27 March 2006
Speech to an audience dominated by Tibetans from Tibet on 27 March 2006 during the Spring Teachings
I thought that I would talk to you about the
Dholgyal issue. Actually, I have already spoken a great deal about this
over a period of time and, therefore, most of you know about it. Not
just know about it, but also, regarding inside Tibet-which includes the
U-Tsang region with Lhasa as the main, and in most parts of Dotoe and
Domey-there was an appreciative understanding of my successive
explanations of the issue and many monasteries have made diligent
efforts in taking the responsibility to avoid mistakes about what to
accept and what to reject in this matter. Among the general public too,
there was a similar assumption of responsibility and making of efforts
to avoid mistakes about what to accept and what to reject. For these I
express praises of appreciation and gratitude. Anyway, the issue is of
critical concern to our Buddhist faith generally and regarding Tibet's
Ganden Phodrang or government especially. Therefore what has been done
benefits Tibet generally and because most of the concerned people have
been able to make a proper choice between what to accept and what to
reject in this matter, I felt an urge to thank you all for it. This
activity which concerns the well being of our faith should not begin
and end like the Chinese campaigns, which start suddenly to deal with
an urgent current concern and then, after a while, calm down to
eventually, sort of, die out. We should be able to carry forward to a
successful conclusion the work that we have started in the matter.
In this, I initially used my brain to ponder over
the aspects that were externally manifest. With regard to the aspects
that were covert, and therefore not physically manifest, I carried out
examinations by invoking kindness and action from The Three Precious
Jewels, the ultimate repository of all genuine knowledge. The Dholgyal
Shugden question too is a covert one. Therefore I carried out a
thorough examination of it both in its external and internal aspects
before finally taking a decision on its acceptability. It was therefore
not at all a case in which I made a decision of rejection in a matter
in which I could make a conclusion on the basis of my personal
judgement. I am rejoiced by the fact that you - both the laity and the
religiously ordained - have shown concern in all this and made a proper
choice of what to accept and what to reject.
There are, however, some cases of people
pretending not to have heard what they have heard; especially, there
are still some cases in which I feel that persons deliberately practice
and propagate Dholgyal. With regard to them, all concerned should think
with great caution. To mention specific names in Tibet, there are some
local monasteries in Chamdo with their principal of Chamdo Monastery. I
do feel that there are people there who are still strengthening their
efforts to propagate the practice of Dholgyal Shugden. In the Dragyab
region too, some such at the branch Dragyab Monastery and in the
Markham region also, I feel that there are people who deliberately
retain and propagate the practice. Denma Gonsar passed away last year.
In the region where he lived too, there are people who continue and
propagate the practice of Dholgyal. In the Rawatoe region of Nyethang
there are among the monks and nuns coming to Lhasa from Markham,
Dragyab, etc., people who propagate the practice. There are monks from
the Markham region who have followed their tradition of joining the
Ramoche Temple in Lhasa, where they are still propagating the practice
of Dholgyal. Whatever is the case, if such people are designedly
reciprocating in negative kind the gratitude we owe to the successive
Dalai Lamas and are thereby knowingly showing nothing but scorn for the
religious and political causes of Tibet and the kindness of the Dalai
Lamas, I have no suggestions to offer. If, nevertheless, I am
reiterating my emphasis on the issue, it is because we need to hold as
objects of compassion people, if any, who do not know about the issue,
or who have not heard about it, or who, out of ignorance, have
committed a rash mistake, or who have been led astray by others. All
those who know about it have a duty to explain and thereby ensure
proper conformity regarding what to accept and what to reject. I too
take this as very important.
It is not at all on the basis of a change of mind
arising from a new thought that I have restricted the practice of
Dholgyal Shugden. In my own case, I have previously been a religious
lineage holder of Kyabje Pabongkha. In particular, I have been an
actual disciple of Kyabje Trijang Dorje Chang. From the very beginning
I have practiced Dholgyal under the influences of many circumstances.
Gradually I came to have many major doubts about the external, internal
and secret aspects of it and about developments concerning it. Finally
I looked up the works of the previous Dalai Lamas and for the first
time came to realize the error in practicing Dholgyal; as a result I
stopped it.
The controversy relating to the issue of Dholgyal
arose during the Fifth Dalai Lama. I examined such things as how the
Fifth Dalai Lama viewed the controversy and resolved it. Likewise, when
I examined the works of the snow land of Tibet's holy ones embodying
both knowledge and wisdom in general and specifically those of the
upholders of the Geluk faith at and during that time, I came across the
contents of the work of Purchok Ngawang Jampa on the history of the
Three Geluk Seats of learning dealing with Ganden. That work records
information about restrictions on Dholgyal. And the biography of the
Seventh Dalai Lama Kelsang Gyatso's Tutor Trichen Ngawang Chogden
reveals that during his tenure as the Ganden Tripa, the worship of
earthly guardian-spirits on the premise of Ganden monastery was
restricted. These historical actions are clearly revealed in the
biography of Changkya Rolpey Dorje written by Thuken Choekyi Nyima
which records that Trichen Ngawang Chogden when restricting the worship
of earthly Guardian-spirits within the premise of Ganden monastery
clearly mentioned Dholgyal by name. And the historical record there is
extraordinarily clear that the tradition of worshipping them in the
Ganden monastery's premise was restricted and outlawed. It is therefore
a matter of common knowledge that we are not restricting the worship of
Dholgyal, or have brought up a hitherto non-existent Dholgyal name,
totally out of nowhere; rather, there is a historical precedent to our
action dating from that period.
It is therefore not at all the case that the
two-letter name "Dholgyal" is a recent creation by us. It is clearly
recorded in the old woodblock prints. At the time these types of
woodblock manuscripts were being sculpted, a practice of worshipping
Dholgyal prevailed in Lhasa. The woodblock manuscripts contain
sculpting of the Dholgyal name. When at one time Panchen Tenpey Nyima,
the reincarnation of Panchen Palden Yeshe, came to Lhasa at a very
young age, the Eighth Dalai Lama Jampel Gyatso's Tutor Yeshe Gyaltsen
told him during instruction to beware that Tashi Lhunpo Monastery might
be ruined by the new deity. The history of the order prohibiting the
propitiation and worship of Dholgyal and of allowing only accomplished
guardian-deities at Tashi Lhunpo Monastery is extremely clear in the
biography of Panchen Tenpey Wangchug.
Whatever be the case, if one reads the
biographical works on the successive previous Dalai Lamas, and looks in
chronological order at the biographical works of the accomplished and
responsible upholders of the Geluk order, it becomes extremely clear
that the higher level, holy-born lamas, accomplished in both knowledge
and wisdom, had restricted the practice of Dholgyal. And I have carried
these forward. From a more recent point of view, Drepung Khangsar Dorje
Chang, a contemporary of Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche, has said, "Today,
the practice of Dholgyal Dorje Shugden is becoming a widespread
phenomenon. This is not at all good."
In the case of Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche, he was,
in the earlier part of his life, a practitioner of ecumenical faith.
Gradually, he developed a relationship with Dholgyal. Need I say more?
His own biography records about the inappropriateness of including
Tamding Yangsang in the Sphere of the Lama Choepa Congregation. His
biography has been printed only in Tibet, and not in India. Because of
many such and similarly related matters, at the time of the passing
away of the previous Dalai Lama of unparalleled kindness, a disciple
named Zhide Tazur of Kyabje Pabongkha had a dream in which the Dholgyal
in a joyous, high-pitched tone, issued a forecast, assuring that the
day of namgang (the 30th, or last, day of a month in Tibetan calendar)
after the end of the 29th day would be the day of reckoning. History
records that the disciple reported this to Kyabje Pabongkha. As
everyone knows, there is a sense that the term "in a joyous,
high-pitched tone" is not an ordinary usage but refers to good news
that deserves to be conveyed in a joyous, high pitched voice and
welcomed with happiness. In the case of a news conveying grief, one
would express it with a subdued mind, for it is not a message of such
kind as to be delivered in a joyous, high-pitched tone. When Zhide
Tazur, also known as Meru Talama, dreamed about Dholgyal and received
from him a reassuring forecast of "the day of Namgang (30th day of the
month) at the end of the 29th day" in a joyous, high-pitched tone, and
reported it to his teacher, Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche replied that the
matter could be investigated. Later, on the day of namgang (30th day)
of the 10th Tibetan month, when the sad news of the passing away of the
previous Dalai Lama emerged, Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche expressed the
view that the previous forecast pronounced by Dholgyal about the day of
namgang at the end of the 29th day being the day of reckoning referred
to it. This is recorded in Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche's own biography.
It was right that a forecast was made. But the
reference to the fact that it was pronounced in a joyous, high-pitched
tone was strange. You all should think about it. The previous Dalai
Lama was the very embodiment of gratitude to Buddhism and all sentient
beings in the snow land of Tibet in general and to the Ganden Phodrang
in particular. Was a show of rejoicing at his passing away a positive
indication? Or did it indicate a negative disposition? We should think
about it. During His lifetime, the previous Dalai Lama issued many firm
instructions to Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche and one of the issues related
to the practice of propitiating Dholgyal. Because Pabongkha Rinpoche
found himself in trouble due to the firm instructions he kept receiving
on the Dholgyal issue, and because as soon as the Dalai Lama passed
away they ceased to come, it is not impossible that in the perception
of the common folks there was a deliberate obstruction to the work of
His Holiness.
It is important that one should arrive at a
decision after examining the issue with an impartial attitude while
determining what is good and what is bad on the basis of understanding
the entire, actual history behind it. Apart from the reasons I have
given above for objecting to the worship of Dholgyal, there are many
related reasons. Although I myself, personally, had many symbolic
revelations in dreams about it, I see no great necessity to say
everything about them. But whatever be the case, I have been witnessing
many internal and external developments and indications. You all must
keep these in mind. It you need documents too, there are many. You can
ask the office and others.
During my recent Kalachakra teaching at Palden
Drepung (Amaravati, Andhra Pradesh state), I emphasized to our
religious fraternity in exile-with the lamas and the Geshes as the
main-that with regard to the guidance I provide as important on the
question what to accept and what to reject, one should think in terms
of unequivocal unanimity of commitment. It just won't do to go about
with the attitude that this is the responsibility of His Holiness, that
I will be satisfied if there are as many people as possible making me
offerings, and that it does not matter to me personally. Do you
understand? Within the lay and religiously ordained communities in
exile those having connections in Tibet have the duty to advise and
educate in a convincing manner people in Dragyab, Markham, Chamdo,
Denma, and other problematic places as well as related other persons.
It would be extremely tragic if in front of me, and, when I am giving
the guidance, a person pretends to comply, only to betray hypocrisy
when dealing with the reality. Do you understand? This matter does not
make any difference to me personally. Chiefly, it concerns the
religious and political interests of Tibet. Two-thirds of my life has
already been spent and there is no doubt that I will be able to
complete the remaining portion of it in happiness. But, whatever be the
case, everyone should think of the broader religious and political
interests of Tibet. The broad masses of the Tibetan people have reposed
great faith in me and I, likewise, have a karmic prayer and oath-bound
duty to them. Pursuant to this I am duty-bound to offer them guidance
on dos and don'ts on the basis of what is good and what is bad about
the matter at hand. Whether to heed them or not is in your hands. Do
you get it? The previous Zong Rinpoche was an ardent practitioner of
Dholgyal. I even had to write to him on this issue when he was alive.
His reincarnation, who is here with us today, used his power of
discrimination between the good and the bad, and, with a view to avoid
mistakes about what is in his immediate and long term interest or
disadvantage and for the sake of the religious and political causes of
Tibet, carries out his practices with care to avoid mistakes. It is
only proper that in front of this gathering today Rinpoche has come to
the path of perfection. He rightly deserves congratulatory praise and
appreciation for having taken the decision to conform.
The people of the snow land of Tibet currently
remain set apart between those in and outside the country. Although
those who have come from Tibet will gradually have to happily and
joyfully return home, there is no freedom there. The current situation
is a sad one for everyone. Nevertheless, it will not be too long before
those in and outside Tibet will definitely reunite. I keep praying for
this and urge you all to return home with happiness in your minds. My
Tashi Deleg to all of you.