Talk:New Kadampa Tradition/Archive 3

message: :I have moved most the talk regarding things that have either been resolved, or which will never be resolved(!) into archive 2, hoping no-one minds. If there are any questions that I have been asked that are left outstanding, please take them out of the archive and either use my talk page, or just put them back here. (20040302 18:08, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

message: KW Oct 1 - As a follow up to the e-sangha citation, the man who runs the site told me in an e-mail that the reason he prevents links to NKT sites is to stop arguments bewteen members of the NKT and the Gelugpas.  He did not give as his reason that he sees the NKT as controversial, etc.  I have a copy of this e-mail if anyone would like to read it.
KW - I still object to the use of the phrase 'most Buddhists' see the NKT as controversial.  Unless someone has access to polling data of Buddhists worldwide on this issue, I don't think it is accurate to say 'most'.  The fact is that this is not an issue for anyone but the Tibetan Buddhist community.  Thervadan and other Mahayana traditions can have no view on this since Dharma Protectors are only found in the Tibetan tradition.  Further, many Tibetan Buddhists have sided with Geshe-la on the issue of DS.  Since the Tibetan community itself is split on the issue, it would be inaccurate to say 'most' Buddhists.
I think it would be accurate to say (even without polling data) that 'for some Tibetan practioners', the NKT is controversial.  Unless someone can provide me with evidence from the many different traditions within Buddhism making official statements which are negative about the NKT we should stick with 'for some Tibetan Buddhists'. 
Sept 28 - I changed this passage again, slightly.  I changed the order of the wording, putting the DS issue second and the Buddhist Unions last.  I also changed 'these controversies' to 'this controversy' since the DS issues is the only thing mentioned as being controversial.  Also, can we get any sense of how many Buddhist Unions do not allow NKT centers to join?  If it only a minority of them, that should be reflected in the passage.
Also I am still waiting for evidence that Buddhist traditions outside of the Gelugpa's view the NKT as controversial.  I've redacted the page again.
::1. If you look in the letter of Ken Jones - the present secretary of the UK Network of Engaged Buddhists, who is a long-standing Zen and Ch'an practitioner - you can find an experienced elder Buddhist practitioner who is not tibetan and is quite clear about that point. He is the secretrary of this organisation and you can be sure many of them share his view. 
It Ken's a PERSONAL view or an OFFICIAL view?  The opinion of one person does not mean the same thing as being the official position of an organisation.
::2. Also in Germany the NKT is among Buddhists - also non-tibetan traditions - seen as very controversial. If you want find out more you can ask the Buddhist Unions and groups by a letter or Email. It seems to me you don't believe that NKT is among many Buddhists seen as controversial because you have no contact to a larger group of Buddhist outside NKT. For me the quesition is more: Who don't see the NKT as controversial? - except NKT itselfs. 
Again, where is your proof?  If you want to put AS FACT that many non-Gelugpa groups see the NKT as controversial then you have to give EVIDENCE that non-Gelugpa groups hold this view.  At this point all we have is your opinion.  That is not enough.
::3. Also, if you look at the E-Sangha Community (7,697 registered members) you'll find: 
::"These few "Buddhism" school of thoughts are not recognized by e-Sangha. No links to their websites, their books, their followers' websites are allowed.
::::1) New Kadampa Tradition
::::2) Dark Zen
::::3) Lama Ponya Yeshe (Kentucky)
::::4) True Buddha School
::Thank you for your cooperation." see: 
So what?  An internet site is not the same as the official statement of a religious organisation.  I would assume you would not say that 'godhatesfags.com' is reflective of the views of most Christians about gays.
::I suggest you ask them by mail what proofs they have. Kt66 20:31, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also German Buddhist Union published an official statement in which NKT was criticized for its internal structure and fanaticism. Kt66 20:38, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial 

message: I did an internet search on this and the only thing that came up on it was this article's assertion. No other page on the internet claims NKT center are banned and if this claim cannot be substantiated it should be removed. It would be more informative and accurate if the names of such Buddhist Unions were provided, since most new readers won't even know what a Buddhist Union is.
::The NKT "Mamaki Centre" in Germany for instance was expelled by the German Buddhist Union and the "Dipankara Centre" in Berlin was refused to be a member of the German Buddhist Union. So the best is we sample, which Buddhist Unions didn't accept NKT centers and which did, to be clear about that point. Kt66 19:47, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In German Buddhist Union the facts above are still the same. Kt66 21:06, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes you're right. We have to check out this. When I was within NKT I heard NKT has poblems with different Buddhist Unions to be accepted. We can wait until people react or you send Emails/letters to the different Buddhist Unions. The latest information I got from NKT was: They are present in 25 countries - so now 40 countries? It is always funny how NKT work with informations. Kt66 21:10, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Hi there. I'm sorry to give you the impression that I'm anti-NKT bias. I'm just interested in having a proper article on NKT in Wikipedia which doesn't deceive people and give clear and unbiased informations. As you see it seems to be not easy for the Wiki Editiors to work out a proper article. So lets work on that. My intention by doing this is not to fight NKT. My intenton is to protect people by stepping blindly faithing into NKT (led by the NKT advertisements of "accomplished master", "Kadampa Tradition founded by Atisha", "complete lineage" and so on), and at one day recognize - as I did - there is something wrong with NKT and there has getting something wrong in once own mind. For instance before I was with NKT I cherished holy beings like His Holiness the Dalai Lama very much, I read other books and learned step by step the oppisite by NKT. Also I wanted to become a monk in the tradition of the Buddha Shakyamuni, but I recognized after 4 years I'm not. I'm just a person with 10 vows in a new western organisation. I felt and feel deceived by NKT and I wish to protect other people to experience this and waste their life by following a mistaken path, thats why my engagement in this topic of NKT. I demonstrated with NKT as a stupid, narrow minded, arrogant 10vows-monk blindly believing the NKT opinions against full ordained and wise people. I was ignorant on the facts. This I want now correct. But for you and all NKT's I wish all the best. Don't take it personally. We have the same intention: protect and helping others. But we have a different view on the subject "NKT". You can check your view and I check mine. If you say I'm angry this is a typical phrase to put down critics. yours Kt66 22:17, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buddhist unions banning NKT 

message: From the history section was taken out essential parts which, I think, NKT doesn't like to hear. If one wants to improve the section he can do, but not taken out the stuff from whom GKG was invited and that he overtook the center which was belonged to Lama Yeshe. Just to remind you three quotes: 
1.
"However, at Lama Yeshe’s request the Dalai Lama asked Kelsang Gyatso to leave Manjushri Manjushri in Autumn of 1983 and repair to York and live in his (KG’s) own center there, the Madhyamaka Centre. His Holiness did this by sending his brother to Conishead Priory to discuss this with KG. Obviously, KG was not swayed by this emissary of the Dalai Lama." quote from Thubten Gonpo which is according to the quote of the Sera Letter from the Tibetan Monasteries:
2.
"When he was picked up by the FPMT (Foundation for the Preservation of the MahayanaTradition, found by the late Lama Yeshe) to go to England, he not only went there but he usurped the FPMT centre and made it his own NKT!!" taken from Sera Expulsion Letter
3.
"Indeed, Geshe Kelsang split from the FPMT in 1978, in difficult circumstances..." taken from FWBO UK site
Thank you; ;-)
Kt66 16:10, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the offending phrase but balanced the removal with the first quote from the sera expulsion letter, and attributed the quote. This is in accordance with WP guidelines. I personally think the second quote is not so informative. (20040302 10:11, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes the second quote is not so informative, I agree. But I think NKT only accept stamped letters... Kt66 11:13, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I just made some corrections of the quotes... Kt66 10:23, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

text: Why? Did  Lotus Trading Company overtook the center against the wishes of someone? Kt66 21:14, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: History Section

message: From Click here for full Original Text"I feel that it is best if a practitioner can do the practices of all these four lineages without
discrimination. However, it may be difficult for some unless they have the capacity.
On the other hand, it is also possible for a practitioner to concentrate only on one lineage.
However, this latter practitioner even concentrating only on one lineage, needs to have
sincere and genuine respect and appreciation for all the other lineages he or she is not
practicing."
"The Vajrayogini or Naro Kachodma practices is not introduced into the Gelugpa Tradition by Trijang Rinpoche but popularized earlier by masters such as Pabongka Rinpoche as Pabongka Rinpoche is considered to be an emanation of Naropa who is Himself the first Lineage Master of this tantric cycle. Trijang Rinpoche is Himself strongly affiliated to the Vajrayogini cycle as even HH the Dalai Lama pronounced that Trijang Rinpoche is a great practitioner of both the Heruka and Vajrayogini cycles.
In general, Je Tzongkhapa’s three meditational deities or yidams are the 32 Deity Guhyasamaja, the 62 Deity Heruka Chakrasamvara and the 13 Deity Yamantaka. Amongst these 3 yidams, Tzongkhapa especially meditates on Guhyasamaja and wrote most extensively and deeply on this practice. Guhyasamaja is in fact Tzongkhapa’s main practice. Both Guhyasamaja’s and Heruka’s meditation texts are long whilst Yamantaka’s text is relatively shorter. The genuine good practitioner of the Gelugpa tradition must do all these three practices inseparably.
I have personally heard HH the Dalai Lama taught before that doing the practices of these 3 yidams inseparably is not exactly to mean to read the meditation texts of these 3 yidams separately. The point is to extract the essential and critical features of each of these 3 respective yidams and to subsequently integrate them into any one of these 3 yidams which one has adopted as one’s main yidam.
For example, if your main yidam is Yamantaka, you integrate the essential features of each of these 3 yidams into Yamantaka and you then concentrate on the practice of Yamantaka. Similarly, if your yidam is Guhyasamaja, you then integrate the essential features of each of these 3 yidams into Guhyasamaja and you then concentrate on the practice of Guhyasamaja. This applies also if your yidam is Heruka.
The past great lineage Gelugpa Masters similarly do practices of these 3 yidams inseparably. The recent great lineage Gelugpa Masters such as Ling Rinpoche [ who is the 97th Ganden Tripa and the Senior Root Teacher of the present Dalai Lama ], Trijang Rinpoche [ who is the 10 Junior Root Teacher of the present Dalai Lama ] and Zong Rinpoche all practise these 3 yidams inseparably. These great masters have definitely mastered practices of these 3 yidams. 
Some teachers may have taught their students only to concentrate on Vajrayogini and Solitary Yamantaka because their students may not have the ability or time to do the practices of these 3 great Yidams. "
:Hi Kelsangpagpa,
:You wrote: “About Phabongha's sectarianism, he wasn't sectarian; he simply believed in practising one tradition purely…” Sure, practicing a tradition of his own making.
“Everyone is as pains to show they aren't sectarian by mixing and matching teachings from other traditions.” Personally I practice only teachings from the Gelugpa (though I have received teachings from Kagyu teachers), that is not sectarian to my mind. The Dalai Lama is quite clear that he believes the Shentong view to rest on a serious philosophical error (as did Tsongkhapa himself), but that’s not sectarian either. One of Je Tsongkhapa’s teachers held that the Kalachakra was not a genuine Tantra, this being a reasoned belief based on the peculiarity of the Kalachakra but can hardly be thought to be sectarian. But Pabongkha’s Shugden practice, according to which so much as touching a Nyingma scripture will result in Shugden’s pursuing and killing you, is sectarian. The Yellow Book is full to the brim with these stories.
And Robertect wrote:
“I would trust his [Trijang’s] scholarship, knowledge and honesty above those of Geshe Georges Dreyfus…” With respect, I think that Dreyfus is a clearly better historian of ideas, a more broadly educated scholar, and a more impartial observer on this issue than Trijang Rinpoche. In his book about the Gelugpa education system (The Sound of Two Hands Clapping) he points out that his two main teachers were on opposite sides of the Shugden controversy: Geshe Rabten was a Shugden practitioner and Geshe Lobsang Gyatso was strongly opposed to the practice, and to Geshe Rabten’s sectarian writings. (In the end Lobsang Gyatso was murdered by Shugden fanatics.)
::Dan
::: Hello Dan,
::: Thanks for your comments, expressed eloquently.  I must disagree though, as I did with Tashi.  Firstly, the Yellow Book is superstitious rubbish, and if the Dalai Lama had ignored it, there wouldn't be any problems.  There were no problems between Gelugpas and Nyingmas before this was published and accepted as truth, and propagated.  Zemey Rinpoche had freedom to publish, but why did people believe it?  Bad karma.
:::Secondly, you are stating in a very matter of fact way that Lobsang Gyatso was murdered by Shugden fanatics although there is no evidence for this, other than the ongoing dispute between Dorje Shugden supporters in India and the Dalai Lama.  That seems scant evidence for accusing someone of murder.  I totally condemn this action, it was horrendous, but as I'm sure you know, Tibetan history is full of this kind of thing.  It's not unusual.  You can't blame Dorje Shugden supporters.  I don't know who did it, but they aren't Buddhists.
:::It would be useful sometime to agree on a defintion of sectarian.  Wanting to practice one tradition of Buddhism purely isn't it.
:::Best wishes, --Kelsangpagpa 23:25, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Excerpts form Interview with the 101st Ganden Tripa