Is the Dalai Lama authentic?….calling Reting Rinpoche

I recently read an article about whether the Dalai Lama is actually the Dalai Lama or not. It is quite a shocker in all, especially since many of the events refereed to were very public. Some of the points which really stand out relate to the political and religious environment around the time of the choosing of the 14th Dalai Lama and after.

The regent at that time we know to be Reting Rinpoche (the fifth) and it appears as if his own position and power were very much related to the finding of the new (14th) Dalai Lama. A rival minister at that time called Langdun put forth that the of one of his relatives was the re-incarnation of the Dalai Lama. However later, in contradiction to this, Reting himself stated having had prophetic visions when he visited the Holy Lake of the deity Shri-Devi (aka cho-kor-gye), which indicated where the new Dalai Lama would be found. The results of these visions were followed up, and a group led by an associate of Reting Rinpoche went to the Muslim town of Taktser. Then it was the associate of Reting Rinpoche namely Ketsang Lama who performed the tests on the young boy (such as picking out various items belonging to the previous Dalai Lama). This is also stated in the Story of Tibet by Thomas Laird. Upon returning with the chosen boy, there was considerable disagreement regarding accepting him as the Dalai Lama by the government ministers.
So it seems that the whole choosing of the 14th Dalai Lama was based principally upon the prophetic visions of Reting Rinpoche— and then followed up by his friend Ketsang Lama. These things are publicly known. Now one would think it wise to rely on visions and clairvoyant experiences of only those known to be highly realised beings. Or at least (since such things are hard to know) then those who are seen to be of exceptionally pure conduct and moral standard – like the old Kadampas. However Reting Rinpoche is described in the article mentioned above as someone who coveted power and had broken his celibacy vows whilst remaining as if a monk. I have no idea whether this a true reflection of him or not. However the Historian K.Dhondup wrote that it is a dismal fact of modern Tibetan history that Reting Rinpoche had “extremely callous handling of the Tibetan administration treating it merely as a source of personal enrichment and an avenue to reward friends and supporters and punish enemies and critics. It was one of the darkest points of Tibetan history” Also Reting Rinpoche is mentioned in Making of Modern Tibet as being a “bon vivant who cherished luxury items”. Further to this, in Seeing Lhasa: British Depictions of the Tibetan Capital 1936-1947 By Clare Harris, Tsering Shakya, Pitt Rivers Museum, International Association for Tibetan Studies Seminar it says, “Despite the general criticism, the public tended to excuse the lama himself for the excess and blamed the Labrang Changdzo – the estate manager. The frail and small-framed Reting Rinpoche was known within courtly circles for his avaricious sexual appetite for both male and female lovers.” 

Now although it seems obvious, upon investigation, that the fifth Reting Rinpoche found himself with somewhat of a compromised reputation, I have to add that none of this forms hard fact. No matter how many reputedly reliable people repeat similar views, it doesn’t thereby make what they are saying conclusive. If I have learnt one totally unexpected thing as a member of the NKT it is this.

However, one has to nonetheless consider the import if these things stated about Reting Rinpoche (the 5th) were true, as so many believe to be the case. Since it is the so-called visions and actions of Reting Rinpoche that principally led to the current Dalai Lama  being found, tested and appointed, the Dalai Lama’s own authenticity must be brought into question.

My final point would therefore be that any balanced and reasoning individual considering this should find themselves holding the question “Is the current Dalai Lama really the re-incarnation of Je Gendundrub?”

Advertisements

Views on the NKT Internal Rules

I have just been looking at the New Kadampa Tradition Internal Rules. Has anyone else noticed the ‘new’ 4 year term for future Spiritual Directors. I say new, but it looks like this was introduced sometime over the last 12 months:

In the following extract GSD stands for General Spiritual Director (the main Spiritual Director), and DSD stands for the Deputy Spiritual Director,

 

5§8. The term of office of the GSD shall be four years. At the end of his or her term of office, a person serving as the GSD shall not be eligible for immediate re-election. The term of office of the DSD shall be four years.

5§9. At the end of his or her term of office, a retired GSD shall normally return to his or her previous Dharma Centre, to serve as the Resident Teacher there once again…

 

Please post me your reactions to this, as I would be really interested to hear the points of view of others. I think this makes a massive difference, that will have a fundamental effect. For starters there will be less pressure on the individual(s) who later become the Spiritual Director. Also there will be far less emphasis on who is the individual or figurehead of the tradition – since after four years they go back to being a Resident Teacher and cannot be immediately be re-elected. In this case the emphasis can go to what remains unchanged (so to speak) i.e. the teachings we are focused upon and trying to realise these. Individual practitioners will be able to focus principally on the meaning of the teachings and their origins in Je Tsongkhapa and Buddha Shakyamuni. In this way because Geshe Kelsang Gyatso has put in his books the essence of Je Tsongkhapa’s teachings – it will be Je Tsongkhapa (and through him Buddha) that we will be trying to rely upon, mainly by attempting to understand and then integrate the meaning of his teachings. For those practising in the New Kadampa Tradition, Geshe Kelsang’s books will be the principal means for accessing the meanings in Je Tsongkhapa’s mind, with assistance and support from the Sangha including the Spiritual Teachers at that time. 

This is just my opinion, but please let me know what you think, and I am especially interested in the point of view of those who feel critical of the NKT, and those who may have had disappointing or bad experiences with teachers in the past.

Animal Suffering and a Kadampa Buddhist’s Musings

I noticed a few festivals ago that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso talked briefly about animal suffering in comparison to human suffering. He stated at that time that (dispelling) animal suffering was more important than human suffering. Prior to this I have thought about this subject and have thought that, other than my feeling instinctively a stronger wish to protect animals (than humans), dispelling their suffering is more important from the point of view of numbers. What I mean is that when working to dispell the suffering of animals or even praying for animlas to be free of suffering, one is at that time acting (or wishing) to dispel the suffering of unimaginably huge numbers of living beings. Whereas even when genuinly feeling cherishing towards all humans you are cherishing only a tiny number of beings (in comparison). Anyway, putting my own musings aside (for the time being), this was not the reason Geshe Kelsang gave at the teaching I referred to above. He said that alleviating the suffering of animals is more important (than that of humans) because when humans suffer they have some opportunity to do something with that suffering, for example to learn from it or transform it by increasing their endurance, or their compassion. In contrast, when animals suffer they do not have this opportunity and all they can do at that time is just suffer. This is a very clear reason and seems to me to be all about the over-ridding importance of protecting the protectorless.

       While I am on this subject, let me refer to a post on another blog – A Meat Eating  Buddhist – which I find hard to come up with reasons against thier argument. It reminded me of another thing Geshe Kelsang said on the subject more recently which was that humans abuse animals, and we talk about human rights but we abuse the rights of animals. He said that if they (the animals) had a lawyer then they could sue humans, yet almost no-one protects their rights except for a few small groups. I looked at some figures on animals killed for human consumption. The figures were nearly 60 Billion. Bear in mind that there is less then 7 Billion humans at present. So that means that in just over a month humans kill (just for food) a number of animals equal to the human population. So let me set up a scenario. If you convinced evryone in the world to just avoid killing animals for food for one month – This would be equal to an action of saving every single human being alive from being slaughtered. I find this a bit staggerring. I’ve got another scenario, Lets imagine if one country were to make war on all other countries and as a result enslave, imprison and then brutally kill every other human in the world one by one. This would be some feat, and take some time and I think everyone would agree that such a thing would be unimaginably horrific, and create untold amounts of negative karma. The collective negative actions of the country in my example however does not even equal the collection of negative actions that the animal trade (for human food) accrues in one year. It does not even get close. Why? – just look at the numbers.

Sectarianism, Dorje Shugden and the Dalai Lama

I would like to now follow on from my previous article in which I quoted Geshe Kelsang Gyatso as stating that sectarianism can arise as a result of a blending of traditions, (as opposed to each one respecting one another whilst maintaining their own individual lineage of teachings). With respect this idea, which I read about some time ago, whilst I had some grasp of it in theory, I did not have much notion of the practical aspects of it until these were illustrated by particular actions of late. One would have thought perhaps that if traditions were mixed then they would at least end up being more open to each other and tolerant (despite losing any special individual characteristics, internal coherence and clarity). Geshe Kelsang is stating precisely the opposite.

Now the recent actions of various individuals and institutions who stand in opposition to Geshe Kelsang Gyatso in the Dorje Shugden issue have clearly illustrated Geshe-la’s own point on sectarianism.

First of all many other people including prominent teachers in other Mahayana Buddhist traditions have criticised the New Kadampa Tradition (NKT) as a sectarian cult for years. However it is a fact that anyone is allowed to attend an NKT teaching, or be part of an NKT Centre. It is also a fact that NKT students can go to any other teachings as they individually see fit. This is clear within the constitution of the NKT.

The same is not true with respect to the teachings of the Dalai Lama. It is a fact that practitioners of Dorje Shugden are banned from attending his teachings, and are banned from attending his empowerments. They are also not allowed to work within any branch of his government or the Health Service. Here are some very public actions and resolutions relating to this:

March 21st, 1996

The Dalai Lama tells worshippers of Dorje Shugden to leave the temple and bars them from attending the empowerment.

March 30th, 1996
The Private Office of the Dalai Lama issues a decree for everyone to stop practising Dorje Shugden, with instructions to make people aware of this through government offices, monasteries, associations, etc.

The Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies (Parliament) passes a resolution banning the worship of Dorje Shugden by Tibetan government employees.

April 18th, 1996
The Tibetan Department of Health gives a special notice to doctors and staff members: ‘We should resolve not to worship Shugden in the future. If there is anyone who worships, they should repent the past and stop worshipping. They must submit a declaration that they will not worship in the future.’

April 22nd, 1996
The decree banning the worship of Dorje Shugden is officially read out at Drepung Monastery. The abbot says that everyone must abide by the ban. Drepung Loseling Monastery distribute a form, saying that anyone who does not sign will be immediately expelled from the monastery. Many monks including Dragpa Rinpoche move to a nearby Indian town.

 

Since then very recently the ban on Dorje Shugden and the marginalisation of Dorje Shugden practitioners has been spread throughout most of the major Tibetan monasteries in India.In addition to this and following the ‘advice’ of the office of the Dalai Lama, the assembly of Tibetan people in Switzerland recently agreed the following:

“On August 16, 2008, in the local assembly of Tibetan people in Switzerland and Liechtenstein, their Deputies discussed thoroughly with great responsibility. After that, the Local Assembly’s Deputies extended their appreciation to the Resolution (1996) adopted by the majority regarding the worshipping of Dholgyal (Shugden). Due to necessity there is now no option but to add three new resolutions on top of the existing five resolutions. We request all Tibetans who are above 18 years old in Switzerland and Liechtenstein to fully follow the content of these resolutions.

A The five resolutions passed unanimously by the Local Assembly’s Deputies on July 6, 1996 were:

The Dholgyal worshipper must completely give up [the practice] henceforth.

Those who do not worship Shugden must follow the instruction without falling into the trap of others.

You all must invite only those who do not worship Dholgyal, when you need to perform puja for oneself or for the Dalai Lama’s well-being.

Be it in private or a group, when you make offerings to the monasteries in Nepal, India, etc., you must do these offerings to those monasteries which do not worship Dholgyal.

You must bear in mind the instructions of politics and religion and abide by them without any contradiction.

B Three additional resolutions adopted on August 16, 2008 by the majority during the Second Session of Local Assembly were:

Recently a few Dholgyal followers have engaged in baseless criticism against the Dalai Lama in public. This we recognise as a conspiracy to spread rumours through gossip.

Those few Tibetans who criticise the Dalai Lama, we recognise them being in the category of Chinese government’s politics, directly, indirectly and thoroughly.

We will collect signatures as a truth witness which represents the volunteer support to the above-mentioned points.”

 

I have no intention here to pass on negative rumours about other traditions or teachers, however I am trying to merely state certain facts relating to this subject.

Another mahayana tradition the FPMT (Foundation for the preservation of the Mahayana Tradition) have also released certain resolutions or measures concerning Dorje Shugden practitioners. They have stated that they have done this in response to the Dalai Lama’s policy. They state their wish to follow the Dalai Lama’s example of prohibiting the practice:

 

“As FPMT follows the advice of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, all those in service or teaching in FPMT centres and projects do not engage in the practice of Shugden. 

From The FPMT Handbook:

All those who offer service or teach in FPMT centres are committed to follow the advice of His Holiness the Dalai Lama. As an example, His Holiness has prohibited the practice of the so-called protector, Do Gyel (Shugden), so teachers or others affiliated with the FPMT should not engage in this practice.”

 

Without showing disrespect to the FPMT, it appears to be clear that (as they have explained) they are merely doing this out of the wish to follow the Dalai Lama and the wishes expressed by his office. Otherwise it would be hard to argue the standpoint that they would ever have issued any prohibition on the practice of Dorje Shugden given the fact that their founder Lama Yeshe practised, and relied sincerely upon Dorje Shugden throughout his life.

Mixing Traditions -by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso

There is much speculation on Geshe-la’s stance with respect to mixing traditions and sectarianism. I think this section summarizes Geshe Kelsang’s opinion very well.

In the chapter on effort in Guide to the Bodhisattva’s Way of Life Shantideva advises us that before we commit ourself to engaging in a practice we should investigate it carefully to see whether it is suitable and whether we can sustain it; but once we have committed ourself to it we should never turn back but continue until we attain the final result. Switching from one practice to another unrelated practice not only prevents us from fulfilling our wishes in this life, but also makes it difficult for us to accomplish our goals in future lives. Moreover, it is often the cause of breaking our commitments and severing precious relationships, such as those that exist between Guru and disciple, and between spiritual friends.

We must be careful not to misunderstand the effort of non-satisfaction. Practicing this effort does not mean that we should become dissatisfied with our tradition or with our main practice, and try to follow many different traditions or mix together many different practices. Every Teacher and every tradition has a slightly different approach and employs different methods. The practices taught by one Teacher will differ from those taught by another, and if we try to combine them we shall become confused, develop doubts, and lose direction. If we try to create a synthesis of different traditions we shall destroy the special power of each and be left only with a mishmash of our own making that will be a source of confusion and doubt. Having chosen our tradition and our daily practices we should rely upon them single-pointedly, never allowing dissatisfaction to arise. At the same time as cherishing our own tradition we should respect all other traditions and the right of each individual to follow the tradition of their choosing. This approach leads to harmony and tolerance. It is mixing different religious traditions that causes sectarianism. This is why it is said that studying non-religious subjects is less of an obstacle to our spiritual progress than studying religions of different traditions.

Once we have decided which tradition to follow and which practices to do, we should engage in them wholeheartedly with a joyful mind. This is the power of joy. Whether we are listening to Dharma teachings, reading Dharma books, reciting prayers, contemplating, or meditating, we should do so with a light and happy mind, like a child at play. If we enjoy a practice we shall naturally have enthusiasm for it. (Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, Understanding the Mind: an Explanation of the Nature and Functions of the Mindpp. 161-162, © 1993, 1997, 2002)

Evil Spirits, the NKT and what Geshe Kelsang Gyatso says,

 During a teaching in 1994 Geshe Kelsang Gyatso gave many references to a particular evil spirit, and its importance in relation to what a practitioner within the NKT should prioritise. So that the points can be understood clearly I will quote various sections of this teaching to provide the context. This was  a teaching that was open to everyone.

Geshe-la said:

“Although relatively speaking we are doing many good things, chanting prayers, studying, discussing or reading books, making offerings, and so forth, our intention or wish to practice Dharma purely is very weak. Sometimes for a few minutes it develops, but normally our main mind is completely filled with the intention to develop the things of this life. Our main intention is to obtain the happiness of this life. We want to experience worldly pleasures. We should meditate and check whether this is true or not.”

“Sometimes it looks as if we have read many Dharma books and listened to so many teachings and we are ready to teach, but on the other hand the intention or wish to establish samsaric development is so strong. This means that our Dharma practice is mixed with worldly concerns. Because of this it is difficult to achieve realisations, and our progress in Dharma practice is difficult.”

“.. even if we meet a qualified Spiritual Teacher and receive a very special and profound instruction we will be unable to use the instruction due to our lacking the pure intention or pure wish to practise Dharma purely. Because of this, although we receive many higher instructions, they are almost too difficult to use. From the practical point of view this is our problem. Maybe there are some exceptions. I am not saying that this applies to everybody, but I am speaking in general.”

later in the teaching Geshe-la goes on to say,

“The main point is that we have a mind that grasps at a permanent I. This mind prevents us from engaging in Dharma practice purely. This mind is urging, pushing and encouraging us to engage in samsaric activity. It is saying, “You need money, you need this and you need that.” Then when our wishes are unfulfilled we get angry. Normally this mind causes us to develop strong attachment to the things of this life. Because this attachment is so strong it blocks the development of the wish to practice Dharma purely. Because we lack this wish the door of Dharma remains closed for us. There is then no possibility to gain Dharma realisations. Therefore, the point is that we need a method to solve this problem, and this method is to contemplate and meditate on death. This is very important.”

He later continues,

“..as explained in Essence of Nectar Lamrim. Our life is like a candle flame moving in the winds of various conditions for death..”

“..Our life is very uncertain. Our life remains with countless conditions for death, which are like winds moving our life. If we check we will find this to be true. But still we think and act as if we will remain forever. Still we think we will remain tomorrow, and everyday we think, “I will not die today.”

“The mind grasping at a permanent I is a real evil spirit. We are held by this evil spirit, and this prevents us from engaging in the practice of holy Dharma. Although we may know clearly and very well everything about the spiritual path, because we are held by the evil spirit of grasping at a permanent I, we are following mundane paths. From a practical point of view our main aim actually is exactly the same as the wish of normal ordinary people who have not learned about the Dharma, who have never heard about the Dharma in the same way. This situation comes from possessing this evil spirit. We must remove this evil spirit from our mind by sincerely practising contemplation and meditation on death until we develop a spontaneous mind that thinks, “I may die today.” From the depths of our heart we must think, “I may die today,” day and night. Until this thought develops we need to contemplate and meditate on death, otherwise this evil spirit that grasps at the permanent I will prevent us from engaging in holy Dharma practice. Then our knowledge is useless, and we may even misuse our knowledge of the Dharma for the development of samsara, reputation, wealth, position. This will definitely happen.”

“We say we follow the New Kadampa Tradition, and that this is our main aim, so we must do this meditation on death. Up to now we have jumped a little forward. Before gaining realisation of death we jumped into Highest Yoga Tantra practice. This is O.K. In order to encourage people I did this. But now we need to go back and rebuild our house and make it more stable. First we went a little bit quickly and superficially so as to see everything. We have now seen what kind of things there are in Highest Yoga Tantra. To show this I first needed to quickly jump a little bit. now it is time to go back to the first meditation* of the stages of the Path and build the real foundation for the house of Highest Yoga Tantra realisations.”  

*In this context the first meditation of the stages of the Path is the meditation on Death and Impermenence, as Geshe-la explains in this same teaching that the meditation on Reliance upon a Spiritual Guide and Meditation on our Precious Human Life are preparations for this meditation.

Some experiences with Geshe Kelsang Gyatso

Also on the internet there has been much criticism regarding Geshe Kelsang Gyatso (Geshe-la) and his intentions, so I wanted to put forward a few small encounters with Geshe-la of my own, which I at least know to be true. First of all although Geshe-la is very busy, whenever I have written and asked something of him I have always received a response. Most of these were questions about emphasising different practices and understanding various practical points to do with meditation. On a few occasions I have been in meetings with Geshe-la regarding issues surrounding Dharma centres, such as for change of location etc… however when I saw Geshe-la after I had been away on a retreat I did see a different aspect. When beginning to talk about the retreat, Geshe-la’s eyes absolutely lit up (in a way I had not seen in previous meetings) and he eagerly leaned forward and said “Tell me your experience”.  This meeting always stuck in my mind. It highlights for me what Geshe-la is really about (in my opinion) which is the actual practice of Dharma, practising the meaning of Dharma and nothing else. After all these years and with the NKT becoming a large organisation it still seems obvious that Geshe-la regards all the other things as merely a necessity – a necessary condition.

               On another occasion I remember privately giving Geshe-la a cheque for several thousand pounds on behalf of someone else. Geshe-la accepted this cheque, but then a few days later I received the cheque back, and crossed out – because Geshe-la wanted the money instead used to help the local Dharma Centre. Over the years everyone can see that the NKT has grown a huge amount, and yet Geshe-la remains as he always did, without accumulating possessions or houses or cars. It is very rare even amongst spiritual teachers for their organisation to become so widespread whilst themselves they remain with very little, as Geshe-la has done.

Bad Press and Dorje Shugden practitioners

As said before, I try to practice as a Kadampa Buddhist and within this I daily do the practice of Dorje Shugden. Who can help but notice some of the bad press that Dorje Shugden practitioners are receiving currently. This seems to have led to a remarkable (but apparently socially acceptable) level of discrimination against such practitioners right here in Europe. 

                  One tiny example of this I experienced recently on the internet when I visited a Buddhist site called E-Sangha. On this forum I read various posts giving the experience of different Buddhists among others. On one popular thread there were posts related to the Dalai Lama’s recent illness. One person blamed Dorje Shugden practitioners for this occurrence and another was saying that probably many Dorje Shugden practitioners would be feeling pleased and that such practitioners had been praying for such a thing to occur. 

     Now I personally have tried to rely upon Dorje Shugden for a long time, and engage in His practice and I have many friends who do the same. Never have I heard of any of them praying for anyone to receive harm – always quite the opposite. Our view of Dorje Shugden is as a Buddha, whose nature is therefore that of compassion and wisdom.

            I joined this E-sangha forum and added a response saying that a practitioner relying on Dorje Shugden who prayed for anyone to receive harm (even someone engaged in negative actions), was not really a Dorje Shugden practitioner. I stated that I loved Dorje Shugden and I also only wished for the Dalai Lama to be free from harm. I listed the various compassionate Lamas who have showed the perfect Buddhist example and who also were practitioners of Dorje Shugden.

              As a result of posting these positive messages, I was immediately thrown off the forum. Myself and my posts were removed from E-Sangha. I have to conclude form this that this forum is completely unbalanced in its views and ethics. Now I have nothing against them despite the critical and misleading comments, but obviously the feeling is not mutual.

Newsflash- The NKT is not a Cult

The following post is from someone who wishes to share their experiences after having read other peoples:

Hi I wanted to write my experience on here in an attempt to give a broader view. Up to now I have been a student within the NKT in NYC for many years. The resident teacher at this Center (Chakrasambara Center) is Morten Clausen. I have also attended many of Geshe Kelsang Gyatso’s teachings when work has allowed. When first starting at this center and since then over the years, I have heard and read of many people saying the NKT is a cult. From the beginning I have listened to Morten Clausen’s teaching with quite a critical ear. In my initial teachings I found Morten Clausen to rely heavily upon reason and daily experiences and the undertone of the teaching was one which asked of the listener to use and rely on their own reason and experience. This is not the method of a cult, however I realise that often a cult may begin speaking like this to draw people in and then later change approach completely. Since then over the years I have heard loads of teachings by Morten Clausen on various levels and in each one he has consistently asked the listener to apply their wisdom, to use their own reasoning and experience and so reach their own conclusions. You would think that if the resident teacher had an underlying cult-like approach then this would slip out. Yet years on I have never heard Morten push anyone with his speech or demand any leap of faith, quite the opposite, on every occasion. I believe this would be apparent for most Buddhist or non- Buddhist or non- religious persons attending.

Prior to NKT Buddhism I studied Buddhism academically and since coming to Chakrasambara Center I have received mainly Lamrim teachings and explanations of the practices relating to JeTsongkhapa and Dorje Shugden. I found these to be remarkable and found within them a very clear commentary to the various Sutras of Buddha which I had previously encountered.

Outside of the teachings at the Center I have never been pressurised for money or for my time at all. This to me would have been another tell-tale sign of a cult. Take into account that this is no tiny Dharma Center, for years now Chakrasambara has been one of the largest and most well attended NKT Centers in the world. Therefore it does seems scandalous to me when people start saying “The NKT is a cult”. My Center and Sangha group and resident teacher are a prominent part of the NKT and so we are included in this accusation. Yet as I believe can be witnessed by anyone coming to the Center, the teachings and culture surrounding this Center do not resemble those of a cult. Therefore I really must say that these people are wrong when they say “The NKT is a cult”. Of course I do not know what things certain people or “survivors” have experienced in their local Center or what the resident teacher there may be saying and doing (or have done). It may well be very bad, close-minded or cult-like. However these people should nonetheless recognise the limits of their experience as I do mine and simply say just their own Center is like this, or that particular resident teacher(s) or community act like this, at this time. Even if one of Geshe-la’s most well known English students ends up not practising the teachings and acting in completely the wrong way, how does this then make my Center and community a cult? Oh I know….. it doesn’t.

My other main experiences of the NKT are teachings at festivals from Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. Geshe-la himself seems to hold the use of and reliance upon logic and reasoning as of primary importance. He has repeated many times that we should not just accept the teachings but analyse them for ourselves as Buddha advised.

Other than these good experiences and teachings, I have attended a few teachings where the teacher did seem to have a method which appeared to be at odds with Geshe-la’s own way. There was a public talk by an NKT teacher not so long ago, in which  near the very start the teacher stated firmly “Everything I am going to say to you tonight is the truth, because my teacher is a Buddha.” Now while in my own mind I agree with what is said here, to me this came across as quite cult-like and in some ways at odds with Buddha’s way and indeed Geshe-la’s way. This is just my own impression, my opinion.

In contrast when K. Khyenrab came to NY he immediately taught about the four reliances which Buddha gave. The first one being – “Do not rely upon the person, but upon the Dharma”. This shows the side of the NKT that many of us experience most of the time.

My main point in giving these experiences is to provide a broader view of the NKT in light of the various sweeping statements going around.

Hate the NKT? … Love Geshe-la?

Give me a penny for every time I hear “ I love Geshe-la, but I’m not sure about the NKT”, along with many other similar often much stronger sentiments. In this way it seems as though an idea of the NKT has arisen as a soft target- object of blame whilst being able to avoid any overt criticism on the spiritual guide of the tradition. My own feeling in short is :-  I love Geshe-la; and many of the teachers I find excellent; whilst others seem ok and some appear to be downright bonkers; many of the organisers and workers within the NKT appear to be straightforward and charitable people; while others may show themselves to be neurotic power-mongers at times. Alongside all of this, I have to say I love the NKT, I love all the teachings, the temples and books, the good and skilful efforts of many of those involved and the precious internal rules. On the other hand I can’t bear it when teachers start making up their own version of the Dharma through their teachings and example and pushing their ideas worldly and spiritual on to others without acting at all in a genuinely humble and considerate manner, as in the Kadampa way of life. I can’t bear this because it undermines and devalues a wonderful tradition. 

The NKT is clearly Geshe-la’s dedication, coming out of his own practice. He would like the explanation of Kadam Buddhism to become available in every town, which of course would be wonderful. Now the tradition has been the subject of lots of criticism much of it on the internet however I believe it has also been damaged by many teachers and organisers in the past (and some now) not acting in accordance with the Kadampa way of life, or even close. I pray that now and in the future NKT teachers and organisers will act as simple calm practitioners whilst teaching and organising and may they quickly step down when they find that they cannot do this. In this way may this glorious tradition become available in every place in the world.  

Finally I hope that individual Buddhists will always be prepared to conscientiously and peacefully question and stand up to wrongs which they can help to correct, especially where others they know of are persecuted or oppressed.