follow on previous statements on the Karmapa issue at this web-site,
here are further ‘proofs' supplied by none other than our detractors
themselves: proofs to the effect that the whole controversy was
conceived and put in motion by Mr. Juchen Tupten in the Tibetan
exiled government, to subvert our rights to recognize the Karmapa
from within; to bring Karma Kagyupa to its knees till it became
a vassal to Dharamsala.
proofs that I am speaking about today are entirely consistent with
what Shamar Rimpoche told us at the IKKBO conference at Kathmandu
in April 2000. According to Shamar Rinpoche, a group of Kagyu Lamas
had betrayed our Lineage to the Tibetan exiled government by supporting
its choice of the Karmapa candidate with total disregard of Karma
Kagyupa protocol and tradition that is our unwritten constitution.
The master-mind of this renegade group of Lamas was Thrangu Rinpoche,
the oldest and most knowledgeable in the ways of the world, followed
by Situ Rinpoche and Gyaltsep Rinpoche: like a pack of hyenas attacking
a buffalo; with six more junior Rinpoches at their heels like coyotes
picking up the leftovers.
proof of betrayal is given by Thrangu Rinpoche's own intransigence
in a court case he pursued in 2004. In characteristic contempt of
the truth, he submitted an affidavit to the court at Auckland
, New Zealand -- in contest for a property run by Beru Khyentze
Rinpoche as a Karma Kagyu Buddhist center -- which says that Urgyen
Trinlay was the titular head of the Karma Kagyu school. What the
whole thing boils down to is this question: Is the Dalai Lama's
authority really needed to institute a new Karmapa incarnation?
Yes, according to Thrangu Rinpoche. And to prove it, his affidavit
states to the effect that in all Tibetan history the Karmapas
are recognized or authenticated by no one except the Dalai Lamas.
that was a bold lie in the face of the presiding judge at Auckland
. It obliged Chodrak Tenphel, Khenpo of Rumtek Monastery, to submit
an affidavit to the effect that none of the Dalai Lamas
at any time in history have in fact been required to render such
services to the Karma Kagyu lineage. And guess who won? Beru Khyentze
Rinpoche, of course. But how exactly?
Khenpo Chodrak Tenphel's affidavit was endorsed by independent
expert Geoffrey Samuel, a renowned historian and rabbi whom the
court had appointed to the case. With relevant documents at his
disposal, Mr. Samuel testified at court that none of the previous
Dalai Lamas had anything to do with the recognition of the Karmapas
and, by inference, the present Dalai Lama's claim of having any
authority, spiritual or legal, over the recognition of the 17 th
Karmapa is simply a falsehood.
detractor, Lea Terhune, is the author of “Karmapa – The Politics
of Reincarnation”, published last year. By her account, ‘the Black
Crowns' (note the plural) means “the original one given by Yung
Lo ….. and a copy, made a few hundred years later …..” But it is
well known and generally accepted that there is only one Black Crown.
Had Terhune wanted to surprise the world with ‘a copy', she obviously
had not thought it wise or appropriate to match the report's eccentricity
with a good explanation. The fact is that, for the majority of the
Karmapa's disciples and devotees this bit of revelation would mean
searing a big question mark right into their hearts, forcing them
to wonder whether they had been deceived by the fake article. By
flashing the Two Black Crowns card in front of the public, she has
undoubtedly damaged the Karmapa, his name and his lineage.
also has much to say about the previous Shamarpas, the Sixth Shamarpa
in particular; for example:-
the Karmapas the Shamarpas gravitated toward politics. The political
maneuverings of the Sixth Shamarpa Chokyi Wangchuk and his patron,
the king of Tsang, provoked hostility among Kagyu lamas who
opposed sectarian rivalry and created tension between the Karmapa
almost ten centuries Karmapa is a unique spiritual personage. So,
for a serious work such as her “Karmapa” claims to be, it has no
justification for leaving unmentioned the far more substantial and
crucial history of the close and famous guru-disciple relationship
between the Sixth Shamarpa (the guru) and the Tenth Karmapa (the
disciple); a relationship so exemplary that it is exceptional by
any standard in the history of Tibetan Buddhism; a fact that is
accepted by all regardless of sectarian origins.
is further proof that, given the kind of people that they are, our
detractors will distort history to malign Shamar Rimpoche:
just because he refuses to bow to politicians who
use Buddhist Dharma for politics.
Terhune may have said, the Sixth Shamarpa unfortunately had died
in 1633, many years before war broke out (in 1642) between the Gelugpa
and Kagyupa forces. As for the Sixth Shamarpa himself, generations
of practitioners are beholden to the Sixth Shamarpa for having rehabilitated
or reorganized, at a critical juncture and almost single-handedly,
a vast treasury of Kagyu texts and transmissions that had been
passed down from Marpa's time and so saved them from disappearance
forever. Thus he was able to pass these transmissions
on to the Tenth Karmapa and others. Many Tibetan histories (in the
original Tibetan texts) acknowledge these critical contributions.
Terhune would have no business with fair-play in what
is, at least nominally, an account of Tibetan history. Instead she dug
up the Sixth Shamarpa to 'explain' the Shamarpa of
four centuries later in what is a gross fudging of causes
and effects. It may have dramatic value, and it may fool
an unsuspecting reader now and then. But this distortion of
the Sixth Shamarpa is clear to anyone who knows anything about Tibetan
history. Yet, if she managed to brand the Sixth Shamarpa as a
war-monger, it might follow that all these Kagyu transmissions
might be discredited, and with them the integrity of the entire
lineage. This then is precisely the plan of the Rinpoches,
Situ, Gyaltsep and Thrangu.
is an American writer and therefore she is relatively
free to publish anything she wants and claim innocence or ignorance
afterwards if necessary. But, this book is not written in
a vacuum but under the close tutelage of the Situ and
Gyaltsep rinpoches, a fact she admits in the introduction.
all of this is in complete accord with what
Rimpoche told us in 2000 at the IKKBO conference at Kathmandu, namely
about the grave dangers that were (and still are) facing our
lineage: Pressure from outside, and betrayal from within, to destroy
the identity and independence of Karma Kagyupa, in effect to terminate
it for good. But no doubt the sham of these lamas will peel
off layer by layer with our continual efforts to unmask
them on this website.
U.S. spokesperson for IKKBO