engagement of Niyngmapa Sangha inthe Tibetan cause that seems to prove what I say. The reply was sentto me by the secretary of Lama Chagdud Khadro and I'll show itpublicly here, for the first time:"(...) On the Tibet issue. Below is what Khadro just repliedto someone about this issue (...).Althoughyour compassionate concern for the Tibetan people is deeplyappreciated, we follow the tradition established in the time of thelate Chagdud Rinpoche to help with private contributions tomonasteries in Tibet and to limit our public expressions to prayersand ceremonies.The last update of Free Tibet Movement Brazil's blog is of March2011. At this time, I've made several reflections on the Tibetanissue, Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism. Announced to some supportersthat I would leave the Free Tibet Movement and soon I would reveal myreasons, but these almost three years I reflected a little more, andto my surprise I've found more reasons for final renouncement. So nowI write this public letter of renouncement. And I do this byanalyzing the facts in a non-sectarian Buddhist perspective.The low response of practitioners of Tibetan Buddhism (and otherBuddhist lineages) to the Free Tibet Movement in Brazil struck me.This began to reveal details of Tibetan politics in exile. The answerof Chagdud Gonpa prompted me to a question: the intricacies ofTibetan politics before and after Tibet annexed to China.The final straw was when the Dalai Lama's secretary said to one ofour supporters at an international event that Dalai Lama's activismin support of Tibet was the "peaceful path" and the FreeTibet was the other path, implying that it no would be peaceful.Therefore, they do not strongly support the movement and still demandthat vajraiana communities officially not to engage themselves in it.Itsounded to me like a lot of hypocrisy, since, on the official websiteof the Tibetan Government in Exile, among the various organizationslisted there that support freedom for Tibet, appeared the website ofthe NGO Free Tibet Campaign. Today within the new website of theTibetan Government (http://tibet.net),you can find several positive references to the actions of theBritish NGO Free Tibet Campaign (check in: http://tibet.net/?s =%22free+tibet+campaign%22&x=0&y=0). How cananyone may say we were not the peacefull path and still include thewebsite of the movement in the related links?When, after 1988, the Dalai Lama recognized the Bonpa as the fifthTibetan Vajrayana lineage of teachings, it showed a bias existingpreviously in the monasteries and Tibetan government. This lineagehad not been recognized in the original Tibet due to political andreligious issues. But now that the situation is different, therecognition of Bonpos became interesting for the Tibetan Governmentin Exile, as it brings them to the struggle for Tibet.We could say that, by encouraging a non-sectarian vision with regardto five Tibetan lineages, the Dalai Lama could be totally favorableto religious diversity (Buddhist or not) and even inter-religiousdialogue. But what about the controversial issue of the practice ofthe Protector Dorje Shugden?Dorje Shugden is a deity of Vajrayana, especially ofthe Gelugpa school, where he is seen as a Dharma Protector and theincarnation of Lama Dragpa Gyaltsen of Drepung Monastery, acontemporary of the 5th Dalai Lama (1617-1682). Shugden is a DharmaProtector of the Sakya and Gelugpa,