Dalai Lama: Compromised By Politics?

(Note: My intent in this post is not to senselessly bash the Dalai Lama. The intention is to point out some concerns I have, and to show that the Dalai Lama is no different from any other public figure in one sense: his words and actions cannot be taken 100% at face value, because no public figure is immune to the politics and social issues he is enmeshed in. The fact that virtually nobody in the USA has heard of the controversy I'm writing about is rather scary, and hints at just how untouchable and free of criticism we think the Dalai Lama is.)

I wrote earlier that I was looking into the "Dorje Shugden Controversy" -- a kind of split within Tibetan Buddhism, centered around the Dalai Lama. The core issue is the worship of Dorje Shugden, who is either a manifestation of Buddha Manjushri or (according to the Dalai Lama) an evil spirit.

The Dalai Lama has established his position as follows: Dorje Shugden is a mere spirit, and worshiping him as one would worship a "true" Buddha degenerates Tibetan Buddhism to mere superstitious spirit worship. He sees this kind of worship as "troublesome" for Tibetan society and strongly advises against it. To quote his web site on the issue:

Whether or not his advice is heeded, His Holiness has made clear, is a matter for the individual. However, since he personally feels strongly about how negative this practice is, he has requested those who continue to propitiate Dolgyal [Shugden] not to attend his formal religious teachings, which traditionally require the establishment of a teacher-disciple relationship.

Some of my thoughts on this statement:

1. The Dalai Lama, as a religious teacher, is well within his rights to establish guidelines for who he wants to teach. If he finds Shugden followers to be a distraction or problem in his formal teachings, then I've no problem with that. However, I do have other issues with this, which I will get to in a second. But strictly speaking, he has the right to teach or not teach whomever he chooses.
2. "It is a matter for the individual" -- this is a distinctly Buddhist sentiment about the issue, and it is a good thing that it is included in the Dalai Lama's statement. However, I seriously wonder if that same sentiment has been expressed to the Dalai Lama's own people and followers. There is the very real possibility that this statement on the Dalai Lama's web site is written to appease English-speaking Western audiences, while on the other side the flames are being fanned by more aggressive rhetoric. I don't know if that's the case or not, but it is a possibility that casts some shadow on the issue.

Having said that the Dalai Lama has the right to restrict teachings to whatever audience he wishes, I will also say that I think it is a very bad idea to do so. For someone who preaches about universal compassion, this seems like a particularly divisive stance to take. Given that the Dalai Lama is a public figure who many people look up to, I fear it is a bit irresponsible to take this position.

In fact, the Dalai Lama himself says that worshiping Dorje Shugden is what creates division within Tibetan Buddhism. Maybe that's true, I don't know. Clearly this issue is revealing something very important that most of us outsiders aren't aware of: strong political tensions within Tibetan Buddhism. Despite the rose-colored glasses with which we view the Dalai Lama and Tibet, it is obvious that some powerful political issues exist. Whatever they are, they are tainting the goodness that does exist within Buddhism.

This brings me to my ultimate conclusion, which is the realization that the Dalai Lama is, to some degree, compromised by his multiple roles as religious leader, political leader, and global figure. It would seem the Dorje Shugden issue exposes the problems with playing all those roles, and it saddens me to see that the Dalai Lama can't (or won't) find a way to totally live up to his preached ideals of universal acceptance, compassion, etc. where some of his own people are involved.

The moral of the story? Nobody is perfect, not even the Dalai Lama. And Tibet is no Shangri-La, since this issue has apparently degenerated into violence on more than one occasion. Considering the overall harmony of Buddhism over the centuries (despite the wide variety of schools and practices across the globe), it is very sad to see something like this happen. It is also sad to see that the Dalai Lama, who so many people respect and love, is in fact just as fallible and perhaps as political as anybody else.

I still find the Dalai Lama to be an inspiring and insightful teacher, but unfortunately the shadow of this controversy will forever color how I see his words and actions.