of Geshe degree this should be.

I have a couple of questions here. Firstly, how is "enlightenment" defined? Secondly, how would anyone be expected to know if someone else was enlightened?