Tag Archives: dorje shugden controversy

The Dalai Lama’s Followers are Used for Psychological Warfare

Recently, I managed to get my hands on a few of the CIA documents that are being published on the Western Shugden Society website. In The Dalai Lama Cables: A Wolf in Monk’s Robes? the WSS writes:

The CIA went on to formulate and fund a strategy of anti-communist propaganda with the Dalai Lama that included sponsoring him personally, and well as establishing Tibet Houses on his behalf in various locations and encouraging him to teach widely. In the discussion mentioned in this memo, they describe organising a teaching tour by distinguished Buddhist leaders as:

‘a major step towards utilizing certain elements of the Buddhist world in one aspect of psychological warfare’.

Of all the cables posted on the WSS site recently that one shocked me the most. The Dalai Lama and the US Government are actually trying to use the whole of Buddhism as a weapon to divide and conquer China.

Psychological warfare is mentioned three times in the cables. I don’t think there are any Buddhists in the world who actually want to be used for psychological warfare. Today a friend of mine said:

“The Dalai Lama’s followers often accuse Shugden practitioners of having links to the Chinese even though we have nothing to do with China. Yet they are actually being manipulated by the CIA and they don’t even know it”.

This is clearly true. The full documents that mention psychological warfare are below.

Serpom Norling Monastery

Due to the ban the Dalai Lama has enforced, Dorje Shugden practitioners may not associate with non-Dorje Shugden practitioners in any way, shape or form. A large group of monks wishing to continue their practice of Dorje Shugden, had to separate from Sera Monastery in order to carry out this directive. They have formally started a new monastery called Serpom Norling Monastery nearby. They currently have many qualified Geshes and altogether 500 monks.

Dalai Lama Controversy in the News

This is a new video that I put together to help spread the truth about the Dalai Lama on the web and promote the Western Shugden Society website.

The Dalai Lama and Human Rights – 2nd version

This version a little longer, but I think the additional clips tell the story more clearly. My hopes are that this video will give a glimpse of the truth about the Dalai Lama to people who don’t have time to watch some of the longer documentaries about the controversy.

The Dalai Lama and Human Rights

This is a new video that I put together using clips from various news reports about the Dalai Lama’s ban on Dorje Shugden. I wanted to point out the fact that the Dalai Lama was receiving a human rights award while at the same time engaging in religious persecution against his own people.

Reviews of ‘A Great Deception – The Ruling Lama’s Policies’

A Great Deception - The Ruling Lama's Policies

Below are some of the best reviews of A Great Deception – The Ruling Lama’s Policies from Amazon.com. The book is now available in the US from the Independent Publishers Group. If you’ve read the book, feel free to post your own review in the comments section below or better yet write your own review on Amazon.com

Review by Michael-James B. Weaver

This book advocates a spiritual solution to a political problem that has plagued Tibetan society for the past 15 years, the Dorje Shugden controversy. Walking in the footsteps of the Buddha, high Lamas should renounce involvement in political affairs. Buddha spoke of his renunciation in this way: “Bodhisattvas should follow my example. I renounced my kingdom and attained complete enlightenment. You must be aware of how close the relationship between renunciation of the world and the eventual attainment of supreme enlightenment is.” Buddha’s father offered to abdicate the throne in favor of his son’s rule, to which Buddha replied, “Father, I am no longer the son of one family, one clan, or even one country. My family is now all beings, my home is the Earth, and my position is that of a monk who depends on the generosity of others. I have chosen this path, not the path of politics. I believe I can best serve all beings in this way.”

It is readily apparent throughout this book that the Western Shugden Society is *no* fan of Communist China, a “totalitarian regime” that “invaded” Tibet and has now “occupied” it for more than 50 years. Still, primary blame for the “catastrophic decline” of Buddhadharma in Tibet over the past few hundred years, which ultimately precipitated the loss of the country to the Chinese, rests solely on the unholy mixing of religion and politics which the book calls ‘Lama Policy’. The current Dalai Lama’s political ambition to become the unprecedented spiritual head of all Tibetan Buddhists, his unfailing adulation of Mao, and his fascination with ‘half-Buddhist, half-Marxist’ communism (seriously retarding his exile government’s democratization) are all given heavy treatment in the book. Many Tibetans feel personally betrayed by the Dalai Lama, who unilaterally handed over the cause of Tibetan independence to the Chinese as early as the 1980s, without consulting either the Tibetan parliament or his people. Once Tibetan nationals started to realize that their hopes for a ‘Free Tibet’ had been ruined, the Dalai Lama’s scapegoating of Dorje Shugden practitioners began… and for the past 15 years this clintonesque misdirection has worked amazingly well, albeit to the detriment of the Tibetan exile community’s internal trust, peace, and harmony.

The book puts forth a most intriguing thesis, which is touched on throughout various chapters as it retraces the history of the Dalai Lamas; the implications will be earth-shattering for many Tibetan Buddhists, yet liberating for many others including myself. That is, “a great deception” has been perpetrated since the death of the Fourth Dalai Lama, in that no one who has carried this title since–from the Fifth to the current Fourteenth–has actually fulfilled the First Dalai Lama’s promise to his root Guru, Je Tsongkhapa, who was the founder of the Gelugpa tradition: “From now until I attain enlightenment I shall seek no refuge other than you… I pray that, with my mind free from the influence of attachment and hatred, I may strive to maintain your doctrine and cause it to flourish without ever giving up this endeavor” (translation in the book Heart Jewel by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso). The first four Dalai Lamas are presented as pious, holy men who lived “exemplary lives of pure moral discipline and spiritual practice,” and so there is no doubt about their authenticity.

In sharp contrast, the so-called Fifth Dalai Lama’s military escapades (including sectarian suppression of the Jonang, Kagyu, and Bön traditions), political intrigues (including the assassination of his spiritual ‘rival’, Dragpa Gyaltsen), and abhorrence of his root Guru the Panchen Lama call into doubt whether he was really the reincarnation of the Fourth Dalai Lama at all. Rather, “Many Gelugpa lamas believe that Dragpa Gyaltsen, and not Losang Gyatso, was the actual incarnation of the Fourth Dalai Lama and that when Dragpa Gyaltsen died he became a Protector of Je Tsongkhapa’s Ganden tradition” (i.e., he manifested as Dorje Shugden). Indeed, it would be interesting to know how pervasive this interpretation is amongst contemporary Shugden Lamas, because it helps to explain so much, for example, why the earliest rituals to Dorje Shugden identified him as an emanation of Avalokiteshvara (see the Dorje Shugden History website), and why it is that the Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Dalai Lamas weren’t particularly noteworthy, to say the least.

The book is a damning account of the Fifth, Thirteenth, and current Dalai Lamas’ theocracies and their failures as political and spiritual leaders. And, although the book is heavily sourced, it is intended merely as a starting point for journalists and scholars to dig even deeper. In a sense, exposing the Dalai Lama’s “open secrets” to the world in this way is like giving us permission to look past the facade and not feel blasphemous for doing so: the authors invite the world again and again to scrutinize the Dalai Lama’s actions just as they would any politician, and not be mesmerized by the celebrity of this ‘simple Buddhist monk’. For these Tibetan Buddhists, the Dalai Lama can no longer hide behind the mask of Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Compassion, for his actions simply do not merit it: even the current Dalai Lama’s militant campaigns, political intrigues, and abhorrence of his root Guru (whom he never acknowledges) are laid bare, a haunting replay of the Great Fifth’s samsaric life.

Nevermind the fact the Dalai Lama has never had the ecclesiastical authority to ban prayers to Dorje Shugden, what this book makes transparent is that neither does he have the *moral* authority. Of course, the Dalai Lama’s Buddhist teachings and lectures are spectacular, which is a testament more to the wisdom and kindness of his unsung Spiritual Guide, Trijang Rinpoche, a Dorje Shugden practitioner who arguably was the greatest Tibetan Buddhist master of his generation. The Dalai Lama often says that we have to choose between himself or Dorje Shugden, which in effect amounts to choosing either the Dalai Lama or the late Trijang Rinpoche; for many Shugden practitioners this has been a difficult but clear choice, and this book makes it crystal clear.

Review by Aaron Pearson

What a fantastic read. I couldn’t put this book down. Once you get past the first couple of chapters, which makes some quite strong accusations against the Dalai Lama and his `religious ban’ on a group of Buddhists, the book starts to unravel the background behind these claims – and there’s a lot of information to back them up. The book has almost 400 references to various resources so it does seem pretty credible after all.

The book gives a lot of interesting facts about the previous Dalai Lamas, a lot of which I didn’t know about. Particularly interesting was the chapter on the present Dalai Lama, with new information about his escape from Tibet, about his dealings with the CIA, and other things like the fact that members of his family are part of his Government – it’s quite an eye-opener.

The main point of the book is to put pressure on the Dalai Lama to stop his ban against Buddhists who follow a deity called Dorje Shugden. I understand that he claims there is no ban, but when I looked into some of the references in the book I found some video footage of the Dalai Lama referring to the ban as `his’ – see the Western Shugden Society website, under ‘videos’. On the same website I also found some footage from a TV News Channel of a Buddhist monk being refused entry to a local shop because he is a follower of Dorje Shugden. With all these claims I read saying that there is no ban, this type of evidence seems pretty hard to ignore. It seems like a pretty clear cut case of religious discrimination when you can’t even go into a shop and buy some groceries because of your religious beliefs!

What I came away with was a feeling that the image of the Dalai Lama I had previously was a bit superficial. I knew he’d won the Nobel Peace Prize, that he is the head of the Tibetan Government etc. and on that basis I had him down as a good guy, fighting for World Peace, but I now realise I didn’t really have anything to back this up with. This book takes things to a whole new level. There are pictures of him shaking hands with Chairman Mao, with ex-Nazi SS soldiers, with the Aum Cult leader (responsible for the Japanese train gassing) and more. Now I’m not saying I think he’s a Nazi, but when you put all of this together, my image of him being a ‘holy man’ is now looking a bit dubious. Well, that’s my take on it anyway.

I would recommend this book to anyone who likes a bit of controversy and to anyone who is interested in finding out about the Dalai Lama’s background – everything other than what he would want you to know of course. And to anyone who won’t read the book because they don’t feel comfortable that the ‘holy’ Dalai Lama is finally being brought into disrepute, if this information is true, you might want to think about the suffering of the Buddhists in Tibet who are being discriminated against – if we continue to turn a blind eye to these types of reports, then maybe no one will ever find out the truth behind these claims?

Review by C. Poulengeris

I read this book really carefully and I think it is excellent. For a long time Tenzin Gyatso (14th Dalai Lama) has been doing whatever he likes with very little scrutiny from Western observers. Anyone who should dare to criticise the Dalai Lama is usually just attacked. Far better to investigate the complaints to see if they hold water. In this book the Dalai Lama’s most serious failings are exposed. It is a little bit like the story of “The Emperor’s New Clothes”.

In any case, I would recommend this book because it is very well researched with a lot of documentary evidence. It has cast iron evidence of

1. His links to the CIA
2. His shady, shady finances. This guy has received hundreds of millions of dollars over the years for “Tibetan Independence”. Everyone knows that the Dalai Lama (against the wishes of many Tibetans themselves) gave up on Tibetan Independence years ago. What has happened to the money. It certainly hasn’t been used for the benefit of alleviating poverty amongst Tibetans!
3. How he is attempting to divide and weaken the Gelugpas (by attacking the worship of a popular deity called Dorje Shugden) so that they will then join his “Rime” (Ecunemical) movement. (The Rime movement by the way never existed until recent times, invented by, yes the 14th Dala Lama)
4. His utter failure to do anything whatsoever either for Tibet or for Tibetans in general (above and beyond some serious nepotism regarding his close family)
5. His disrespect for his own Spiritual Guide (His Holiness Trijang Dorjechang). There is documentary evidence where he says that HH Trijang Dorjechang was wrong to worship Dorje Shugen. According to Mahayana Buddhism ANYONE who directly criticises their own Spiritual Guide is creating heavy negative karma.

It is, I believe, very well researched and accurate.

Anyone who may find it hard to believe that the Dalai Lama is fallible should read this book. It exposes the Dalai Lama’s failings. As Abraham Lincoln said: “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.”

An excellent book.

Western Shugden Society website redesign

The Western Shugden Society has redesigned their website. The site has a lot of new photos, videos and information that weren’t included before. Now the website is similar to the new book (A Great Deception) in a multimedia format. However, there is a lot of information in the book that can’t be found on the website. The two together are a powerful combination that have the function of freeing Buddhism from political pollution and protecting Shugden practitioners from persecution by the Dalai Lama.

Looking Behind the Dalai Lama’s Holy Cloak

Michael Backman

Michael Backman has been one of the few mainstream journalists who have revealed the true face of the Dalai Lama. Backman received death threats for his article Behind the Dalai Lama’s Holy Cloak from a follower of the Dalai Lama. “My correspondent informed me that the next time I visit India I will be killed (eaten, he said) and my family will never find my body” Backman writes. Below are some excerpts from two of his articles published in The Age.

Behind the Dalai Lama’s Holy Cloak

Rarely do journalists challenge the Dalai Lama.

Partly it is because he is so charming and engaging. Most published accounts of him breeze on as airily as the subject, for whom a good giggle and a quaint parable are substitutes for hard answers. But this is the man who advocates greater autonomy for millions of people who are currently Chinese citizens, presumably with him as head of their government. So, why not hold him accountable as a political figure?

No mere spiritual leader, he was the head of Tibet’s government when he went into exile in 1959. It was a state apparatus run by aristocratic, nepotistic monks that collected taxes, jailed and tortured dissenters and engaged in all the usual political intrigues. (The Dalai Lama’s own father was almost certainly murdered in 1946, the consequence of a coup plot.)

The government set up in exile in India and, at least until the 1970s, received $US1.7 million a year from the CIA.

The money was to pay for guerilla operations against the Chinese, notwithstanding the Dalai Lama’s public stance in support of non-violence, for which he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989.

The Dalai Lama himself was on the CIA’s payroll from the late 1950s until 1974, reportedly receiving $US15,000 a month ($US180,000 a year).

The funds were paid to him personally, but he used all or most of them for Tibetan government-in-exile activities, principally to fund offices in New York and Geneva, and to lobby internationally.

Details of the government-in-exile’s funding today are far from clear. Structurally, it comprises seven departments and several other special offices. There have also been charitable trusts, a publishing company, hotels in India and Nepal, and a handicrafts distribution company in the US and in Australia, all grouped under the government-in-exile’s Department of Finance.

The government was involved in running 24 businesses in all, but decided in 2003 that it would withdraw from these because such commercial involvement was not appropriate.

Several years ago, I asked the Dalai Lama’s Department of Finance for details of its budget. In response, it claimed then to have annual revenue of about $US22 million, which it spent on various health, education, religious and cultural programs.

The biggest item was for politically related expenditure, at $US7 million. The next biggest was administration, which ran to $US4.5 million. Almost $US2 million was allocated to running the government-in-exile’s overseas offices.

For all that the government-in-exile claims to do, these sums seemed remarkably low.

It is not clear how donations enter its budgeting. These are likely to run to many millions annually, but the Dalai Lama’s Department of Finance provided no explicit acknowledgment of them or of their sources.

Certainly, there are plenty of rumours among expatriate Tibetans of endemic corruption and misuse of monies collected in the name of the Dalai Lama.

Many donations are channelled through the New York-based Tibet Fund, set up in 1981 by Tibetan refugees and US citizens. It has grown into a multimillion-dollar organisation that disburses $US3 million each year to its various programs.

Part of its funding comes from the US State Department’s Bureau for Refugee Programs.

Like many Asian politicians, the Dalai Lama has been remarkably nepotistic, appointing members of his family to many positions of prominence. In recent years, three of the six members of the Kashag, or cabinet, the highest executive branch of the Tibetan government-in-exile, have been close relatives of the Dalai Lama.

An older brother served as chairman of the Kashag and as the minister of security. He also headed the CIA-backed Tibetan contra movement in the 1960s.

A sister-in-law served as head of the government-in-exile’s planning council and its Department of Health.

A younger sister served as health and education minister and her husband served as head of the government-in-exile’s Department of Information and International Relations.

Their daughter was made a member of the Tibetan parliament in exile. A younger brother has served as a senior member of the private office of the Dalai Lama and his wife has served as education minister.

The second wife of a brother-in-law serves as the representative of the Tibetan government-in-exile for northern Europe and head of international relations for the government-in-exile. All these positions give the Dalai Lama’s family access to millions of dollars collected on behalf of the government-in-exile. …

What has the Dalai Lama actually achieved for Tibetans inside Tibet?

If his goal has been independence for Tibet or, more recently, greater autonomy, then he has been a miserable failure.

He has kept Tibet on the front pages around the world, but to what end? The main achievement seems to have been to become a celebrity. Possibly, had he stayed quiet, fewer Tibetans might have been tortured, killed and generally suppressed by China.

Michael Backman on the Dorje Shugden Controversy

Why is the Dalai Lama so hell-bent on moving against Shugden supporters? A reason might be that he genuinely believes Shugden worship is wrong. Another seems to derive from his desire to unite the four traditions of Tibetan Buddhism – the Nyngma, Sakya, Kagyu and Gelugpa. This has always been one of the Dalai Lama’s problems. He is not the head of Buddhism; he is not even the head of Tibetan Buddhism. Traditionally, the Dalai Lamas are from the Gelugpa sect. But since leaving Tibet, the current Dalai Lama has sought to speak for all Tibetans and particularly all overseas Tibetans.

To enhance his authority, he has sought to merge the four traditions into one and place himself at its head. But Dorje Shugden presents a roadblock. One aspect of Shugden worship is to protect the Gelugpa tradition from adulteration, particularly by the Nyngma tradition. Nyngma followers respond by not wanting anything to do with Gelugpa followers sympathetic to Dorje Shugden. So to allow a proper merger of the four traditions, the Dalai Lama needs to get rid of the Shugden movement. If the Dalai Lama can claim to represent all Tibetans, it will increase his political prestige and clout with overseas Tibetans and with governments.

Acting with impunity: the Dalai Lama

Dean MacKinnon-Thomson (a politics student at Stirling university in Scotland) posted a small piece about the Dalai Lama’s hypocricy on his blog New Right this morning. The post is titled Acting with impunity: the Dalai Lama.

Below is the section that relates to Shugden practitioners.

Political hypocrisy and impunity

This deeply symbolic and important border town however saw the Dalai Lama engage in his usual round of confrontational politics over Chinese influence in Tibet.

He spoke of Tibetan right of autonomy within China, he also spoke of the fundamental rights of Tibetans to command their own fate free from violence or cohersion. And normally I would agree with any leader who spoke such words. But not the Dalai Lama. The hypocracy in his saying such things grates with my sense of fair play and justice.

Someone should stop treating this man [for that is all he is] with such impunity, and challenge him. When he speaks of Tibetan human rights, why on earth does no one challenge him over his cultural and physical suppression of the followers of Dorje Shugden? Why when he speaks out against Chinese state sanctioned murder and torture does the BBC and the world press not demand to know why the Dalai Lama has never condemned the actions of those acting in his name who have murdered in the hundreds Dorje Shugden believers?

The longer we treat this Dalai Lama with such impunity over his own actions the worse the human plight of the human beings at the centre of his cultural war within Tibetan Buddhism shall become.

As much as I find myself disliking Chinese actions in Tibet, it must surely be preferable to a Tibet run by this Dalai Lama.

For those of you who do not know about the secret history of the Dalai Lamas wars against his own followers, please watch this documentary on the Dorje Shugden issue.

Evidence of Deception: In the Dalai Lama’s Own Words

Looking closely at the Dalai Lama
The following article was written by Ron Cook


The Fourteenth Dalai Lama is regarded by his followers to be:

1) an authentic and pure lineage holder of the teachings of Buddha;
2) a propagator of Buddhism;
3) the political leader and advocate of the Tibetan people, representing their best interests;
4) a manifestation of the Buddha of Compassion Avalokiteshvara (Tib. Chenrazig);
5) a reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama, who in turn was a reincarnation of the Dalai Lama previous to him, and so forth – an unbroken lineage of fourteen successive reincarnations of the same person.

In this presentation the Dalai Lama’s own words reveal that he holds hidden views opposite to those that have brought him accolades few others have received, including a Nobel peace prize. His reputation as an authentic spiritual leader of the Buddhist faith has been carefully and meticulously crafted, but sadly appears to be nothing more than a magician’s illusion. Though a stellar reputation precedes him everywhere he goes, the quotes collected herein savage that reputation. In moments of candour the Dalai Lama brings into disrepute both himself and the institution of the Dalai Lamas. His political views appear to be much more self-serving than altruistic and more expedient than moralistic. It will become clear that the Dalai Lama has a sinister side that is rarely noticed or is deliberately ignored. I have included my own comments following various quotations and interviews that help expose the shocking contradictions and inconsistencies with Buddhist teachings. I believe that even the most ardent supporter of the Dalai Lama will have to agree (if only privately) that his words are very troubling.

1) Is the Dalai Lama an authentic and pure lineage holder of the teachings of Buddha?

Interview with Jennifer Byrne ‘Australian Broadcasting Corporation’ (ABC TV), Broadcast: May 22, 2002:

Byrne: “As you have said, people have tried to paint you as a living God – as a living Buddha – a man God… you say you are very much a human…?”

Dalai Lama: [laughs] “If it is some Tibetan, you see – they say or I think believe, the Tibetan sort of bright future can be achieved through just praying to the Dalai Lama. That is nonsense.”

Byrne: “So they should not pray to the Dalai Lama?”

Dalai Lama: “It is useless. We work hard… we have to work hard, even Dalai himself. Through prayer nothing can be achieved. I’m always telling people prayer of course is good, but through prayer we can’t change the reality. Very different. So change reality through heart, through action!”

Byrne: “Through work?”

Dalai Lama: “Yes. Karma means action. So things change through action not by prayer… not by wish.”

The Dalai Lama reveals that he does not believe in the power of prayer. This belief is completely contrary to Buddhist doctrine as well as all major spiritual traditions. The efficacy of prayer has been confirmed in various scientific studies but even more importantly – anecdotally – by millions and millions of people. The above statement is inconceivable coming from a supposed spiritual leader. The question is, why would he ever say such a thing? Why would he encourage the abolition of prayer?

The Dalai Lama is known around the world as a champion of non-violence. Sadly his words and actions are deeply inconsistent with this reputation. On January 25, 1997 the Chicago Tribune ran a story that revealed the Dalai Lama’s involvement with the CIA.
Among other things the article exposed that Tibetan guerrillas were trained in Colorado and later sent to Tibet to fight the Chinese. From 1956 to 1972 the CIA armed and trainedthe guerrillas. The Dalai Lama’s brothers were deeply involved and acted as contact
agents for the CIA. The CIA arranged parachute drops of arms and established training camps in eastern Tibet prior to the 1959 exodus. The Dalai Lama was also reported to be in radio contact with the CIA during the final escape to India. In addition it has been
learned that the Dalai Lama was on the CIA’s payroll for at least a decade, and was paid $186,000 USD a year. This topic is beyond the scope of this article, however an important conclusion can be drawn. He clearly supported the use of violence against the
Chinese army as evidenced below.

A 1998 BBC television documentary titled ‘The Shadow Circus: The CIA in Tibet’ the Dalai Lama talked about utilizing violence during the Chinese invasion:

“There is a basic Buddhist belief that if the motivation is good and the goal is good, then any method, even apparently of a violent kind, is permissible.”

In the book Resort to Arms: International and Civil Wars, 1816-1980 by Melvin Small and David Singer, Tibetan resistance fighters (many trained by the CIA) killed some 40,000 Chinese soldiers in the years between 1956 and 1959. Approximately 100,000 Tibetan civilians and fighters were slaughtered according to Barbara Harff and Ted Gurr in their book Ethnic Conflict in World Politics. This carnage was all happening while the Dalai Lama was in power in Tibet.

The astonishing truth is the Dalai Lama is not at all adverse to employing violence in order to accomplish particular goals, despite all that he has said to the contrary.

While being interviewed by Robert Thurman in the Nov / Dec 1997 issue of ‘Mother Jones’ magazine the Dalai Lama said:

“…if the situation was such that there was only one learned lama or genuine practitioner alive, a person whose death would cause the whole of Tibet to lose all hope of keeping its Buddhist way of life, then it is conceivable that in order to protect that one person it might be justified for one or 10 enemies to be eliminated…”

The number 10 has great significance. This statement coincided with a list of names being circulated in the Tibetan exile communities in 1997. The ‘enemies of Tibet’ were a group of Dorje Shugden practitioners who had publicly dared to defy the Dalai Lama’s ban on the propitiation of this deity. The list included the following:

1) Geshe Kelsang Gyatso – founder of the New Kadampa Tradition
2) Lama Serkong Titrul Rinpoche – Abbot of Buddhist Centres in Singapore and Taiwan
3) Lama Gangchen Rinpoche – Spiritual Director of Gangchen Kunpen Ling Buddhist Centres world wide
4) Kundeling Lama Losang Yeshe Rinpoche – Abbot of Atisha monastery in Bangalore India
5) Geshe Chime Tsering – General Secretary of the Dorje Shugden Society in Dehli India
6) Geshe Konchog Gyaltsen – Vice-President of the Dorje Shugden Society in Dehli India
7) Gen Chatring Jampel Yeshe – President of the Dorje Shugden Society in Dehli India
8 ) Tenzin Chodak – a Dorje Shugden practioner living in the UK
9) Tseten Gyurme – a well known supporter of Dorje Shugden practitioners
10) Dr. Losang Thubten – a scholar who is an advisor to the Dorje Shugden Society, Delhi India

Interview with Anne Curry ‘NBC Nightly News,’ broadcast April 11, 2008:

Curry: “Is violence ever justified?”

Dalai Lama: “No.”

Curry: “Never?”

Dalai Lama: “No. In theoretically, yes. (sic) You can say in certain– under certain circumstances. Provided your motivation is good. Your goal is larger interest for larger people and a just cause. Theoretically, a violent method can be permissible…”

Unfortunately, the Dalai Lama seems incapable of excluding violence as a solution to the problems of the world.

From the Dalai Lama’s first autobiography (1964) page 190: [referring to Tibetan insurgents engaged in fighting the Chinese]

“Despite my belief, I much admire their courage and their determination to take on the fierce struggle which they began for our freedom, our culture, and religion. I thank them for their strength and their daring, and also personally for the protection which they gave me. … Hence I could not honorably give them the advice to avoid violence. In order to fight they had sacrificed their homes and all the comforts and advantages of a peaceful life. Now they could not see any alternative to continuing to struggle and I had nothing to oppose that with.” [quote subsequently removed from reprints]

Here the Dalai Lama admits that in the political struggle for Tibet he is unable to either practice dharma or give dharma. The action of killing is one of the heaviest negative actions one can engage in. The Dalai Lama’s unwillingness to encourage regret and to repudiate violence is utterly contrary to the function of a spiritual guide. His admiration of these acts of killing is in itself very non-virtuous. How can a Buddhist spiritual master be so bereft of wisdom and compassion – the very things that he is supposed to represent?

From ‘The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’ by Fran Bauer and Tom Heinen, May 14, 1998 the Dalai Lama said in a news conference with Wisconsin Governor Tommy Thompson [regarding India’s testing of nuclear weapons]:

“There is sometimes the concept, a few nations OK to possess nuclear weapons [and] the rest of the world should not – that’s undemocratic.”

Posted on the official web site of the Tibetan Government in Exile the Dalai Lama said [quote subsequently removed from the site]:

“As long as some of the major world powers continue to possess nuclear weapons, it is not right to outright condemn India’s actions. After all, India is a large country with its own nuclear perceptions.”

The Dalai Lama is widely known to be against nuclear proliferation and for world peace. Here he endorses the right of India to pursue development of weapons of mass destruction. Is he for or against nuclear proliferation? This contradiction is understandable in light of the fact that the Indian government allows the Dalai Lama to operate a government in exile on its soil. It is likely that his endorsement of India’s nuclear program is a political debt being repaid.

From the ‘Seattle Times,’ story by Hal Bernton, May 15, 2001:

Dalai Lama: “If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun. Not at the head, where a fatal wound might result. But at some other body part, such as a leg.”

This answer was in response to a young schoolgirl’s question on how to react to a shooter who takes aim at a classmate. Is the Dalai Lama’s response an endorsement of firearms in schools, for arming teenagers, or implicit approval of American second amendment? [the right to bear arms] Is he indicating that public safety can be achieved through the barrel of a gun? In light of the horrific mass killings in American schools why would a spiritual master indicate that appropriately aimed gunfire is a suitable remedy? Can he not think of a non-violent alternative?

If the Dalai Lama was an authentic Buddhist master and lineage holder he would naturally possess superior qualities of both wisdom and compassion. Thus he would not be subject to such confusion, lack of wisdom, contradiction, and poor judgment. Yet another example of these deficiencies is found in the disturbing relationship with apocalyptic cult leader Shoko Asahara that arose in the mid to late 1980’s. In their book ‘The Cult at the End of the World -The Incredible Story of Aum,’ authors David E. Kaplan and Andrew Marshall quote the Dalai Lama:

Dalai Lama: [speaking to Shoko Asahara] “You should spread real Buddhism there [in Japan]… You can do that well, because you have the mind of a Buddha. If you do so, I shall be very pleased. It will help me with my mission.”

A few years later on March 20, 1995, Asahara commanded his followers to release deadly sarin gas into the Tokyo subway. Twelve people died and 5,500 were injured. Shortly after the attacks the Dalai Lama was quoted in the German magazine ‘Stern’ (36/95, p. 126), saying that Asahara was:

… [a] “friend, although not necessarily a perfect one.”

Kaplan and Marshall detail Asahara’s activities over this whole time period and indicate that Asahara was quite disturbed. Why is it that the Dalai Lama was unable to perceive such an unbalanced personality – particularly if the Dalai Lama is supposed to be an advanced spiritual being with special powers of awareness?

Interview with Claudia Dreifus ‘New York Times’ November 28, 1993:

Dalai Lama: “Of course, abortion, from a Buddhist viewpoint, is an act of killing and is negative, generally speaking. But it depends on the circumstances. If the unborn child will be retarded or if the birth will create serious problems for the parent, these are cases where there can be an exception. I think abortion should be approved or disapproved according to each circumstance.”

All parents experience significant challenges in raising their children – the parents of the disabled in particular. However, millions of parents have found their disabled children to also bring them immense joy. How can advocating the killing of the disabled be of karmic benefit to anyone? This way of thinking creates many problems – that arbitrary standards based on convenience or inconvenience determine who is worthy to live or die.

Moreover, what determines whether an action is negative or not has nothing to do with the circumstances, it has to do with whether or not a negative mind is present.

The Dalai Lama is known to be fascinated by science and its views concerning the nature of phenomena. In his book ‘The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality’ (2005) he writes:

“My confidence in venturing into science lies in my basic belief that as in science so in Buddhism, understanding the nature of reality is pursued by means of critical investigation: if scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.”

The ‘New York Times,’ November 12, 2005:

“If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.”

Science is principally predicated on exploring the outer world and Buddhadharma is an exclusive exploration of the inner world of the mind. Since Buddha proved in the Perfection of Wisdom Sutras that all phenomena lack inherent existence and are mere appearances to the mind, it is impossible for science to hold a more advanced view of the nature of reality. Buddha called the realization that all phenomena lack inherent existence an ultimate truth because it is a perfect and unmistaken final awareness of reality. Is it not true that the Dalai Lama’s view that science has or will discover a more profound reality is heretical, grossly ignorant of Buddhadharma, and an example of holding no faith in Buddha’s teachings? Does the Dalai Lama’s view not also imply that Buddha must not have possessed omniscient wisdom?

An authentic Buddhist spiritual master necessarily has unwavering faith and reliance in the Three Jewels – Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha. Faith and reliance in the Three Jewels is what distinguishes a Buddhist from a non-Buddhist. In the ‘Times Online’ August 23, 2008, Charles Bremner quotes the Dalai Lama while on a visit to France as saying:

“We should strive for inner peace in the concert of God…. We also have responsibility to take care of the planet. The trees and all beautiful things are part of creation … Harmony is very very essential.”

Belief in God the creator is belief in monotheism. Monotheism and creationism are not part of Buddha’s teachings. This statement begs the question what religion does the Dalai Lama actually believe in?

Interview with Femi Adesina, Lagos, Nigeria, December 13, 2008:

Adesina: “What roles should religious leaders play in national development?”

Dalai Lama: “Basically, religious leaders should promote human values and harmony. They should be active in the preservation of ecology. It’s our duty to protect our world. We have the responsibility to take care of the planet created by God.”

Here the Dalai Lama is even more explicit in his belief in God the creator. This belief utterly contradicts Buddhist doctrine. Buddha said repeatedly that mind is the creator of all phenomena. Why does the Dalai Lama apparently not know what Buddha taught?

The interview also included this question:

Adesina: “As a spiritual leader, do you have healing powers?”

Dalai Lama: “As a Buddhist monk, you study five different courses. Logic, craft, medicine, literature, Buddhist philosophy. But healing powers? No, no, no. If I had healing powers, then first I would heal myself of the gall bladder problem, for which I had surgery (laughs). But I had to go for modern technology. If I had healing power, I wouldn’t need that. It therefore means I have no healing powers. I’m very sceptical about such claims. Very, very sceptical. It does not mean people do not get healed miraculously. It happens. One of my French friends, who her hands. It may happen, but I’m very sceptical. By chance maybe, one or two. But you can’t say it’s definite. Furthermore, Buddhists are more of scientists, rather than believers.”

Why is the Dalai Lama ‘very very sceptical’ concerning miraculous healing? Buddha performed many miraculous healings as did Jesus and others. Buddha explicitly taught the methods to accomplish such powers. The Dalai Lama again reveals his non-faith in Buddhism, and as such, seems to be functioning to destroy the faith of his followers so they will develop faith in science instead.

A few sentences later [while answering the same question] the Dalai Lama says:

“Since my childhood, I’ve had keen interest in science and technology. We must accept the reality, rather than what literature says.”

The Dalai Lama explained that, ‘As a Buddhist monk, you study five different courses. Logic, craft, medicine, literature, Buddhist philosophy.’ He goes on to say ‘We must accept the reality, rather than what literature says.’ Is his conclusion that Buddhist teachings should not be believed and we must believe in reality as taught by science?

Interview by Parveen Chopra and Swati Chopra, ‘Life Positive’ magazine August 2001:

Dalai Lama: “Compassion, or karuna, stems from wisdom. For instance, animals with their limited intelligence, are happier and more peaceful than we are. Even so, I have observed that animals become aggressive during the mating season because there is now attachment to the mate. Attachment awakens feelings of klesh within them. Similarly for us, if there is less attachment and jealousy, we are able to focus within.”

Here the Dalai Lama seems to be completely unaware of Buddha’s teachings concerning fortunate and unfortunate rebirth. Animal rebirth is not a happier and more peaceful existence than human. What principally distinguishes one realm of rebirth from another is
the level and degree of suffering one has to experience within that realm. Animals have to remain in a state of constant fear and vigilance for their life. Animals must endure whatever harsh conditions present themselves – disease, famine, extreme weather, injury, pollution, loss of habitat, exploitation and attack by humans, etc. Apparently as far as the Dalai Lama is concerned, being eaten alive or torn to sheds by other animals, being slaughtered for human consumption, or experiencing harsh environmental conditions is a more peaceful and happier way to live.

Interview with John Kennedy in ‘George’ magazine, November 1997:

Kennedy: “One of the principles of karma is that if you do good deeds, they will come back to you. Why do you think all this misfortune has befallen the Tibetan people? What happened in a previous time that could have led to this?”

Dalai Lama: “That is, of course, basically due to karma. But this does not mean Buddhism is wrong or these people are wrong. Circumstances change. Times change. Sometimes it happens. But I don’t believe it’s because we did anything wrong.”

Interview by Johan Hari, ‘The Independent’ – 07/06/2004:

Hari: […Yet the Dalai Lama has suggested that Tibetans are being punished for their ‘bad karma.’] “Can this be true, Your Holiness?”

Dalai Lama: “Yes. Of course. We are punished for feudalism. Every event is due to one’s karma.”

Hari: “So, are disabled children being punished for sins in a past life?”

Dalai Lama: “Oh yes. Of course.”

Hari: [‘Suddenly, one of his entourage – dormant until now – leaps up and speaks quickly to the Dalai Lama in Tibetan. He turns to me.’]

Dalai Lama: “This is for Buddhists! Only for Buddhists! Last question now, please. We must hurry.”

Why does the Dalai Lama contradict himself in the two interviews? On the one hand he explains that Tibetans have done nothing wrong and on the other that Tibetans are experiencing the fruit of their non-virtuous actions. His first explanation is – there is effect without action. His second explanation is – there is action and effect. Since the law of actions and their effects is a central pillar of Buddhism shouldn’t the leader of Tibetan Buddhism have a thorough understanding of this tenet?

An often quoted one-liner of the Dalai Lama concerns meditation practice. In ‘People’ magazine, September 1979 he said:

“Sleep is the best meditation.”

What is the Dalai Lama’s meaning? If this statement is not intended to discredit the practice of meditation and to reinforce a person’s laziness and attachment to sleep, then what is its meaning?

‘Los Angeles Times’ interview, May 21, 1994:

Dalai Lama: “Although I cannot claim to have knowledge of the entire dimensions of Buddhist thought, I try to give the overall picture in my presentations. Sometimes I, too, find certain kinds of Buddhist teaching unrecognizable.”


The Dali Lama cannot be an authentic and pure lineage holder of Buddhist teachings. He does not believe in the power of prayer. He is in favour of violence when it suits his own or his government’s purposes. He has advocated nuclear proliferation. He believes that armed retaliation is reasonable. He developed a strange relationship with the criminal Shoko Asahara. He believes that a mentally disabled fetus is unworthy of life. He believes that scientific views should prevail over Buddhist views. He believes in not only developing concert with God, but that God is the creator of the world. He is ‘very, very sceptical’ concerning miraculous healing. He advocates non-belief in Buddhism. He believes animal rebirth is more peaceful and happy than human rebirth. He is confused as to the basic understanding of Buddha’s teachings on the law of cause and effect. He admits holding an incomplete understanding of Buddha’s teachings. How could an authentic Buddhist spiritual master be afflicted with so many views that contradict Buddhist teachings?

2) Does the Dalai Lama propagate Buddha’s teachings?

Interview with Claude Arpi, Tekchen Choling, Dharamsala India, March 6, 2006:

Arpi: “Our Review [magazine] is destined to the French public. Could you tell us about the spread of Buddhism in France? In 1960 when you sent Dagpo Rinpoche in France, Buddhism was practically unknown. I am told that there are today 5 millions of sympathizers. It seems a wave, a spiritual tsunami. Could you envisage this when you sent lamas such Dagpo Rinpoche in Europe?”

Dalai Lama: “No, never! In fact it has never been my interest to propagate Buddhism, my own religion. At that time, the main reason why we were eager to send Tibetans scholars in some of European universities (in France, Germany, Denmark or Italy) was some wrong perceptions about Tibetan Buddhism. It was our duty to show a proper representation of Tibetan Buddhism. This was the main reason. Even today, I have no intention to expand or promote Tibetan Buddhism… I always make it clear that it is better to keep your own religion.”

If the Dalai Lama is not interested in promoting Buddhism what exactly is he interested in promoting? Why has he written dozens of books? Are the books just an easy and convenient way to generate steady income? Or is writing books a way to create an illusion of propagating Buddhism? Why would anyone remain as the spiritual head of Tibetan Buddhism if they are not committed to promoting it? From a spiritual point of view his intention is utterly illogical.

The Dalai Lama’s actions are in sharp contrast to Buddha’s. Buddha was keenly interested in causing Buddhism to flourish. He traveled extensively and gave some 84,000 teachings. At the time there was a tradition of debate between leaders of philosophical schools and various spiritual traditions. The custom was that the looser of the debate converted to the victor’s tradition. In this way Buddha gathered thousands of disciples.

Interview with Rachael Kohn in ‘The Emory Wheel’ October 21, 2007:

Kohn: “The Buddha taught people how to avoid suffering in a material world, and you teach people how to be happy in a material world. Is this a more optimistic way, a more western way, of putting the Buddha’s teaching?”

Dalai Lama: “No, actually I always try to promote secular ethics or human values not as a religion, not as Buddhism. Of course to Buddhists, certainly. You see, I explain the importance of the suffering nature, then the causes of suffering, the cessation of suffering, then the ways and paths to overcome the suffering. So I always, you see, emphasise the importance of the realisation of the suffering nature. But my partisan approach that is simply the promotion of human values, not religion, it’s not a religious thing. In fact I make this always clear, in order to be good person, a warm hearted person, it is not necessarily to have religious faith. Without religious faith, there can be a nice person, a warm hearted person, and happy person.”

Are we to understand that the Dalai Lama holds real interest in creating a tradition of non-religion? Is he intent on creating a system of belief that excludes faith in or recognition of enlightened beings? What spiritual leader of any tradition promotes non-
faith and non-religion in their tradition? Is it because he secretly wants Buddhism to be destroyed and secular humanism to become popular? Strangely this view is in contradiction to what he has said concerning his belief in God. Why should it be the least bit confusing as to what the Dalai Lama believes?

In an interview conducted by Erich Follath and Padma Rao at the exile headquarters of the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, India for ‘Spiegel’ (05 / 12 / 2008), the Dalai Lama is clear in his primary objectives. He is not interested in promoting Buddhism, he is interested in science, promoting secular humanism, and as always, engaging in politics.

Follath/Rao: “You travel around the world a lot …”

Dalai Lama: “… and that’s the way it will remain for a long time. Even if I am to return to Lhasa, I would like to continue traveling. I consider myself a citizen of the world and am very interested in the relationships between science and Buddhism. My main goals are to promote fundamental human values and exchange among the religions. Then comes Tibet.”

‘Mother Jones’ magazine Nov/ Dec 1997, interview with Robert Thurman:

Thurman: “Some people say that you have to follow the religions of your own culture. Is it really a good idea to adopt a religion or spiritual practice foreign to one’s culture?”

Dalai Lama: “I always say that people should not rush to change religions. There is real value in finding the spiritual resources you need in your home religion. Even secular humanism has great spiritual resources; it is almost like a religion to me.”


The Dalai Lama is the most famous Buddhist in the world but he has no real intention of propagating Buddhism. His own words show that he cannot be considered a real Buddhist but instead must be regarded as either a secular humanist or a monotheist. He all but admits to being an adherent of secular humanism. Can his agenda of non-promotion of Buddhism and promotion of the non-religion of ‘human values’ be seen as anything other than an attack on Buddhism? Is the Dalai Lama just ignorant and confused or is he holding a secret intention to destroy Buddhism? If destroying Buddhism is his intention then an external enemy of Buddhism could not be more effective.

3) Does the Dalai Lama represent the best interests of the Tibetan people?

Speech by the Dalai Lama at State University of New York, Stony Brook NY, USA, September 17, 1990:

“Then I was 21 years and already had some knowledge about Western civilization. Dalai Lama means a Buddhist monk who is supposed to be a man of peace, but I was fond of looking at war books. The Thirteenth Dalai Lama had some war pictorial books about the first world war. I was very fond of looking at and reading them. I could not read English — I looked with amazement at these, the primitive tanks or motors and some primitive aeroplanes. These were very fascinating to me. Therefore I developed a scientific outlook. I felt along with the Chinese that we may develop Tibet as a modern community, a modern country, and also I had great attraction towards Marxism, especially the Marxism stressing internationalism. Of course according to the Marxist theory, his main concern was not how to make money, but rather how to distribute, how to utilize these things properly. I think in his economic theory there is some moral principle involved. Anyway, since then I call myself half Marxist and half Buddhist monk.”

Here the Dalai Lama expresses a bizarre association between the development of a scientific outlook, the weaponry of war, and Marxism. The essential point here is what would lie in store for Tibetans were they to regain some sort of statehood. The Dalai Lama has repeatedly said he upholds democratic principals, but in truth he is attracted to Marxist values and not democratic ones. Prior to his fleeing Tibet, his rule was authoritarian with the average Tibetan holding little more status than a serf.

After 40 years in exile the Dalai Lama decided that Tibetans should have an official head of government, and in July 2001, Samdhong Lobsang Tenzin was elected Prime Minister. In reality Lobsang’s position is nothing more than that of a figure head. He cannot do
anything without the prior approval of the Dalai Lama. It is impossible for him or anyone who wishes to remain within the Tibetan exile community to disagree with any policy or utterance of the Dalai Lama. This is why they stay silent when the Dalai Lama says things like ‘I am half Marxist – half Buddhist’ or referring to Shoko Asahara as having ‘the mind of a Buddha.’

Speech by the Dalai Lama at State University of New York, Stony Brook NY, USA, September 17, 1990:

“Then in 1954 I went to China as a head of the delegation of Tibet, to participate in the Chinese Congress of People’s Deputies. During that period I had a number of occasions to meet Chairman Mao and other dignitaries. I considered Chairman Mao really a great revolutionary and great leader. When I talked with him, I used an interpreter, one Tibetan who knew Chinese and Marxist ideology very well. With his help the discussion with Chairman Mao reached great depths.”

This ‘great leader’ repressed religion and encouraged thoughtless devotion to the state through intimidation, incarceration, and violence. It is obvious that the Dalai Lama was enamored by Chairman Mao’s his ability to subjugate and control millions of human beings.

Interview with Jörg Eigendorf July 4, 2009:

Eigendorf: … “you used to be a long-time admirer of Mao Zedong. How could you be so wrong?”

Dalai Lama: “I am still convinced that Mao Zedong was a Marxist, who wanted to help workers and farmers, in his early years up until the mid-1950s. In the mid-1950’s I spent six months in Beijing and another four months in many other parts of China. The party leaders, to me, seemed really dedicated to their cause.”

Eigendorf: “What impressed you about Mao?”

Dalai Lama: “He always looked like a farmer – his clothes were old and ruined. And when he spoke, he did so very slowly, so every word had an importance. He never beat around the bush, never said niceties; he always came straight to the point. All of his party members that I met back then were like that, which impressed me.”

Interview to ‘Associated Press’ Dharamsala, January 31, 1995:

Question: “If Deng Xiaoping did die over the next few days, can you sum up your feelings towards the man?”

Dalai Lama: “No doubt a great leader, a great revolutionary. Also a very able person; a person who can act decisively and quickly according to circumstances, no matter whether his motivation was sincere or not. It is very difficult to judge the motivation. As a human being, Deng Xiaoping, whom sometimes I call my old friend, is a great person if we disregard the suffering meted out to other people.”

Deng Xiaoping was in power during the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre and ordered the crackdown on pro-democracy protestors. What precisely is admirable about a leader who can act ‘decisively and quickly according to circumstances, no matter whether his motivation was sincere or not?’ As with his relationship with Shoko Asahara the Dalai Lama is rather forgiving of his friends’ murderous behavior and holds an attitude with regard to Xiaoping, that the ends justify the means. There is no unequivocal condemnation of their violent actions because the Dalai Lama is not adverse to employing violence when power and control is at stake.

The Dalai Lama’s admiration for authoritarian leaders should cause alarm bells to ring in the minds of Tibetans. It took more than 30 years in exile before an Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies were directly elected from among the 130,000 Tibetan exiles.
Democracy was definitely not a high priority with the Dalai Lama.

Interview with ‘Associated Press’ Dharamsala, January 31, 1995:

…“There are deputies who are elected by the people. The final approval of them is mine. The People’s Deputies, who are elected in exile, only have authority from those in exile. The Dalai Lama, however, is somebody who can represent all six million Tibetans. So you see, my approval of them is beneficial. It gives weight or authority to them… Now in most cases, if there are several candidates, I approve those who have the highest votes. Suppose, however, there is a person who I feel cannot correctly handle the responsibility, I then have the authority to choose someone else.”

The Dalai Lama admitted that he was the supreme authority of the government thus proving that democracy did not exist. The question is has anything changed since Samdhong Lobsang Tenzin was elected in 2001? Given his admiration for those who have achieved great power and authority, there has been no evidence to date that the balance of power has changed. In fact, not once since the inception of the Tibetan government in exile have any of the Dalai Lama’s initiatives been repudiated. It seems the government is well acquainted with both a rubber stamp policy and fear of the consequences of disagreeing with the Dalai Lama.

‘The Economic Times’ New Delhi, June 20, 1994:

Question: “Do you think you can ever go back to Tibet?”

Dalai Lama: “Oh Yes! In a few years we’ll go back.”

Speech by the Dalai Lama at Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies, Dharamsala, June 4, 1996:

“As I have repeatedly pointed out prior to 1959 and 1960, the Tibetan cause was not something on which one could place one’s hopes. Even many friends said that was the end of Tibet. These days significant changes are taking place…From the positive viewpoint, as I have been saying, we are nearing the solution of our cause. There is still no change in my hope that in about two-three years there will certainly be a change.”

Speech by the Dalai Lama at the 40th Anniversary of Tibetan National Uprising Day on March 10, 1999:

“Today, the Tibetan freedom movement is in a much stronger and better position than ever before and I firmly believe that despite the present intransigence of the Chinese government, the prospects for progress in bringing about a meaningful dialogue and negotiations are better today than ever.”

Tibet was irrevocably lost in 1959. Unfortunately, the Dalai Lama’s deep involvement with the CIA sealed Tibet’s fate. The Chinese will never trust the Dalai Lama due to this covert relationship with American spy masters. The ‘Free Tibet’ campaign has only prolonged the misery of the Tibetan people by instilling in them a sense of false hope. In 1989 the Dalai Lama unilaterally abandoned the fight for an independent Tibet and submitted to the Chinese his ‘Strasbourg Proposal.’ He effectively recognized that Tibet was now a part of China and proposed a degree of autonomy within the Chinese state. Supposedly he withdrew the Strasbourg Proposal in 1991, but it is clear he is still seeking no more than autonomy within China and not and independent state. Why does the ‘Free Tibet’ campaign continue to solicit donations 20 years later when their leader has no intention of fighting for it?

Until 2009, whenever asked, the Dalai Lama was eternally optimistic about impending success in returning to Tibet. This previous unrelenting ‘optimism’ must be held suspect as evidence for deception. Why? Because the function of repeatedly saying return to Tibet is close at hand was to keep Tibetans holding a mind of unwavering confidence and hope in the Dalai Lama.

One of the most despicable things the Dalai Lama has said comes from an interview by Paul Bibby and Joyce Morgan for the Australian paper ‘The Age,’ June 12, 2008:

[in reference to Dorje Shugden practioners protesting the Dalai Lama’s ban against this practice]

“They consider me a big liar – perhaps that is true.”

The Dalai Lama’s ban on the practice of Dorje Shugden has caused the most rancorous and painful division within the Buddhist faith since the time of Buddha. Is it not contemptuous of Buddha, Dharma, and Sangha to utter something like this?


The Dalai Lama’s reverence for authoritarian and dictatorial leaders, Marxism, the weaponry of war, his lack of interest in democracy, and his clinging to power despite years of political failure, indicate he is not an honest advocate for the people of Tibet. He has said that if Tibetans achieve some sort of autonomy within China he will immediately step down as their political leader. Perhaps he knows all too well that this will never happen. His service for others could easily be a tool to insure his position of authority. Superficially his words and activities appear to show a man of the people – for the people, but it appears if one digs a little deeper they find a man of himself – for himself. Why do Tibetans and all Buddhist for that matter not hold him to his words below?

From an interview with Femi Adesina, Lagos, Nigeria, December 13, 2008:

“Then in politics, I think religious leaders should better stay clear of partisan politics.”

4) Is the Dalai Lama a manifestation of the Buddha of Compassion?

Interview with Australian reporter Ray Martin for the TV program ‘Sunday’ June 10, 2007:

Martin: “The world calls you a living god, a living Buddha, does that embarrass you?”

Dalai Lama: “That is totally nonsense. I am not God. I am not living Buddha. The real person or the real name fit the real person; that is simple Buddhist monk.”

Martin: “Simple Buddhist monk?”

Dalai Lama: “Just Buddhist monk.”

Interview in India by Parveen Chopra and Swati Chopra published in ‘Life Positive’ magazine, August 2001:

P.Chopra/ S. Chopra: “You are called the ‘living Buddha’…?”

Dalai Lama: “The term ‘living Buddha’ is a translation of the Chinese word ‘ho fu’. In Tibetan, the operative word is ‘lama’ which means ‘guru’. A guru is someone who is not necessarily a Buddha but is heavy with knowledge. I believe that previous Dalai Lamas were manifestations of Avalokiteshvara (the Buddha of Compassion) and the fifth Dalai Lama is believed to be an incarnation of Manjushri. I am fortunate to be the reincarnation of all these great lamas!” (laughs)

Why does he give completely opposite answers to the same question? At some point in his life did he suddenly realize that he is an ordinary being? From a spiritual point of view it is completely illogical to make such contradictory statements, unless there is a motivation to deceive or confuse. The question is which of these answers is the truth? I think the true answer can be validly inferred by admissions he has made concerning the state of his own mind.

Interview by Mary S. Aikins in the Canadian version of ‘Readers Digest Magazine’ in the February 2004:

Aikins: “I’m told that after a long day you often relax by watching television. What are your favourite programs?”

Dalai Lama: “Nature programs: National Geographic, Discovery Channel.”

Aikins: “Do you have a favourite animal?”

Dalai Lama: “Birds maybe. I feed birds, peaceful birds. I’m a non-violent person, but if a hawk comes when I’m feeding birds, I lose my temper and get my air rifle.”

Aikins: “You have an air rifle?”

Dalai Lama: “Yes, although I shoot only to scare the hawks.”

Later he was asked the following:

Aikins: “What special message do you have for parents?”

Dalai Lama: “They themselves must have a very close relationship, respect one another. That has a positive impact on the child’s mind. On top of that, parents must provide every occasion for genuine human affection to the child. I think that’s very important. [Pause.] Though I’m not sure that if I was a father I would be very good. I have a bad temper…My father also was quite short-tempered.”

Interview with Claudia Dreifus ‘New York Times’ November 28, 1993:

Dreifus: “It is said that you get up at 4 in the morning. How can you be lazy?”

Dalai Lama: “It’s not that kind of laziness. For instance, sometimes, when I visit some Western countries, I develop an enthusiasm to improve my English. But when I actually make the effort to study, after a few days, my enthusiasm is finished. [Laughs.] That is laziness. Other weaknesses are, I think, anger and attachments. I’m attached to my watch and my prayer beads. Then, of course, sometimes beautiful women. . . . But then, many monks have the same experience. Some of it is curiosity: If you use this, what is the feeling?” [Points to his groin.]

Later he is asked:

Dreifus: “What do you do for leisure, to relax?”

Dalai Lama: “I like to let my thoughts come to me each morning before I get up. I meditate for a few hours and that is like recharging. After that, my daily conduct is usually driven by the motivation to help, to create a positive atmosphere for others. I garden . . . gardening is one of my hobbies. Also, reading encyclopaedias with pictures. [Laughs.] I am a man of peace, but I am
fond of looking at picture books of the Second World War. I own some, which I believe are produced by Time-Life. I’ve just ordered a new set. Thirty books.”

Dreifus: “Really? Why does the Reincarnation of Compassion have such a fascination with one of the most terrible events in human history?”

Dalai Lama: “Perhaps because the stories are so negative and gruesome, they strengthen my belief in non-violence. [Smiles.] However, I find many of the machines of violence very attractive. Tanks, airplanes, warships, especially aircraft carriers. And the German U-boats, submarines. . . .”

Dreifus: “I once read that as a little boy in Lhasa, you liked war toys.”

Dalai Lama: “Yes, very much. I also had an air rifle in Lhasa. And I have one in India. I often feed small birds, but when they come together, hawks spot them and catch them — a very bad thing. So in order to protect these small birds, I keep the air rifle.”

Dreifus: “So it is a Buddhist rifle?”

Dalai Lama: [Laughs] “A compassionate rifle!”

An example of the Dalai Lama’s ‘bad temper’ comes from the pages one his own books where he threatens one of his students. On page 242 of ‘Kalachakra Tantra- Rite of Initiation’ he says:

“You must do what I tell to you. You should not deride me, and if you do, without forsaking fright, the time of death will come, and you will fall into a hell.”

Interview with Jörg Eigendorf July 4, 2009:

Eigendorf: “When was the last time you were unfair or unjust?”

Dalai Lama: [Thinks] “Sometimes I lose my patience, but then I apologize. It happens sometimes.”

Eigendorf: “You have written books about how damaging anger is, and still you get angry sometimes?”

Dalai Lama: “Of course. It is not about eliminating anger, but rather finding the cause for it and working against it. If you do not understand where the anger comes from and don’t work against it, the anger will grow. Anger is a destructive emotion which is based on arrogance. This is why one must find the cause and counteract it.”

The Dalai Lama repeatedly admits suffering from the delusion of anger. If he were an enlightened being – the Buddha of Compassion – generating the mind of anger would be completely impossible. Anger can only arise in ordinary beings because they have yet to abandon negative minds. The mind of enlightenment is totally free from all traces of negativity, and once attained could never degenerate.

Interview with Bill Moyers, ‘Spirit and Nature’ 1991, PBS Television:

Moyers: “Does this reverence for all living things mean that I shouldn’t have [slaps his own face] … that mosquito that just bit me here?”

Dalai Lama: [laughing]

Moyers: “I’m serious about that – would it – does it … is there a danger of excess in this. A lot of people say, well you who care about the environment are going to extremes.”

Dalai Lama: “Usually is my practice is something like this. One mosquito see…one mosquito come… that if my mood is something quite – quite happy then usually I give some blood see – to the mosquito. Then there is the second time comes …then more impatience. So that sometimes I do like this… [blows on his arm at imaginary mosquito] blow … blow. Then third come! Then sometimes…” [flicks imaginary mosquito with his finger apparently indicating that he is killing it, while laughing]

Moyers: “Three strikes and your out – as we say.”

Australian TV program ‘Sunday’ with Ray Martin, June 10, 2007:

Martin: “And, do you — last — Do you really, as you say in this book, do you really believe you may come back as an insect or an animal next time?”

Dalai Lama: “It’s always possible.”

Martin: “Is it?”

Dalai Lama: “As a Buddhist that, depends on my sort of activities or my actions during this lifetime.”

Martin: “But what have you done bad that would bring you back as an insect?”

Dalai Lama: “One of my sort of little doubt is unfortunately, I think, killing few mosquitoes.”

Martin: “Mosquitoes?”

Dalai Lama: “I really don’t know. So, so — so next life there is possibility to reincarnate as a mosquito.”

In two separate interviews the Dalai Lama admits deliberately breaking his ordination vow of refraining from killing. For an ordained person this is a very serious transgression and a great accumulation of non-virtue. In the interview with Bill Moyers, he feels the action of killing to be humorous! The Dalai Lama clearly states that the condition which determines whether a mosquito lives or dies is dependent upon his mood. In fact, his ordination vows are destroyed because he expresses both no regret for the action, and sets an unprecedented example of non-virtue for his followers to emulate. For the Dalai Lama compassion for all sentient beings has severe limits. In most spiritual traditions he would be considered an apostate.

Interview with Amitabh Pal ‘The Progressive’ January 2006:
[the Dalai Lama comments about military leaders who were apparently Buddhist]

“In the 1930s, one Mongolian leader became a very, very brutal dictator and eventually became a murderer. Previously, he was a monk, I am told, and then he became a revolutionary. Under the influence of his new ideology, he actually killed his own teacher. Pol Pot’s family background was Buddhist. Whether he himself was a Buddhist at a young age, I don’t know. Even Chairman Mao’s family background was Buddhist… So one day, if the Dalai Lama becomes a mass murderer, he will become the most deadly of mass murderers.” [Laughs]

Article by Michael Paulson and James F. Smith, in the ‘Boston Globe,’ May 1, 2009:

‘A student asked about ethics and the weapons industry. The Dalai Lama, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 for his non-violent campaign for Tibetan rights, said he hoped this would be the century for global demilitarization. But a good start, he said, would be for institutions like MIT to invent a bullet “that misses ordinary people but hits the decision makers,” waving his arm in the path of a wiggling bullet to laughter and applause. “That kind of bullet needs to be developed. Wonderful.”’

These are supposedly examples of the Dalai Lama’s sense of humour. Considering he has been friends with and admired people who have ordered mass murder, (Asahara, Mao, Xiaoping) is it not a sign of spiritual degeneracy to joke in this way?

Lama Zopa Rinpoche, Aryatara Institute, Germany, April 7, 2001:

Lama Zopa: ‘Recently, when His Holiness the Dalai Lama was at Geshe Sopa’s center, Deer Park, in Madison, Wisconsin, His Holiness said in the teachings, “I have no realization of bodhichitta or emptiness.”

If the Dalai Lama was a manifestation of Avalokiteshvara – the Buddha of Compassion – necessarily he would possess both bodhichitta and wisdom realizing emptiness.


The Dalai Lama cannot be the Buddha of Compassion. By his own admission he states that he is subject to experiencing negative minds like anger and attachment. Since Buddhas do not experience negative minds, the Dalai Lama must be an ordinary being.
The admissions of anger, killing, attachment to women and material things, possession of a firearm, watching television, and fascination for the weaponry of war clearly indicate the mind of an ordinary deluded being. He states that he has no realization of bodhichitta or emptiness which are the very qualities of a superior being. Moreover, his sense of humour may seem to be innocuous to some, but why is it violence based? Is it not perverse for a religious leader to joke that, ‘if the Dalai Lama becomes a mass murderer, he will become the most deadly of mass murderers?’ It is impossible for ordinary beings to know the minds of others directly but the Dalai Lama’s words do express the content of his mind. In his moments of candour he reveals a deeply disturbed psyche. One may argue that, of course, all ordinary beings have faults, but it is the Dalai Lama and majority of his followers who are the ones who have claimed that he is the manifestation of a faultless enlightened being.

5) Is the Dalai Lama a reincarnation of the previous Dalai Lama?

To have successfully reincarnated 14 times in a row in the same world and in the same region of the world, one would necessarily have to possess a high degree of control over their mind. The fourteenth Dalai Lama has an admitted anger and attachment problem. It is all but impossible for a person strongly influenced by negative minds to take human rebirth fourteen times in succession. Why? Delusions such as anger cause a person to perform non-virtue (such as killing mosquitoes) which is a direct cause for unfortunate rebirth. Since the first reincarnation would supposedly possess the most negative minds and subsequent reincarnations fewer and fewer, the current Dalai Lama should possess the least negative and purest mind of all the fourteen reincarnations. He should have the deepest and most profound wisdom and realization of all the Dalai Lamas. Unfortunately the Dalai Lama’s speech exposes to the world a person whose practice of Buddha’s teachings is completely inconsistent and contradictory to them.


The Dalai Lama has an anger problem, an attachment problem, and by extension an ignorance problem. These deluded minds preclude the possibility of successive reincarnations, therefore the fourteen Dalai Lamas cannot be the same person. In addition the biographies of the Dalai Lamas indicate that some were deeply troubled and were unable to maintain moral discipline or even hold an interest in practicing Dharma. In his book ‘The Making of Modern Tibet,’ Tom Grunfeld describes the sixth Dalai Lama, Tsangyang Gyatso. On page 43 he writes:

“[He] came to be known among Tibetans as the ‘Merry one’, and not without cause, for he devoted himself more to debauchery than to religious pursuits. He is fondly remembered for his poetry, which constitutes almost the entire non- religious literature of Tibet.”

The early Dalai Lamas on the other hand were pure practioners that caused both peace and Dharma to flourish throughout the whole region of Tibet and Mongolia. Opposite personality traits such as these show unequivocally that the Dalai Lamas are of different mental continuums.

The Dalai Lama’s own words are best suited to summarize what Buddhists should do in response to uncovering such deceitfulness. In the article ‘Shaping the Future? Western Buddhist Teachers Meet the Dalai Lama,’ (Dharamsala, India. March 23-22, 1993) Stephen Batchelor quotes the following:

Dalai Lama: “When there is incontrovertible evidence of wrong-doing, then it is one’s responsibility to take action. Make voice! Give warning! We no longer tolerate!”

Batchelor: [The Dalai Lama encouraged us repeatedly to criticise such behaviour openly, even, when all else fails to “name names in newspapers.”]

The ‘Globe and Mail’ (Canadian newspaper) September 8, 2006:

Dalai Lama: “Media people should have long noses like an elephant to smell out politicians, mayors, prime ministers and businessmen. We need to know the reality, the good and the bad, not just the appearance.”


The Dalai Lama’s own words are his worst enemy. What Buddhists need to understand is that the institution of Dalai Lamas, (since the time of the fifth Dalai Lama) has merged religion with politics so thoroughly and for so long, that the practice is rarely questioned. It has resulted in Tibetan Buddhists and now Western Buddhists developing faith in and obedience to the political power of the Dalai Lama. History has shown that political considerations invariably cause abandonment of spiritual values.

The purpose of exposing the Dalai Lama’s deception is not to induce hatred toward him but to show that the institution of the Dalai Lamas is heretical and is destroying Buddhism. It is because he holds so much influence over Buddhists worldwide that his betrayal must be exposed. Sadly, the Dalai Lama’s spiritual heart has been sacrificed in order to appease his political ambition and power. He is therefore completely unreliable as a spiritual leader. He has indicated repeatedly that he does not hold basic Buddhist beliefs nor does he wish to propagate Buddhist teachings. Buddhist should of course develop compassion for such a misguided being. Buddhists would be wise to conclude that no matter what profound or beautiful things he may say, there is no reasonable basis in which he should be regarded as an actual Buddhist practitioner. Buddhists should realize that the only reason he is able say anything profound or meaningful is because he has Buddha’s words to repeat.

The Dalai Lama has said that whether or not there is a fifteenth Dalai Lama is for Tibetans to decide. For the sake of Buddhism may Tibetans find the wisdom to finally and forever abandon this fusion of religion and politics, and let the religious lead the religious and the political lead the political.