A Great Deception 2011-08

A Great Deception
A Great Deception
The Ruling Lamas’ Policies
Western Shugden Society

First published in 2010 by the Western Shugden Society
This electronic edition published 2011 by the Western Shugden Society
The Western Shugden Society is the international coalition of practitioners of the
enlightened Deity Dorje Shugden
Studio 177
56 Tavistock Place
London
WC1H 9RG
Tel: +44 (0)207 193 9206
email: info@westernshugdensociety.org
Company Reg No: 6631434 (UK)
Copyright © Western Shugden Society 2009
Cover image Copyright © Western Shugden Society 2009
A Great Deception; The Ruling Lamas’ Policies

by Western Shugden Society is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-
NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
You are free: to Share – copy, distribute and transmit the work under the
following conditions:
Attribution – You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author
or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your work).
Noncommercial – You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
No Derivative Works – You may not alter, transform, or build upon this work.
With the understanding that:
Waiver – Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from
the copyright holder.
Public Domain – Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain
under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
Other rights – In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license:
Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and
limitations;
The author’s moral rights;
Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used,
such as publicity or privacy rights.
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.
ISBN 978-09563918-8-9 – e-book
ISBN 978-0-9563918-0-3 – paperback
ISBN 978-0-9570036-0-6 – Adobe Portable Document Format (.pdf)
Contents
List of plates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PART ONE: The Tibetan Situation Today

Chapter 1: Lama Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Chapter 2: Reting Lama – How he chose the false Dalai Lama . . . . . . 23
Chapter 3: A Dictator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Chapter 4: A Hypocrite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Chapter 5: The Ban on the Practice of Dorje Shugden:
a Chronicle of Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Chapter 6: Newspaper and Magazine Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
Chapter 7: A Refutation of Shugden Research Group Dhomed . . . . . 99
PART TWO: The Dalai Lama of Tibet – Unravelling the Myth
Chapter 8: Mixing Religion and Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Dharma and Politics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
The Meaning of ‘Mixing Religion and Politics’ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
The Tibetan System of Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
Oracles, Dough Balls and Divinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Chapter 9: The History and Institution of the Dalai Lamas . . . . . . . . 117
Je Tsongkhapa and the Ganden Tradition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
The First Four Dalai Lamas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119
The Fifth Dalai Lama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
The Sixth and Seventh Dalai Lamas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
The Eighth to Twelfth Dalai Lamas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
The Thirteenth Dalai Lama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
Chapter 10: The Fourteenth Dalai Lama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
His Early Life and Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Embracing Communism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
The Myths Surrounding his Escape from Tibet . . . . . . 154
Political Views and Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
The Issue of Tibetan Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .161
5
Negotiations with Beijing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167
The Panchen Lama Affair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
The Issue of Democratisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
How the Dalai Lama’s Political Failures Led to His Ban
on Dorje Shugden Practice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
Chapter 11: The Implementation, Effects and Alleged
Reasons for the Ban on the Practice of
Dorje Shugden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Chapter 12: Open Secrets concerning the Fourteenth Dalai Lama . . . 199
The Recognition of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
The Illusion of Government . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
The Dalai Lama’s Brother, Gyalo Dondrub . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
The Dudjom Rinpoche Affair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
The Assassination of Gungtang Tsultrim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
The Karmapa Affair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
The Politics of the Kalachakra Initiations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
Defamation of Je Phabongkhapa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212
The Dalai Lama’s involvement with the CIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
and the Tibetan Guerrillas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
The Attempted Coup in Bhutan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
The Tibetan Arms Trade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 220
The Hypocrisy over Taiwan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
The Dalai Lama’s fascination with war and Nazism . . . . . . . . . 222
The Friendship with Shoko Asahara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
Incitements to Murder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225
How did the Dalai Lama receive the Nobel Peace Prize? . . . . . . . 228
Chapter 13: Judging the Dalai Lama by his Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
What has the Dalai Lama achieved? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
‘Free Tibet’ – Where has all the money gone? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 235
Who is the real Dalai Lama? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
Appendix 1: 1959 Correspondence between the Dalai Lama

and General Tan Kuan-san . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Appendix 2: The Mongoose-Canine Letter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257
Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283
6
List of plates:
1. The first statue of Dorje Shugden, made by the Fifth Dalai Lama with his own
hands. The statue is now at Pelgyeling Monastery, in Nepal.
2. Trode Khangsar, the Temple dedicated to Dorje Shugden by the Fifth Dalai Lama.
3. Line drawing of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Losang Gyatso, 1617-1682.
4. The Thirteenth Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso, 1876-1933.
5. Yapshi Langdun, a Tibetan minister who Reting regarded as a rival and
outmanoeuvered in the search for the new Dalai Lama.
6. Reting Rinpoche with Bruno Beger in 1938, during one of several German SS
expeditions to Tibet.
7. An SS expedition to Tibet in 1938. Reting sent them home with a letter to
‘King Hitler’, praising the Nazi leader and requesting that they strengthen the
relationship between the two regimes. 378
8. Lhamo Dondrub, as a child in the Muslim village of Taktser before being
brought to Lhasa.
9. Enthroned as the Fourteenth Dalai Lama and given the name Tenzin Gyatso.
10. Nowadays the Dalai Lama lives in exile, but who is the real Dalai Lama behind
the mask?
11. The Dalai Lama meeting Chairman Mao in 1955.
12. The Dalai Lama voting at the First National People’s Congress, 1954.
13. The Dalai Lama praised Mao as being like a God.
14. A division of the Tibetan army on parade in 1938.
15. Bayonet wielding soldiers on guard at the Norbulinka, the Dalai Lama’s summer
palace.
16. This top secret CIA field diary was kept by Douglas MacKiernan and Frank
Bessac. It proves that the CIA were in Tibet as early as 1949, before the
People’s Liberation Army entered Tibet in 1950. CIA covert operations in Tibet
continued until the early 1970s. In recent decades the National Endowment for
Democracy has continued CIA activities with respect to Tibet. 379
17. The Dalai Lama with Tibetan Resistance fighters in 1959. According to CIA files,
in 1956 the Dalai Lama personally requested the Indian and US governments to
support the Tibetan resistance fighters. 380
18. Monks surrendering the guns and explosives they were using against the Chinese.
19. Gyalo Dondrub, the Dalai Lama’s brother, involved - in his own words - in
‘very dirty business’.
20. The Dalai Lama inspecting troops at Chakrata. He authorised the Tibetan units
of the Indian Special Frontier Force to fight the war in East Pakistan in 1971.
21. John Kenneth Knaus, a CIA operative who was involved with the CIA funded
Tibetan guerrillas.
22. Norbu Dorje, a US-trained former Tibetan guerrilla.
23. Torture implements from the time of the 13th & 14th Dalai Lamas on display
in Lhasa. This photo shows tools for gouging out eyes and crushing fingers.
7
24. A Tibetan with his severed arm.
25-26. Stocks. These were in common use in Shol prison at the base of the
Dalai Lama’s 1000-room Potala Palace.
27. A Tibetan whose arm was cut off as punishment.
28. A Tibetan whose Achilles tendons were severed as punishment.
29. A Tibetan in leg-irons, left to wander the streets begging for food.
30. The Dalai Lama with Shoko Asahara, leader of the AUM Cult, who
masterminded the sarin gas attack on Tokyo’s subway that killed 12 people.
31. The Dalai Lama with Jorg Haider, leader of Austrian extreme rightwing (FPÖ) party.
32. The Dalai Lama with Bruno Beger, a convicted Nazi war criminal, who
conducted experiments on Jews in German concentration camps; 86 of his
subjects were murdered.
33. The Dalai Lama with his friend and mentor Heinrich Harrer. Harrer was a
Nazi and an SS sergeant. He joined the SA (Sturm-Abteilung) in 1934 when it
was illegal in Austria.
34. The Dalai Lama in January 2008: ‘These monks must be expelled from all
monasteries. If they are not happy, you can tell them that the Dalai Lama
himself asked that this be done, and it is very urgent.’ 381 Subsequent to this,
the persecution, already started in 1996, became more intense.
35. Entry is denied to the monasteries and their facilities.
36. Hundreds of monks are expelled and made homeless. Indian Police provide
temporary protection for them.
37. Even children are forced to make public oaths denouncing Dorje Shugden.
38. Wanted posters appear around Dharamsala inciting violence to Dorje Shugden
practitioners.
39. Hospitals ban Dorje Shugden worshippers from receiving treatment.
40. The public ‘referendum’ that forces monks from their monasteries.
41. A wall is built at Ganden Monastery to segregate the Shugden monks from the
rest of the monastery.
42. Application for identity documents require the person to have denounced
Dorje Shugden.
43. The identity card received by those who publicly denounce Dorje Shugden,
without this there is no access to food and medicine.
44. Samdhong Rinpoche, the Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government in Exile
and principally responsible for trying to fulfil the Dalai Lama’s wish to ‘clean’
society of Shugden practitioners.382
45-47. These young tulkus from Shar Gaden Monastery were beaten up because
they worship Dorje Shugden.
48-59. Demonstrations & Protest Marches in Australia, France, Germany, India, United
Kingdom and the United States against the Dalai Lama’s religious persecution.
60-65. Having just received spiritual advice from the Dalai Lama at a talk he gave in
Radio City Music Hall, New York, the attendees left the auditorium and immedi-
ately began attacking the peaceful protest being held by members of the Western
Shugden Society. The Police called in horse-backed reinforcements and heavily
armed riot police; finally they closed down several blocks of Manhattan.
8
Preface
The purpose of this book is to achieve the following four aims:
• to liberate millions of innocent practitioners of the Buddhist
Deity Dorje Shugden and their families from suffering;
• to restore peace and harmony between Shugden and
non-Shugden practitioners;
• to re-establish the common spiritual activities of Shugden
and non-Shugden practitioners; and
• to free Buddhism from political pollution.
Achieving these aims depends solely upon whether the present
Dalai Lama will accept the four points set out at the conclusion of
Chapter 4 of this book.
The Dalai Lama wishes to ban Shugden worship in general; and in
particular to remove Tibetan Shugden worshippers from their com-
munities, and Western Shugden worshippers from the international
Buddhist community. Since 1996 the Tibetan exile government has
continually applied effort to fulfil these wishes. In February 2008
alone, 900 monks who are Shugden practitioners were expelled from
their monasteries in India.
In 1996 the Tibetan exile government publicly decreed to the
Tibetan communities of each country, including Tibet, that Shugden
practitioners were their national enemies and were against the Dalai
Lama’s wishes. The decree stated that unless Shugden practition-
ers promised to stop Shugden worship they would not receive any
official position or job, nor any help or support, even medical assist-
ance, either from the Tibetan exile government or from individual
members of the Tibetan community. Further, any connection at
all with Shugden practitioners should be cut. Children of Shugden
practitioners were no longer permitted to attend Tibetan schools,
and Shugden practitioners themselves could not join community
meetings, social events and so forth.
9
a great deception
The Tibetan exile government put the Dalai Lama’s wishes into
practice directly in India, and in the same way the Dalai Lama’s
official representative in each country throughout the world has
directly and practically followed the orders of the exile govern-
ment. These representatives have organised vigilante groups in
their respective regions and directly prevailed upon such groups to
defame, threaten, and sometimes physically harm Shugden practi-
tioners. In this way many Shugden temples have been closed and
shrines destroyed, individual Shugden practitioner’s houses have
been burned down, practitioners have been brutally beaten, and
children have been banned from their schools. Tibetan Shugden
practitioners are repeatedly accused unjustly of being ‘the Tibetan
national enemy’ and ostracised from their communities.
This inhumane treatment directly violates basic human rights
and principles of democratic law, but nevertheless pervades almost
every Tibetan community today, whether in the East or West.
For example, in Tibet itself where the Chinese now give basic equal
rights to everyone, all Shugden practitioners still suffer from a
lack of religious freedom caused by other Tibetans who continue
to work within Tibet to fulfil the Dalai Lama’s wishes there. And
in Switzerland, a democratic country which hosts a large Tibetan
exile community, Shugden practitioners suffer from a lack of
religious freedom caused by the unjust and discriminatory actions of
groups organised by the Office of the Dalai Lama’s Representative,
which acts directly against democratic law in continually working
to fulfil the Dalai Lama’s wishes. It is the same in all other coun-
tries. The Dalai Lama himself, the Tibetan exile government, the
present and former abbots of the main monasteries of the Gelug
Tradition, and the Dalai Lama’s official representatives in each
country throughout the world, have all broken international law
and are abusing basic human rights. They are criminals wearing
spiritual masks.
The source of all these problems is just one single person – the
Dalai Lama himself. It is very clear that the Dalai Lama’s people are
acting against Shugden practitioners simply out of blind faith, and
only to fulfil his wishes.
10
preface
Since the Dalai Lama first created this international problem in

1996, the world’s media, including the BBC in the UK, have contin-
ually received information about it. In many countries in 1996 and
2008 they directly witnessed thousands of Shugden practitioners
engaging in international public demonstrations against the Dalai
Lama, protesting ‘Dalai Lama, give religious freedom!’ and ‘Dalai
Lama, stop lying!’. There is no doubt that, for example, the BBC
understands this international problem, including the inhumanity
of the situation; the violation of basic human rights; the fact that
it is entirely caused by the Dalai Lama, who acts like a 21st century
dictator; and the fact that the suffering is experienced by millions
of innocent people throughout the world. However, the BBC does
not broadcast any true information about this international prob-
lem, but instead always supports the 21st century dictator, the Dalai
Lama. Why is this?
From the very beginning until now, the Dalai Lama and his exile
government have striven to hide this international problem that
the Dalai Lama himself has created. Whenever a journalist asks the
Dalai Lama ‘Why have you banned Shugden worship and caused
so many problems?’ he replies saying that it is not true that there
is a ban, it is merely rumour; there is no problem. Following this
lie, when journalists ask the same question of the Dalai Lama’s
representatives in each country, they again receive the same bland
reply ‘This is not true, it is just a rumour; there is no problem’. If
you were to telephone the Dalai Lama right now and ask him ‘Why
have you banned Shugden worship and caused so many problems?’
he would still reply saying ‘This is not true, it is rumour; there is
no problem’.
There is no greater liar or a person more powerfully deceptive
than this in the world today. So far the international community
has had no opportunity to receive clear and true information about
Tibetan ruling lamas in general, nor about this present Dalai Lama
in particular, who keeps the name of Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha
of Compassion, whilst harming people’s spiritual life and causing
suffering to millions of innocent people. It is for these reasons that
the Western Shugden Society has prepared this book to provide this
11
a great deception
information, and we hope that the world’s media will investigate

more fully and publicise the issues raised in this book.
The book mainly focuses on the source of this ban – the Dalai
Lama himself – and on the ancient flaw in the system of the
Tibetan government – the ‘Lama Policy’ – that continues in the
Tibetan exile community today, a fundamental flaw which allows
this one man to use his position as religious leader to exercise
political power, and his position as political leader to enforce his
own religious prejudices.
Part One begins by examining the nature of Lama Policy, which,
far from bringing enlightened Buddhist values into politics,
corrupts the practice of Buddhism and makes it a tool in the ruth-
less power struggles of Tibet. The second chapter focuses on the
present Dalai Lama. Based on personal testimonies it shows how
his selection as Dalai Lama was due to political corruption in Tibet
at that time. The Dalai Lama has through his persuasive speech
become revered worldwide as a supposedly wise and compassionate
leader, but the next two chapters of the book examine his actions
and expose the truth, that he is a religious dictator and hypocrite.
The next two chapters are a chronicle of events relating to his ban
on the practice of Dorje Shugden, and a brief selection of news-
paper and magazine reports on the issue of Tibetan independence
and the ban on Dorje Shugden. The remaining chapter of Part One
is a refutation of false accusations made by the ’Shugden Research
Group Dhomed’, a group of the Dalai Lama’s supporters based in
Tibet.
Part Two is a more detailed examination of the major themes
raised in Part One. It begins with an examination of the ‘union of
religion and politics’ system of Tibetan government, first estab-
lished by the Fifth Dalai Lama and from which the Fourteenth
Dalai Lama derives his present power, and reveals how this system
is a great deception, which from generation to generation has
brought nothing but suffering to millions of people. The next
chapter is a review of the history and institution of the Dalai
Lamas, showing how the Fifth Dalai Lama first came to hold dual
political and religious power in Tibet, not through spiritual qualities
12
preface
but through the might of supporting armies and the cynical ruth-
lessness of his ministers. It also looks at the Fifth Dalai Lama’s role
in the murder of Ngatrul Dragpa, who arose after his death as the
Dharma Protector Dorje Shugden; and shows how the Fifth Dalai
Lama’s shameful example as a Buddhist monk was emulated by the
Thirteenth Dalai Lama. Chapter 10 looks at how the present Dalai
Lama has continued this shameful example, examining his political
views and failures, and showing how his ban on Dorje Shugden is
connected with his failed political policies. The following chapter
focuses in particular on this ban itself. Chapter 12 exposes the
present Dalai Lama’s role in the many scandals that have damaged
the Tibetan exile community, revealing a criminal face behind a
spiritual mask, and the final chapter is a summary assessment of
the Dalai Lama’s harmful activities.
We hope that all Buddhist traditions will grow and develop
strongly and purely in the future, free from all such political inter-
ference as exposed in this book.

September 2009
13
PART ONE
The Tibetan Situation Today

Chapter 1
Lama Policy
The explanations given in this book are to encourage people not to

follow or be influenced by ‘Lama Policy’, which like a drug causes
people to be confused about the real nature of Buddhist practice. In
this context, ‘Lama’ refers to the Fifth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth
Dalai Lamas of Tibet. The policy of these lamas has been to use
religion for political aims, thus causing suffering to millions of
people from generation to generation. Because of the Fifth Dalai
Lama’s policy of mixing religion and politics, the Nyingma, Sakya
and Kagyu traditions of Tibetan Buddhism rapidly declined and, as a
result, for hundreds of years millions of people who followed these
traditions experienced great difficulties. Today, some people from
these traditions say that it was followers of the Gelug Tradition who
caused their tradition to decline, but this is untrue. The Gelugpas
themselves had no political power. It was the Fifth Dalai Lama who
alone used his political power to destroy the development of these
traditions, both spiritually and materially.
The Fifth Dalai Lama always showed two faces. One was that of
a Nyingmapa and the other was that of a Gelugpa. In fact, he did
not follow either tradition, but remained between them without ever
finding a pure spiritual path. In this he was like the present Dalai
Lama, the Fourteenth, who also shows two faces and likewise has
never found a pure spiritual path.
The Fifth Dalai Lama achieved political power in the 17th century
through the military support of Gushri Khan, the ruler of the Qoshot
Mongols, who helped him fight a war against Karma Tenkyong
Wangpo, then the principal ruler of Tibet. At the request of the
Fifth Dalai Lama, Gushri Khan sent his Mongol armies into Tibet,
17
a great deception
and as a result won the war. Karma Tenkyong Wangpo was captured
and later executed, and the Fifth Dalai Lama achieved political power
and became the ruler of Tibet. This event alone shows the nature of
Lama Policy. The Fifth Dalai Lama was an ordained Buddhist monk
having the commitment not to kill or otherwise harm others. He
therefore acted directly against the spiritual commitments laid down
by Buddha. This is a very shameful example for a Buddhist monk
holding the position of a high lama, a supposedly holy being.
In their teachings the Fifth and Thirteenth Dalai Lamas talked
about compassion, but they behaved like dictators creating so many
problems for their society. This is true also of the present Dalai
Lama. Despite this hypocrisy, many people because of their extreme
religious view and blind faith still believe that these lamas are holy
beings. In Tibetan society, anyone who has views and intentions that
are different from those of the Dalai Lama is immediately accused
of not being Tibetan; they are criticised, threatened and ostracised.
This happened in the past and is happening to Dorje Shugden prac-
titioners today. From this alone we can see that this Lama Policy
continues to have a devastating effect on society. This problem
cannot be solved unless the lama himself changes his own attitude.
The Fifth Dalai Lama was the founder of Lama Policy, which he
called ‘the union of religion and politics’. The nature of Lama Policy
is deceptive; its function is only to mislead people and to use religion
for political aims. It is like a rainbow, which from a distance looks
beautiful but upon closer examination is seen to be completely empty
and hollow. The lamas who have principally upheld the policy estab-
lished by the Fifth Dalai Lama are the Thirteenth and Fourteenth
Dalai Lamas, and of these two the policy of the present Dalai Lama
is the worst.
During the Fifth Dalai Lama’s time there was a lama called Ngatrul
Dragpa, who was recognised as an emanation of the Buddha of
Wisdom. Even though the Fifth Dalai Lama had political power,
Ngatrul Dragpa had spiritual power, and people throughout Tibet
had great faith in Ngatrul Dragpa, as also did Gushri Khan. These
two lamas had different views and intentions; Ngatrul Dragpa
rejected the Lama Policy of the union of religion and politics. He
18
lama policy
wanted Buddhism to be maintained purely without being used for

worldly aims, but the Fifth Dalai Lama was opposed to this. Afraid
that Ngatrul Dragpa would usurp his position through the help of
Gushri Khan’s ministers, the Fifth Dalai Lama and his ministers
secretly murdered Ngatrul Dragpa. It is commonly accepted that
Ngatrul Dragpa then appeared as a Deity called Dorje Shugden, a
protector of pure Buddhism who prevents the Buddhist religion
being used for political aims. This belief is based on commitments
made by Ngatrul Dragpa himself before he died, and on many
predictions.1 A more detailed account of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s
involvement in the murder of Ngatrul Dragpa is presented later in
Chapter 9.
After Ngatrul Dragpa’s death the Fifth Dalai Lama began to
experience many difficulties and inauspicious signs. Because of this
he believed that Ngatrul Dragpa had become Dorje Shugden and
was wishing to retaliate, and he was terrified that Dorje Shugden
would now kill him. The Fifth Dalai Lama first sought refuge in
other lamas and requested them to burn Dorje Shugden with a
magic ritual fire practice. When this failed, he strongly made many
prayers to his own protector, the Nechung spirit, to destroy Dorje
Shugden, but his experience of inauspicious signs and hallucina-
tions grew even stronger. Eventually he realised that he had made a
great mistake in opposing Ngatrul Dragpa. Regretting his previous
actions, he began to respect the instructions of his root Guru, the
First Panchen Lama, Losang Chokyi Gyaltsen, who had indicated
that Ngatrul Dragpa was of the same mental continuum as the
previous holy beings Sonam Dragpa, Duldzin Dragpa and Je
Tsongkhapa Losang Dragpa. With strong regret the Fifth Dalai
Lama confessed his wrong deeds and, recognising Dorje Shugden
as an enlightened Deity, finally decided to rely upon him. For his
daily practice the Fifth Dalai Lama wrote the following prayer of
request to Dorje Shugden, called Lhundrub Doma in Tibetan:
‘hum
‘Though unmoving from the sphere of primordial
spontaneity,
19
a great deception
With wrathful turbulent power, swifter than lightning,

Endowed with heroic courage to judge good and bad,
I invite you with faith, please come to this place!
‘Robes of a monk, crown adorned with rhinoceros

leather hat,
Right hand holds ornate club, left holds a human heart,
Riding various mounts such as nagas and garudas,
Who subdues the mamos of the charnel grounds,
praise to you!
‘Samaya substances, offerings and tormas, outer, inner and

secret,
Favourite visual offerings and various objects are arranged.
Although, previously, my wishes were a bit dense,
Do not stop your powerful apparitions, I reveal and confess!
‘Now respectfully praising with body, speech and mind,

For us, the masters, disciples, benefactors and entourages,
Provide the good and avert the bad!
Bring increase like the waxing moon in spiritual and temporal
realms!
‘Moreover, swiftly accomplishing all wishes,

According to our prayers, bestow the supreme effortlessly!
And like the jewel that bestows all wishes,
Always protect us with the Three Jewels!’2
Later he ordered a Shugden Temple to be built in Lhasa called

‘Trode Khangsar’, which still exists today, and he even crafted the
first statue of Dorje Shugden himself.3
From this account we can understand that the present Dalai
Lama’s actions are completely opposite to those of the Fifth Dalai
Lama. Due to ignorance, the Fifth Dalai Lama first rejected the
enlightened Deity Dorje Shugden, but later his mind changed from
ignorance to wisdom and he came to believe in and rely upon Dorje
Shugden for the rest of his life. In contrast, the present Dalai Lama
at first relied upon the enlightened Deity Dorje Shugden, during
20
lama policy
this period writing a prayer of request, the first and last verses of
which read:
‘You are the powerful protector of Saviour Manjushri,
Who have the powerful wealth of the wisdom and
compassion of innumerable conquerors,
And who arose as the king of all powerful wrathful ones;
Please come from Tushita, Pure Dakini Land, and so
forth.
‘In summary, I request you, O Protector,
Who are the synthesis of all Protectors, Yidams and
Gurus,
Please be the embodiment of all my Protectors, Yidams
and Gurus,
And please send rain from the great gathering of clouds
of the four types of actions, to fulfil the two
attainments.’4
Later, having received advice from the oracle of the Nechung

spirit, the present Dalai Lama’s mind changed from wisdom to ignor-
ance. Using his political power he has now imposed a ban on the
practice of Dorje Shugden, causing suffering to millions of people.
Despite this difference in their actions, the present Dalai Lama still
says publicly that he is rejecting Dorje Shugden because he is follow-
ing the Fifth Dalai Lama. This is clearly a lie.
Shugden practitioners want to practise the Gelug Tradition purely
without mixing it with the Nyingma or any other tradition, and
because of this the present Dalai Lama says that Shugden practi-
tioners are sectarian. In truth, Nyingma practitioners also want
to practise their tradition purely without mixing it with the Gelug
Tradition, and this is also true of Sakya and Kagyu practitioners.
Thus, according to the Dalai Lama’s view, the practitioners of these
other traditions would also be considered sectarian, but he accuses
only Shugden practitioners of this. This shows how dishonest and
biased he is.
What the present Dalai Lama really wants is to become the
21
a great deception
leader of all traditions of Tibetan Buddhism by making all the

practitioners of these traditions throughout the world follow only
one tradition that he has newly created. Doing this would naturally
destroy the pure lineages and blessings of the Nyingma, Sakya,
Kagyu and Gelug traditions. This would be a very great loss to the
world, when people more than ever need access to the Buddha’s
supreme methods for finding true peace and happiness, and it is for
this reason that the Western Shugden Society is encouraging people
to stop being deceived by the drug of Lama Policy.
22
Chapter 2
Reting Lama – How he chose the

false Dalai Lama
The following information has been compiled from various sources,

including Ocean of Truth Explained and personal testimonies.5
Reting Lama was the reincarnate Lama of Reting Monastery
in Tibet, and also one of the most important lamas of Sera Jey
Monastery near Lhasa. After the death of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama
in 1933, Reting Lama became Regent of Tibet. A few years later a
relative of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, a high government minister
called Langdun, told Reting Lama and other ministers that the son
of one of his (Langdun’s) relatives was the reincarnation of the
Thirteenth Dalai Lama, and gave evidence to prove this.
The relationship between Reting Lama and Langdun was strained
and difficult, and Reting rejected Langdun’s claim that the son of
his relative was the reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama.
However, the majority of ministers supported Langdun, and this
made Reting anxious about his position. If the son of Langdun’s
relative was recognised as the reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai
Lama, he would then lose his own power and position.
To solve this problem and protect his position, Reting devised
a plan with his close friend, Ketsang Lama, another lama from
Sera Jey Monastery. They made three decisions, the first of which
was that the reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama would be
chosen from a faraway place such as the Amdo Kumbum region
near the Chinese border. Secondly, Reting should go to the holy lake
of the Deity Shridevi, in accordance with tradition, pretend to see
visions of the Tibetan letters a, ka and ma in the water there, and
record this in writing. These letters a, ka and ma would indicate
23
a great deception
that the mother (ma) of the reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai

Lama would appear in Amdo (a) Kumbum (ka). And thirdly, after
completing the second preparation, Ketsang should go to Amdo
Kumbum and choose a suitable boy as the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s
reincarnation.
When Ketsang and his two assistants arrived in Amdo Kumbum
they began searching for a suitable boy. One day Ketsang met an old
monk of Kumbum Monastery and explained that he was looking for
a suitable boy to be recognised as the reincarnation of the Thirteenth
Dalai Lama. He asked if the monk could recommend anyone. The
old monk replied that in the nearby village of Taktser there was a
boy who might be suitable, and offered to take Ketsang to see him.
The old monk was actually a relative of the boy’s family, so he was
trying to guide Ketsang in the direction of his own family! Taktser
was a Muslim village.
Two days later, Ketsang visited the family with the old monk, and
was introduced to the boy. Ketsang showed the boy many different
objects that had belonged to the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, but the
boy showed no interest at seeing these things. Even when Ketsang
handed him something saying, ‘This is yours’ the boy would immedi-
ately throw it away. However, Ketsang found that the boy was
attractive looking, and thought that this would be good enough.
As detailed in The Ocean of Truth Explained, Ketsang lied about the
results of his examination of the boy.
A few days later Ketsang visited the family again and told the
boy’s parents, ‘We are representatives of the Tibetan government,
and if you are happy we want to recognise your son as the reincar-
nation of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama.’ The parents happily accepted.
The boy later wore the saffron robes of a Buddhist monk, and the
local people jokingly nicknamed him ‘The Saffron-Robed Muslim’.
In this way, he received the position of the Tibetan Dalai Lama, and
because of this Tibetan people began to worship him and keep his
photograph on their shrines.
Having made these preparatory arrangements, Reting then
informed the Tibetan government ministers and announced to
the public that he and Ketsang Lama had found the authentic
24
reting lama – how he chose the false dalai lama
reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama. In saying this he

publicly lied.
The ministers of the Tibetan government were unhappy to accept
someone from a non-Buddhist background as the reincarnation of
the Thirteenth Dalai Lama. However, some monasteries supported
Reting, and in particular the Abbot of Sera Jey Monastery force-
fully threatened that there would be civil war if the ministers did not
accept the reincarnation chosen by Reting. Also, as Reting himself
had great political power, the ministers eventually had no choice but
to follow whatever he said.
The boy was called Lhamo Dondrub, and to receive permission
for him to be released from the Muslim community, Reting asked
the Tibetan government to pay 400,000 silver coins to the local
Muslim leader of the area around Taktser, a man called Ma Pu-fang.
Eventually the Muslim boy Lhamo Dondrub was brought to Lhasa,
arriving together with his search party, his family and a large group
of Muslim merchants. Reting organised a great welcoming ceremony
for the boy’s arrival.
Later, when the time came for Lhamo Dondrub to receive
ordination vows, he should have received them from the Regent
Reting himself. However, Reting did not have the confidence to
grant ordination vows because of having seriously damaged his
own moral discipline. It was generally known that he was having
a sexual relationship with the wife of his brother, and that he was
engaging in many other actions that were inappropriate for a monk.
Because of this he requested his own Teacher, the elderly Taktra
Rinpoche, to hold the position of Regent for three years, and during
that time to teach the Buddhist way of life and grant ordination
vows to Lhamo Dondrub. Taktra agreed to this request.
After Taktra became Regent he tried to care for and teach the boy,
but soon found that Lhamo Dondrub was very different from other
boys. Whenever Taktra taught him how to practise the Buddhist way
of life, the boy rejected these teachings and showed no interest in
any spiritual practice. The boy was bad tempered, and often shouted
at Taktra. Taktra was very disappointed and one day told some of
his close disciples, ‘This boy Lhamo Dondrub does not have any
25
a great deception
good imprints of a Buddhist way of life. I am worried about our

country and what the future will hold for the Tibetan people.’ Taktra
then appointed two other teachers for the boy – Ling Rinpoche and
Trijang Rinpoche.
Later, Taktra received further information that clearly showed
that Reting was still having sexual relations with a woman and was
engaging in many other actions that were inappropriate for a monk,
and he became even more disappointed with Reting. Generally, in the
very beginning, many government ministers including Langdun had
understood that Reting had lied when he claimed to have received a
vision of the three letters a, ka and ma in the holy lake of the Deity
Shridevi. At the time one of Reting’s assistants had told a friend that
Reting had lied, and the friend in turn had passed this information
to government ministers. When Taktra’s term as Regent was almost
finished, the Tibetan government Kashag (‘Cabinet of Ministers’)
received many reports from different people about how Reting and
Ketsang had chosen a false reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai
Lama, and for this and other reasons the government sent soldiers to
Reting Monastery to arrest Reting and bring him to Lhasa.
While in prison, Reting was brought one day under guard to the
Kashag’s meeting room. The Chief Minister asked Reting to tell the
truth about his vision of the letters a, ka and ma in the water of the
holy lake. Fearing for his life, Reting admitted that he had lied, and
made a full confession. He died soon afterwards in prison; some say
that he was executed on the orders of the Tibetan Government.
Having learnt the truth, the government then publicly announced
that any person who had received a special position from Reting,
including Lhamo Dondrub, would be removed from office. However,
this was a time of great upheaval in Tibet. There was great fear that
the Chinese army would soon invade Tibet and enter Lhasa. Also,
many people were unhappy at hearing that Lhamo Dondrub would
be removed from his position; and Lhamo Dondrub had apparently
begun to improve his qualifications through receiving special care
and teachings from Trijang Rinpoche and Ling Rinpoche. For these
reasons, a number of lamas strongly requested the government
through Taktra Rinpoche to delay the removal of Lhamo Dondrub
26
from the position as Dalai Lama, and this request was accepted.
Shortly afterwards, in 1950, the elderly Taktra Rinpoche was himself
forced to resign. The Chinese army invaded Tibet in the following
year, entering Lhasa a year later. The Tibetan government gradually
ceased to function, and finally in 1959 Lhamo Dondrub – or Tenzin
Gyatso as he was then called – escaped to India.
In India the false Dalai Lama created the Tibetan exile govern-
ment. This exile government has hidden the truth about previous
events in Tibet, and for fifty years has spread throughout the world
only false information that has exaggerated the good qualities of
this false Dalai Lama. They have made this false Dalai Lama famous
throughout the world, but what have they gained from this? They
receive a lot of money every year, but where does all this money go?
Their policy of mixing religion with politics has achieved nothing for
Tibet, but has greatly damaged the reputation of Buddhism. Although
Lhamo Dondrub is a Muslim, throughout his life he has maintained
the pretence of being a Buddhist holy being, giving Buddhist teach-
ings that he stole from his root Guru Trijang Rinpoche. In this way
he has cheated people throughout the world.
There are innumerable examples of how this false Dalai Lama has
cheated people through lying. One example concerns a Spanish boy
called Osel Hita Torres who was recognised by the Dalai Lama as the
reincarnation of a Tibetan lama. In May 2009 an article about Osel,
‘Boy chosen by Dalai Lama as reincarnation of spiritual leader turns
back on Buddhist order’ appeared in the British Guardian newspaper.
The article said:
‘As a toddler, he was put on a throne and worshipped by monks

who treated him like a god. But the boy chosen by the Dalai
Lama as a reincarnation of a spiritual leader has caused con-
sternation – and some embarrassment – for Tibetan Buddhists
by turning his back on the order that had such high hopes for
him.
‘… He is now studying film in Madrid and has denounced
the Buddhist order that elevated him to guru status. “They
took me away from my family and stuck me in a medieval
27
a great deception
situation in which I suffered a great deal,” said Torres, 24,

describing how he was whisked from obscurity in Granada to
a monastery in southern India. “It was like living a lie,” he told
the Spanish newspaper El Mundo.’6
Another article called ‘Osel’s awakening, a kid against his destiny’
in Babylon, an English/Spanish magazine, says:
‘ “They recognized me through the dreams of the Lama Zopa,
although there were ten candidates from around the world,
especially among sons of students of the Lama Yeshe. The
Dalai Lama spoke some riddles and consulted the oracle.”
‘However, he had no recollection of his supposed earlier life.
“My earliest memory is of being four years old in Dharamsala,
walking alone through a wood, but nothing about past lives.”
‘… “I returned to Spain because I had arrived at a point
where I no longer fitted into that life. I couldn’t find myself,
because for me it was a lie being there living something that
was imposed from outside.” For a person who has lived eight-
een years in a bubble, stepping back into reality was a brutal
shock.’7
Osel finally managed to liberate himself from this false life created
by the Dalai Lama and some of his close followers. This is one of
many examples of how the Dalai Lama deceives and manipulates
people at different levels.
All of Lhamo Dondrub’s opportunities came from the supreme
kindness of his two Teachers – Ling Rinpoche and Trijang Rinpoche
– yet how did he return their kindness? In The Ocean of Truth Explained
it says:
‘Later, in Dharamsala, India, Ling Rinpoche died with deep
disappointment because the Dalai Lama refused his request to
stop encouraging Gelugpas to practise the Nyingma Tradition.
And Trijang Rinpoche died with deep disappointment, because
the Dalai Lama refused his request to stop banning the practice
of Dorje Shugden.’
28
It is commonly known that in this age the great Lama Je

Phabongkhapa and his heart disciples Ling Rinpoche and Trijang
Rinpoche are the lineage holders of the Gelug Tradition – a spiritual
tradition that was founded by the Wisdom Buddha Je Tsongkhapa
and which has flourished extensively throughout the world. The
‘Saffron-robed Muslim’, this false Dalai Lama, acts directly against
the views, intention and deeds of these three precious lamas. The
main wish of this false Dalai Lama is to destroy the pure lineage of
the Gelug Tradition.
To avoid losing their own position within the monasteries, the
present and ex-abbots of the main monasteries of the Gelug
Tradition apply effort to fulfil the wishes of the false Dalai Lama.
They have directly caused great division within the Sangha (the
Buddhist ordained community), have removed thousands of monks
from their monasteries, and have destroyed the internal trust,
harmony and peace of every Gelug monastery. In this way they
have caused many thousands of monks and their families to
suffer.
It is shocking that they support the false Dalai Lama in his work
to destroy the pure lineage of the Gelug Tradition. How shameful
these present and former abbots are: they are truly criminals hiding
behind spiritual masks.
The principal of these criminals is Samdhong Tulku, the Prime
Minister of the Tibetan exile government and former Speaker of the
Tibetan National Assembly. Previously he was Trijang Rinpoche’s
close disciple, but now he has become a criminal who acts directly
against Trijang Rinpoche’s view, intention and deeds. On behalf of
the false Dalai Lama Samdhong actively encourages Tibetan people
to act against Shugden practitioners. After the false Dalai Lama,
Samdhong is the source of this international problem.
29
Chapter 3
A Dictator
Like a dictator, the present false Dalai Lama has complete control over
both religious and secular life within the exile Tibetan community.
One of his dictatorial actions has been to expel Tibetan Shugden
practitioners from the Buddhist community, claiming that they are
not Buddhist because they worship Dorje Shugden, who he says with-
out evidence is an evil spirit; and at the same time he is preparing to
remove western Shugden practitioners from the Buddhist community
for the same reason. With blatant religious discrimination and extreme
view, he has already expelled thousands of Shugden practitioners from
Tibetan society. Not satisfied with this, he has ordered the collection
of signed declarations from Tibetans in the East and West stating that
they personally will abandon or never engage in Shugden practice,
and that they will not support materially or spiritually, or maintain any
connection with, anyone who does engage in Shugden practice.
His aim in collecting these signed declarations is to protect his own
reputation, by claiming that he is not breaking the law but simply act-
ing in accordance with the wishes of his people. His acts of religious
discrimination are violations of basic human rights, and they defy
any rule of democratic law. This is his own fault, not the fault of
other people; he is being deceitful in blaming others for his breaking
the law. Many people have signed this declaration only because they
were afraid of being punished if they did not. These punishments
have been clearly reported in many newspapers. Other people have
signed because they are the Dalai Lama’s supporters and are trying
to protect his reputation.
On 29 February 2008 the Western Shugden Society asked the
Dalai Lama to produce evidence to prove that Shugden is an evil
31
a great deception
spirit, saying: ‘If you are not telling lies and you have valid evidence
to support your actions you should show such evidence publicly,
and you should do this yourself not through your people who until
now you have hidden behind, having them perform your dirty
work.’8 The Dalai Lama did not reply. His silence proves that he is
lying and has no valid evidence.
To fulfil this false Dalai Lama’s wish to remove all Shugden
practitioners from the worldwide Buddhist community, Robert
Thurman has been quoted publicly as saying that Shugden prac-
titioners are ‘the Taliban of Tibetan Buddhism’9 and also that
Shugden practitioners are working for the Chinese. To clarify this
issue, the Western Shugden Society wrote the following open letter
to him:
‘10th September 2008

An Open Letter
To Robert Thurman,
‘We the Western Shugden Society are writing this letter
regarding your previous public statement that Shugden
people are sectarian, naming them “the Buddhist Taliban”;
and your recent public statement that the Western Shugden
Society protestors are “working for the Chinese”.
‘As you know, Shugden people want to practise the Gelug
tradition purely, without mixing with the Nyingma tradition.
Because of this the Dalai Lama has said to Shugden people
that they are sectarian. In truth, the Nyingmapa also want
to practice their Nyingma tradition purely without mixing
with the Gelug tradition; and it is the same for the Sakyapa
and Kagyupa. So according to the Dalai Lama’s view, the
Nyingmapa, Sakyapa and Kagyupa are also sectarian, but he
only says that Shugden people are sectarian. In reality he is
lying.
‘If you, Robert Thurman, are not yourself lying, then you
must show your evidence to prove your public statements:
that Shugden people are sectarian, “the Buddhist Taliban”
as you named them; and that the Western Shugden Society
32
a dictator
is working for the Chinese. You should show your evidence

publicly through the internet before 25th October 2008.
If your evidence does not appear by this date then we will
conclude that you have lied publicly and are misleading
people.
‘Sincerely,
Western Shugden Society’10
The Western Shugden Society did not receive any reply from
Robert Thurman. Again, his silence indicates that his statements
are lies.
Since 1996 the Dalai Lama has stated publicly again and again
that Shugden practice is harming his life and the cause of Tibetan
independence. Because of their blind faith in the Dalai Lama many
Tibetans believe what he says without investigating the actual truth.
Consequently they have become extremely angry with Shugden
practitioners and have tried to expel them from Tibetan society by
many different means. These measures have included public humili-
ation, acts of provocation and intimidation, and threats; dismissing
Shugden practitioners from jobs and positions, and denying them
services; spreading lies and manipulating public opinion against
them; not allowing other people to have material or spiritual relation-
ship with them; withdrawing essential supplies to monks who engage
in Shugden practice, not allowing them to attend classes or services
at their monasteries, and forcing them to sign promises that they will
abandon Dorje Shugden practice.
Through the Dalai Lama’s acts of religious discrimination,
Tibetans throughout the world are now divided into those who
accept what he says concerning Dorje Shugden and who are con-
sequently angry with Dorje Shugden practitioners, and those who
reject what he says about Dorje Shugden and who are consequently
experiencing great suffering within their communities. This situation
pervades throughout the world, both in the East and in the West.
The entire Tibetan community has lost its internal trust, peace and
harmony, and is experiencing a very dangerous situation. The single
source of all these problems is the Dalai Lama himself. Through
33
a great deception
his destructive policies, the Gelug Tradition is divided into those

who follow his view and believe that Shugden is an evil spirit, and
those who believe that Shugden is a Wisdom Buddha. In this way
the Gelugpas have lost their trust, peace and harmony, as well as
their common spiritual activities, and are experiencing many dangers.
Because of other actions of the Dalai Lama the Kagyupas are also
divided into two groups, and have likewise lost their trust, peace and
harmony, and their common spiritual activities (see Chapter 11: The
Karmapa Affair).
For many years the Dalai Lama repeatedly said that he was not
seeking Tibetan independence and that he has not done anything
to promote it, yet in 2008 he suddenly organised demonstrations
in Tibet against China for this purpose. Although the demonstra-
tions were intended to embarrass the Chinese government in the
year when the Olympic Games were held in China, the widely-
distributed video footage of Buddhist monks involved in looting
and violence brought Buddhism into disrepute. He himself enjoys
life in his luxurious palace in India, while the poor Tibetan people
experience great suffering and danger. His senseless actions have
caused Tibetans living in Tibet many difficulties, again through
destroying their internal trust, peace and harmony.
As soon as he arrived in India as a refugee in 1959 he made plans
to transform the four traditions of Tibetan Buddhism – Nyingma,
Sakya, Kagyu and Gelug – into one single tradition. This was his
method to destroy the pure lineages of the Nyingma, Sakya, Kagyu
and Gelug, and make himself alone the head of them all by estab-
lishing a new combined tradition. In this way he sought to achieve
complete power to control everything within Tibetan society at a
spiritual, political and material level.
At that time, the Tso Kha Chusum (‘Thirteen Groups of Tibetans’)
opposed his plans and because of this for many years the Tibetan
community lost its harmony and peace. In 1977 the leader of the
Thirteen Groups, Gungtang Tsultrim, was shot dead (see Chapter
11: The Assassination of Gungtang Tsultrim). It is commonly accepted
that the assassin was paid by people working for the Dalai Lama, in
particular the Dalai Lama’s notorious brother Gyalo Dondrub (see
34
a dictator
Chapter 11: The Dalai Lama’s Brother, Gyalo Dondrub). Later, other
important members of the Thirteen Groups also died suddenly and
in suspicious circumstances, again causing many people to believe
that organisations behind the Dalai Lama caused their deaths. It is
said that there is a secret organisation based in New Delhi led by his
notorious brother, whose function is to threaten, destroy the reputa-
tion of, or even kill those who oppose the Dalai Lama’s plans.
Although the Dalai Lama received an advanced education in
Buddhism from his kind Teacher and root Guru Trijang Rinpoche,
who was the lineage holder of Je Tsongkhapa’s teachings, after he
arrived in India his behaviour towards his root Guru sadly changed.
He continually acted against the intentions of Trijang Rinpoche, and
worked hard to destroy Trijang Rinpoche’s spiritual tradition, the
pure tradition of Je Tsongkhapa’s doctrine.
Since 1996, Shugden practitioners throughout Tibet, India and
Nepal have suffered because many Tibetans followed the Dalai
Lama’s view and adopted the belief that Shugden practitioners are
their enemy. In both India and Tibet, many Shugden temples, shrines,
statues, paintings and texts have been unlawfully destroyed, and
many monks have been expelled from their monasteries. Following
the Dalai Lama’s orders, the authorities within the monasteries and
Tibetan settlements are continually making effort to expel those
who have devotion for Trijang Rinpoche and who practise Dorje
Shugden. In this way, the Dalai Lama has caused great sorrow and
suffering to millions of people.
What is clear is that all these dreadful situations have developed
through the power of the Dalai Lama’s evil actions. By dictatorial
decree he has caused great suffering to people throughout the world,
threatened the continued existence of pure lineages of Buddhist
practice, opened up deep divisions in the Buddhist community and
rendered the cause of Tibetan independence hopeless by destroying
the internal trust, peace and harmony of the Tibetan people.
35
Chapter 4
A Hypocrite
Although the Dalai Lama talks constantly about love and compas-
sion, his own actions have brought and continue to bring misery
and unhappiness. Since 1996, this false Dalai Lama has unceas-
ingly inflicted heavy and unjust punishment on Dorje Shugden
practitioners – all of whom are completely innocent of any crime
or misdemeanour. Using his people like an army, the Dalai Lama
has destroyed many Shugden temples and shrines, caused mil-
lions of people to experience inhumane situations and unbearable
feelings of pain, and expelled all Shugden practitioners from the
Tibetan community. He has caused innocent people to become
severed from their families, friends, monasteries and communities.
Thousands of Shugden practitioners have been forced into refugee
status for the second time in their life, as they try to escape the
inhumane treatment by seeking exile in other countries.
On 8 February 2008, this Dalai Lama caused the expulsion of
900 monks from their monasteries in India. Earlier, on January 9th,
he had been invited to inaugurate a Prayer Hall for a large monastic
community in South India. At this supposedly spiritual event he
publicly announced a ‘Referendum on the practice of Dolgyal’
(Dolgyal is a false name for Dorje Shugden, which the Dalai Lama
uses in a derogatory way), insisting on a collection of votes on this
issue by the deadline of February 8th. Each monk was required to
cast his individual vote. But since when did any spiritual practice
become the object of a political vote like this?
The voting itself was held in public, in full view of monastery
administrators, by casting coloured sticks indicating either ‘yes’ or
‘no’, with no possibility of abstention. As a direct result of this
37
a great deception
so-called referendum 900 innocent monks were then summarily

expelled from their monasteries.
Most of these 900 monks were very poor and had no other
place to live; many were fearful of the future and actually wept as
they were forced to leave. The false Dalai Lama is clearly breaking
the law by inflicting such blatant religious persecution. Making this
difficult situation worse for the expelled monks is the message now
being issued by his representatives to the Tibetan community, that
anyone who helps Dorje Shugden practitioners will receive similar
punishment. Furthermore, anyone who dares not to follow the
orders of the Dalai Lama is publicly denounced by his government
ministers and declared a ‘Chinese supporter’. Not satisfied with
this, his ministers encourage groups within the Tibetan community
to humiliate, discredit and ostracise the people denounced, and to
distribute ‘wanted’-style posters giving their names, addresses and
biographical details, and those of their families.
Becoming aware of the international public horror at these
recent violations, which clearly stem from the single-minded policy
of the Dalai Lama alone, the Tibetan Prime Minister and other offi-
cials within the exile Tibetan government then started a campaign
to distance the Dalai Lama from this referendum, and from the
resulting inhumane victimisation of a whole section of the Tibetan
community. Such official deception, hypocrisy and duplicity is truly
astounding.
One only needs to hear the speeches of the Dalai Lama and to
witness current events within the Tibetan community to under-
stand the truth. It should be clear to the international public, and
to world leaders, governments and other organisations that it is the
false Dalai Lama himself and no one else who solely initiated and
who solely maintains the prevalent discrimination, persecution and
intolerance within Tibetan society today.
The Dalai Lama has given two reasons for banning the practice
of Dorje Shugden. He claims that Shugden practice shortens his
lifespan, and harms Tibetan independence, but this is all complete
nonsense. He has never produced one valid piece of evidence to
prove his claims. He asserts that ‘Shugden is an evil spirit’, but
38
a hypocrite
where is his evidence to prove this? Until now the only evidence he
has given has been recollections of his own dreams. But how can
he think that such ‘evidence’ is credible? It is utter nonsense and
would be thrown out of any court of law.
If the Dalai Lama is not lying and really has valid evidence to
support his actions then he should make this evidence public; and
he should do this himself, not through those whom he hides behind
and makes perform his ‘dirty work’.
The Dalai Lama has somehow been very fortunate in his decep-
tion and repressive behaviour. Even now, because he has inherited
a high reputation and title from his predecessors, many people still
believe what he says without checking its validity. It is only this
inheritance that has given him the opportunity to use the title ‘Dalai
Lama of Tibet’ and become known throughout the world. He has
never earned this title through his own personal qualities or actions.
This is clear from the way in which he has misused his position
in this modern world. Instead of putting Buddha’s teachings of
universal love, compassion and equanimity into practice he con-
tinues to inflict discrimination, persecution and intolerance upon
Tibetans and upon western Buddhists. He is cynically abusing the
faith that people have in him.
If he really is a Buddhist ‘holy being’, then why is he directly
acting against Buddha’s teachings? Buddha said, ‘You should never
harm living beings because they are your kind mothers.’ But for
many years now the Dalai Lama has harmed millions of innocent
people causing them completely unnecessary suffering, fear and
dangers. And what benefits have been achieved from these actions?
None whatsoever!
This false Dalai Lama is the only 21st century ‘Buddhist’ dicta-
tor. He is the only Tibetan ‘lama’ who uses Buddha’s teachings for
political aims. He is the only Tibetan ‘lama’ who is causing great
suffering and sorrow to millions of innocent people. He is the only
Tibetan ‘lama’ who has no compassion.
To liberate millions of innocent people from suffering we request

everyone throughout the world, including world leaders, to ask the
39
a great deception
Dalai Lama to accept the following four points:

1. to allow anyone who wishes to practise Dorje Shugden
the freedom to do so;
2. to stop completely the discrimination against Shugden
practitioners;
3. to allow all Shugden monks and nuns who have been
expelled to return to their monasteries and nunneries,
and to receive the same material and spiritual rights
as non-Shugden practitioners;
4. to write to Tibetan communities throughout the world
that they should apply practically the above three
points.
40
Chapter 5
The Ban on the Practice of Dorje Shugden:

a Chronicle of Events
Early 1950s
The Dalai Lama composes Melody of the Unceasing Vajra: A
Propitiation of Mighty Gyalchen Dorje Shugden, Protector of Conqueror
Manjushri Tsongkhapa’s Teachings.
1978
The Dalai Lama speaks publicly for the first time against the
practice of Dorje Shugden.
1980s
18 July 1980
During an address at Sera Monastery (near Bylakuppe, Karnataka
State, South India), the Dalai Lama says ‘To summarise my views, I
am not saying Gyalchen [Dorje Shugden] is not an authentic Deity,
but in any event, for those who mainly rely on Palden Lhamo
or Gyalpo Kunga [Nechung], whether it be a great master or a
monastery, it does not bode well to worship Gyalchen.’
The Dalai Lama orders the closure of a small Shugden Temple
near the main hall of Sera Monastery. Lamas and senior monks
from Sera-Jey and Sera-Mey monasteries have attended this temple.
By command of the Tibetan exile government, a small new temple
of the Nechung spirit is erected in the courtyard of the monastery,
and similarly in all Tibetan settlements.
41
a great deception
1983
The Dalai Lama orders the removal of the Dorje Shugden statue
from the main prayer hall of Ganden Monastery (in Mundgod,
Karnataka State, South India), the main monastery of the Gelug
Tradition of Tibetan Buddhism. When the Dalai Lama is told that
the statue is too large to get through the door, he replies that the
statue should be broken into pieces.
1986
The renowned Mongolian Lama Guru Deva Rinpoche, then living
in Clementown near Dehra Dun, is forced to leave India because
his printing press published a letter questioning the Dalai Lama’s
actions regarding Dorje Shugden.
Guru Deva donates his house in Drepung Gomang Monastery
to the monastery itself. The abbot of the monastery manages to
persuade a Tibetan mob not to destroy the house.
Under increasing pressure from Tibetans in Nepal, Guru Deva is
forced to return to Mongolia, where he remained isolated from the
Tibetan community until his death in 2009 at the age of 101.
In the past, he had made very generous offerings and donations
to the Dalai Lama, the two tutors and the great monasteries of
Sera, Drepung and Ganden at a time when the Tibetan exile com-
munity was experiencing serious shortages of everything.
1996
March 1996
The only independent newspaper in Dharamsala, known as Democracy
is forced to stop publishing. (Dharamsala is the town in northern
India where the Dalai Lama lives and where the Tibetan exile gov-
ernment is based.)
10 March 1996
During annual teachings at the Thekchen Choeling Temple in
Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama for the first time imposes an outright
ban on the practice of Dorje Shugden:
42
a chronicle of events
‘Whether outside of Tibet or within Tibet, this Deity is [in]

discord with [government Deities] … this is serious in the
context of the common cause of Tibet. Therefore unless I
remind you once again, there are ones who pretend they have
not heard it. It will be good if you comply [with what we are
saying] without our having to resort to this last step. It will
be the last resort if [we] have to knock on doors. It will be
good if [they] can heed without having to resort to this last
step. Whether it be a monastery, or the residence of eminent
spiritual masters, or private individuals themselves, it will be a
different matter if they do not have the interest of the Tibetan
cause [in their heart]. If you consider the cause of Tibet, if
you agree to the leadership of the Dalai Lama, if you support
my part in the [exile] government, your stand should not be
otherwise [on this point].’
21 March 1996
During his talk at the preparatory session of Tamdrin Yangsang and
Sangdrub empowerments, the Dalai Lama says:
‘Basically the autobiography of the 5th Dalai Lama is explicit
on the conflict between the Dalai Lama and Tulku Dragpa
Gyaltsen. The ‘‘Secret Vision’’ is also clear on this. Based
on them, the 13th Dalai Lama issued a ban. Many things
that remained anonymous during his lifetime, on the part of
government ministers as well as the common public, started
thrashing about after his death. Gyalchen [Dorje Shugden]
is one of them. I have come to be counted amongst the line
of the 5th Dalai Lama. I feel a definite karmic connection
with my predecessor. It is my mandate to complete what was
in practice during [the time of] the 5th Dalai Lama and my
predecessor. This is my responsibility.’
The Dalai Lama then tells any Dorje Shugden practitioner present to
leave the temple, barring them from attending the empowerments:
‘We are to participate in the empowerment of Tamdrin [a
Tibetan Buddhist Deity]. We require recipients who do not
43
a great deception
worship Gyalchen ... it happens that Dolgyal [Dorje Shugden]

relates to Chinese spirits, we actually mentioned him by name
in our exorcism based on Tamdrin at the time. Although these
exorcisms cannot be relied upon, I had strange dreams [since
then]. [Therefore] I do not feel it will be comfortable for wor-
shippers [of Shugden] to be here. That being the fact I have
said it is impermissible to have worshippers of Dolgyal in this
audience. If acrimony between deities results in disharmony
between humans it will be spiritual ruination ... This will affect
the life span of the spiritual master also.
‘Hence yesterday we decreed that it will not be right for
worshippers of Gyalchen to be among our audience ... If there
are any people unknown to me who have crept into this audi-
ence who are nevertheless worshippers of Shugden, it is better
for you not to stay among us. If you refuse, not only will it not
benefit yourself but in the worst case may even become the
cause of shortening the life of the Dalai Lama. If you wish
for the speedy death of the Dalai Lama, then I have no objec-
tion. If there is anyone who wishes to continue worshipping
Gyalchen, it is better that they stand up and leave. If there are
no such people, it is alright.
‘... if you private monks and spiritual masters continue mak-
ing excuses and continue worshipping thus, you shall have a
day of regret. Likewise, in the monastic colleges the majority
are beyond criticism; I also see that there are some who remain
firm. If you can think by yourselves it is good; as mentioned ...
it will not be good if we have to knock on your doors.
‘This is my responsibility, although some people may not like
it … I will carry through to completion the work I have begun.
I will not back off because of a few disgruntled individuals. I
am determined to implement the conclusions of my careful
research and will not let it be.’
30 March 1996
The Private Office of the Dalai Lama issues a decree requiring
everyone to stop practising Dorje Shugden, with instructions to make
44
people aware of this through government offices, monasteries, asso-

ciations, etc.
The then Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies (now called
the ‘Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile’) passes a resolution banning the
practice of Dorje Shugden by Tibetan government employees.
Letters from the Private Office of the Dalai Lama are sent to the
abbots of various monasteries in South India:
‘... government oracles [such as Nechung] point towards there

being a danger to the health of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, as
well as to the cause of Tibet, due to the worship of Shugden.
Banning this is also the conclusion reached by His Holiness
after years of observation. There is also a rift between Shugden
and the two principal deities of the government as well as with
Dharmaraja. Moreover, this is a cause for instability within the
Gelugpa tradition.
‘Though aware of repeated addresses by His Holiness, there
is continued [worship of Shugden] by Tibetan monasteries, and
Tibetan incarnate Lamas and Geshes within India and Nepal.
In certain cases, far from heeding this address, individuals have
actually urged His Holiness to desist from raising this issue
since, according to them, this is causing more harm than good
in Tibetan communities.
‘ ... in his inaugural address to the Congress of the Cholsum
[Three Provinces of Tibet] Association, he [the Dalai Lama]
referred to his recurrent sore throat, mentioning that it may
be an indication that he should stop raising this issue. This
indicates that he does not wish to speak about this anymore
since no one is paying any attention.
‘On March 4th, at the concluding audience for these
Congress members, the Dalai Lama remarked: “It is good that
paying attention to my health you have passed a resolution
regarding this matter. Danger to health does not exclusively
mean armed attack. This type is extremely rare in Tibetan
society. If there is continued indifference to my injunctions,
then there would not be any point in my continuing to live
45
a great deception
silently as a disappointed man. This would be a more apt

interpretation.”
‘Therefore, under the auspices of all former Abbots,
Disciplinarians, incarnate Lamas and Geshes, an announcement
should be made of these talks by His Holiness regarding the
worship of deities in such a way that no one can have the excuse
of not having heard it. In addition, ensure total implemen-
tation of this decree by each and everyone.
‘With the additional assistance by the house masters, also
ensure the explicit announcement of this decree to all ordinary
monks [in the monastery].
‘In implementing this policy, if there is anyone who contin-
ues to practise Dolgyal, make a list of their names, house name,
birth place, class in the case of students, and the date of arrival
in case of new arrivals from Tibet. Keep the original and send
us a copy of the list. Please share this responsibility and submit
a clear report on the implementation of this circular.’
5 April 1996
The Dalai Lama addresses the Tibetan Youth Congress and the
Tibetan Women’s Association to encourage them to take up the
cause of the ban and enforce it actively. During this talk, the Dalai
Lama is reported as saying that there may be one or two persons
willing to give up their life for him, thus emphasising the deter-
mination with which he intends to enforce the ban. Although this
remark was later removed from the official record of the talk, it is
believed that the full talk was videoed by a Japanese film crew that
was present.
At 8 a.m. at Ganden Choeling Nunnery in Dharamsala, a group of
nuns go into the abbot’s chamber and drag a Dorje Shugden statue
into the street with a rope attached to its neck. The main perpet-
rators – Lobsang Dechen, disciplinarian of the nunnery, Tenzin
Tselha and Dolma Yangzom – spit at and sat on the statue before
breaking it up and throwing the pieces into the town’s garbage dump.
This statue had been consecrated by Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche (the
junior tutor of the Dalai Lama), Kyabje Ling Rinpoche (the senior
46
tutor of the Dalai Lama), Kyabje Zong Rinpoche and Kyabje Rato
Rinpoche.
9 April 1996
The Tibetan Freedom Movement bans the worship of Dorje
Shugden by its members.
14 April 1996
The Guchusum Movement Organisation passes a resolution banning
the practice of Dorje Shugden by its members.
All government employees are ordered to sign a declaration to the
effect that they do not and will never practise Dorje Shugden.
18 April 1996
The Tibetan Department of Health posts a notice to its doctors and
staff members:
‘We should resolve not to worship Shugden in the future. If
there is anyone who worships, they should repent the past and
stop worshipping. They must submit a declaration that they
will not worship in the future.’
19 April 1996
The Toepa Association (Regional Group) passes a resolution declar-
ing Dorje Shugden to be a ‘Chinese ghost’ and banning its practice.
Employees of the Tibetan Children’s Village (in Dharamsala,
Himachal Pradesh, North India) are urged to take loyalty oaths.
A decree is sent by the Dalai Lama’s Private Office to all major
Tibetan monasteries making it mandatory for administrators and
abbots to enforce the ban.
Representatives of the Dalai Lama’s Private Office begin to arrive
in the monasteries and Tibetan settlements to apply pressure and to
supervise a signature campaign against Dorje Shugden practice.
47
a great deception
22 April 1996
The decree banning the worship of Dorje Shugden is officially
read out at Drepung Monastery (near Mundgod, South India), and
the abbot confirms that everyone must abide by the ban. Drepung
Loseling Monastery distributes a prepared form, saying that anyone
who does not sign it will be expelled from the monastery imme-
diately. Many monks, including Dragpa Rinpoche, move away to a
nearby Indian town rather than give their signature.
That night, on behalf of some frightened Tibetans at Golathala
Tibetan settlement near Bylakuppe, a large statue of Dorje Shugden
together with smaller images and pictures of Kyabje Trijang
Rinpoche are driven through the night to the Dorje Shugden Temple
in Ganden Shartse Monastery, for safe keeping.
In Bylakuppe, a search party looking for other Shugden images is
told by an attendant of the young Lama Dakyab Rinpoche that he
has thrown one statue into the lake near Tibetan Settlement No 2.
It is reported that many other Shugden statues were thrown into the
lake at this time.
23 April 1996
In the main assembly hall at Drepung Gomang Monastery, the abbot
announces a strict ban on worshipping Shugden. That evening, the
windows of the house of Kyabje Dagom Rinpoche, a prominent
devotee of Dorje Shugden, are smashed, and an atmosphere of
intimidation pervades the monastery. Kyabje Dagom Rinpoche’s
disciples complain to the abbot, but are ignored.
The abbot orders a declaration to give up the worship of Shugden
to be signed. Later, two monks from Ngari Khangtsen (part of
Drepung Gomang Monastery) arrive weeping at the Dorje Shugden
Temple at Ganden Shartse Monastery, explaining that although they
do not want to give up their religious belief, they have no choice
but to sign this declaration or face immediate expulsion from their
monastery. One of these monks leaves his monastery the next day.
25 April 1996
On the orders of their abbot, Achog Tulku, who was in Dharamsala
48
at this time, Ganden Shartse Monastery convenes a meeting to dis-

cuss the status of its Dorje Shugden shrine. The meeting resolves
not to curtail the religious freedom to practise Shugden.
26 April 1996
A Hayagriva puja group of Sera-Jey Monastery receives a special
commission from the Private Office of the Dalai Lama to perform
twenty-one days of exorcism by the Deity Hayagriva Tamdim
Yangsang, against Dorje Shugden and its practitioners. Bari Rinpoche
is asked to preside over the exorcism, and in return the Private Office
offers to award him the position of ‘Geshe Lharampa’ (the highest
geshe degree) in the following year, with exemption from the Geshe
examinations normally required.
Late April, 1996

Zungchu Rinpoche collects signatures agreeing to the ban from
Ganden Shartse schoolchildren. When an 11-year-old monk asks
what the signed form is for, Zungchu replies that it is a form to find
western sponsors for the schoolchildren.
27-30 April 1996

This is a period of great tension in the monasteries of South India.
There is fighting between monks from Ganden and Drepung monas-
teries. At Ganden Jangtse Monastery, a monk is beaten by supporters
of the ban and has to be taken to hospital; and windows of the
houses of prominent Shugden practitioners are smashed.
1 May 1996
Under armed police protection, Tibetan exile government officials
proclaim a decree of the ban at Ganden Monastery.
9 May 1996
Representatives from Tibetan monasteries all over India that trad-
itionally practise Dorje Shugden meet in Delhi and resolve not to give
up their faith. They submit their first appeal to the Private Secretary
of the Dalai Lama.
49
a great deception
10 May 1996
In the hope of a dialogue, Shugden practitioners send a petition to
the Dalai Lama, followed by further petitions on May 20th, May 30th
and June 5th. The petitions are all rejected.
Since then a number of other petitions and letters have been sent
to the Dalai Lama, and requests for audiences have been made on
several occasions. They have also all been rejected.
10-11 May 1996

The Tibetan Youth Congress convenes, and resolves to implement
the ban in every Tibetan settlement. House-to-house searches
start, and statues, paintings and other holy objects are burned or
desecrated.
14 May 1996
The Kashag (Cabinet of ministers of the Tibetan exile government)
releases a statement denying any religious suppression.
15 May 1996
Kundeling Rinpoche, Director of Atisha Charitable Trust in
Bangalore, India, organises peaceful demonstrations against the
ban.
The Tibetan exile government in Dharamsala makes the baseless
allegation that Kundeling Rinpoche is a Chinese spy, and a warrant
for his arrest is issued. He has to leave the country temporarily
because of threats made to his life.
23 May 1996
The Dorje Shugden Devotees Charitable and Religious Society (now
usually called ‘the Dorje Shugden Society’) is formally registered in
Delhi. Documents including Tibetan government decrees relating to
the ban on the practice of Dorje Shugden are mailed by the Society
to about 75 human rights groups around the world, as well as to
Tibet support and cultural groups.
50
24 May 1996
The Dorje Shugden Society receives a letter dated May 22nd under
the name of Kalon Sonam Topgyal, Chairman of the Kashag,
announcing that now there will be a complete ban on Shugden prac-
tice. The ban emphasises that:
‘… concepts like democracy and freedom of religion are empty
when it concerns the well-being of H.H. the Dalai Lama and
the common cause of Tibet.’
28 May 1996
The Kashag Secretariat restricts permission for Geshe Chime Tsering
– the general secretary of the Dorje Shugden Society – to travel
abroad to lead a cultural tour to raise funds on behalf of his monas-
tery, Ganden Shartse.
5 June 1996
During the 12th session of the Tibetan National Assembly held in
Dharamsala between May 31st and June 6th the Chairman of the
Kashag, Kalon Sonam Topgyal, addresses the assembly as follows:
‘Now, on the matter of propitiation of Dharma protectors, I
think we first have to come up with explanations on whether
this [ban] infringes upon human rights or not. Therefore, it
is clear that no one is dictating “dos and don’ts” to all our
religious traditions, including the four Buddhist Traditions
and Bön. Anyone in our Tibetan society can engage in the
religious practices of Islam, Christianity, Buddhism or Bön.
However, once having entered a particular religious faith, [one
has to] conform to the standard practices pertaining to that
religious faith; it is not proper, however, for Buddhist monks
to enter and practise [Buddhism] in mosques in the name of
freedom of religion. This being the case, this [ban] is imposed
without infringing upon religious freedom. In particular, since
we are a dual-system nation, we have to proceed in accordance
with this religio-political structure [of our nation]; it is not
proper to engage in whims in the name of religious freedom.
51
a great deception
In short, the great monastic institutions and those under the

[Tibetan exile] administration are not allowed to rely [on Dorje
Shugden].’
6 June 1996
An eight-point resolution is passed by the Tibetan National Assembly,
imposing a ban on the worship of Dorje Shugden.
19 June 1996
The Tibetan Women’s Association sends a letter to Ganden Tripa,
the head of the Gelug Tradition:
‘We heartily appreciate and praise that many monks and mon-
asteries have obeyed H.H. the Dalai Lama’s speech against
Shugden. We do our best against Geshe Kelsang, some geshes
and Westerners. They did protest. You must reply to letters
and books written by them. This is the only best way to solve
the Tibet issue.’
June 1996
A retired Tibetan minister, Mr. Kundeling, is stabbed and badly
wounded at his house. At a meeting in Dharamsala a few days before
this, he had mentioned his concern about the course of this new
policy of the exile government.
July 1996
A Tibetan Democratic draft constitution for a future free Tibet is
amended to read that no judge or juror can be an adherent of Dorje
Shugden.
During the preparation for a Kalachakra initiation in Lahul Spiti,
the Dalai Lama’s female oracle Tsering Chenga alleges that some thirty
members of the Dorje Shugden Society will attack the Dalai Lama
during the initiation. Elaborate security measures are taken and
searches are made, but it is shown to be a false prophecy and a false
alarm. No one from the Dorje Shugden Society is present.
52
7 July 1996
Geshe Losang Chotar from Sera-Jey Monastery burns a thangkha
[religious painting] of the wrathful aspect of Dorje Shugden that
came from Tawang Monastery in Arunachal Pradesh.
8 July 1996
A Public Notice is posted in Dharamsala:
‘On July 8th, at 9 a.m. there will be the preparatory rite for the
empowerment of Avalokiteshvara [Buddha of Compassion].
And on July 9th there will be the actual empowerment.
However, those who worship Dolgyal [Shugden] are not
allowed to attend this empowerment. By order of the Private
Office of H.H. the Dalai Lama.’
11 July 1996
In the Tibetan community in Shillong, Meghalaya, ten Tibetans
(eight men and two women) are expelled from the Tibetan Youth
Congress and Tibetan Women’s Association for refusing to give up
their religious faith in Dorje Shugden.
13 July 1996
Samdhong Tulku, Speaker of the Tibetan National Assembly, talks
to local Tibetan dignitaries in New Delhi. He advises them not to use
pressure or violent language when persuading Tibetans in the Delhi
area to give up the practice of Dorje Shugden, but to ask them to
choose between Dorje Shugden and the Dalai Lama.
13-14 July 1996

In Mundgod, South India, over 700 monks, devotees of Dorje
Shugden, conduct a peaceful protest against the suppression of
Dorje Shugden. Eleven monks from Serkong House of Ganden
Jangtse Monastery participate in the march. As a result, these monks
are expelled from their college.
On August 6th, in the name of the Tibetan settlements in
Mundgod, the Tibetan government sends a letter to Ganden Jangtse
53
a great deception
Monastery expressing appreciation for the expulsion of the eleven

monks.
14 July 1996
In a closed meeting held in Caux, Switzerland, the Dalai Lama
speaks to the legislative members of the Tibetan exile community in
Switzerland. An extract from his talk reads:
‘Everyone who is affiliated with the Tibetan society of Ganden

Phodrang government, should relinquish ties with Dolgyal.
This is necessary since it poses danger to the religious and
temporal situation in Tibet. As for foreigners, it makes no
difference if they walk with their feet up and their head down.
We have taught Dharma to them, not they to us. ...
‘Until now you have done a good job on this issue. Hereafter
also, continue this policy in a clever way. We should do it in such
a way to ensure that in future generations not even the name
Dolgyal is remembered.’
16 July 1996
The Dalai Lama speaks on The World Tonight, BBC Radio:
‘I myself, in early age, I also did practise this. I was also a

worshipper of the Deity [Dorje Shugden]. Then about 20 years
ago I found through my own investigation, not suitable. So
therefore, you see I also started some restriction. Then, begin-
ning of this year, once more I repeated this. This time our exile
parliament and many big monasteries made some effort. That
is why a few individuals here and there complain.’
17 July 1996
A resolution is passed by the Tibetan National Assembly (proposed
by Yonten Phuntsog and seconded by Tsering Phuntsog):
‘8: In essence, government departments, organizations, asso-
ciations, monasteries and their branches under the direction
of the Tibetan exile government should abide by the ban
54
against the worship of Dolgyal ... however, if a person is a

worshipper of Dolgyal, he should be urged not to come to
any teachings such as Tantric empowerments given by H.H.
the Dalai Lama.’
Mid-July, 1996
A 70-year-old widow, Mrs Chogpa, from the Rajpur Tibetan settle-
ment near Dehra Dun in Uttar Pradesh, is harassed beyond tolerance
by local Tibetans including her immediate neighbours. Helpless
against abuse by so many people, she is forced to sell her home,
kitchen, and small vegetable garden for a fraction of their value, and
takes shelter in Tibetan Camp No 1 in Mundgod, Karnataka State.
25 July 1996
A letter is sent to various monasteries recruiting monks for the
Buddhist School of Dialectics in Dharamsala. One of the four qualifi-
cations required is: ‘4: The candidate should not be a worshipper of
Dolgyal.’
29 July 1996
900 monks from Sera-Mey Monastery conduct a peaceful demon-
stration against the ban on Dorje Shugden.
Samdhong Tulku, Speaker of the Tibetan National Assembly,
gives a speech to monks gathered in the assembly hall of Sera Lachi,
saying during the speech: ‘... Dorje Shugden and Nechung [state
protector] are both Bodhisattvas who have reached high grounds.’
This is an example of contradictory statements made by members
of the Dalai Lama’s government at this time.
August, 1996
An organisation calling itself ‘The Secret Society of Eliminators of
the External and Internal Enemies of Tibet’ makes public its death
threat against the two young reincarnations of high Lamas who rely
on Dorje Shugden: Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche (aged 13) and Kyabje
Zong Rinpoche (11). An extract reads:
55
a great deception
‘Anyone who goes against the policy of the government must

be singled out, opposed and given the death penalty ... As
for the reincarnations of Trijang and Zong Rinpoche, if they
do not stop practising Dolgyal and continue to contradict the
words of H. H. the Dalai Lama, not only will we not be able to
respect them but their life and activities will suffer destruction.
This is our first warning.’
8 August 1996
Tibetan school children are taught for the first time a new song called
Tibetan Cause, which includes the lines:
‘All Tibetans, listen to the advice of the Dalai Lama and rely
on pure protectors. This is the Tibetan cause.’
4-6 October 1996

The Board of Gelug Teachers in Europe (19 members) meet and
resolve to request an audience with the Dalai Lama to discuss this
issue. The audience is denied, with a letter from the Private Office
of the Dalai Lama stating, ‘You have nothing else to say apart from
taking care of the 18 volumes of Je Tsongkhapa’s works.’ Since then
the members of the board feel too intimidated to meet again.
The Dorje Shugden Society meets with abbots from Sera, Drepung
and Ganden monasteries in New Delhi. The abbots request an audi-
ence with the Dalai Lama to discuss the issue. The audience is denied,
like all such previous requests by the Dorje Shugden Society.
7-8 November 1996

The house of retired schoolteacher Mr. Losang Thubten is attacked
and set on fire, with his daughter and another relative deliberately
locked inside. Fortunately they all survive.
In an audio tape published earlier by the Dorje Shugden Society
Mr. Thubten had given a number of historical accounts showing
blatant injustice in the actions of the Tibetan exile government.
56
11 November 1996
In Dharamsala a notice is posted banning Dorje Shugden practition-
ers from attending a Guhyasamaja empowerment to be given by the
Dalai Lama.
19-21 November 1996

The Dalai Lama visits Tibetan monasteries at Mundgod, South India,
doing so without the traditional request, which is unprecedented for
a Dalai Lama.
In the hope of more conciliatory speech by the Dalai Lama, Dorje
Shugden practitioners call off a proposed peace march. This cancel-
lation is publicised in the local newspaper, and the organisers also
personally call the Deputy Commissioner and Superintendent of
Police of Karwar to assure the authorities of this goodwill gesture.
The Dorje Shugden Society in Delhi sends a delegation to request
an audience with the Dalai Lama in the hope of reconciliation during
this visit. But the Dalai Lama’s Private Secretary, Mr. Lobsang Jinpa,
tells the delegates that there is no point in the delegates seeing the
Dalai Lama if they do not want to give up their practice of Dorje
Shugden.
On November 20th there is a monastic debate examination.
Members of both Ganden Shartse and Jangtse monasteries (approxi-
mately 2,000 monks) participate. The programme begins at 2 p.m.
and lasts until 7:30 p.m., and at about 6 p.m. the Dalai Lama speaks.
Excerpts from this talk include the following:
‘When I was visiting Sera Monastery [in Bylakuppe, November

15th-18th], a representative of Shartse and Jangtse monasteries
called on me, formally inviting me to visit these two monaster-
ies. I playfully asked them about the recent demonstrations
against my officers.
‘This time I will visit Shartse. In the future, however, if
this monastery continues to practise Dorje Shugden and build
images of this Deity, then I must decline to visit Shartse. In
that case they should not invite me, nor will I come even if
invited.
57
a great deception
‘Likewise, in Tibet in the future, if any monastery practises

Dorje Shugden, they should not entertain any hopes of inviting
me, and even if invited, I shall not feel comfortable accepting
such invitations.
‘Likewise if there are still people who feel they cannot give up
this practice and who feel they will continue to practise Dorje
Shugden, I do not see any benefit for them to remain under the
auspices of the Ganden Phodrang Tibetan government.
‘You might feel that by publishing letters, pamphlets etc.
against this ban, that the Dalai Lama will revoke this ban. This
will never be the case. If you take a hard stand, I will tighten
this ban still further.’
After these pronouncements, the Dalai Lama stands up from his

throne and, pointing to the left and right, asks ‘Which is Shartse
and which is Jangtse?’ Then, pointing towards the Shartse section,
he continued: ‘I warn you, elder monks of Shartse. You must not
say one thing and do another. The elder monks should change their
mind, and guide the junior monks.’
1997
6 June 1997
An amendment to the Tibetan constitution is made:
Original Version: ‘The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:
The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court should be a Tibetan
national, and in a court of law ... need not be referred to ... .’
New Version: ‘The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: The
Chief Justice and the two other justices of the Supreme Court,
in addition to being a Tibetan national, should not be a devotee
of Gyalchen Shugden and in a court of law ... need not be
referred to ... .’
58
1998
January 1998
Tashi Wangdu, president of the Tibetan Regional Council, states on
Swiss TV:
‘There are governmental and non-governmental gods. To
worship gods that are not recognised by our government is
against the law.’
2 January 1998
During the Dalai Lama’s inauguration of a new debating court-
yard of Sera-Mey Monastery, the monks of Pomra Khangtsen (a
section of the monastery), who constitute about three-quarters of
the monastery and who all rely on Dorje Shugden, are prohibited
from attending the ceremony. Under instructions from the Tibetan
exile government in Dharamsala, these monks are prevented from
leaving their rooms and kept under virtual house arrest by the local
police. The Tibetan exile government allege that the monks are a
threat to the Dalai Lama’s security.
During the inauguration ceremony, there is on display a large
thangkha painting of Tha-wo, the monastic protective Deity, who
looks like Dorje Shugden. The Dalai Lama, mistakenly thinking that
the Deity is Dorje Shugden, bitterly attacks the practice of Dorje
Shugden in his talk to the monks. Later he calls the abbots together
and begins to chastise them for displaying the thangkha, until it is
pointed out to him that it is not of Dorje Shugden.
During this talk the Dalai Lama announces that the monks have
to choose between the Dalai Lama and Dorje Shugden.
5-8 January 1998

The Swiss TV SFI news programme ‘10 vor 10’ features four con-
secutive daily news reports on the Dorje Shugden issue, entitled
Dalai Lama: Discord in Exile. These reports reveal the suffering and
conflict within the Tibetan exile community caused by the ban on
Dorje Shugden practice, as well as the hypocrisy of the Dalai Lama
59
a great deception
and the Tibetan exile government in seeking to suppress evidence

of its persecution of Shugden practitioners.
22 March 1998
There is a public meeting in Delhi on the ‘religious crisis precipi-
tated by the Private Office of the Dalai Lama’. Participants number
about 200, including Shri Rathi Lal Prasad Verma, Member of
Parliament (BJP Party), Mrs. Dolly Swami, President of Delhi
Mazdoor (Laborers), Prof. Dr. P. R. Trivedi, Chairman of the Indian
Institute of Ecology and Environment, Shri Dev Anand Mishra,
prominent Human Rights Activist, Prof. Ashwani Kumar, Faculty
of Law at Delhi University, and other dignitaries. Mr. Rathi Lal
expresses genuine pain over the religious ban. He says this is a clear
attack on religious freedom as guaranteed by the Constitution of
India. He offers to discuss this issue with his colleagues in govern-
ment, and to bring it on the floor of the parliament. Dolly Swami
notes that as long as Tibetans live in India, their leadership has to
live by Indian law. Every Indian leader or academic who speaks on
the occasion expresses deep sympathy with all those Tibetans who
worship Dorje Shugden, and offers their encouragement.
23 March 1998
In Tages Anzeiger (Switzerland’s largest newspaper) the Dalai Lama
says:
‘I think that this Shugden-worship has been for 360 years like
a painful boil. Now I have – like a modern surgeon – made
a small operation that hurts for a moment but is necessary
to solve this problem.’
19 May 1998
A letter is sent from the Department of Religion and Culture,
Central Tibetan Administration of the Dalai Lama, signed by
Tenzin Topgyal, Assistant General, and directed to all Tibetan
‘Settlement and Welfare Officers’ in India:
‘Concerning monks and nuns who wish to travel to foreign
countries, after obtaining recommendation letter from the local
60
settlement and welfare officer on the strength of authorisa-

tion letter from their monasteries, after these are received at
this office, (this office) has to obtain authorisation from the
Cabinet Secretariat after verifying whether or not the candidate
meets the following requirements ...
‘3. Attestation from their monastery and the abbot, that
neither the host, whether private or organisation, as well as the
invitee is a devotee of Dolgyal, that neither the host nor the
invitee has any connection with Dolgyal.’
This requirement directly contravenes Article 13(2) of the United

Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 12(2)
of the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, and Article 18 of the Tibetan
Constitution adopted by the Tibetan exile government.
1999
13 January 1999
The Dalai Lama pays a visit to Trijang Labrang (in Ganden Shartse
Monastery), the residence of His Holiness the late Trijang Rinpoche
(1900-1981), his root Guru. At a gathering of the Labrang’s monks,
the Dalai Lama says:
‘... during my visit to Switzerland, Lobsang [Chief Steward

of Trijang Labrang] asked that the current Choktul
Rinpoche [the Dalai Lama’s recognised reincarnation of
Trijang Rinpoche] be allowed to worship Dorje Shugden like
his predecessor, without a decision through the dough ball
divination. He also told me that the ban on Shugden prac-
tice is causing widespread suffering to everyone, and that
it should be revoked. This is ridiculous talk. My reason for
banning the Shugden Protector is in the interest of Tibetan’s
politics and religion, as well as for the Gelug Tradition. In
our face-to-face meeting, I also told Rinpoche to understand
that we may be meeting each other for the last time.’
61
a great deception
During this private audience with the Dalai Lama, Ven. Choezed-la,
the eldest official at Trijang Labrang, humbly points out that the
religious ban has created an unprecedented atmosphere of hostil-
ity against both Shartse Monastery and Trijang Labrang, which is
not very different from the atmosphere of the Cultural Revolution
in Tibet. He requests that, to end the suffering within the Tibetan
public arising from this atmosphere, the Dalai Lama would kindly
consider revoking the ban. To this the Dalai Lama angrily replies,
‘There will be no change in my stand. I will never revoke the

ban. You are right. It will be like the Cultural Revolution. If
they [those who do not accept the ban] do not listen to my
words, the situation will grow worse for them. You sit and
watch. It will grow only worse for them.’
14 January 1999
During the first public address of a visit to Drepung Monastery,
the Dalai Lama touches briefly on the Tibetan issue, and dwells on
his ban on the practice of Dorje Shugden. An excerpt reads: ‘The
Dorje Shugden Society plays games with me wherever I go. They
have published an announcement. They think that I will back off.
That I will never do. If not in this life, a successor will be appointed
to sustain this ban.’
15 January 1999
In Mundgod, representatives of the Dorje Shugden Society call on
Mr. Pema Choejor, Tibetan Minister for the Department of Security
in Dharamsala, and Mr. Khedrup, Secretary of the same department.
The Society’s representatives, in their face-to-face meeting, explain
their situation in detail. Excerpts include:
‘The exile government has already taken away both our political
rights and religious rights. The Tibetan public has been induced
to hate us even more than [they hate] the Chinese, with dis-
crimination, defamation, abuse and baseless allegations. This
has gone on for three years now. From our side, time and again,
62
we have approached the Dalai Lama and the exile government

through personal representation and delegations, as well as
numerous petitions. To this date, however, there has been no
sympathetic solution from the exile government’s side. Today
the Dalai Lama spoke out so angrily, violently and so abusively
against us, and our faith in front of the entire settlement.
‘According to you, the practice of Shugden in Tibetan
society harms the well-being of the Dalai Lama and the cause
of Tibet. We do not have any intention to undermine the
well-being of the Dalai Lama; at the same time we cannot
compromise our religious principles for the sake of political
expediency.’
To these representations, the exile government officials respond:
‘We understand your difficulty. We will convey your grievance

clearly to the Kashag in Dharamsala. What you say is true, but
since the ban comes from His Holiness, we are put into a very
difficult situation. H.H. the Dalai Lama is taking a rock-like
stand, and if you also take an equally rigid stand, we [the exile
government] are caught helpless in between.’
First week of May, 1999

In an informal meeting of local Tibetan organisations in Darjeeling
with a new representative Officer of the Dalai Lama, these groups
unofficially announce to the local Tibetan people that henceforth
no one is permitted to invite any member of the following three
local monasteries to any Tibetan gatherings or Buddhist festivals in
the area: Samten Choeling Monastery (established in 1952), Tharpa
Choeling Monastery (1922) and Kharshang Monastery (1919).
All three are Gelug monasteries that follow the practice of Dorje
Shugden.
24 July 1999
An anonymous poster appears in Tibetan settlements in Nepal,
reading:
63
a great deception
‘The Mahayana Gelug Monastery in Kathmandu sent around

152 monks to Pomra of Sera-Mey and Dhokang of Ganden
Shartse monasteries.’ The posters go on to ask Tibetan families
in Nepal not to send children to these monasteries, because
these monasteries practise Dorje Shugden.
2000
12 September 2000
Around 3,000 Tibetans descend on Dhokhang Khangtsen at Ganden
Shartse Monastery, attacking the monastery and its monks with
stones and bricks.
14 December 2000
The Delhi High Court directs the Delhi Police Department to
investigate complaints of torture of Dorje Shugden practitioners by
agents of the Dalai Lama.
2001-2008
During this period many Shugden practitioners escape from India
and Nepal to various other countries as refugees. Other Shugden
practitioners choose to stay in India, but in places where there are no
supporters of the Dalai Lama. However, members of their families
and relatives who still live within the Tibetan communities continue
to suffer.
2006
14 February 2006
In Lhasa, Tibet, a statue of Dorje Shugden is forcefully removed
from Ganden Monastery and destroyed along with a statue of
Setrab (another Buddhist Deity) by a few monks in the Nyakri
section of Ganden Monastery. Unrest occurs inside Tibet due to
strong denouncements by the Dalai Lama at a Kalachakra empower-
ment (in India), and because of sending people to Tibet with the
64
mission to spread allegations that the Deity Dorje Shugden is harm-

ing Tibetan freedom and is a danger to the Dalai Lama’s life. The
houses of practitioners of Dorje Shugden and their relatives are
attacked.
19 July 2006
In Lhasa, Tibet, the house of a family of well-known Dorje Shugden
practitioners is attacked by four Tibetans wearing masks and claim-
ing to be the Dalai Lama’s messengers. The only person in the house
at that time is their 20 year old son, who is tortured by having his
fingers cut off. He is threatened that next time they will cut his hands
off and then they will cut his head off if his family doesn’t listen to
the Dalai Lama.
January 2008
In a speech at a Tibetan monastery in South India, the Dalai Lama
says with reference to Shugden monks:
‘These monks must be expelled from all monasteries. If they
are not happy, you can tell them that the Dalai Lama himself
asked that this be done, and it is very urgent.’
A record of the Dalai Lama’s continuing persecution of Dorje

Shugden practitioners is maintained in the ‘Chronicle of Events’ on:
www.westernshugdensociety.org.
65
Chapter 6
Newspaper and Magazine Articles
The world’s media have been reporting on this growing crisis

surrounding the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, a crisis that has led to
a major tragedy of violence and bloodshed within the Tibetan
Buddhist community in India, and which has now spread to
Buddhist communities around the world. Two of the principal
political issues underlying this crisis are: (1) the Dalai Lama’s uni-
lateral decision to abandon Tibetan independence as a political
goal, and (2) his ban on the religious practice of Dorje Shugden.
Many newspapers and television networks have now reported
on this situation, presenting in many cases the extreme views of
the major contestants or the opinions of other journalists, usually
unsubstantiated. Now that the public at large is aware that there is
a problem, what is needed is a deeper investigation and analysis of
the many complex issues involved, with the aim of ending this great
tragedy of unnecessary human suffering.
16 June 1988 – ‘Dalai Lama asks Home Rule, with Chinese Role, in
Tibet’, The Washington Post:
‘The Buddhist spiritual leader proposed talks with China to
make Tibet “a self-governing, democratic political entity . . . in
association with the People’s Republic of China [which] could
remain responsible for Tibet’s foreign policy.”
‘The Dalai Lama said he was “well aware that many Tibetans
will be disappointed by the moderate stand” these new ideas
represent.’
67
a great deception
16 November 1988 – ‘Dalai Lama offers Tibet Compromise’, The

Boston Globe:
‘The Dalai Lama, revered by Tibetans, said yesterday he would

settle for less than full independence for Tibet to prevent
assimilation of the region by China. “I am not insisting we
should be an independent country,” the spiritual and temporal
leader of Tibetans said in an interview.’
11 March 1996 – ‘Refugees chafe at Dalai Lama’s rule’, The

Independent (London):
‘Tibetan refugees began an 18-day walk from their northern

India headquarters to New Delhi yesterday, hoping to step
up pressure on China for Tibet’s independence. The march
reflected growing impatience by a younger generation of
Tibetans with the Dalai Lama, whose offer to compromise
on independence has failed to win concessions from China.’
26 January 1997 – Paul Salopek, ‘The CIA’s Secret War in Tibet’,

Chicago Tribune:
‘The Americans came, he said, in a big turboprop plane, a

gleaming machine that he and other awed Tibetans called a
“sky ship”. They wore sunglasses and baggy flight suits. They
packed shiny automatic weapons on their hips. And speaking
through an interpreter, they asked Nawang if he wanted to
kill Chinese.
‘ “I told them I would be very happy to kill many Chinese,”
recalled the 63-year-old rug merchant, one of thousands of
exiled Tibetans living in this picturesque Himalayan capital.
‘ “I was very young and strong then. Very patriotic. I told
them I would even be a suicide bomber.”
‘The strangers, Air Force pilots working with the CIA, must
have liked what they heard because on that hot day back in
1963, at a secret air base in India, they took Nawang and 40
other Tibetan recruits on the first airplane ride of their lives. It
68
newspaper and magazine articles
was a journey that would stretch halfway around the world and
into one of the murkiest chapters of the CIA’s long history of
covert activity in Asia: a secret war in Tibet.’
20 November 1997 – John Goetz and Jochen Graebert, ‘Verklärt,

verkitscht – Hollywood feiert den Dalai Lama’ (‘Modified and
kitschified – Hollywood fetes the Dalai Lama’), ARD (German TV
documentary):
‘Things are not so harmonious and tolerant around the Dalai
Lama – especially not when it comes to his own power.
‘Shugden is one of many traditional Tibetan protector
deities. For many years the Dalai Lama also worshipped this
centuries old Deity. But now he has banned the worship of
this Deity.
‘It’s alleged that Shugden worship endangers the personal
safety and health of the Dalai Lama. There is a ban on any
Shugden worshippers receiving employment in roles from
Ministers to nurses. And on top of this the Dalai Lama
demands that people spy on each other: [quoting government
letter:] “Should anyone whosoever continue to worship the
Shugden Deity, make a list of their name, address and place
of birth. Keep the original and send us a copy of the list.”
Denunciation and spying have poisoned the atmosphere
amongst the Tibetan exiles.
‘The Dalai Lama is renowned throughout the world for his
wisdom. But in reality he makes all his important political deci-
sions in a highly dubious manner: he asks traditional Tibetan
oracles for advice.
‘Lhasang Tsering: “In terms of introducing democracy, I
can only say that the exile government is half-hearted. In fact,
almost embarrassingly so. The question of independence was
decided by the Executive in isolation. Not even the parliament
was consulted, let alone the people. So I say: the decision to
give up the goal of independence was undemocratic.” ’
69
a great deception
5 January 1998 – Beat Regli, ‘Dalai Lama: Discord in Exile’, 10 vor

10, SF1 (Swiss TV documentary):
‘A ban that shakes many Tibetan Buddhists at the core of their
faith. In just one monastery in southern India about a thousand
monks refuse to comply with the Dalai Lama’s decision.
‘Anonymous threats are spread against anyone who refuses
to obey his directives: Whoever reveres Dorje Shugden, “...
must be targeted and firmly opposed. We must bring them
before the public. They have to be killed.”
‘The Thubten family was literally chased out of their resi-
dential area.
‘Mrs Thubten: “About a hundred people attacked us. Had
we gone out of our house, they definitely would have killed
us.”
‘Fanatical followers of the Dalai Lama tried to burn down
this family’s house. They successfully forced these people
who revere the Deity now banned by the Dalai Lama to flee.
They lost everything. This family are pariahs of the Tibetan
Community in India.
‘Mrs Thubten: “They broke into our house and destroyed
everything. They smashed the china; demolished the TV with
stones; wrecked the fridge. All the windows, they destroyed
everything. My husband worked thirty-five years for all this.”
‘Only few victims are willing to speak out against this
persecution.’
March 1998, Laura Durango, ‘Report – Bad Times’, Diario de

Cordoba:
‘The media all over the world is taking notice of this conflict.
The Swiss television SF1, the German television ARD and
the Canadian magazine NOW have already reported on the
supposed methods used by the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan govern-
ment in exile to ban the worship of Shugden: destruction of
statues and images of this Deity, forced signature campaigns
to make people promise to stop their worship, intimidation
70
of those who refuse to do so, expulsion of monks from their

monasteries and punishments compared to those of Hitler
against the Jews.’
26 April 1998 – Julian West, ‘Tibetans accuse Dalai Lama of spiritual

betrayal’, The Daily Telegraph (London):
‘All is not well in Shangri-la. In the Dalai Lama’s mountain
headquarters the chanting of Tibetan monks has been dis-
turbed by loud voices of dissent.
‘Many members of the 130,000-strong Tibetan exile com-
munity are convinced that the Dalai Lama has betrayed their
dream of a Tibet free of Chinese occupation.
‘Some are even accusing “His Holiness” of sacrificing
Tibetan independence for “his own spiritual ideology” by
constantly changing his aims and failing to modernise their
society.’
28 April 1998 – Karen Butler, ‘Monks, nuns to protest Dalai Lama

in NY’, United Press International (UPI) (New York):
‘Followers of the Dalai Lama will petition the Tibetan holy
man during his visit to New York City this week asking him to
reverse his ban on a traditional Buddhist practice, which they
say is religious persecution.
‘It is the first time that the Dalai Lama has been faced with
a protest from his own followers while visiting the United
States.
‘The Dalai Lama, who arrives Friday, reportedly stopped
Dorje Shugden as a protector deity in 1976 after an oracle
told him that the deity was a malevolent spirit harmful to the
leader’s well being.
‘A High Lama, Kundeling Rinpoche, says that on Saturday
about 150 monks and nuns plan to present the Dalai Lama
with a petition bearing 15,000 signatures objecting to the ban,
which he compares to President Clinton forbidding Christians
from worshipping the Virgin Mary.’
71
a great deception
30 April 1998 – ‘Major Change in Political Complexion as Tibetans

Call for Militant Campaign’, East Asia Today Reports, BBC World
Service:
‘The death of Thupten Nudup[sic], the fifty year old monk,
who self immolated this week in Delhi, is, according to ana-
lysts, producing nothing short of a sea change among the
followers of the exiled spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama.
‘Tens of thousands of them came onto the streets of
Dharamsala, the seat of their exiled government, to pay
respects to the dead man.’
30 April 1998 – Nadine Brozan, ‘Buddhists to Protest Dalai Lama

during US Visit’, The New York Times:
‘The Dalai Lama may be bearing messages of peace when he
arrives in New York today at the start of a 15-day American
tour, but he faces the threat of protests from a coalition of
Buddhists who contend that he has kept them from worship-
ping a deity that they revere.’
30 April 1998 – Karen Michel, ‘Protesting the Dalai Lama, All Things
Considered’, National Public Radio, (USA):
‘The Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader, is starting
another visit to the United States.
‘This one could be less peaceful than previous visits. A group
of dissident Tibetan Buddhists says the Dalai Lama’s ban on
the worship of a Buddhist Deity called Dorje Shugden amounts
to religious oppression. The Dorje Shugden International
Coalition is also criticizing the Dalai Lama for heeding the
advice of an oracle to issue the ban.’
1 May 1998 – Costas Panagopoulos, ‘Zero Worship: The Deity the

Dalai Lama Doesn’t Love’, New York Magazine:
‘The Shugden Coalition ... has collected some 15,000 signatures
petitioning the Dalai Lama to lift the ban, which, the Coalition
72
claims, has incited human-rights violations―house-to-house

searches, destruction of prayer books and images of the
deity―among some of his followers, primarily in Dharmsala,
India, seat of the Tibetan leader’s exiled government. ... also
cites the Tibetan regional council’s statement that it is unlaw-
ful to worship gods not recognised by the government, and
the fact that the Dalai Lama’s private office has asked for the
names, birthplaces, and addresses of Shugden worshippers.
“The Dalai Lama portrays himself as a Gandhi figure,” says
Jampel, “but he is acting more like a modern-day Hitler.” ’
3 May 1998 – Cynthia Tornquist, ‘Dalai Lama Greeted by Protestors

in Manhattan’, CNN TV:
‘Nearly 130 worshippers of a Buddhist Deity protested
Sunday against the Dalai Lama during his visit to midtown
Manhattan.
‘Worshippers of the Dorje Shugden, a 350-year-old
Buddhist Deity, accuse the Dalai Lama of instigating a ban
against the worship of the Deity, which they say is one of the
most revered in the Buddhist religion.
‘A spokesman for an international coalition to lift the ban
says worshippers are being discriminated against in many
Buddhist regions of Asia. The group says the Dalai Lama is
oppressing human rights.’
4 May 1998 – John Zubrzycki, ‘Patience of Tibetans Wears Thin’,

Christian Science Monitor, International Section:
‘As Thupten Ngodup watched the first three Tibetan hunger
strikers being taken away under cover, he decided there was
only one way to fight back.
‘So as Indian riot police surrounded their camp in New
Delhi at dawn the next day to pick up the three remaining
protesters, the former monk poured kerosene over himself,
struck a match, and walked behind a banner demanding
independence for Tibet.
73
a great deception
‘Mr. Ngodup died two days later on April 29….

‘Despite spending nearly 40 years in exile, the Dalai Lama
remains the undisputed symbol of the Tibetan exile move-
ment. But more and more exiles are beginning to question
his authority as the political leader of their struggle. “There is
a stagnation in the Tibetan struggle caused by indecision on
the part of the leadership and a lack of political will to take
the necessary steps to achieve results,” says Lhasang Tsering,
former president of the Tibetan Youth Congress.’
5 May 1998 – Neelesh Misra, ‘Tibetans Try to Storm Embassy’,

Associated Press, (New Delhi):
‘Indian police showered baton blows on Tibetan demonstra-
tors trying to storm the Chinese Embassy today to protest
Beijing’s rule of their homeland. About a dozen protesters
were left injured and bleeding.
‘In a guerrilla-style operation that took the police off
guard, about 200 slogan-shouting protesters converged on
the embassy from different directions, waving banners and
Tibetan flags.
‘Monks and nuns jostled and traded punches with the out-
numbered policemen, who summoned reinforcements and
attacked the crowd with bamboo truncheons.’
‘ “The self-immolation was just the beginning”, said Pema
Lhundhup, joint secretary of the Tibetan Youth Congress.
“The frustration is boiling over. More and more Tibetans are
getting ready to die.” ’
11 May 1998 – David Van Biema and Tim McGirk, ‘Monks vs

Monks’, Time Magazine:
‘Tibet’s political and religious leader garnered not only a
1989 Nobel Peace Prize for efforts on behalf of his Chinese-
occupied homeland but also (as the Apple Computer ads
strove to exploit) the vague undifferentiated goodwill of a
cynical and overcaffeinated world still auditioning sources of
truth, calm and peace.
74
‘All the more jarring, then, that upon arriving in New York
City last Thursday to start a 16-day American tour, the icon
of enlightened harmony was met by demonstrators. And not
just any protesters, but saffron- and maroon-robed Tibetan
Buddhist monks and nuns hefting a sign that read dalai
lama, please give religious freedom and accusing
him of suppressing devotions to a deity known as Dorje
Shugden.’
11 May 1998 – Kenneth Woodward, ‘A Scratch in the Teflon Lama’,

Newsweek:
‘The reputation of His Holiness―despite constant trafficking
with politicians, fund-raisers and media and movie stars―has
remained as lofty as the Himalayas. He is the Teflon lama.
‘Now there is a scratch. At the start of a religious visit to
the United States, the Dalai Lama was picketed in New York
City last week by a group of Buddhists charging him with―of
all things―religious intolerance.’
13 July 1998 – Christopher Hitchens, ‘His Material Highness’, Salon

Magazine:
‘The Dalai Lama has come out in support of the thermo-
nuclear tests recently conducted by the Indian state, and has
done so in the very language of the chauvinist parties who
now control that state’s affairs. The “developed” countries,
he says, must realise that India is a major contender and
should not concern themselves with its internal affairs. This
is a perfectly realpolitik statement, so crass and banal and
opportunist that it would not deserve any comment if it
came from another source. ...
‘The greatest triumph that modern PR can offer is the
transcendent success of having your words and actions
judged by your reputation, rather than the other way about.
The “spiritual leader” of Tibet has enjoyed this unassailable
status for some time now, becoming a byword and synonym
75
a great deception
for saintly and ethereal values. Why this doesn’t put people
on their guard I’ll never know.’
1 August 1998 – Sara Chamberlain, ‘Deity Banned – Outrage as

Dalai Lama denounces Dorje Shugden’, New Internationalist:
‘Buddhists picketed the Dalai Lama’s recent visit to the United
States and Europe. They protested against the ban on the wor-
ship of the 350-year-old deity, Dorje Shugden, whom they say
is one of the most revered in the Buddhist religion. In 1996 the
Dalai Lama announced that worship of Dorje Shugden was
banned and explained that his oracle, Nechung, has advised
him that the deity was a threat to his personal safety and the
future of Tibet.
‘According to P.K. Dey, a human-rights lawyer from Delhi:
“Those worshipping Shugden are experiencing tremendous
harassment … Dalai Lama supporters are going from house
to house searching. For example, in Clementown, India, the
house of a family of Shugden worshippers was stoned and
then firebombed. Wanted posters describe people believed to
be Shugden leaders as the top ten enemies of the state.”
‘Dorje Shugden worshippers say the ban and its implemen-
tation are in direct conflict with the proposed constitution of a
free Tibet, laid down by the Dalai Lama in 1963. The constitu-
tion states that all religious denominations are equal before
the law, and every Tibetan shall have the right to freedom of
thought, conscience and religion. But when Dorje Shugden
worshippers challenged the ban, the Tibetan Government-in-
exile stated that: “Concepts like democracy and freedom of
religion are empty when it comes to the well-being of the Dalai
Lama and the common cause of Tibet.”
‘During recent peace vigils a petition with 15,000 signatures
was handed to the Dalai Lama stating the need for all Tibetan
traditions to flourish. Protesters asked him to sign a declar-
ation of freedom to worship Dorje Shugden. The Dalai Lama
refused.’
76
24 August 1998 – Archana Phull, ‘Anti-Shugden agenda flares up

conflict’, The India Express:
‘The “anti-Shugden agenda” of a convention to be hosted by

the United Cholsum Organisation of the Tibetans in McLeod
Ganj from August 27 has again flared up the Dalai-deity con-
flict with over 120 members of the Dorje Shugden Charitable
and Religious Society, Delhi deciding to throng the venue,
without any invitation, to seek direct “evidence of Cholsum
accusations on Chinese funding to the hard core Shugden to
divide the Tibetan community.” ’
2 September 1998 – Hema Shukla, ‘Protest by religious dissidents

reflects schism among Tibetan exiles’, Associated Press:
‘NEW DELHI, India: About 150 Tibetan protesters accused

the Dalai Lama of religious repression Tuesday, reflecting
a schism in the Tibetan exile society that was once seen as
cohesive.
‘The demonstrators were believers in Dorje Shugden, a
Tibetan deity whose worship was banned by the Dalai Lama
in 1996. They wore white masks during their protest march to
symbolise what they called attempts to silence them.
‘Tibetan officials have indicated that the Dalai Lama believes
the spirit of Dorje Shugden is working against him, hampering
his goal of winning autonomy for Tibet from China.
‘ “We want the world to know that Tibetan society has
problems. There is religious repression,” said Cheme Tsering,
a spokesman for the marchers. ...’
15 September 1998 – Jim Mann, ‘CIA gave Aid to Tibetan Exiles in

‘60s, Files show’, The LA Times:
‘For much of the 1960s, the CIA provided the Tibetan exile
movement with $1.7 million a year for operations against
China, including an annual subsidy of $180,000 for the Dalai
Lama, according to newly released U.S. intelligence documents.
77
a great deception
‘The money for the Tibetans and the Dalai Lama was part
of the CIA’s worldwide effort during the height of the Cold
War to undermine Communist governments, particularly in the
Soviet Union and China. In fact, the U.S. government commit-
tee that approved the Tibetan operations also authorized the
disastrous Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba.’
November 1998 – Brendan O’Neill, ‘Dalai Lama “a religious dicta-

tor”’, Living Marxism:
‘... There is no outlet in Tibet or northern India for Shugden
worshippers to protest about what is happening. The only
independent newspaper in Tibetan exile society, Democracy, was
forced to close in March 1996 after it criticised government-
in-exile policy. ...
‘Perhaps it is not surprising that the Dalai Lama should be
able to suppress debate in Tibetan society. More disturbing is
that the Western media has also been largely silent about this.
It seems that for many the Dalai Lama is beyond reproach; as
Hollywood’s and the liberal media’s favourite good guy he can
do no wrong.
‘ “It’s not the politically correct thing to do, to criticise the
Dalai Lama”, says Dan Coote of the British branch of the
Dorje Shugden Coalition. When Coote sent out press releases
at the beginning of this year he was told by some journalists
that “they would not touch this story”, because it was “too
critical” of the Buddhist leader. “There seems to be a double
standard”, says Coote, ‘‘where some freedoms are seen as
worthy of support, while others are ignored”.’
10 January 1999 – ‘Dorje Shugden worshippers barred from Dalai

Lama meet’, The India Express:
‘Theological differences among Tibetan Buddhists reached a
climax here on Saturday with the arrival of the Dalai Lama
with worshippers of Dorje Shugden deity demanding that they
be derecognised as Tibetans so that they can apply for Indian
citizenship.
78
‘Before the Dalai Lama’s arrival in Hubli where he will

conduct a series of religious classes, a notice was sent to all
the communities stating that followers of Dorje Shugden,
addressed as Dolgyal (a derogatory term), would not be allowed
to attend the seminar. Passes were issued only to those people
and monks who gave a written statement that they were not
followers of this deity.’
10 March 1999 – Iain S. Bruce, ‘The Dark Side of the Dalai Lama’,
The Scotsman:
‘To much of the Western world he is the very embodiment of
kindness and peace, a gentle robed figure of great wisdom and
limitless virtue. Feted by politicians, pop stars and Hollywood
stars, the seemingly undisputed spiritual and political leader of
the movement to free Tibet has always seemed like a pretty safe
bet in a diplomatic arena populated by rogues and charlatans.
‘The cracks in the Dalai Lama’s impeccable image, however,
are beginning to show and accusations are being levelled with
increasing frequency which link the 1989 Nobel laureate to
religious repression, despotism and murder.
‘ “The Dalai Lama has two faces. In the West he enthusiastic-
ally creates an atmosphere of liberalism and open dialogue;
in the East he treats people as a monarch does his subjects”,
says Lama Kundeling, the abbot of the Atisha monastery in
Bangalore and a respected member of the exiled Tibetan com-
munity. “There is no freedom for us – he has a total monopoly
over all spiritual and secular matters and spreads confusion and
distress among the Tibetan people.’’ ’
5 January 2001 – ‘Of the Dalai Lama and a witch-hunt’, Frontline

(India’s National Magazine):
‘What has been the impact of the ban?
‘Kundeling Rinpoche: “Severe. I call it the Tibetan Inquisition
initiated worldwide, but particularly in India. For example, the
house of every Tibetan was searched, pictures and images
79
a great deception
of Dorje Shugden were trampled upon, desecrated, burnt or

destroyed publicly. The houses of prominent people – followers
of Dorje Shugden – were attacked during the nights, and death
threats issued to all those who did not follow the dictates of
the Dalai Lama. A number of monks were expelled from the
monastery at the Mundgod settlement for having participated
in a peaceful protest march organised by me on May 15, 1996 in
the Mundgod settlement. When the Dorje Shugden Society was
established in April 15, 1996 in Delhi, the Dalai Lama and his
so-called ministry used threats, money, and the Indian bureauc-
racy to close it down forcibly.” ’
18 September 2003 – Laurie Goodstein, ‘Dalai Lama says Terror

may need a violent reply’, The New York Times:
‘The Dalai Lama, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and one
of the world’s most prominent advocates of nonviolence, said
in an interview yesterday that it might be necessary to fight
terrorists with violence, and that it was “too early to say”
whether the war in Iraq was a mistake.
‘ “I feel only history will tell,” he said. “Terrorism is the
worst kind of violence, so we have to check it, we have to take
countermeasures.”
‘The Dalai Lama spoke in his first visit to New York
City since the 2001 terrorist attacks. He is on the last stop
of a United States tour that has highlighted his dual roles as
Buddhist teacher and head of state.’
10 October 2003 – Colman McCarthy, ‘The Dalai Lama is no

Gandhi’, National Catholic Reporter:
‘If you’ve ever had suspicions that the Dalai Lama is a light-
weight, suspect no more. He is.
‘Recently finishing a U.S. lecture tour that attracted rock-
concert crowds in major cities, the 68-year-old Tibetan
Buddhist came up against a pesky New York Times reporter
who asked questions about terrorism and the war in Iraq. In a
80
story headlined “Dalai Lama Says Terror May Need a Violent

Reply,” the monk said: “Terrorism is the worst kind of violence,
so we have to check it, we have to take countermeasures.”
‘Soothing words to the Bush war makers as they seek $87
billion for countermeasures to bolster earlier countermeas-
ures that failed. No amount of Buddhist incense smoked over
the lama’s words can hide their meaning: Kill people to solve
conflicts. Here is one more religious leader who is a pacifist
between wars, akin to being a vegetarian between meals ...
‘The Dalai Lama joins a long list of people who, in the
parlance of celebrity, are famous for being famous. He is an
entertainer, a headliner, a showman—complete with maroon
robes and a bare shoulder. Nothing wrong with that. A shtick’s
a shtick. But he’s nowhere close to being in the company
of Gandhi, who said, “I do not believe in any war,” or the
Mennonites Church of the Brethren or Quakers who don’t
hedge their antiwar convictions, much less wait for history.’
23 May 2007 – Michael Backman, ‘Behind the Dalai Lama’s Holy

Cloak’, The Age (Melbourne):
‘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? ...
‘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
81
a great deception
to become a celebrity. Possibly, had he stayed quiet, fewer Tibetans

might have been tortured, killed and generally suppressed by China.’
5 February 2008 - French Politician Jean-Luc Mélanchon on the

Olympic Protests, Telematin, France 2 (French TV):
‘Jean Luc Melanchon: “If people want to protest against the
Olympics, it means they accept the Dalai Lama’s claims about
Tibet. But there we need to look carefully and not be naive. I
find it unbelievable, really, to see French people, who would
argue forcefully for the separation of church and state, finding
it desirable to have a theocracy in Tibet ...
‘We know how these things work. It’s not a simple affair
about an association or an NGO. There are strategic interests
being played out. Kosovo didn’t demand independence, but
ended up with a US military base. So let’s not pretend to be
naive, and say that this isn’t about geo-political or geo-strategic
issues. People are being manipulated.” ’
6 March 2008 – Brendan O’Neill, ‘Why Tibetophilia won’t set Tibet

free’, edited version first published on Comment is Free on 6th March
2008 (available on www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/arti-
cle/4852/, March 10th 2008):
‘At the same time, [free Tibet] campaigners’ unquestioning
support for the Dalai Lama suggests they see Tibetans as an
immature people who need a godlike figure to lead them. The
Dalai Lama was never elected by anybody; rather, in a process
that makes Britain’s House of Lords seem almost modern and
democratic (I said almost), he was handpicked by a tiny sect of
monks who believed that he represents one of innumerable
incarnations of the Buddhist entity Avalokitesvara.
‘Indeed, some writers on Tibet have pointed out that the
idolisation of the Dalai Lama by Western activists and officials,
and of course by some Tibetans, might actually undermine the
development of democracy in Tibet. In her book The Tibetan
Independence Movement: Political, Religious and Gandhian Perspectives
82
[Routledge, 2002], Jane Ardley writes: “[It] is apparent that

it is the Dalai Lama’s role as ultimate spiritual authority that
is holding back the political process of democratisation. The
assumption that he occupies the correct moral ground from a
spiritual perspective means that any challenge to his political
authority may be interpreted as anti-religious.”
‘In elevating the Dalai Lama to the position of unques-
tionable representative of the Tibetan people, pro-Tibet
activists are helping to stifle “the opportunity for opposition
and the expression of different views” – the very lifeblood
of democracy. Indeed, some Tibetan Buddhist groups that
have challenged or questioned the authority of the Dalai Lama
have found themselves denounced and suppressed by the Dalai
Lama’s people.’
21 March 2008 – Somini Sengupta, ‘Some Tibetan Exiles Reject

Middle Way’, The New York Times:
‘Since March 10 the Dalai Lama has stuck to his “middle way”
script and appeared remarkably affable, at least publicly, even
as China accused him of masterminding the uprising and called
him “a devil with a human face.” ...
‘Yet, a handful of radical Tibetan exile groups have said
angrily that the “middle way” has achieved nothing in nearly
30 years. They have called for an Olympic Games boycott,
burned Chinese flags and refused to call off a march from
here to Lhasa, Tibet’s capital, which he has called impractical
in opposing a mighty state intent on using force.
‘So the question arises of whether the Dalai Lama, who has
spent the last 49 years here in India and built one of the most
powerful exile movements in the world, is out of touch with
his own people.’
31 March 2008 – Pankaj Mishra, ‘Holy Man: What does the Dalai
Lama actually stand for?’, The New Yorker Magazine:
‘Since the Dalai Lama speaks English badly, and frequently
collapses into prolonged fits of giggling, he can also give the
83
a great deception
impression that he is, as Pico Iyer reports a journalist saying,

“not the brightest bulb in the room.”
‘His simple-Buddhist-monk persona invites skepticism, even
scorn. “I have heard cynics who say he’s a very political old
monk shuffling around in Gucci shoes,” Rupert Murdoch has
said. Christopher Hitchens accuses the Dalai Lama of claim-
ing to be a “hereditary king appointed by heaven itself ” and
of enforcing “one-man rule” in Dharamsala, the town in the
Indian Himalayas that serves as a capital for the more than a
hundred and fifty thousand Tibetans in exile. ...
‘His critics may have a point: the Dalai Lama’s citizenship in
the global cosmopolis seems to come at a cost to his dispos-
sessed people.’
6 May 2008 – Venkatesan Vembu, ‘Dalai Lama’s Middle Way has

failed’, DNA (India):
‘Jamyang Norbu: “There’s now a very strong voice among
Tibetan people, especially among young people. ... A lot of
them, who are coming out of Tibet into exile, are not so
reverent of the Tibetan government-in-exile. They are now
saying that the Tibet government’s policy – and the Dalai
Lama’s ‘Middle Way’ approach – is a failure. The Dalai Lama
in some ways is desperate. He doesn’t comprehend the nature
of modern politics – and I don’t think he has an understanding
of totalitarian regimes.” ’
17 May 2008 – Stefan Kornelius, ‘A politician in Monk’s Robes’,

Suddeutsche Zeitung (Germany):
‘Even in the first hours of his journey through Germany
the spiritual leader of the Tibetans, the Dalai Lama, didn’t
want to utter a thoughtless word. In countless interviews,
accompanied by cameras at every step, and in his speeches
to followers and believers he patiently repeated the same old
claims and assertions: No, this is not a political visit, he is just
a simple monk, it’s about religious and cultural autonomy for
84
the Tibetan People and protecting the environment. The unity

of China is not being challenged and all his efforts are based
in non-violence.
‘Whoever examines this flow of words for their political
substance will quickly realise that, according to the Constitution
of the Tibetan Government in Exile, enacted in the Tibetan
year 2218 (1991), the Dalai Lama is the lord over the executive
and the legislative. Nothing goes in the world of the Tibetan
Exiles without his say so.’
17 May 2008 – ‘Stop Lying’, Suddeutsche Zeitung (Germany):

‘It sounds like a battle cry from the stadium, which is diago-
nally opposite, yet it is an accusation: “Dalai Lama, stop lying”
Again and again the 300 robed protesters chant the sentence.
Motorists wind down their windows, perhaps they cannot
believe what they are hearing. Are there actually people outside
China, even Tibetans who have something against the Dalai
Lama? ...
‘This is not about politics but about religious freedom.
Nothing is being asked of the Dalai Lama other than what he
is asking of the Chinese, but nobody is interested in what he’s
actually doing. “Here the Dalai Lama presents himself as a
Spiritual Leader. We want people to look behind the mask”.’
18 May 2008 – Mariam Lau, ‘The Laughing King without a Country’,

Die Welt am Sonntag (Germany):
‘Wherever the Dalai Lama shows up – and he shows up pretty
much everywhere – a spiritual supermarket immediately pops
up. For example, in front of the RuhrCongress in Bochum, the
second stop on his long planned tour of Germany are stands
selling Tibet Snowlion cushions, mousepads with his likeness,
incense, wooly hats and “Free Tibet” ringtones. Across the
way, in a gold and burgundy throng, are the monks from the
Western Shugden Society accusing him of lying: “Dalai Lama,
stop discrimination!”
85
a great deception
‘Indeed in an unusual act of political and religious con-

striction, a few years ago the religious leader of the Tibetans
banned the worship of the Buddhist Deity Dorje Shugden that
he felt was backwards and bloodthirsty. ...
‘He isn’t opposed to having his face on screen-savers. He
happily writes forwards for embarrassing books and has made
a dubious Temple of Hollywood. At the end of the day all
he has is PR. If the Palestinians could have a figurehead like
him instead of leaders intent on self-destruction they would
have probably regained their country longer ago. But the Dalai
Lama hasn’t achieved much for his people up to now. Not
one influential head of state in the world has given clear and
concrete support to his campaign for cultural autonomy.’
18 May 2008 – from ‘Rights pleas against Dalai Lama’, The Telegraph
(Calcutta):
Shimla, May 17th: ‘A Delhi-based charitable trust has filed a
human rights violation petition in Delhi High Court against
the Dalai Lama and Samdong Rinpoche, the Prime Minister
of the Tibetan government-in-exile.
‘ “The Dalai Lama is blackmailing Dorje Shugden worship-
pers into giving up their religious beliefs. ... ” said the petition
filed ... ’
20 May 2008 – Brendan O’Neill ‘Is the Dalai Lama a religious dicta-
tor?’, Spiked Magazine:
‘In her book The Tibetan Independent Movement: Political, Religious

and Gandhian Perspectives, Jane Ardley argued that in terms of the
development of internal political life in Tibet and Dharamsala,
“[It] is apparent that it is the Dalai Lama’s role as ultimate
spiritual authority that is holding back the political process
of democratisation. The assumption that he occupies the
correct moral ground from a spiritual perspective means that
any challenge to his political authority may be interpreted as
anti-religious.” ...
86
‘The state of denial in the West about some of the Dalai

Lama’s alleged power-tripping, or at least the unquestioning
attitude towards the Dalai Lama and everything that he does,
highlights the role that he plays for many Western celebs, com-
mentators and politicians today: he’s a cartoon “good guy”,
giggling, pure and righteous, who apparently should be uncon-
ditionally applauded for standing up to the “Evil Chinese”.
All of the Dalai Lama’s bad points – his origins in the stifling
medievalism of 1930s Tibet; his archaic practices; his disregard
for “concepts like democracy and freedom of religion”; his
backing from the CIA in its Cold War with the Chinese – are
simply ignored.’
22 May 2008 – Mario Cacciottolo, ‘Peace and placards greet Dalai

Lama’, BBC News:
‘Directly opposite, on the other side of the road, are a group
of Buddhist monks whose argument is that the Dalai Lama has
called for a ban on the worship of the Buddhist Deity Dorje
Shugden, and particularly a prayer to him.
‘The arguments are complicated, but basically His Holiness
says that this particular Deity is un-Buddhist in its nature.
‘These followers disagree, and according to Kelsang Pema, a
nun taking part in the protest, what they want is a “meaningful
discussion” with the Dalai Lama. “The only purpose of Dorje
Shugden is to help people develop Buddhist minds of love,
peace and compassion,” she said.
‘ “We’ve sent him faxes, email and letters asking him to talk
to us about it but they’re all ignored. The Dalai Lama himself
practised as we do until he was 50.” ’
23 May 2008 – from The Metro (London):

‘The Dalai Lama’s tour of Britain ran into multiple protests
yesterday as demonstrators voiced their opposition to his
political and religious beliefs. As the Tibetan spiritual leader
spoke inside the Royal Albert Hall, hundreds lined the streets
outside.
87
a great deception
‘They waved signs reading “Give us Religious Freedom”

and “Hypocrisy”.’
23 May 2008 – Ann Treneman, ‘Dalai Lama drama as Westminster

sees the Light’, The Times (London):
‘The Dalai Lama arrived at Westminster in a silver Merc
accompanied by three other silver Mercs. His Holiness may
be close to the heavenly light but he does not travel light. ...
‘It has to be said that Mr Lama is pure box office. He is the
crowd-pleaser to end all crowd-pleasers. He began by getting
out the crimson man-bag that he always carries and which I
thought contained something sacred or at least the meaning
of life.
‘Like a magician, Mr Lama brought out its contents: first he
brandished a crimson visor (it matched his robes perfectly) and
placed it at a rakish angle on his shaven head. Then he showed
us his spectacles case with great delight. He brought out a tiny
cellophane-wrapped item. “A sweetie!” he cried, giggling.
‘Then he began to ramble. “Sometimes on the aeroplane,
breakfast is quite small. I need not only quality but quantity
because the Buddhist monk – no dinner. So I always carry
some bread.”
‘It seemed a shame when we had to quit playing “Show Me
Your Manbag” and talk about human rights. To start Mr Lama
did a lot more bowing (he can bow while he sits)...
‘Then he was off in a swirl of crimson. I tell you, if he
wasn’t a revered spiritual leader, he’d be a great ham actor. He’s
a Drama-Lama, that’s for sure.’
27 May 2008 – John Hess, ‘Protest over Dalai Lama’, BBC News:
‘These followers [belonging to the Western Shugden Society]
came to Nottingham today to voice anger over his ban of an
ancient Buddhist prayer.
‘His [the Dalai’s Lama’s] visit to Nottingham has not only
been politically controversial but this demonstration highlights
88
the controversies within the Buddhist faith itself over his style
of leadership.’
29 May 2008 – Brendan O’Neill, ‘Down with the Dalai Lama’, The
Guardian (London):
‘Has there ever been a political figure more ridiculous than
the Dalai Lama? This is the “humble monk” who forswears
worldly goods in favour of living a simple life dressed in
maroon robes. Yet in 1992 he guest-edited French Vogue, the
bible of the decadent high-fashion classes …
‘The Dalai Lama says he wants Tibetan autonomy and politi-
cal independence. Yet he allows himself to be used as a tool
by Western powers keen to humiliate China. Between the late
1950s and 1974 he is alleged to have received around $15,000
a month or $180,000 a year from the CIA.
‘In truth he is a product of the crushing feudalism of
archaic, pre-modern Tibet, where an elite of Buddhist monks
treated the masses as serfs and ruthlessly punished them if they
stepped out of line.
‘The Dalai Lama demands religious freedom. Yet he per-
secutes a Buddhist sect that worships a deity called Dorje
Shugden.’
30 May 2008 – Matt Wilkinson, ‘Update: Hundreds Protest at Dalai

Lama Visit’, The Oxford Times (Online), Oxford, England:
‘The Dalai Lama is speaking at the Sheldonian Theatre and
about 1000 members of the Western Shugden Society turned
up outside. The protesters chanted “Dalai Lama Stop Lying”
and other slogans as he arrived for the talk at 9.30am. The
chanting reached fever pitch as the Dalai Lama arrived in a
chauffeur-driven vehicle and was escorted into a building.
The society claims the Tibetan leader has banned a traditional
Bhuddist[sic] prayer, while his followers are abusing the human
rights of Shugden Bhuddists[sic].’
89
a great deception
5 June 2008 – Michael Backman, ‘Selling Tibet to the World, The Age
(Melbourne):
‘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 Nyingma, 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.’
11 June 2008 – SBS Worldnews Australia:

‘The Dalai Lama arrived in Australia today to a warm welcome
from supporters but was branded a “liar” and a “hypocrite” by
some 50 protesting Buddhist monks and nuns.
‘ “He is a hypocrite, and it’s very sad to say that about a
religious leader”, said WSS spokesperson Kelsang Pema …
“He is not practising what he preaches. He’s here teaching
about love and compassion but he endorses human atrocities,
basically.”
‘She said the Dalai Lama’s “inflammatory” campaign against
a Buddhist Deity called Dorje Shugden had resulted in thou-
sands of monks being expelled from monasteries, supporters
denied food, medicine and travel visas, families being ostracised
and Shugden temples being destroyed.’
12 June 2008 – John Stapleton, ‘Adoration and Protests greet Dalai

Lama’, The Australian:
‘While adoring crowds met the Dalai Lama in Sydney yesterday
for the start of his six-day visit, there was also the predicted
90
rabble of protesters on hand accusing him of being a liar and

hypocrite.
‘But instead of the dissenters being Chinese nationals, the
group deriding him were fellow Buddhists with barely an Asian
face among them.
‘About 100 Buddhists clad in the same scarlet robes as
the Dalai Lama stood outside the Sydney Showground at
Homebush chanting “Dalai Lama liar” and waving placards
calling for religious freedom while the Tibetan spiritual leader
inside preached love and compassion.
‘ “He is a hypocrite, and it’s very sad to say that about a
religious leader,” Western Shugden Society spokeswoman
Kelsang Pema said. “He is not practising what he preaches.
He’s here teaching about love and compassion but he endorses
human atrocities, basically.” Ms Pema said the Dalai Lama’s
“inflammatory” campaign against a Buddhist deity called
Dorje Shugden had resulted in thousands of monks being
expelled from monasteries, supporters denied food, medicine
and travel visas, families being ostracised and Shugden temples
being destroyed. “It’s mainstream Tibetan Buddhism, but he is
making us look like an offshoot because he has had a change
of heart,” she said. “He has banned a prayer which he himself
engaged in for half of his life.” ’
15 June 2008 – ‘The Tibetan Opposition’, The Sunday Programme, Nine

Network (Australian TV):
‘Kelsang Lhachog: “One of the things about the Dalai Lama

is that he has this extraordinary reputation that sort of puts a
spell over the people of this world so that they don’t question
his actions and find it difficult to believe that he could make
any mistakes or be faulty in any way. He speaks beautiful words
but no one checks whether or not his actions actually match up
to the words that he speaks. If you look into what is actually
happening in his community that he is the leader of, you will
see very clearly that he acts like a dictator. ...
91
a great deception
‘ “I think that he’s a political leader who is masquerading as a

spiritual leader, and that is something that we all understand in
the west is not an appropriate thing to mix. We all know: don’t
mix religion with politics because then it all gets very messy,
and he’s confused those two roles and is using his political
power to enforce his own religious views on others.” ’
13 July 2008 – Tony Nauroth, ‘Hundreds Protest Dalai Lama’, The

Express Times, USA:
Bethlehem [Pennsylvania, USA]: ‘Those looking for enlight-
enment Saturday from the Dalai Lama at Lehigh University’s
Stabler Arena first had to manoeuvre past 400 monks and
nuns protesting a 40-year-old arcane decree by the Tibetan-
leader-in-exile that they said violates their religious freedom.’
18 July 2008 – David Van Biema, ‘The Dalai Lama’s Buddhist Foes’,
Time Magazine, USA:
‘On Thursday afternoon, following a teaching by the Dalai
Lama at New York City’s Radio City Music Hall, a group
of 500 or more audience members screamed at and spat
at a mixed group of about 100 people, both Tibetan and
Western, who had been peacefully protesting the high lama.
Police felt it prudent to move in fast, with horses, and herded
the smaller group into buses for their own protection. The
pro-Dalai Lama crowd had also flung money at their foes,
an insult indicating that they had been bought (presumably
by the high lama’s enemies in Beijing). Said one of the anti–
Dalai Lama protesters, Kelsang Pema, who is British, has
a Tibetan name and is the spokeswoman for the Western
Shugden Society, “If this is what the Dalai Lama’s people
do to us in America, can you imagine what they would have
done somewhere else?” ’
92
8 August 2008 – ‘The Dalai Lama’s Demons’, France 24 (French TV

documentary):
‘Dalai Lama: “These monks must be expelled from all mon-
asteries. If they are not happy, you can tell them that the
Dalai Lama himself asked that this be done, and it is very
urgent.”
‘The speech was a historic moment in the history of Tibetan
Buddhism, and the beginning of a schism which could exclude
the four million Tibetans followers of Shugden. A few weeks after
the Dalai Lama’s speech, Shugden monks could no longer enter
monasteries. They regroup themselves outside village walls and
meditate on why the Dalai Lama has excluded them.
‘ “Can the Dalai Lama really ban an entire religion?” asks
one. “We are in the right, he’s the one who is being incoherent.
On one hand, he’s always preaching freedom of religion and
compassion, but on the other he’s forbidding us to worship the
god we choose”, says another.
‘Photos of Shugden leaders are posted on city walls,
branding them as traitors. Signs at the entrance of stores and
hospitals forbid Shugden followers from entry. It’s apartheid,
in a Buddhist land.’
28 August 2008 – Meindert Gorter, ‘Why did the Dalai Lama ban
Dorje Shugden?’, The New Statesman:
‘Gradually the pressure on Dorje Shugden practitioners got
worse. Fanatical Dalai Lama followers began to demolish
statues of the deity, the existing social solidarity amongst
Tibetans was gone. Even in Tibet itself, where restoration of
temples is in full swing and people enjoy new religious free-
dom, this ban created suspicion. Dorje Shugden worshippers
were accused of being part of the ‘Dorje Shugden sect’ and
became outcasts. The Dorje Shugden Society was founded,
an ad-hoc group of people working together to oppose the
ban – not to save the enlightened deity from harm but to help
thousands of people from becoming outcasts.
93
a great deception
‘But numerous appeals and worldwide protests have not

helped. The Dalai Lama has not responded and refuses all
contact. If you think the Dalai Lama is only in the business
of provoking positive sentiments, as most Westeners believe,
you have to firmly close your eyes to imagine this less romantic
reality.
‘During speeches in India in January 2008, he has enforced
the ban more strictly than ever before.’
30 September 2008 – ‘The Dalai Lama: The Devil Within’, Al Jazeera

(TV documentary):
‘With the help of rebel monk Kundeling Rinpoche, [the Dorje
Shugden Society] are taking the most famous ex-Shugden prac-
titioner, the Dalai Lama himself, to court.
‘Kundeling Rinpoche: “So there is no democracy. The man,
Dalai Lama, talks about democracy, talks about compassion,
talks about dialogue, talks about understanding, talks about a
solution, but for us there is no solution. There is no dialogue.
There is no understanding. There is no compassion. Because
in his perception we are not human beings. We are just evil.
We are evil and we are agents of the Chinese. That is what it
is. It is as simple as that.”
‘With just a few days to go before the Dalai high court hear-
ing, Kundeling and Thubten meet with their lawyer.
‘Shree Sanjay Jain (Human rights lawyer): “It is certainly
a case of religious discrimination in the sense that if within
your sect of religion you say that this particular Deity ought
not to be worshipped, and those persons who are willing to
worship him you are trying to excommunicate them from the
mainstream of Buddhism, then it is a discrimination of worst
kind.” ’
9 October 2008 – ‘Sur les traces du Dalaï Lama’ (‘Following the Dalai
Lama’s Tracks’), Envoye special, France 2 (French TV documentary):
‘Dalai Lama: “I don’t want any more disorder in the monaster-
ies. And to those who are not happy, tell them that the Dalai
94
Lama approves of the expulsions prescribed by the abbots in

the temples.”
‘Reporter: For the first time, I discover an authoritarian face
– himself the wise Tibetan is calling for the exclusion of the
faithful. Why, and who is this Deity? To understand this, I am
going to meet Dorje Shugden followers. ...
‘Monk: “This Deity has never divided Tibetans. This is
untrue. It is the Dalai Lama who has divided us, by banning
Shugden practice. Before, everything was going well. The com-
munity was living in peace.”
‘Reporter: “Today, Shugden followers are expelled from
their monasteries, and their photos are posted in the streets. A
witch hunt has started in Southern India.” ’
7 March 2009 – David Eimer, ‘Dalai Lama too soft on China say
Tibetan Exiles’, The Daily Telegraph (London):
‘50 years on from his exile to India, the Dalai Lama is
facing a growing tide of discontent over claims that his non-
confrontational style of leadership is simply too soft.
‘Militant Tibetan groups are increasingly challenging the
spiritual leader’s authority ahead of Tuesday’s anniversary of
the failed uprising against Chinese rule that led to him fleeing
to Dharamsala in northern India.
‘Mindful of the fact that half a century has passed and
Tibet’s independence has still not been achieved, they refer to
his “failed” policies and talk of replacing the figurehead of the
Free Tibet campaign with a more aggressive leader.
‘ “The Dalai Lama has been trying to resolve the situation
through dialogue but, personally, I think the dialogue is get-
ting us nowhere. The situation in Tibet is getting worse,” said
Dhondup Dorjee, the vice-president of the Tibetan Youth
Congress ...
‘Differences between the exiles forced the Dalai Lama last
November to call a special meeting of the most prominent
groups in Dharamsala, where he and the Tibetan government-
in-exile have their HQ. “When the Dalai Lama called that
95
a great deception
meeting he was saying ‘My approach has failed, tell me what

to do next’,” said Miss Tethong, who attended the gathering.
“But the meeting was dominated by the Tibetan government-
in-exile and they’re not going to tell him ‘Oh you’ve failed’, so
it ended up being an endorsement of His Holiness.” ’
26 March 2009 – South African Finance Minister Trevor Manuel on

the Dalai Lama, IOL (South Africa):
‘ “To say anything against the Dalai Lama is, in some quarters,
equivalent to trying to shoot Bambi,” he said.
‘ “Let’s put our cards on the table. Who is the Dalai Lama?
I’ve heard him described as a god. I’ve heard him described
as Buddha.
‘ “Is he just the spiritual leader of the Buddhists in Tibet, or
is he the one who on March 28 1959 established a government-
in-exile in the same way as Taiwan was established to counter
the reality of a single China?”
‘Manuel said Tibet’s history had to be looked at, because the
Lamas had been “feudal overlords” in that country.’
‘ “The reason why the Dalai Lama wants to be here ... is to
make a big global political statement about the secession of
Tibet from China and he wants to make it on the free soil of
South Africa.”
‘ “I’m sure he’s welcome to come at any other time, but we
shouldn’t allow him to raise global issues that will impact on
the standing of South Africa.” ’
30 July 2009 – Timan Muller and Janis Vougiokas, ‘The Two Faces
of the Dalai Lama: The gentle Tibetan and his undemocratic regime’,
Stern Magazine (Germany):
‘The Dalai Lama smiles away all doubts. Almost everywhere he
receives the same god-like veneration. In the West he appears
as the idol of the new age but in the Himalayas he governs
like a medieval potentate. A gentle do-gooder who can show
surprisingly intolerant and dictator-like behaviour ...
96
‘He will have to face confrontation as there is growing criti-

cism in his own exile community. “His Holiness is living in a
bubble without contact with the outside world,” says Lhasang
Tsering, a long term activist, now running a bookstore in Little
Lhasa. “Religion and politics should finally be separated.” ’
97
Chapter 7
A Refutation of Shugden Research Group

Dhomed
Following the false Dalai Lama’s lies a group called the ‘Shugden
Research Group Dhomed’ have produced a book in Chinese called
Protector vs. Evil Spirit. The Western Shugden Society has checked this
book and found that it is full of lies. It gives false information about
Je Phabongkhapa, who is a living Buddha Heruka, about Kyabje
Trijang Rinpoche, who is the lineage holder of the Gelug Tradition,
and about Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, who is the founder of nearly
1,200 Buddhist centres and groups throughout the world, as well as
the author of twenty-one highly acclaimed and qualified books on
Buddhism. The following are a few of the examples of lies and false
information being spread by this group.
During Je Phabongkhapa’s time, not only his disciples but
many famous scholars and realized Teachers from both the Sakya
and Gelug traditions sincerely relied upon Dorje Shugden. Because
of this, out of jealousy, the oracle of the spirit called Nechung con-
tinually lied to the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, saying that Dorje Shugden
was harming the Tibetan government and the Dalai Lama’s health.
Believing what the Nechung oracle told him, the Thirteenth Dalai
Lama used his political power to ban the practice of Dorje Shugden.
In this way, he restricted the religious freedom of Shugden practi-
tioners. This was the real situation. Through this we can understand
that the source of this problem was the Nechung oracle. However,
the Shugden Research Group Dhomed in their book Protector vs. Evil
Spirit falsely blame Je Phabongkhapa and Trijang Rinpoche for these
problems, and have spread false information about these precious
spiritual Teachers.
99
a great deception
Also, in this book the Shugden Research Group Dhomed

writes: ‘For example, when Kelsang Gyatso, who is now living in
England, returned to the UK from China, he did not allow the por-
trait of the Dalai Lama to be displayed in his organizations.’ As it is a
proven fact that Geshe Kelsang Gyatso has never visited China, this
is clearly a lie.
Furthermore, Geshe Kelsang Gyatso has never once said
that he is the Third Buddha. There are thousands of witnesses to
this, but in their book, this Group writes: ‘On the one hand Kelsang
Gyatso used intemperate words and gossip to smear the Dalai Lama
and the Tibetan people, and on the other hand he alleges that he is
“the Third Buddha” in Western society.’ This is also a lie.
We, the Western Shugden Society, have the intention to
write a more detailed clarification of these matters.
100
PART TWO
The Dalai Lama of Tibet –

Unravelling the Myth
Chapter 8
Mixing Religion and Politics
Part Two is a deeper examination of the points raised in Part One. It

explains the Tibetan theocratic system of government, and presents
a history of the Dalai Lamas, in particular the present Dalai Lama’s
political views and failures. This gives us the context in which to
understand his ban on the practice of Dorje Shugden as another
example of a dismal record of deceit and hidden scandals.
Dharma and Politics
As clearly shown throughout much of human history, mixing religion

and politics in general is a great mistake. In the context of this book,
religion refers to Buddha’s teachings, or Dharma. Buddha taught that
all living beings experience without freedom or choice, in life after
life, the recurrent cycle of birth, ageing, sickness and death, known
as ‘samsara’. The fundamental purpose of all Buddha’s teachings is to
show how to achieve liberation from samsara by overcoming attach-
ment to it, and how to help others to achieve this same liberation.
Although skilful political activity may bring temporary benefits,
the main purpose of political activity is to find happiness within
samsara through trying to change external conditions. Political activ-
ity and political objectives therefore lie within samsara.
The result of Dharma is to destroy samsara, whereas the result of
politics is to keep us within samsara. Through practising Dharma,
Buddhists try to overcome attachment to samsara, whereas through
political activity people try to fulfil desires that increase their attach-
ment to samsara. The desires underlying our attachment to samsara
103
a great deception
include desire for wealth, power, fame and pleasure, all of which are
mistakenly viewed as sources of real happiness.
For these reasons, Dharma and politics are completely opposite in
their views, aims and results. The consequences of mixing Dharma
with politics will always be at best bad, at worst catastrophic.
The Meaning of ‘Mixing Religion and Politics’
Mixing religion with politics means using religious faith for political
aims. Because of the terrible atrocities that have been perpetrated
throughout history in the name of religion, it is often said that reli-
gion is the cause of much suffering in the world. However, when
practised purely, religion cannot cause suffering. It is not religion
itself but rather the exploitation of religion for political objectives
that has caused and continues to cause so much suffering in this
world. For example, in the West it is clearly understood that mixing
religion and politics has been the cause of many problems, and of the
sufferings caused by the Crusades, the Inquisition and the numerous
European wars that have been fought in the name of religion, even
in modern times. The western experience is that mixing religion and
politics does not work. Because this is clearly recognised, in almost
all countries throughout the West today there is a clear separation
between ‘Church’ and ‘State’.
The Tibetan System of Government
In direct contrast, in Tibetan society not only is there no clear

separation between ‘Church’ and ‘State’, but the union of these two
is the very basis of government, even today. The Tibetan name for
their system of government is ‘bö.zhung chö.si nyi.den’ (bod zhungs
chos sri gnyis ldan), which means the ‘Tibetan Government of both
Religion and Politics’. As Phuntsog Wangyal, who established the
London-based Tibet Foundation, says:
‘The term “Chö-si nyi-den” appears for the first time in the
Seventeenth Century when the Fifth Dalai Lama reorganized
104
mixing religion and politics
the Government of Tibet as … the “Ever Victorious Tibetan

Government of Ga-dän p’o-dr’ang”.
‘Religion is different from politics. But there was never any
attempt in Tibetan history to separate the two. Rather the rul-
ing class, first the aristocracy and later both the aristocracy and
the monasteries, encouraged their union.’11
Although the system of ‘Chö-si nyi-den’ had previously existed in

practice, it was the Fifth Dalai Lama who consolidated the exist-
ing arrangements and standardised them into hard-and-fast rules.
As the self-proclaimed and infallible embodiment of the Buddha
Avalokiteshvara and as the supreme secular head of state, the Fifth
Dalai Lama made the institution of the Dalai Lama the core symbol
for the union of ultimate political and religious power. As Phuntsog
Wangyal again observes:
‘ … the supremacy of the Dalai Lama does not mean that the
Dalai Lama always exercised supreme power, but it does mean
that he is the ultimate authority in which supreme power over
religion and politics rests.
‘The institution of the Dalai Lama has a dual role, that of
politics and religion. He symbolises the force that links two
principles into a single institution.’12
Thus, the mixing of religion and politics was institutionalised by the
Fifth Dalai Lama, and it is from this point in Tibetan history that the
catastrophic decline begins that led to the loss of Tibet.
This intermingling of religion and politics can be seen in a whole
series of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s actions, including his construction and
naming of the Potala Palace; his relationship with his Spiritual Guide,
the Panchen Lama; his reliance upon and institution of Nechung as
the State Oracle of Tibet; his twice-attempted invasions of Bhutan;
and his military campaigns against the Jonangpas, Kagyupas and
Bönpos, and their forced conversion to the Gelug Tradition.
The Fifth Dalai Lama’s most significant creation from mixing
Dharma and politics was the institution of the Dalai Lama itself.
Through the fusion of supreme religious and political authority in
105
a great deception
one single person, the Fifth Dalai Lama became the self-appointed
‘God-King’ of Tibet. All of the actions of the Dalai Lama were thus
to some extent contaminated by this union of religion and politics.
None of his religious actions could be totally free of political impli-
cations, and likewise none of his political actions could be totally
free of implication for the religious sphere. All of the Dalai Lama’s
religious and political actions, no matter how insignificant, carried
the full weight of both his supposed religious infallibility and his
absolute political authority.
The Potala Palace had the dual function of serving both politi-
cal and religious objectives. On the one hand, the construction of
the Potala itself was first intended to provide the Dalai Lama with
an impenetrable fortress against military attack in the event that his
powerful Mongol allies withdrew their support and second to serve
as a potent symbol of his absolute political authority. On the other
hand, in so naming the Potala, the Dalai Lama was identifying his
residence as the earthly abode of the Buddha of Compassion, and
himself as its resident, Avalokiteshvara.
Although from a religious point of view, even the human eman-
ations of Buddhas need to accept and rely upon their Spiritual
Guides, from a political point of view the Fifth Dalai Lama could
not bridge the gap between his absolute authority and the propriety
of relinquishing authority to his Spiritual Guide. How could the
fountainhead of absolute religious and political power, to whom
all others are subordinate, ever subordinate himself to a Spiritual
Guide? This intrinsic contradiction within the Fifth Dalai Lama’s
position destroyed his spiritual relationship with his Spiritual Guide
and created a poisonous precedent for future Dalai Lamas, especially
the present Dalai Lama who claims to have a special connection with
the Fifth.
One example of how the Fifth Dalai Lama regarded maintenance
of his political power as more important than his duty as a Buddhist
practitioner was his efforts to destroy the power of two important
officials whom he considered to be rivals to his political authority.
(These events are described below in Chapter 8.) When they took
refuge in Tashi Lhunpo Monastery, the monastic seat of his own
106
Spiritual Guide, the Fifth Dalai Lama raised an army to attack it. He
dismissed his Spiritual Guide’s attempts at conciliation; and some
years later, in an unprecedented act of public disrespect, the Fifth
Dalai Lama did not even attend his Spiritual Guide’s funeral.
Many of the actions of the Fifth Dalai Lama, through which he
became known as the ‘Great Fifth’, were in fact from a spiritual
point of view extremely negative political actions. Some of them
were catastrophic for Tibet both spiritually and politically, and pro-
vided the stepping-stones that in the end led to the loss of Tibet as
an independent nation.
Oracles, Dough Balls and Divinations

The pronouncements of trance oracles have long played a crucial
role in Tibetan politics and continue to do so today in Dharamsala.
Indeed, these oracles are so revered that the State Oracle Nechung
has the rank of a deputy minister in the Tibetan exile government
today. An excerpt from the Tibetan government’s official website
reads:
‘In the Tibetan tradition, the word oracle is used for a spirit
which enters those men and women who act as mediums
between the natural and the spiritual realms. The mediums
are, therefore, known as “kuten”, which literally means, “the
physical basis”.
‘In early times it is believed that there were hundreds of
oracles throughout Tibet. Today, only a few survive, includ-
ing those consulted by the Tibetan government. … Nechung
Kuten is given the rank of a deputy minister in the exiled
Tibetan Government hierarchy.’13
To understand the Tibetan exile government it is necessary to
understand the pervasive influence that oracles in general, and the
Nechung oracle in particular, have on its decision-making. Loosely
speaking, an oracle or spirit medium is a human being who believes
their body can be used by a spirit; but the majority of people who
claim to be oracles are merely pretending. They claim that the spirit
107
a great deception
puts their human mind into an unconscious state and then uses their
body to speak directly to humans.
Nechung is a Bön (the pre-Buddhist religion of Tibet) spirit who
was appointed by the Fifth Dalai Lama as the personal protector of
the Dalai Lamas. In Freedom in Exile the present Dalai Lama extols
the virtues of his relationship with the Nechung spirit:
‘I seek his opinion in the same way as I seek the opinion of my
Cabinet and just as I seek the opinion of my own conscience.
I consider the gods to be my “upper house”. The Kashag
constitutes my lower house. Like any other leader, I consult
both before making a decision on affairs of state.’14
The Dalai Lama explains that he is very close to the Nechung spirit,
‘friends almost’, but that he is essentially in command, ‘My relation-
ship with Nechung is that of commander to lieutenant’. As he says,
despite objections from more ‘progressive’ Tibetans he continues to
rely on this ‘ancient method of intelligence-gathering’ because in his
opinion the answers he has received from the spirit medium have
over time proven to be correct.15
The Dalai Lama graphically describes how the oracle enters into
trance:
‘Now the kuten’s [spirit medium’s] face transforms, becom-
ing rather wild before puffing up to give him an altogether
strange appearance, with bulging eyes and swollen cheeks.
His breathing begins to shorten and he starts to hiss vio-
lently. Then, momentarily, his respiration stops. At this point
the helmet is tied in place with a knot so tight that it would
undoubtedly strangle the kuten if something very real were
not happening. The possession is now complete and the
mortal frame of the medium expands visibly.’16
While the medium is possessed, questions are put to the oracle
first by the Dalai Lama and then by members of his government.
In this way, just ‘like any other leader’, the Dalai Lama consults
his upper house – a spirit – before making decisions on affairs
of state. The Dalai Lama says that Nechung’s answers are ‘rarely
108
vague … But I suppose that it would be difficult for any scientific

investigation either to prove or disprove conclusively the validity
of his pronouncements.’17
If any other politician in the world were to consult a spirit
medium about matters of state he or she would be universally
derided and dismissed from office.
At critical points in Tibetan history, experience has proven the
spirit medium’s advice to be both wrong and harmful. For example,
in 1904 the British invaded Tibet under Colonel Younghusband,
but they had no intention of openly attacking the Tibetans who
were poorly equipped militarily. As the British force marched on
Lhasa the Nechung oracle was consulted as to the best course of
action. As Jamyang Norbu writes:
‘The oracle declared that the “enemies of the Dharma” would
be soundly defeated by a “heavenly army” which he would
personally lead. The Tibetans were, of course, overwhelmingly
defeated, around seven hundred peasant levies being massa-
cred in a couple of hours at the hot springs near Guru.
‘… The next year during the New Year celebrations in
Lhasa, when the state oracle came charging out of the Jokhang
Temple in full trance, as was the annual custom, the exasper-
ated citizens of Lhasa are reported to have booed the god – the
women flapping their aprons, and the men shouting “Hey-le!
Hey-le!” or “Shame on you!” ’18
The Thirteenth Dalai Lama was so displeased with Nechung at that
time that he forbade further consultations for a number of years.
It is commonly known that the Nechung oracle made a fatal
error when prescribing wrong medicine to the Thirteenth Dalai
Lama which resulted in his untimely death. It is believed that it
was this medicine that worsened the Dalai Lama’s condition and
led to his death.19 The Tibetan historian K. Dhondup, citing the
testimony of the doctor present at the crucial diagnosis, tells us
that due to fever the Dalai Lama’s condition had become extremely
critical:
109
a great deception
‘At that moment, I, Kuchar Kunphela, the medium of the

Nechung Oracle and the Dalai Lama were the only persons
present. The Nechung Oracle asked me if I had Chamjom
Pawo 14, a medicine for cold disease. As this medicine was
very strong, I could not risk giving it to the Dalai Lama.
Therefore, I told the Nechung Oracle I did not have this
medicine at all. Then the Nechung Oracle told us to ask his
own attendant. Kuchar Kunphela quickly went outside and
most probably met the attendant and obtained the medicine
as he returned with a medicine bag with a spoon ready in
it and offered the bag to the Nechung Oracle. The Oracle
took a spoonful of medicine and offered it to the Dalai
Lama. I did not know whether that medicine in that bag was
Chamjom Pawo 14. Then the Oracle lost his trance. From
that night onwards, the fever rose higher than before and
the Dalai Lama was delirious. The illness went from bad to
worse and on the 30th of the 10th month, [the next day], the
Dalai Lama passed away.’20
Knowledge that this fatal error was made by the spirit medium –
Nechung oracle – is also supported by the testimony of a clerk who
worked for the Dalai Lama, as cited by Bell:
‘That same night, between 1 and 2 a.m., the medium gave the
Precious Protector some medicine in the form of a powder.
When the medium came out, Champa La, the Presence’s
regular doctor, said to the medium, “You have made a mistake
in the medicine” (Men di norra nangzha).’21
There is also an account in Bell that this mistake was the result of
the Nechung oracle being taken over by an evil spirit. The spirit was
the reincarnation of a tulku (incarnate lama) who some years before
had been repeatedly flogged for alleged involvement in a plot to kill
the Thirteenth Dalai Lama and had then taken his own life:
‘At the end of February 1934, Palhese [Bell’s great friend and
informant], coming for his daily talk, asked me with suppressed
eagerness, “Has Rai Bahadur Norbhu told you about recent
110
happenings in Lhasa concerning the passing of the Precious

Protector to the Field?”
‘[Bell replies:] “He has told me about the medium of the
Nechung Oracle giving the Precious Protector medicine which
injured him.”
‘Says Palhese, “It is about the medicine that I wish to speak.
It was given at the instruction of a tulku from Nyarong (a prov-
ince in Eastern Tibet), who has been reborn as a devil. It did
indeed do injury; in fact, it made the Precious Protector [the
Thirteenth Dalai Lama] an ‘Is Not’ [i.e., a dead person].” ’22
Palhese gave Bell further details about this ‘tulku’ and his violent
death, his rebirth as a ‘devil’ and of the failed attempts to subdue
him, concluding ‘Later on, it was noticed that the prophecies issu-
ing through the prophet of the Nechung oracle were wrong and
harmful.’23
Goldstein presents an even more damning indictment of the
Nechung oracle’s role in the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s death:
‘On this occasion, the Nechung oracle said that the Dalai Lama
should take a medicine known as ‘the seventeen heroes for sub-
duing colds’ (chamjom pawo chupdün) and himself prepared
the medicine in a cup with water. Most respondents report that
the Dalai Lama refused the dose and that the state oracle had
literally to pour it into his mouth. The Dalai Lama’s condition
immediately deteriorated, and by noon he was unconscious.
He never said another word.’24
The Nechung oracle also had a negative role during the Chinese
invasion in 1950:
‘During the flight of the Dalai Lama to Dromo (Yadong) in
the Chumbi Valley at the time of the invasion of Tibet by the
Chinese in 1950, the Nechung Oracle was consulted repeat-
edly as to what course of action the Tibetan ruler should take.
Should he take refuge in India or should he stay in Tibet? Twice
the Oracle said that he should stay in Tibet despite attempts by
the government to get him to say the contrary. It is said that it
111
a great deception
was eventually discovered that he had been bribed to deliver

his message by the pro-Chinese monks of Sera, …’.25
In more recent times the Nechung oracle has made repeated proph-
ecies that Tibet would gain independence within a few years. He
also said on a number of occasions that he would send a ‘heavenly
army’ to drive out the Chinese.26 Of course these god-soldiers have
failed to materialise and Tibet is still as firmly as ever under Chinese
control. It is also well known that the Tibetan uprisings in Lhasa
in the 1980s took place due to Nechung’s advice. The results were
devastating, many Tibetans lost their lives and the Chinese cracked
down even more harshly.27 The political bungling surrounding the
recognition of the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama is also attrib-
uted to Nechung. He advised that the identity of the boy chosen
by the Tibetans should be announced before the boy was officially
recognised by the Chinese.28 This decision infuriated the Chinese and
the young Panchen Lama has been under virtual house arrest ever
since, with very little chance of being allowed to leave Tibet.29
As Jamyang Norbu comments:
‘What is mind-boggling in retrospect is the absolute faith of
the public and even the Dalai Lama in these predictions that
never even came remotely close to being realised.’30
It is primarily due to advice from the Nechung oracle that the present
Dalai Lama has banned the worship of Dorje Shugden. It is known
by many that the spirit medium of Nechung grew increasingly
jealous of the Dalai Lama’s reliance on Dorje Shugden.31 Trijang
Rinpoche, the Dalai Lama’s own Spiritual Guide and principal advi-
sor for many years, relied on Dorje Shugden and encouraged all his
students to do the same.
However, in recent years a number of other oracles have emerged
in Dharamsala that are of even more questionable authority than
Nechung but upon whom the Dalai Lama nevertheless relies to make
crucial political and religious decisions:
‘Right now there is a glut of oracles in Dharamshala. Over and
above the two state oracles there is the deity Dorjee Yudonma,
112
one of the twelve Tenma goddesses, whose medium is a mild

looking old amala [elderly woman]. There is also the oracle
Lamo Tsangba, a local protective deity of Lhasa. His medium
is a somewhat corpulent gentleman who was a trombone
player in the Chinese military orchestra in Lhasa.’32
An event that occurred in November 1996 illustrates the confusion
that these oracles are bringing to Tibetan society. In the main temple
in Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama was attending the last day of six
weeks of practices in connection with the invocation of a Deity
known as Tamdrin Yangsang, the day on which the rituals including
the ‘taking out of the tormas’ are performed. Those present included
75 monks from Sera Monastery, monks from Nechung Monastery,
and also six or seven oracles of spirits chosen by the Dalai Lama.
These oracles proceeded to go into trance, and a female oracle of
the long-life protectoress Tsering Chenma, who had previously made
virulent statements against the practice of Dorje Shugden, began
attacking the Deity Dorje Shugden, saying that ‘even within this con-
gregation there are still those who practise Dorje Shugden.’ Then:
‘Another female oracle, Yudonma, then pointed to Jangmar
Rinpoche from Drepung Loseling monastery, a Lama in his
late 60s who was originally from Gyalthang province of eastern
Tibet, and started shouting, “This Lama is bad, he is following
Dorje Shugden, take him out, take him out!” She then starts
pulling his robes and grabbing his head. The Lama gets up and
slaps her twice. There was uproar in the temple: all taking place
in front of the Dalai Lama. Jangmar Rinpoche was pushed out
of the Temple, and the scuffle continued outside, with Jangmar
Rinpoche being heard to say, “It is you spirits who are causing
all this mess. It is you who are causing disharmony. You spirits
cannot be trusted.” Later, he threatened to take the medium
to court, but was persuaded not to by the Dalai Lama. When
he reported this incident to the Dalai Lama directly the next
day the Dalai Lama says, “You have no fault, I know very well
that you are not a practitioner of Dorje Shugden. Sometimes
these oracles are a little too much. It is good you gave a slap.” ’33
113
a great deception
So even the Dalai Lama himself, who relies upon the spirit medium
of Nechung as his ‘deputy minister’ of government, recognises that
oracles are not reliable sources of qualified information.
The oracle of the Deity Tsering Chenma is regarded so highly
by the Dalai Lama that she was even allowed to live in his palace in
Dharamsala. When she first arrived from Tibet, she was a young and
attractive woman, and the Dalai Lama listened carefully to her pro-
nouncements.34 Unfortunately, she is just as unreliable as the other
alleged spirit mediums.
In July 1996 during the preparations for a Kalachakra Initiation to
be given by the Dalai Lama in Lahul Spiti, this same oracle, Tsering
Chenma, alleged that thirty members of the Dorje Shugden Society
from Delhi would attack the Dalai Lama during the initiation.
Elaborate security measures were taken but no weapons were found,
no plot was uncovered and it was discovered that there was no one
even present from the Dorje Shugden Society!35
Oracles have played a role in Tibetan history for a long time.
Their influence, however, has never been as dominant as it is now
in Dharamsala. Many ordinary Tibetans and distinguished lamas are
concerned about this growing influence. Gonsar Rinpoche has been
quoted on German television as saying:
‘These days the State and other oracles – there are about four
other oracles in India – play a great role in the different deci-
sions of our exile government. Many of us think that this is
somewhat of a risk.’36
The question naturally arises: if the Dalai Lama is an enlightened
being – as some believe he is – why does he have to rely on the
advice of spirits channelled through trance-oracles? An enlightened
being would necessarily be able to make his or her own decisions
based on their omniscient wisdom, and would not have to turn to
such questionable methods. If other politicians in the world were
to rely upon trance-oracles they would be laughed out of office. As
Lukhangwa, a former Tibetan prime minister, told the Dalai Lama
in 1956: ‘When men become desperate they consult the gods. And
when the gods become desperate, they tell lies.’37
114
These however are not the only dubious means by which the Dalai
Lama makes his decisions. He openly admits that he uses dough
balls, dice and dreams to help him come to important decisions,38 for
example, he is quoted as saying:
‘I conducted a dough-ball examination and dice divination,
which were so convincing that since 1975 I have completely
stopped this practice [of Dorje Shugden]. I have not even had
a portentous dream to make me wonder if the deity is vexed.’39
Considering that his political activities are based on these methods
of discrimination we should not be surprised that in all these years
he has not accomplished anything substantial for the Tibetan people.
In an interview for the Spanish magazine Más Allá Geshe Kelsang
Gyatso, the Founder and Spiritual Director of the New Kadampa
Tradition – International Kadampa Buddhist Union, was asked:
‘It is said that the Dalai Lama has more oracles (mediums) than
ministers, that he is surrounded by oracles and that he does not
take a step without consulting them. What do you think about
such reliance? Do you think that there is a hidden power at the
palace in Dharamsala?’
Geshe Kelsang Gyatso replied:
‘This reliance is inappropriate. These methods of divination
are often the source of many problems, conflicts and quarrels,
and give rise to superstition. The person who gets into the habit
of relying upon these methods ends up losing self-confidence,
and there comes a time when he becomes incapable of making
a single decision by himself based on logical reasoning and
using his own wisdom, or relying on the wisdom of other
experts who could advise him. Buddha did not teach these
methods, they are not Buddhist practices.’40
It is interesting to note the Fourteenth Dalai Lama himself is on
record as saying that oracles have ‘nothing to do with Buddhism …
hey should be looked upon as a manifestation of popular supersti-
tion’41, but on the other hand he still sincerely relies upon them to
115
a great deception
make important decisions on political and religious matters that affect

the lives of millions of people. For him spirit mediums are more
important than his root Spiritual Guide, and Buddha Shakyamuni,
the founder of Buddhism. In 1971 the Dalai Lama was quoted as
saying about oracles:
‘This has nothing to do with Buddhism. The oracles are abso-
lutely without importance. They are only small tree-spirits.
They do not belong to the three treasures of Buddhism.
Relations with them are of no help for our next incarnation.
They should be looked upon as manifestations of popular
superstition which is deleterious to the health of human
beings.’42
This is just one of many examples of the Dalai Lama contradict-
ing himself – saying one thing but doing another. What is clear is that
in relying upon the Nechung oracle the Fourteenth Dalai Lama is
following a spirit with a history of false prophecies. The Dalai Lama
is free to listen to a spirit-oracle when deciding his personal affairs,
but it is clearly inappropriate, if not outrageous, that the fate of the
Tibetan people and of millions of Buddhist practitioners should be
decided in this way.
116
Chapter 9
The History and Institution of the Dalai Lamas
To understand the destructive nature of the union of religion and

politics as practised in Tibet, and how it continues to have a deeply
harmful effect on Tibetan society, it is necessary to look briefly at
an overview of Tibetan history and the role of the Dalai Lamas in
it, in particular at the roles of the Fifth, Thirteenth and Fourteenth
Dalai Lamas.
Je Tsongkhapa and the Ganden Tradition
The founder of the Buddhist religion, or Dharma, was Buddha

Shakyamuni. ‘Shakya’ is the name of the royal family into which
he was born, and ‘Muni’ means ‘Able One’. He was born a royal
prince in northern India in the 7th century bce, and given the
name Siddhartha. At the age of 29 Prince Siddhartha renounced
his kingdom and, turning to the life of a forest monk, meditated
for six years until he achieved full enlightenment, or Buddhahood.
For forty years after his enlightenment, Buddha travelled
throughout India and, motivated by great compassion, taught the
meaning of what he had achieved and how to achieve it. It is said
that during this period he gave 84,000 different teachings according
to the different mental and spiritual capacity and inclination of
those attending his teachings.
Buddhadharma then gradually flourished throughout much
of Asia, and was first introduced into Tibet during the reign of
King Songtsen Gampo (ca. 616-650 ce), although it was not until
the reign of King Trisong Detsen (ca. 754-798 ce) that it flour-
ished through the activities of Shantarakshita, Padmasambhava
117
a great deception
and other Indian Buddhist teachers. King Trisong Detsen first

invited the renowned Buddhist teacher Shantarakshita to Tibet,
but Shantarakshita soon met with opposition from many of the
King’s ministers who were followers of the Bön religion, and he
was forced to leave for a while. Before he left he advised the king to
invite another famous Indian master, the great Tantric practitioner
Padmasambhava. Padmasambhava was able to pacify the non-
Buddhist spirits of Tibet, thus removing the obstacles to the spread
of Buddha’s Mahayana and Vajrayana teachings throughout the
country. The tradition that developed from this first dissemination
of Buddhism in Tibet and which traces its origins to translations
of scriptures produced at this time is called the ‘Nyingma’ or ‘Old
Tradition’.
The work of King Trisong Detsen, Padmasambhava and
Shantarakshita, however, was soon undone by the anti-Buddhist
King Lang Darma, who reigned from 838 to 842. Lang Darma
destroyed Buddhist temples, closed monasteries and forced monks
and nuns to disrobe, executing those who refused. In this way he
eradicated all forms of organised Buddhist practice from Tibet.
Lang Darma’s persecutions eventually led to his own death; while
watching a theatrical performance he was killed by an arrow shot by
a Buddhist monk pretending to be one of the actors.
Although Buddhism gradually returned to Tibet, it was not until
over a hundred years later that it began to flourish again there. One
of the key figures in this second dissemination was Atisha (ca. 982-
1054), another famous Indian Buddhist scholar and meditation
master. Atisha was largely responsible for the re-establishment of
Buddhism in Tibet, and his special presentation of Buddhist teach-
ings, called the ‘stages of the path to enlightenment’ (Lamrim in
Tibetan), attracted such interest and devotion that the dominance of
Buddhism in Tibetan society was never threatened again. His trad-
ition later became known as the ‘Kadampa Tradition’. The followers
of Atisha, known as Kadampa Geshes, were not only great scholars
but also spiritual practitioners of immense purity and sincerity.
At the same time, through the extraordinary works of other great
Tibetan masters, including Marpa the Translator (1012-1097); his
118
the history and institution of the dalai lamas
disciple the famous Yogi Milarepa (1052-1135); and Milarepa’s dis-

ciple Gampopa (1079-1153), also a practitioner of Kadam Dharma,
the Kagyu Tradition was established.
The Sakya Tradition was established by Gonchok Gyelpo (1034-
1102) who founded Sakya Monastery in 1073. One of the greatest
masters of this lineage, Sakya Pandita (1182-1251), was invited
to Mongolia in 1244 by the Mongolian Prince Godan, grandson
of Genghis Khan. Sakya Pandita was able to spread Buddhism
throughout Mongolia, and Prince Godan in turn established the
Sakya lineage as the dominant political force in Tibet at that time.
The Sakya, Kagyu, Kadam and later Gelug traditions all follow the
translations of Tantric scriptures made during this second dissemi-
nation of Buddhism into Tibet, and are thus referred to in Tibetan
as ‘Sarma’ or ‘New Traditions’.
The institution of the Dalai Lama belongs to the Gelug (or
Ganden) Tradition, which was founded by Je Tsongkhapa (1357-
1419). The Gelug Tradition arose as a reformation of the original
or ‘old’ Kadampa Tradition founded by Atisha; the Gelug practi-
tioners (‘Gelugpas’) sometimes being called ‘New Kadampas’. Je
Tsongkhapa’s legacy to Tibet is a very pure and special way of
practising Buddha’s teachings. Its source is the Kadam Emanation
Scripture, which was transmitted directly to Je Tsongkhapa by the
Wisdom Buddha Manjushri. The tradition that developed from this
is known as the Ganden Oral Lineage.
The early masters who upheld this tradition, including the first
four Dalai Lamas, led exemplary lives of pure practice and selfless
devotion to the welfare of others.
The First Four Dalai Lamas
Gendun Drub (1391-1474), who posthumously received the title

‘First Dalai Lama’, met Je Tsongkhapa when he was twenty years
old and became one of his foremost disciples. Gendun Drub was
a very pure spiritual practitioner, and renowned for combining
study and practice. He spent more than twenty years in meditation
retreat.
119
a great deception
Although one of the youngest of Je Tsongkhapa’s disciples,

Gendun Drub became one of the strongest upholders of the
Ganden Tradition. With great energy, organisational skill and leader-
ship ability he established the famous Tashi Lhunpo Monastery – the
future seat of the lineage of the Panchen Lamas. In this and in many
other ways Gendun Drub worked to secure the future protection
and development of the Ganden Tradition. He died at the age of
84, seated in meditation.
Gendun Gyatso (1475-1542), whose recognition as the Second
Dalai Lama was also posthumous, spent his whole life dedicated
to upholding and spreading Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition. In 1512 he
became the abbot of Tashi Lhunpo Monastery, in 1517 the abbot
of Drepung Monastery, and in 1525 the abbot of Sera Monastery.
While at Drepung Monastery he built a residence known as ‘Ganden
Phodrang’, also known as the ‘Lower Residence’, which became
the principal residence of the Dalai Lamas until the time of the
Fifth Dalai Lama. Having spread the teachings of Je Tsongkhapa
throughout Central Tibet, he passed away in Drepung after a brief
illness.
After Gendun Gyatso passed away, the high lamas of Drepung
set out in search of his reincarnation. They found a young boy,
who was named Sonam Gyatso (1543-1588). He became greatly
respected not only as a scholar and meditator but also as a negotia-
tor of peace between factions of the Gelug and Kagyu traditions
who were fighting at that time. Like his predecessor, he was so
highly respected by his fellow monks that he was in turn elected
abbot of both Drepung and Sera monasteries.
His fame eventually reached Mongolia and particularly Altan
Khan – the leader of the Mongols and grandson of Dayan Khan, a
descendant of Kublai Khan. Upon Altan Khan’s invitations, Sonam
Gyatso visited Mongolia in 1578. On hearing Sonam Gyatso’s teach-
ings, Altan Khan converted to Buddhism. During his three-year
visit Sonam Gyatso taught Je Tsongkhapa’s teachings throughout
Mongolia, ordained thousands of Mongolians and brought an end
to animal sacrifice and other inhumane practices there. Altan Khan
conferred on Sonam Gyatso the title ‘Dalai Lama’, ‘dalai’ being a
120
Mongolian word for ‘ocean’, indicating that Sonam Gyatso’s good

qualities were as extensive as the ocean. Thus Sonam Gyatso became
known as the Dalai Lama, with his previous reincarnations receiving
the title retrospectively.
The Fourth Dalai Lama Yonten Gyatso (1589-1616) is unique
in being the only Mongolian Dalai Lama, the grandson of Altan
Khan. Attendants of the late Third Dalai Lama as well as rep-
resentatives of the three great Gelugpa monasteries – Drepung,
Sera and Ganden – travelled to Mongolia to confirm the reincar-
nation. At the age of twelve, Yonten Gyatso moved to Drepung to
undergo religious training and at the age of nineteen was installed
on the throne of the Ganden Phodrang at Drepung Monastery.
Yonten Gyatso later became the abbot of Drepung and then Sera
monasteries, but only for a short while. He died in 1616, at the age
of only 27.
Until this time, the concept of a Dalai Lama with supreme politi-
cal or even religious authority over all of Tibet did not exist. The
first three Dalai Lamas were held in high regard as pure spiritual
teachers. The fame of the ‘Third’ had spread throughout Mongolia,
and he had received a Mongolian term of respect as well as the
patronage of a strong military power. But there was no ‘God-King’,
no one embodying the union of religious and political power, in
these early Dalai Lamas. There was no institution of the Dalai
Lama: the Dalai Lamas were more usually known as ‘the reincarna-
tions of the Lower Residence’, and regarded as a lineage of famous
reincarnate Gelugpa Lamas from Drepung who had simply been
given an additional title by Mongolian patrons.
Through their activities of teaching and spreading the tradition
of Je Tsongkhapa, and their exemplary lives of pure moral discipline
and spiritual practice, these first four Dalai Lamas fulfilled their main
responsibility of upholding the teachings of the Ganden Tradition.
Initially, the Ganden Tradition was not mixed with the politics
of Tibet, but later this tradition gave rise to some of the most
political lamas in Tibetan history: namely the Fifth, Thirteenth and
Fourteenth Dalai Lamas. As John Powers remarks in Introduction to
Tibetan Buddhism:
121
a great deception
‘… the fortunes of the Gélukpa order rose quickly, mainly

because it continued to produce an impressive number
of eminent scholars and tantric adepts. Another factor in
its success was its initial reluctance to become involved in
Tibetan politics. Instead, for several centuries after the death
of Tsong Khapa, the Gélukpa order was mainly renowned
for its strict adherence to monastic discipline, its accom-
plished scholars, and its intensive meditative training.
‘This attitude of aloofness towards politics was not to last,
however.’43
The Fifth Dalai Lama
The institution of the Dalai Lama as we currently know it – mixing

Dharma with politics as a method of government – begins with the
Dalai Lama popularly known as the ‘Great Fifth’. As a consequence
of a complicated series of political-historical developments, as well
as open warfare, ‘the Fifth Dalai Lama made the institution of the
Dalai Lama the core symbol of the state of Tibet.’44
Due to the rapid development and growing popularity of the
Gelugpas, the kings of the Tsang region of Tibet, who were follow-
ers of the Karma Kagyu Tradition, felt increasing animosity towards
the Gelugpas and subjected them to periods of persecution.45
In the years immediately before and following the death of the
Fourth Dalai Lama, hostilities between the Gelugpas and the sup-
porters of the king of Tsang intensified. It was into this environment
of political and religious conflict that the Fifth Dalai Lama, Losang
Gyatso (1617-1682) was born.
There were three candidates for the throne of the Fifth Dalai
Lama. One was Dragpa Gyaltsen, whose later fame and stature as
a great spiritual master were perceived as a threat by the Fifth Dalai
Lama. The Fifth Dalai Lama’s autobiography (Du ku la’i go zang
in Tibetan) says that the Panchen Lama Losang Chokyi Gyaltsen
(Losang Chogyen) performed a divination and chose him – Losang
Gyatso – as the reincarnate Dalai Lama, although no date is given
122
for the event and it is not even mentioned in the Panchen Lama’s
autobiography.46
Many doubts have been expressed about the confirmatory examin-
ations made to test the authenticity of the Fifth Dalai Lama, which
were carried out by a disciple of the Dalai Lama’s Regent, Sonam
Rabten. The nature of the relationship between the Dalai Lama and
his Regent, as well as certain statements made by the latter which are
recorded in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s own autobiography, have fuelled
speculation concerning the authenticity of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s
recognition.47
In any event, the times into which the Fifth Dalai Lama was born
were so unstable politically that his discovery and whereabouts were
kept secret for some time. In 1635, when the Fifth Dalai Lama was
eighteen years old, the leader of the Chogthu Mongols, supporters
of the ruler of Tsang, sent ten thousand troops ‘to wipe out the
Gelug-pa sect’.48 This eventually led to war between the Chogthu
Mongol armies and the Qoshot Mongol armies of Gushri Khan,
supporters of the Fifth Dalai Lama, each intent on supporting their
respective Buddhist tradition. Gushri Khan emerged victorious and
in 1638 at a ceremony held in the Jokhang Temple in Lhasa he was
placed on a throne and given the title ‘Religious-King and Holder of
the Buddhist Faith’.49 Soon afterwards a letter sent by the pro-Bön
chief of Beri to the ruler of Tsang accidentally fell into Gelugpa
hands. Part of this letter read:
‘It is a great disappointment that our allies, the Chogthu tribe,
have been wiped out. However, next year, I shall raise an army
in Kham and accompany it to Ü [the central region of Tibet,
around Lhasa]. At the same time, you must bring in your
army from Tsang. Together we will completely eliminate the
Ge-lug-pa sect, so no trace of it will ever be found.’50
When this message was intercepted and passed to Gushri Khan

he immediately went to the Dalai Lama, intent upon leading his army
into battle, first against the chief of Beri and then against the ruler
of Tsang. In the religious war that ensued the chief of Beri was
captured and executed and then:
123
a great deception
‘Gushri [Khan]… attacked the Tsangpa King himself at his

home base in Shigatse. The Geluk sect sent its own force of
supporters and monks to assist him and in 1642 they cap-
tured Shigatse. The King of Tibet (the Tsangpa King) was
executed.
‘Gushri Khan gave supreme authority over all of Tibet to
the Fifth Dalai Lama.’51
Having vanquished his enemies in Tsang, there were still other

tasks to be accomplished if Losang Gyatso was to gain full power
and control over Tibet. In his paper, The Sovereign Power of the Fifth
Dalai Lama, Zuiho Yamaguchi writes:
‘The first step along the path whereby the fifth Dalai Lama,
no more than an incarnate lama of ‘Bras-spungs [Drepung]
monastery, came to view himself as king of Tibet and assumed
the reins of government was the construction of the Potala.’52
On the advice of a Nyingma oracle, the Dalai Lama undertook the

building of a massive fortress that would tower above the city of
Lhasa and would secure his position in the event that the Mongols
were to withdraw their military support. John Powers further explains
the significance of the Potala Palace:
‘During his reign, the connection between the Dalai Lamas

and Avalokiteśvara was stressed, and this was reflected in the
construction of the Potala, … The name that was chosen for
the palace was taken from a mountain in southern India that is
associated with Śiva in his incarnation as Lokeśvara, or “Lord
of the World”, who is considered by Tibetans to be an eman-
ation of Avalokiteśvara. This association helped to establish
the Dalai Lamas as incarnations of a buddha, and they are
regarded as such by Tibetan Buddhists, who have traditionally
looked upon the Potala as the residence of Avalokiteśvara in
human form.’53
By destroying the opposing forces in Tsang and building the

Potala Palace, the Fifth Dalai Lama secured some measure of
124
political power. But, to secure supreme religious authority for himself

as well, there were other obstacles to be removed. In the feudalistic
society of those days, a sovereign’s power could only survive if it
was unchallenged and without rivals. Like the custom of medieval
monarchies worldwide, rivals were murdered and all opposition to
the ruler was crushed brutally.
This is clearly illustrated in the case of Tulku or Ngatrul Dragpa
Gyaltsen. Yamaguchi continues:
‘The Fifth Dalai Lama was an incarnate lama (sprul sku [tulku])
of ’Bras-spungs [Drepung] monastery, but there was another
incarnate lama at ’Bras-spungs monastery, namely, sprul sku
gZims-khang-gong-ma [the Tulku of the Upper Residence,
Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen], regarded as a reincarnation of
Pan-chen bSod-nams-grags-pa [Panchen Sonam Dragpa]
(1478-1544). For the Dalai Lama to become the supreme reli-
gious authority in all Tibet, it was imperative that only a single
incarnate lama in the person of the Dalai Lama preside over
’Bras-spungs [Drepung] monastery from his headquarters at
dGa’-ldan [Ganden] Palace.’54
Dragpa Gyaltsen was born in 1619, in the 10th month of the

Earth Sheep year according to the Tibetan calendar. He was born in
Tolung, into the prominent Gaykhasa family. At first he was consid-
ered a possible reincarnation of the Fourth Dalai Lama, but at the
age of six he was instead recognised by Panchen Losang Chogyen
as the reincarnation of Ngawang Sonam Geleg Pelsang (1594-1615).
Accordingly he was enthroned formally as the reincarnate Lama of
the so-called ‘Upper Residence’ of Drepung Monastery (the ‘Lower
Residence’ being that of the Dalai Lamas). Being the reincarnate
Lama of the Upper Residence meant that his reincarnation lineage
went back to Panchen Sonam Dragpa (Tutor of the Third Dalai
Lama) and because of his accomplishments of knowledge and spir-
itual proficiency, Dragpa Gyaltsen was considered equal in spiritual
status to the Fifth Dalai Lama.
A graphic illustration of their equal spiritual status can be seen in a
17th century thangkha painting of the Buddhist Deity Palden Lhamo
125
a great deception
(Shri Devi), reproduced in Wisdom and Compassion: The Sacred Art of

Tibet. The description of this painting reads:
‘In the upper left corner are three Gelukpa lamas, each with an
identifying inscription. … the central figure is Losang Chökyi
Gyaltsen (later made the first Panchen Lama by the Fifth Dalai
Lama), the lama to his right is the Fifth Dalai Lama, and the
lama to his left is Tulku Drakpa Gyaltsen, another reincarnate
lama of Drepung monastic university.’
In this painting it is clear that the Fifth Dalai Lama and Tulku Dragpa
Gyaltsen have equal status as disciples of the Panchen Lama. The
explanation of this painting also reveals how political considerations
would soon take precedence even in a religious painting:
‘[The painting can be dated]… with certainty to before 1642.

Because the Panchen Lama is in the center and Drakpa
Gyaltsen is present, it is clearly before the death of the latter,
and before the rise to eminence of the Fifth Dalai Lama in
1642, after which time he would have been given the central
position.’55
Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen was two years younger than the Dalai
Lama. His spiritual prominence, however, seemed to exceed that of
the Dalai Lama. Pilgrims coming from Mongolia and the eastern
Tibetan borders of Kham would first pay their respects to Tulku
Dragpa Gyaltsen and then proceed to the Dalai Lama, sometimes
making more offerings to Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen than to the Dalai
Lama; and when speaking of the Upper and Lower Residences, peo-
ple often viewed both in equal terms.56
This was unacceptable to Sonam Rabten (who acted as the Fifth
Dalai Lama’s principal executive) and to the officials of the Dalai
Lama’s recently-established government (the Tibetan government is
still called the Ganden Phodrang, after the Dalai Lama’s residence in
Drepung Monastery). Because of his strong resentment and hatred,
Sonam Rabten and his associates began a campaign of persecution
against the unsuspecting Tulku and his family.
126
Norbu, the governor of Tsang, was a close relative of Sonam

Rabten, and participated in these intrigues against the Gaykhasa fam-
ily with the indirect supervision, or at least approval, of the latter. He
secretly invited the Mongols to create anarchy in the Tolung area, and
contrived to leave the younger members of the Gaykhasa family with
no option but to fight. In the event, a number of the family were
killed. Norbu had intended this, and in 1638 he took the opportunity
to seize their lands and property.
Another incident occurred in 1639, just a year later. In an unprec-
edented scheme to isolate Dragpa Gyaltsen further, Sonam Rabten
personally tampered with the documentary records concerning the
Tulku’s predecessors, and destroyed some of them. Sonam Rabten
regarded this as necessary because Dragpa Gyaltsen’s prominence
existed partly because of the claims that he was the reincarnation of
famous Buddhist masters.
The Panchen Lama Losang Chokyi Gyaltsen (1570-1662), the
Spiritual Guide of both Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen and the Fifth Dalai
Lama, had written a prayer listing Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen’s previ-
ous incarnations as including Venerable Manjushri, Mahasiddha
Bhiravapa [Biwawa or Virupa], Sakya Pandita Kunga Gyaltsen,
Buton Rinchen Drub, Duldzin Dragpa Gyaltsen, Panchen Sonam
Dragpa, Sonam Yeshe Wangpo and Sonam Geleg Pelsang. The
same line of predecessors has since been confirmed by Kyabje
Phabongkhapa Dechen Nyingpo (1878-1941), and Kyabje Trijang
Rinpoche (1900-1981).
According to the Fifth Dalai Lama’s own account in his auto-
biography, Sonam Rabten’s tampering with the names of Tulku
Dragpa Gyaltsen’s predecessors took place in 1639 on the 15th day
of the fifth Tibetan month. Sonam Rabten said that the name of
one of the recognised predecessors, Buton Rinchen Drub, had been
misunderstood by Panchen Sonam Dragpa when Panchen Sonam
Dragpa was writing the colophon of one of his texts. This being so,
Sonam Rabten said, Buton’s name should be removed from the com-
mon supplication prayer to Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen. Because of his
tampering with the records in this way, even the name of Panchen
Sonam Dragpa could not be included in the prayer.
127
a great deception
This was clearly an act of defamation on the part of Sonam

Rabten, because the Panchen Lama Losang Chökyi Gyaltsen’s own
prayer composed to the Tulku stated the Tulku to be an incarnation
of both Buton Rinchen Drub and Panchen Sonam Dragpa. The fact
that Sonam Rabten disposed of documents that he wanted to sup-
press is clearly stated even in the Fifth Dalai Lama’s autobiography.
That Sonam Rabten openly lied to achieve his ends is clear evi-
dence of his efforts to isolate and denigrate Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen.
Later, in 1642, the Tulku’s status was officially ‘downgraded’, again
by decision of Sonam Rabten. In these and other ways Tulku Dragpa
Gyaltsen was persecuted for over ten years, and was driven more and
more into isolation.
Regardless of these circumstances, Dragpa Gyaltsen continued his
spiritual engagements. Besides taking the Fifth Dalai Lama as one of
his spiritual mentors, the Tulku honoured and made copious material
offerings to him. On a number of occasions, when the Dalai Lama
was departing from or returning to Lhasa, Dragpa Gyaltsen would
personally see him off, or give welcoming receptions accordingly.
Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen suddenly became ill on the 25th day of
the fourth Tibetan month of the ‘Fire Monkey’ year, 1656. Using
the illness as a cover, Sonam Rabten and Norbu contrived several
attempts on Dragpa Gyaltsen’s life. Finally, on the 13th day of the
fifth month, Dragpa Gyaltsen was brutally murdered in his resi-
dence. To allay suspicion of murder, silk scarves were stuffed deeply
down his throat. In this way a great and pure spiritual being, loved
and venerated by the mass of ordinary Tibetans, was made to suffer
humiliation and death at the hands of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s minis-
ters.57 Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen was 38 years old when he died.
As Kundeling Rinpoche says:
‘This was the most scandalous event of an unprecedented

nature that ever took place in the history of Tibet in general
and the Gelugpas in particular. Judging from these events,
many conclusions can be drawn about the nature of the Dalai
Lama’s own position, the role of his aides, and the monopoly
of the newly established Ganden Phodrang Government.’58
128
Some writers have tried to attribute sole blame for the murder
to the Fifth Dalai Lama’s ministers, especially Sonam Rabten, and
claim that the Fifth Dalai Lama did not know of their actions, but as
Yamaguchi writes: ‘it is patently clear from his undisguised criticism
of Panchen Sonam Dragpa in his Chronicle of Tibet, written in 1643,
that the Dalai Lama detested the incarnate lama.’59 After Dragpa
Gyaltsen’s death, the Fifth Dalai Lama ordered a stop to the lineage
of reincarnations of this great lama.
Many Gelugpa lamas believe that Dragpa Gyaltsen, and not
Losang Gyatso, was the actual reincarnation of the Fourth Dalai
Lama and that when Dragpa Gyaltsen died he became a Protector of
Je Tsongkhapa’s Ganden Tradition. Indeed, before his death, Dragpa
Gyaltsen himself predicted that he would become the Dharma
Protector, Dorje Shugden.60
When giving the blessing empowerment61 of Dorje Shugden
to over five thousand disciples in England on 25 July 2009, Geshe
Kelsang Gyatso explained:
‘First you should know who Dorje Shugden is. Dorje Shugden
is an enlightened Deity who is the manifestation of the
wisdom Buddha Je Tsongkhapa. It is commonly believed that
after the death of the great Lama Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen
he appeared as Dorje Shugden. The first Panchen Lama,
who was the living Buddha Amitabha, listed some of
Dragpa Gyaltsen’s former incarnations, which are, during
Buddha’s time Bodhisattva Manjushri, and later Mahasiddha
Biwawa, the great Sakya Pandita and Buton Rinchen Drub.
These holy beings were also Je Tsongkhapa’s former
incarnations.
‘Later, the great Yogi Kelsang Khedrub and many other
Lamas including Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche listed Dorje
Shugden’s former incarnations, which are the same holy
beings I have just listed from Bodhisattva Manjushri through
to Buton Rinchen Drub. This proves that Dorje Shugden and
Je Tsongkhapa are the same mental continuum, which means
one person but different aspect. For these valid reasons I say
129
a great deception
that Dorje Shugden is a manifestation of the wisdom Buddha

Je Tsongkhapa – no doubt.
‘Je Tsongkhapa himself appears as Dorje Shugden to prevent
his doctrine of the Ganden Oral Lineage from degenerating.
He does this by pacifying obstacles, gathering necessary condi-
tions and bestowing powerful blessings upon practitioners of
this doctrine.
‘If we continually rely upon Dorje Shugden with faith, he
will care for us as a mother cares for her child. He will guide
us to the correct path, the liberating path. He will pacify our
obstacles and gather necessary conditions for us, and we will
receive his powerful blessings through which our wisdom,
compassion and spiritual power will increase. Through this we
can easily make progress along the quick path to enlightenment
that is shown to us by Je Tsongkhapa.’62
Later in his life, the Fifth Dalai Lama realised that he had misunder-
stood the real nature of Dorje Shugden and he began to engage in the
practice of Dorje Shugden and composed prayers to him (see Chapter
1). In these, the first prayers ever written to Dorje Shugden, he invites
Dorje Shugden to come from the Dharmakaya, clearly indicating that
he had come to regard Dorje Shugden as an enlightened being.63
Having destroyed the life of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen and established
his religious authority over Tibet, the Fifth Dalai Lama then moved to
establish his political authority. One remaining obstacle in his path to
complete supremacy that he perceived lay in control over the power
to appoint the Regent, or Chief Minister, which position had been
conferred upon Sonam Rabten by Gushri Khan himself. Gushri
Khan and Sonam Rabten died at about the same time and the dispute
that ensued amongst the Mongolians as to who would inherit Gushri
Khan’s authority provided the Dalai Lama with the opportunity he
needed to seize the right to appoint the future Regent himself.64
In this matter, the main obstacles to the Dalai Lama’s attainment
of absolute power over Tibet were Norbu and Gona Shagpa (sGo-
sna-shag-pa). They were ‘matrilineal relations’ of the former Regent
Sonam Rabten. Although Norbu expected to become Regent after
130
Sonam Rabten’s death, both as a close relative and in view of his

career and positions held until then, ‘if the fifth Dalai Lama had
readily allowed this, it would have been tantamount to endorsing
Governor Nor-bu’s succession ... in a way over which he had no
control, and because the regent’s authority had been conferred by
Guši Khan, he would have been publicly acknowledging a historical
fact that had been beyond his control.’65 This would have diminished
the Dalai Lama’s power. Also, by eliminating Norbu he would be
getting rid of the one person who could prove that the Fifth Dalai
Lama was behind the murder of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen.
The Dalai Lama began a ruthless and cynical campaign against
these two formerly important figures, until eventually, fearing for
their lives, they both took refuge under the protection of Tashi
Lhunpo Monastery, the seat of the Panchen Lama. Hearing of
this, the Dalai Lama dispatched troops and threatened to attack
the monastery. The Panchen Lama, who was the Dalai Lama’s own
Spiritual Guide, together with the principal lamas of Sera, Drepung
and Ganden monasteries, requested that Norbu be forgiven, but the
Dalai Lama’s response was defiant:
‘These 130,000 households of Tibet were given only to me by

the Upholder of the Teachings and Dharma-King (viz. Guši
Khan), and they were not given so that I might share them with
those two matrilineal relations.’66
In the end, the Dalai Lama’s plan of attack was not carried out, but
the banishment of the ‘two matrilineal relations’ secured his sovereign
power over all of Tibet. The Panchen Lama, one of the towering
spiritual figures in the history of the Gelug Tradition, passed away in
1662, but the Fifth Dalai Lama did not even attend the funeral:
‘The Dalai Lama, now head of state, set out on a trip, claiming
that his presence had been requested by the oracle at bSam-yas
[Samye] monastery, and he sent only a rather inconspicuous
envoy to attend the funeral of the great scholar who had been
his teacher. It would appear that the deceased’s intercession
131
a great deception
on behalf of the “two matrilineal relations” had considerably

angered him.’67
In recent years, scholars have begun to investigate the ‘myth of
the Great Fifth’. For example, Elliot Sperling has remarked:
‘One may say with confidence that the Fifth Dalai Lama does
not fit the standard image that many people today have of a
Dalai Lama, particularly not the image of a Nobel Peace Prize
laureate.’68
An examination of some of the Fifth Dalai Lama’s own state-
ments indicates just how far he was willing to go to eliminate those
who opposed him. He is reported as telling one of Gushri Khan’s
officers:
‘... “Relying on that particular virtue which encompasses the
bodhisattva—i.e., thinking of oneself and others in an equal
manner—has not held back strife. Thus, ... nothing other than
shame before others would come of it.” ’
And also:
‘Though we might take revenge, I ... the cleric occupying the
seat of the omniscient ones, would not appear as a disobedient
monk.’69
By this the Dalai Lama meant that because of his exalted position
the Tibetan people would not find fault in his actions even if the
actions were not in accordance with Buddha’s teachings.
Shakabpa remarks that ‘he could be ruthless in stamping out a
rebellion’ and quotes him as saying ‘… no pity should be wasted on a
man who had to be executed for his crimes’.70 During a rebellion of
the Karmapas in Tsang, the Dalai Lama issued the following orders:
‘[Of those in] the band of enemies, who have despoiled
the duties entrusted to them:
Make the male lines like trees that have had their roots cut;
Make the female lines like brooks that have dried up in
winter,
Make the children and grandchildren like eggs smashed
against cliffs,
132
Make the servants and followers like heaps of grass

consumed by fire,
Make their dominion like a lamp whose oil has been
exhausted,
In short, annihilate any traces of them, even their names.’71
With the Fifth Dalai Lama’s sovereignty encompassing all spir-
itual and temporal authority he became not only an autocrat, but
also supreme master over life and death for the masses of ordinary
Tibetans. His government would later exploit this position to its
maximum. It is significant to note that the present Dalai Lama has
often spoken of his close affinity with the Fifth Dalai Lama who as
we have seen was so involved in war and political activity. A Tibetan
Government official statement issued on 31 May 1996, quotes the
Dalai Lama as saying:
‘I am a successor to the Great Fifth Dalai Lama and, likewise,
have a unique karmic relationship with the previous Dalai
Lama. I have therefore a duty to carry out the legacy of the
Great Fifth and the 13th Dalai Lama.’72
The Sixth and Seventh Dalai Lamas
The sequence of events following the death of the Fifth Dalai

Lama (in 1682) was most unusual. The Dalai Lama had appointed a
young man named Sangye Gyatso as his Regent. Sangye Gyatso had
previously been an attendant of the Dalai Lama, and had received
a thorough grounding in religious and political matters. But he
may have had an even closer relationship to the Dalai Lama: as the
Tibetan historian Shakabpa remarks, ‘Some scholars have made the
statement that Sangye Gyatso was believed to have been the natural
son of the fifth Dalai Lama.’73
The young Regent concealed the death of the Fifth Dalai Lama
for fifteen years, by announcing that he had gone into meditation
retreat for an unspecified period of time and could not be disturbed.
A monk from Namgyal Dratsang Monastery was ordered to take
the Dalai Lama’s place by residing in the Potala palace and engaging
133
a great deception
in the regular routines that the Dalai Lama would have followed.
Shakabpa says of this bizarre situation:
‘… the Namgyal Dratsang monk soon tired of his forced
imprisonment and made an effort to escape from the duties of
impersonation. He had to be beaten sometimes, and at others
bribed. Indeed, it could not have been pleasant for him to
remain within the walls of the Potala under those conditions
for fifteen years.’74
Even so, the Namgyal Dratsang monk was relatively fortunate:
‘In his frenzied determination to maintain the secret, Desi
[Regent] Sangyay is said to have murdered both the medium of
the Nechung oracle Tsewang Palbar and the latter’s mother for
getting wind of the secret during Desi’s frequent consultation
with the oracle in the nerve-wracking suspense of running
the Tibetan administrative show without the presence of the
Dalai Lama.’75
The building of the Potala palace, the supreme symbol of the
Dalai Lama’s power and of his association with Avalokiteshvara, was
finally completed in 1695. Soon afterwards the Regent announced
that the Fifth Dalai Lama had in fact died in 1682 and that his re-
incarnation was already thirteen years old! Regent Sangye Gyatso was
later executed by the Mongol leader Lhazang Khan.76
Those fifteen years of deception, however, were not as shocking
as the behaviour and lifestyle of the Sixth Dalai Lama, Tsangyang
Gyatso, which nearly destroyed the institution itself:
‘Because of this one reincarnation [the Sixth Dalai Lama] in
the whole chain, there has been some vague scepticism about
even the authenticity of this Institution …
‘Tsangyang Gyatso (1683-1706) lived for only 24 years but
even during this short span of life he had created a sensation
by the kind of life he led which almost shook the very founda-
tion of this unique system.’77
134
One of the main reforms made by Je Tsongkhapa was strict

adherence to the monastic rules set down by Buddha, but the Sixth
Dalai Lama rebelled against this very religious tradition he was sup-
posed to uphold. Tsangyang Gyatso favoured a frivolous life of
sports, drinking, women and late nights of carousing. As Grunfeld
comments:
‘Tsangyang Gyatso … has come to be known among Tibetans
as the “Merry One”, and not without just 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.’78
The appeals of his Spiritual Guide, Panchen Lama Losang Yeshe,
to focus on religious study and practice were to no avail. The young
Dalai Lama, swayed by the pleasures of ordinary life, instead told
his Spiritual Guide that he wished to renounce his vows.79 As had
been necessary with the Fifth Dalai Lama, the religious leaders of
his time implored him to follow the religious path set forth by
Buddha:
‘The Dalai Lama was … approached by the abbots of the
big three monasteries [Drepung, Sera and Ganden], by Desi
[Regent] Taktse and by Lhazang Khan, … the grandson of
Gushri Khan, all of whom pleaded with the Dalai Lama not
to renounce his Getsul [novice monk] vows; but their pleas
were of no avail.’80
Such behaviour by a senior religious figure was unacceptable,
and was far from what his Mongolian patrons expected. When all
attempts at persuasion had failed, Lhazang Khan marched into
Lhasa and took full political control. He summoned the Dalai
Lama to his court and castigated him for his numerous failings.
Together with the Manchu Chinese Emperor he decided to depose
and exile this disgraceful Dalai Lama, and his military might forced
the Dalai Lama to acquiesce. Enroute to his place of exile, the
young Tsangyang Gyatso ‘mysteriously’ died, probably being
assassinated.
135
a great deception
Lhazang Khan then publicly put forth another monk, Ngawang

Yeshe Gyatso, as the true Sixth Dalai Lama and enthroned him
at the Potala palace. However, the majority of Tibetans did not
support Lhazang Khan’s choice. When news arrived that a reincar-
nation of the late Sixth Dalai Lama had been found in a young
child named Kelsang Gyatso, the Manchu Chinese recognised the
potential political advantage in controlling this young boy and took
him under their protection at Kumbum Monastery. Throughout all
this turmoil, the majority of Tibetans still maintained their faith in
Tsangyang Gyatso as a most unusual upholder of Je Tsongkhapa’s
tradition.
As a result of the actions of Regent Sangye Gyatso and the
Sixth Dalai Lama, the political power that the Fifth Dalai Lama
had so ruthlessly gained was lost, first to the Mongolians and then
to the Chinese, through the Manchus. Lhazang Khan soon found
himself in conflict with another Mongolian tribe, the Dzungars,
who successfully conquered Lhasa and then killed Lhazang Khan
himself. Once in control of Lhasa they deposed and imprisoned
Lhazang Khan’s chosen Dalai Lama, Yeshe Gyatso, and executed
many lamas and political officials who had supported Lhazang.
The Tibetans petitioned the Dzungars to bring the true Dalai
Lama to Lhasa, but the Manchu Chinese would not release the
young Kelsang Gyatso (1708-1757) to the Mongol Dzungars. The
Regent at that time, Taktse Shabdrung, and a number of Tibetan
officials then sent the Manchu Chinese a letter saying that they
recognised Kelsang Gyatso as the Dalai Lama. The Manchu Chinese
Emperor took this political bait and confirmed that Kelsang Gyatso
was the ‘Seventh’ Dalai Lama. He presented Kelsang Gyatso with
a golden seal that read ‘Seal of the Sixth Dalai Lama’, and thus
avoided the question of whether the two previous Sixth Dalai
Lamas had been true incarnations or not.81
Because of the increasing unpopularity of the Dzungar regime,
and frustration with the Dzungars’ inability to bring them their
Dalai Lama, the Tibetans sided with the Manchu Chinese and for-
cibly drove out the Dzungars. Thus in 1720 the Manchu Chinese
escorted Kelsang Gyatso to Lhasa where at the age of only twelve
136
he was enthroned as the Seventh Dalai Lama, but without temporal

power. The Manchu Chinese set up a new form of government
in Tibet, with a council of ministers replacing the previously all-
powerful Regent.82
However, in 1728 one of the newly elected ministers, Pholhanas,
violently overpowered his fellow ministers and took full control
of Tibet. Three ministers and fourteen of their colleagues were
executed just outside the Potala, where their bodies were sliced into
small pieces. The father of the Seventh Dalai Lama had been a
supporter of the executed ministers, and so he and the Dalai Lama
were sent into exile for seven years.83 Pholhanas ruled Tibet until
1747, while the Dalai Lama remained in the background:
‘During the nineteen years he had ruled Tibet, there had
been uninterrupted peace and prosperity throughout the
countryside. He had allied himself firmly with the Manchu
Emperors and was able to exert his influence on the Dalai
Lama himself.’84
Pholhanas was succeeded by his youngest son, Gyemey Namgyal,
who sought to re-establish the Dzungar Mongols as allies in order
to drive the Manchu Chinese out of Tibet. Learning of his plan,
the Manchu Chinese in Lhasa killed him. In 1751 the Dalai Lama
himself was given full spiritual and temporal powers over Tibet,
but he passed away only shortly thereafter in 1757.85
As Shakabpa remarks of the Seventh Dalai Lama’s life:
‘He was a scholarly man. His political life had been marked
by difficulties. Only towards the end of his life, did he
actually exercise temporal power. Although overshadowed
by the political figures of those violent times, the seventh
Dalai Lama has been acknowledged superior to the other
Dalai Lamas on religious grounds, because of his piety and
scholarly achievements.’86
137
a great deception
The Eighth to Twelfth Dalai Lamas
It is already clear from the foregoing that there was, in fact, no

consistent ‘God-King’ in the lineage of the Dalai Lamas. The first
three were pure religious teachers, the Third gaining the admira-
tion of the Mongols and for the first time receiving the title ‘Dalai
Lama’ from the Mongolian ruler Altan Khan. The Fourth, Altan
Khan’s grandson, was in Tibet for only 14 years and died at the
relatively young age of 27. These first four Dalai Lamas were not
interested in the political affairs of state, but concentrated instead
on their main responsibility, which was to uphold and carry on the
spiritual legacy of Je Tsongkhapa’s tradition.
The Fifth Dalai Lama assumed full control of Tibet by ruth-
less means, disregarding the advice of his own Spiritual Guide in
his ascension to power. In rejecting his monastic vows, the Sixth
Dalai Lama also disregarded the advice of his Spiritual Guide, and
had very little to do with either spiritual or political matters. The
Seventh Dalai Lama, while setting an example of a pure spiritual
practitioner, gave little leadership except in the last few years of his
life. John Powers writes that after the death of the Seventh Dalai
Lama:
‘... Tibet began a period of 130 years during which none
of the Dalai Lamas assumed effective control. During this
time, the country was ruled by a succession of regents, all of
whom were Gélukpa monks. The eighth Dalai Lama, Jambel
Gyatso, was uninterested in worldly affairs, and so although
he lived to the age of forty-seven, the administration of the
country was handled by regents.’87
The dominant myth about Tibet that is promulgated in the West
is of a peaceful mountain kingdom that has always been led by the
human incarnation of Avalokiteshvara, the Buddha of Compassion.
On closer scrutiny it can be seen that the institution of the Dalai
Lamas, which effectively began with the violent seizure of power by
the Fifth Dalai Lama, showed a conspicuous lack of leadership until
the twentieth century. In fact:
138
‘The Ninth-Twelfth Dalai Lamas played no notable part in

the life of Tibet. Their lives are conspicuous for their brevity.
Several of them died before they came of age to assume power
or write anything.’88
There is much speculation about these ‘missing’ Dalai Lamas. Their
premature deaths and the sheer ‘greed for power’ evident in Lhasa
has led many historians ‘… to suspect foul play in the demise of
these Dalai Lamas at such young ages.’89 What is certain is that for
a long period of time the Dalai Lamas played no leading role in
Tibetan political or even religious life. This was to change with the
next two Dalai Lamas.
The Thirteenth Dalai Lama
The ‘Great Thirteenth’ Dalai Lama Thubten Gyatso (1876-1933)

assumed power in 1895 at the age of nineteen, and was to preside
over a period of great political upheaval in Tibet. Sir Charles Bell,
a British diplomat and friend and confidant of the Thirteenth
Dalai Lama, comments that in the early years of the Dalai Lama’s
leadership the devotion of his people carried him through internal
matters of state:
‘But in foreign politics he had to stand on his own feet. His
ignorance led him astray; and the impetuosity and unyielding
will, which were always strong ingredients in his character,
pushed him still further on the road that led to disaster.
‘... Pathetic indeed was his ignorance as [to] how things were
done outside his hermit land.’90
Concerned about the Dalai Lama’s growing connection with
Russia apparent at that time, and interested in expanding their own
colonial influence, the British invaded Tibet in 1904. The young
Dalai Lama fled the invaders, escaping north into China where he
remained in exile for four years.
In Beijing, the Thirteenth Dalai Lama was granted an audience
with the Empress Dowager. He was compelled to kneel before her,
139
a great deception
and he received the humiliating title ‘Our Loyal and Submissive Vice-
Regent’. As Goldstein comments:
‘The Chinese had demonstrated clearly to the 13th Dalai Lama
that he was subordinate to the emperor and that his position
in Tibet was dependent on their goodwill. To the extremely
proud Dalai Lama this must have been a very humiliating
experience.’91
Not trusting him to be either loyal or submissive, China covertly
dispatched an army of seven thousand men to march into Tibet,
to ensure the Dalai Lama’s compliance. After presiding over the
Chinese Emperor’s funeral, the Dalai Lama returned to Tibet, but
this sojourn in his country was brief, for two months after his return
the Chinese army entered Lhasa. The Dalai Lama this time fled south
to India; and he was deposed by official decree from Beijing a few
weeks later.92
In India, his former enemies the British treated him kindly but
refused him any help to regain independence.93 So from exile in
Kalimpong the Dalai Lama organised a clandestine War Department
in Tibet to fight the Chinese. This department reported directly to
him in Kalimpong and was responsible for buying arms and recruit-
ing Tibetan soldiers. Even the Tibetan Kashag was left in the dark
as to their activities.94
Eventually civil war broke out in China and the Chinese army was
driven out of Tibet in 1912. The Tibetan historian, K. Dhondup,
describes the scene in the ‘holy city’ of Lhasa at the time:
‘The monks of the three major monasteries and the local
populace, including the fierce Banagshol Khampas joined the
Tibetan army and their only weapons were stones, swords and
spears … The Lhasa street was strewn with dead bodies of
men, dogs, donkeys and horses … Each side displayed the
severed head and hands of the other side to discourage each
other.’95
Those Tibetans who were suspected of having collaborated with
the Chinese were given rough treatment, including some members
140
of the Kashag who were shot. The Kashag ceased to exist and the
War Department became all-powerful, communicating directly to
the Dalai Lama in Darjeeling.96 Through Sir Charles Bell, the British
enjoined the Dalai Lama not to kill the Chinese remaining in Tibet.
‘At this the Dalai Lama was astounded and angry ... he strongly
stated that if the Chinese soldiers could kill to capture Tibet,
Tibetans can and must take arms to defend Tibet.’97
Writing in 1931 of his return to Lhasa, the Dalai Lama said:
‘Religious services were held on behalf of the Faith and secular side
of State Affairs. These ensured the full ripening of the evil deeds
of the enemies and in consequence, …’ referring to the Chinese
Revolution, ‘internal commotion broke out in their country and
the time was changed.’98 His first tasks upon arriving home were
to reward the heroes of the struggle and punish the collaborators.
Guilty monks were banished into exile and Tengyeling Monastery,
which had been pro-Chinese, was closed forever.99
Bell reports that the Dalai Lama received criticism from some
Tibetans for this military activity, and he quotes the young prince
of Sikkim: ‘It is a sin for a Buddhist to take a share in destroying
life, a great sin for a lama, and a terribly great sin for the highest of
all lamas.’100 Once again, this shows the nature of the ruling Lama’s
Policy: the Thirteenth Dalai Lama was an ordained Buddhist monk
who had the commitment not to harm others, including not to kill
and not to cause people suffering. He therefore acted directly against
the spiritual rules of Buddhism. Like the so-called Great Fifth, this
is a shameful example in the world of a Buddhist monk who holds
the position of high lama, a supposedly holy being.
In the years following this expulsion of the Chinese, the Dalai
Lama became increasingly hungry for full Tibetan independence.
He modernised certain aspects of Tibetan society, increased army
recruitment and imported military equipment from abroad. He made
efforts to demonstrate that Tibet was independent from China, and
tried to foster relationships with the outside world. However his
military aspirations met with considerable resistance, first from the
Tibetan aristocracy and later from the monastic establishment. This
141
a great deception
issue caused a rift between the Dalai Lama and the Panchen Lama,
partly because the new Tibetan army was to be funded by estate
taxes, and a large portion of this burden fell upon Tashi Lhunpo
Monastery, the seat of the Panchen Lama. As a result of this rift, in
1923 the Panchen Lama abruptly left Tibet for China.101
Throughout his life, the Thirteenth Dalai Lama followed mistaken
advice and predictions from the State Oracle Nechung, (see Chapter
7), including those concerning Dorje Shugden practice. In the period
between the death of the Fifth Dalai Lama until the time of the
Thirteenth, the practice of Dorje Shugden flourished throughout
Tibet; it was popular in monasteries and among lay communities
alike. Motivated by jealousy and without giving any valid reasons the
spirit medium, Nechung oracle, told the Thirteenth Dalai Lama that
Dorje Shugden practice was harmful for the activities of the Tibetan
government. Once more, out of mere grasping for the political
power of government and without any valid evidence, the spiritual
practice of Dorje Shugden was rejected by a Dalai Lama.
During the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s time, Kyabje Je Phabongkhapa
was the most famous and influential lama who engaged practically
in spreading the doctrine of the Wisdom Buddha Je Tsongkhapa
throughout Tibet. It is said that the Thirteenth Dalai Lama told Je
Phabongkhapa to stop promoting the practice of Dorje Shugden,
but Je Phabongkhapa nevertheless continued to do so. One day, a
government minister who was also a disciple of Je Phabongkhapa
gave him secret information that the Thirteenth Dalai Lama planned
to imprison Je Phabongkhapa if he did not stop spreading the Dorje
Shugden practice. To prevent his disciples becoming discouraged,
which would happen if he were imprisoned, Je Phabongkhapa went
to see the Dalai Lama, verbally apologised in front of him and
promised not to spread Dorje Shugden practice any more. From
that time until the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s death, all Dorje Shugden
practitioners, including Je Phabongkhapa himself, had to keep their
practice of Dorje Shugden a secret.
Throughout the time of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, vari-
ous foreign journalists, officials and explorers visited Tibet and
were astounded by the atrocities that met them in place of their
142
expectations of the supposed ‘Shangri-la’. They published accounts

of what they saw, and from these works we can gain a more accurate
insight into the actual brutality of the theocracy and the Thirteenth
Dalai Lama’s role in it.
In 1882, on his way to Lhasa, Sarat Chandra Das, an Indian Scholar,
observed to his horror ‘in the market place of Tashi-Lhunpo, a party
of prisoners loaded with chains, pinioned by wooden clogs, and in
some cases blinded.’102
Sarat Chandra Das’ visit to Tibet had been organised by the
Sinchen [or Senchen] Lama, who was the governor of Tsang. When
it was revealed that Chandra Das was in fact a spy working for the
British, his host was held responsible by the Lhasa government even
though he had no prior knowledge of this.
‘Upon the Sinchen Lama they visited their anger in a fear-
ful manner. His servants were taken – all except one – they
were beaten, their hands and feet were cut off, their eyes were
gouged out, and they were left to die in the streets of Tashi-
Lhunpo. ...
‘A message was received from Lhasa to the effect that the
Sinchen Lama must commit suicide. This he quietly refused to
do. ... This answer produced another peremptory demand that
the Lama should lay violent hands upon himself. To this the
Lama made no reply at all. ...
‘Thereafter Lhasa grew desperate. They sent a wicked man,
a Kashmiri Mohammedan, ... and the Sinchen Lama’s head was
hacked from his body.
‘Nor was this all. Having destroyed the body, the hierarchy
at Lhasa proceeded to annihilate the soul. No further reincar-
nation of the Sinchen Lama has been recognized from that
day.’103
During the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s rule such brutality spared no
person of any rank, and was extended to innocent family members.
Goldstein gives the example of the Regent Demo Rinpoche who was
thrown into jail and assassinated by order of the Thirteenth when
the Nechung oracle supposedly uncovered a plot by the Regent to
143
a great deception
regain his former power.104 How did the Dalai Lama treat the alleged
conspirators? Friend and confidant of the Dalai Lama, Sir Charles
Bell tells of their fate:
‘Sharpened bamboos were driven under the finger-nails, a
punishment introduced into Tibet by the Manchus. Numerous
floggings were inflicted with rods of willow on the bared back
and buttocks, each of a hundred lashes or more. ...
‘Various relatives were also punished; among others the wife
of Jewel Long Life [Norbu Tsering]. She was a daughter of the
noble family of Long Stone ... But in spite of her high birth
she was flogged and made to sit every day for a week in one of
the main streets of Lhasa with her wrists manacled and a heavy
board round her neck. She was afterwards sent into exile.’105
No suggestion was ever made that Jewel Long Life’s wife had had
any part in the alleged conspiracy. But as Bell explains, even a witness
would be tortured under the medieval justice system over which the
Dalai Lama reigned:
‘The Tibetan criminal code is drastic. In addition to fines and
imprisonment, floggings are frequent, not only of people after
they have been convicted of an offence, but also of accused
persons, and indeed witnesses, during the course of the trial.
For serious offences, use is made of the pillory as well as of
the cangue, which latter is a heavy square wooden board round
the neck. Iron fetters are fastened on the legs of murderers
and inveterate burglars. For very serious or repeated offences,
such as murder, violent robbery, repeated thefts, or serious
forgery, the hand may be cut off at the wrist, the nose sliced
off, or even the eyes gouged out, the last more likely for some
heinous political crime. In former days those convicted of
murder were put into a leather sack, which was sewn up and
thrown into a river.’106
As a summary of what he had witnessed, English writer
Perceval Landon, who travelled through Tibet in 1903-04, wrote
that the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s ‘rule was signalised by numerous
144
proscriptions, banishments, imprisonings, and torturings. Neither

life nor property was safe for a moment.’107
‘Even an earthly manifestation of Avalokiteswara may carry
things too far. Scandals and ill-feeling, however carefully
repressed, will at length find a vent ... At Lhasa, under the
shadow of the walls of the Palace, people spoke little and
with bated breath. But at Tashi-Lhunpo and Shigatse, far from
the intrigues of Lhasa and the overwhelming influence of the
three great monasteries, there was less reticence, and many
tales were told of the overbearing ways and cruel acts of the
absent Dalai Lama.’108
During his reign the Dalai Lama personally ordered the punish-
ments to be meted out for every serious criminal offence. Sir Charles
Bell explains the process by which punishments would be ordered:
‘Perhaps there is a riot or other disturbance. The Ecclesiastical
Court selects an ecclesiastical official, and the Cabinet selects
one from the laity; these are to make an inquiry into the reason
of the riot, and the punishment that should be inflicted. Their
names are sent up to the Dalai Lama for his approval. In their
findings they must agree; no divergence of opinion is permit-
ted; the stronger will carries the day. Then they report through
the cabinet, who propose different alternative orders, sending
their report to the Prime Minister. The Dalai Lama puts his red
hand-mark opposite the order he approves.’109
It seems fitting that someone with so much blood on his hands
should seal others’ fate with a red hand-mark.
It is highly inappropriate that any Buddhist monk, and especially
one carrying the reputation of being the embodiment of all Buddhas’
compassion (Avalokiteshvara), should find torture and execution
unavoidable.110 Bell remarked, ‘it must be admitted that the penalties
inflicted on the chief offenders were, according to Western ideas,
perhaps worse than death’.111
In a perverted interpretation of the law of karma (actions and
their effects), the Dalai Lama and his officers considered that through
145
a great deception
administering floggings they avoided the action of killing so long as

their victim was still alive when the beating finished, even if the
victim would certainly die later. As the Mayor of Lhasa in the 1950s,
Gorkar Mebon, told journalist Alan Winnington:
‘Even when the death sentence was administered ... it was in [a]
form that made no person responsible for the death: by hurl-
ing the person from a precipice or sewing him in yakskin and
throwing him in a river. Lighter sentences were of amputation
of a hand, both hands, a leg or both legs, the stumps being
sterilised with boiling butter. … “It depends on the situation.
That heavy whip, for example: if a person had 300 strokes of
it properly applied he would almost certainly die afterwards.”
‘Commonest punishments are the whip, the cangue (a port-
able pillory) and exile.’112
As Grunfeld reports:
‘A British woman who visited Gyantse in 1922 witnessed a
public flogging and reported that the victim was then forced
to spend the night exposed and tied down on the top of a
mountain pass where he froze to death overnight. A British
resident of two decades reported seeing countless eye gouging
and mutilations, ...’113
And as Robert W. Ford, one of the few westerners living in Tibet
during the 1940s wrote:
‘All over Tibet I had seen men who had been deprived of an
arm or a leg for theft ... Penal amputations were done without
antiseptics or sterile dressings.’114
These punishments continued during the 1950s, during the reign
of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama: and ‘The most graphic evidence
readily available of a public torture can be seen in Life magazine, with
photographs of a whipping (200-250 lashes) that occurred right in
the middle of Lhasa [where the Dalai Lama was living] in 1950.’115
And ‘During her travels in Tibet in 1959, American journalist Anna
Louise Strong heard one account after another of those who had
died shortly after their beatings finished.’116
146
We should remember that the Thirteenth Dalai Lama was a fully

ordained Buddhist monk with vows against harming any living crea-
ture, let alone killing. Did he struggle with his role as chief judge,
commanding such severe punishments and even execution to be
inflicted on his people? His friend, Sir Charles Bell, gives the follow-
ing damning verdict:
‘He loved the work, ... and he liked the power which the work
gave him.’117
Writing about the Thirteenth Dalai Lama, Bell says that towards
the end of his life he ‘became increasingly autocratic’ with no one
daring to object to his orders. ‘The Dalai Lama was indeed an abso-
lute dictator; more so as regards his own country than Herr Hitler
and Signor Mussolini in theirs.’118
The circumstances around his death are replete with intrigue,
superstition and the suspicion of foul play, and also show the malign
influence of the Nechung oracle, as described in Chapter 7. The
Dalai Lama had become seriously ill and had developed a high fever.
The Nechung oracle was summoned in a great hurry one night.
While in trance:
‘… the Nechung Oracle medium gave the Dalai Lama a pow-
der medicine. As the medium came out [of trance], Jampa-la,
the Dalai Lama’s regular doctor, pointed out to the Nechung
medium that the wrong medicine had been administered. Soon
afterwards the Nechung medium gave a second medicine
according to the regular doctor’s prescription. But both these
medicines failed to improve the worsening condition of the
Dalai Lama.’119
From that point onwards, the fever grew worse; the Dalai Lama
became delirious and passed away the next day. Many reports at
this time say that he died in anger.120 Some suspect foul play and the
possibility of poisoning, others that the Nechung oracle had made
a mistake. All those present, including the medium of the oracle,
were interrogated. The oracle was disgraced, and the Dalai Lama’s
physician was first imprisoned and then banished into exile.121
147
a great deception
These were the squalid circumstances in which the ‘Great

Thirteenth’ left this world in 1933. Very soon the search would start
for his reincarnate successor.
148
1
© www.dorjeshugden.com
2 3
© www.dorjeshugden.com
1. The first statue of Dorje Shugden, made by the Fifth Dalai Lama with his
own hands. The statue is now at Pelgyeling Monastery, in Nepal.
2. Trode Khangsar, the Temple dedicated to Dorje Shugden by the Fifth
Dalai Lama.
3. Line drawing of the Fifth Dalai Lama, Ngawang Losang Gyatso, 1617-1682.
5
Bundesarchiv, Bild 135-S-13-13-14 Foto: Schäfer, Ernst | 1938/1939
6
Bundesarchiv, Bild 135-S-13-13-14 Foto: Schäfer, Ernst | 1938/1939
4 7
© Popperfoto/Getty Images Bundesarchiv, Bild 135-KA-10-072 Foto: Krause, Ernst | 1938/1939
4. The Thirteenth Dalai Lama, Thubten Gyatso, 1876-1933.

5. Yapshi Langdun, a Tibetan minister who Reting regarded as a rival and
outmanoeuvered in the search for the new Dalai Lama.
6. Reting Rinpoche with Bruno Beger in 1938, during one of several German
SS expeditions to Tibet.
7. An SS expedition to Tibet in 1938. Reting sent them home with a letter to
‘King Hitler’, praising the Nazi leader and requesting that they strengthen the
relationship between the two regimes.378
8 9
© Popperfoto/Getty Images © Keystone/Hulton Archive/Getty Images
10
© Die Welt / Dan Levine / epa / Corbis
11 12 13
© AFP/Getty Images © AFP/Getty Images
8. Lhamo Dondrub, as a child in the Muslim village of Taktser before being

brought to Lhasa.
9. Enthroned as the Fourteenth Dalai Lama and given the name Tenzin Gyatso.
10. Nowadays the Dalai Lama lives in exile, but who is the real Dalai Lama
behind the mask?
11. The Dalai Lama meeting Chairman Mao in 1955.
12. The Dalai Lama voting at the First National People’s Congress, 1954.
13. The Dalai Lama praised Mao as being like a God.
14
© Bundesarchiv, Bild 135-S-17-14-34 Foto: Shafer, Ernst | 1938/1939
15 16
© Bundesarchiv, Bild 135-S-13-13-33 Foto:
Shafer, Ernst | 1938/1939
14. A division of the Tibetan army on parade in 1938.

15. Bayonet wielding soldiers on guard at the Norbu Linka, the Dalai Lama’s
summer palace.
16. This top secret CIA field diary was kept by Douglas MacKiernan and Frank
Bessac. It proves that the CIA were in Tibet as early as 1949, before the
People’s Liberation Army entered Tibet in 1950. CIA covert operations in Tibet
continued until the early 1970s. In recent decades the National Endowment for
Democracy has continued CIA activities with respect to Tibet. 379
17
© Popperfoto/Getty Images
18 19
© Bettmann / Corbis © AFP/Getty Images
20 21 22
©LegalEagle/wikimedia © Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images © Prakash Mathema/
AFP/Getty Images
17. The Dalai Lama with Tibetan Resistance fighters in 1959. According to
CIA files, in 1956 the Dalai Lama personally requested the Indian and US
governments to support the Tibetan resistance fighters.380
18. Monks surrendering the guns and explosives they were using against the Chinese.
19. Gyalo Dondrub, the Dalai Lama’s brother, involved - in his own words - in
‘very dirty business’.
20. The Dalai Lama inspecting troops at Chakrata. He authorised the Tibetan units
of the Indian Special Frontier Force to fight the war in East Pakistan in 1971.
21. John Kenneth Knaus, a CIA operative who was involved with the CIA funded
Tibetan guerrillas.
22. Norbu Dorje, a US-trained former Tibetan guerrilla.
23
©Adrian Bradshaw/epa/Corbis
24 25 26
27 28 29
23. Torture implements from the time of 13th & 14th Dalai Lamas on display in
Lhasa. This photo shows tools for gouging out eyes and crushing fingers.
24. A Tibetan with his severed arm.
25 - 26. Stocks. These were in common use in Shol prison at the base of the
Dalai Lama’s 1000-room Potala Palace.
27. A Tibetan whose arm was cut off as punishment.
28. A Tibetan whose Achilles tendons were severed as punishment.
29. A Tibetan in leg-irons, left to wander the streets begging for food.
30
31 32
© Stringer/AFP/Getty Images © Gerald Lehner *
33
© Boris Roessler/AFP/Getty Images
30. The Dalai Lama with Shoko Asahara, leader of the AUM Cult, who
masterminded the sarin gas attack on Tokyo’s subway that killed 12 people.
31. The Dalai Lama with Jorg Haider, leader of Austrian extreme rightwing
(FPÖ) party.
32.* The Dalai Lama with Bruno Beger, a convicted Nazi war criminal, who
conducted experiments on Jews in German concentration camps; 86 of his
subjects were murdered.
33. The Dalai Lama with his friend and mentor Heinrich Harrer. Harrer was a
Nazi and an SS sergeant. He joined the SA (Sturm-Abteilung) in 1934 when
it was illegal in Austria.
* Private Archive Beger/from correspondence with the Austrian journalist Gerald Lehner who investigated the rela-
tions between National Socialism and the governments of the Dalai Lamas. Author of Zwischen Hitler und Himalaya . Die
Gedächtnislücken des Heinrich Harrer, Czernin-Verlag, Wien (Austria) 2007
37
Image from Bod Gyalo
34
Image from France 24
38
© Western Shugden Society
39
Image from France 24
35
40
Image from Bod Gyalo
36 41
© Western Shugden Society © Western Shugden Society
34. The Dalai Lama in January 2008: ‘These monks must be expelled from all
monasteries. If they are not happy, you can tell them that the Dalai Lama
himself asked that this be done, and it is very urgent.’381 Subsequent to this,
the persecution, already started in 1996, became more intense.
35. Entry is denied to the monasteries and their facilities.
36. Hundreds of monks are expelled and made homeless. Indian Police provide
temporary protection for them.
37. Even children are forced to make public oaths denouncing Dorje Shugden.
38. Wanted posters appear around Dharamsala inciting violence to Dorje
Shugden practitioners.
39. Hospitals ban Dorje Shugden worshippers from receiving treatment.
40. The public ‘referendum’ that forces monks from their monasteries.
41. A wall is built at Ganden Monastery to segregate the Shugden monks from
the rest of the monastery.
44
© Lynn Goldsmith / Corbis
45
42
46
43 47
© Western Shugden Society © Western Shugden Society
42. Application for identity documents require the person to have denounced
Dorje Shugden.
43. The identity card received by those who publically denounce Dorje Shugden;
without this there is no access to food and medicine.
44. Samdhong Rinpoche, the Prime Minister of the Tibetan Government in
Exile and principally responsible for trying to fulfil the Dalai Lama’s wish to
‘clean’ society of Shugden practitioners.382
45 - 47. These young tulkus from Shar Gaden Monastery were beaten up because
they worship Dorje Shugden.
demonstrations
& protest marches
AUSTRALIA
FRANCE
GERMANY
48 - 59. Demonstrations & Protest Marches in Australia, France, Germany, India,

United Kingdom and the United States against the Dalai Lama’s religious
persecution.
against the dalai lama’s
religious persecution
INDIA
UNITED KINGDOM
UNITED STATES
© Western Shugden Society (all images)
Radio City, New York, 2008
© Western Shugden Society (all images)
60-65 Having just received spiritual advice from the Dalai Lama at a talk he gave
in Radio City Music Hall, New York, the attendees left the auditorium and
immediately began attacking the peaceful protest being held by members of
the Western Shugden Society. The Police called in horse-backed reinforce-
ments and heavily armed riot police; finally they closed down several blocks
of Manhattan.
Chapter 10
The Fourteenth Dalai Lama
Whereas the Thirteenth Dalai Lama was notorious for his brutality, the
Fourteenth will most certainly be remembered for his deception and
hypocrisy. There is little doubt that this false Dalai Lama has achieved
enormous personal success, establishing a huge reputation and great
power; no other figure in modern political history has enjoyed fifty
years of uncritical press, had two major biographical motion pictures
appear within their lifetime, and been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
But how has he accomplished this? It is because he wears the robes
of an ordained Buddhist monk, and gives teachings taken from his
Spiritual Guide, while performing the actions of a politician, hiding
his true actions behind a spiritual mask.
What is needed now is an honest evaluation of the man behind
this mask, the present Dalai Lama, for he is after all regarded by
some to be a key player on the world stage in both political and
religious spheres, with the result that his actions have far-reaching
effects. There is no reason why the standards by which we hold other
world leaders accountable should not also apply to the Fourteenth
Dalai Lama.
As Professor Jens-Uwe-Hartmann, Tibetologist at Humboldt
University Berlin points out:
‘The glorification of the Dalai Lama in his function as a
political leader does not aid the process of democratisation.
A critically differentiating analysis of his political statements
must be possible, and it should furthermore not be blocked
off by the argument that criticism solely serves the purposes
of the Chinese.’122
149
a great deception
His Early Life and Education
Following the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s death in 1933, the Tibetan

authorities immediately made necessary arrangements to maintain
the political apparatus of a reincarnate Dalai Lama. The details of
the mock search which resulted in the recognition of the present
false Dalai Lama have already been given in Chapter 2.
The Fourteenth Dalai Lama had as his Senior and Junior Tutors
two of the greatest spiritual masters of our time: Kyabje Ling
Rinpoche (1903-1983) and Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche (1901-1981).
Trijang Rinpoche and his own principal Spiritual Guide, Kyabje Je
Phabongkha Rinpoche, are the two most important figures of the
Gelugpa Tradition in the twentieth century. It is due primarily to
these two spiritual masters that all of the essential Gelugpa lineages
have been carried forward, completely pure and unbroken to the
present day, including the close lineage of the Dharma Protector,
Dorje Shugden.
Trijang Rinpoche, who was considered to be an emanation of
Buddha Shakyamuni, Buddha Heruka, Atisha and Je Tsongkhapa,
wrote an extensive commentary as well as many special rituals and
yogas connected with Dorje Shugden.123 The present Dalai Lama has
referred to Trijang Rinpoche as his root Guru, or principal Spiritual
Guide124; and Trijang Rinpoche was also the root Guru of many
of the senior and junior lamas of the Gelugpa Tradition as well as
of thousands of other monks, nuns and lay people. He was one of
the most respected and loved lamas in the last half of the twentieth
century.125 It is sad to note that the Dalai Lama does not mention
these extraordinary qualities of his Spiritual Guide even once in his
later autobiography, referring to him in passing only as his Junior
Tutor and as a member of his retinue.126 His earlier autobiography
also mentions Trijang Rinpoche, but only as the person who taught
him how to read, the principles of grammar and how to spell.127
Embracing Communism
In 1949, the new communist Chinese government initially attempted
to engage the Tibetan government in peaceful negotiations to resolve
150
the fourteenth dalai lama
their disputes. But when in September 1950 the Tibetans’ official

representatives failed to arrive for negotiations in the Chinese capital,
the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) was ordered by Chairman Mao
Zedong to enter Chamdo in eastern Tibet. Chinese troops crossed
the Yangtse River on 7 October 1950.128
The Tibetan forces were poorly led, equipped and organised, and
were quickly defeated. Within two weeks the PLA had captured the
entire Tibetan army, including the governor-general of the region.
Although, with this easy military victory the road to Lhasa was
open, the PLA did not advance further; instead they again called
on Lhasa to negotiate. Melvyn Goldstein explains:
‘Mao did not want simply to conquer Tibet, even though it
would have been easy to do so. He wanted a political settlement
approved by Tibet’s leader, the Dalai Lama. He wanted China’s
claim to Tibet legitimized by having the Dalai Lama accept
Chinese sovereignty and work with the PRC [People’s Republic
of China] gradually to reform Tibet’s feudal economy.’129
In effect, Mao Zedong was using his military might to force the
Tibetans to the negotiating table, for he understood the dangers of
a protracted guerrilla war in Tibet’s mountainous terrain.130 With
the advent of the Cold War there was also the very real possibil-
ity of such a conflict drawing in the United States as part of its
worldwide stance against communism.131
In Lhasa the news of the Chinese victory brought fear and
confusion. High lamas and the traditional oracles were consulted
to determine a course of action. It was agreed that the sixteen-
year-old Dalai Lama should be ‘officially enthroned’ and given full
powers of government.132 Shortly afterwards the Dalai Lama and
many of the Lhasan nobility fled to the town of Yatung, just north
of the Indian frontier, and established a provisional government
there.133
Before his departure from Lhasa, the Dalai Lama sent a mes-
sage to the PLA in Chamdo saying that he ‘sincerely wanted to
restore the friendship’ between the Tibetan and Chinese peoples.
Moreover, he authorised two delegations to travel to Beijing to
151
a great deception
begin negotiations with the Chinese, and finally on 23 May 1951,

under direct order from the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, the ‘Agreement
of the Central People’s Government and the Local Government of
Tibet’ was signed, now more commonly known as the ‘Seventeen-
Point Agreement’.134 As Goldstein says,
‘The Seventeen-Point Agreement ushered in a new chapter
in Sino-Tibetan relations since it officially ended the conflict
over the Tibet Question. Point 1 sets this out clearly: “The
Tibetan people shall unite and drive out imperialist forces
from Tibet: the Tibet people shall return to the big family
of the Motherland―the People’s Republic of China.” Tibet,
for the first time in its 1,300 years of recorded history, had
now in a formal written agreement acknowledged Chinese
sovereignty.’135
The Dalai Lama sent the Chinese leadership a telegram
expressing ‘unanimous support for the agreement’ by the ‘local
government of Tibet, the monks and the entire Tibetan people’.
Whatever his reasons were for sending this message, with his
return to Lhasa and ratification of the Seventeen-Point Agreement
the political incorporation of Tibet into China was accomplished.
Tibet was now formally part of the Chinese state. Mao Zedong
had the political agreement he wished for that would lead to the
peaceful liberation of feudalistic Tibet, and the Tibetan nobility
and clergy had assurances that their positions of power and privi-
lege would continue.136
Contrary to popular belief the Chinese invasion of Tibet was
peaceful after the initial clash in Chamdo. In some parts of the
country the Chinese were even welcomed. Han Chinese soldiers
and civilian cadres were authorised to enter central Tibet only after
the formal signing of the Seventeen-Point Agreement. They were
well-behaved and under strict instructions not to become a burden
on the local populace.137
The Chinese went to extraordinary efforts to work with the
Tibetan elite in a ‘united front’. Goldstein writes that:
152
‘… [Mao’s] Tibet strategy sought to create cordial rela-

tions between Han (ethnic Chinese) and Tibetans, and
allay Tibetan anxieties so that Tibet’s elite would over time
genuinely accept “reintegration” with China and agree to a
societal transformation … Between 1951 and 1959, not only
was no aristocratic or monastic property confiscated, but
feudal lords were permitted to exercise continued judicial
authority over their hereditarily bound peasants. At the heart
of this strategy was the Dalai Lama. Mao saw him, in par-
ticular, as the vehicle by which the feudal and religious elite
(and then the masses) would come to accept their place in
China’s new multi-ethnic Communist state.’138
It is under these circumstances that the Dalai Lama’s view of
communism evolved. Far from taking a confrontational position as
he would have his western audience believe, instead he embraced
the communist ideology in general and Chairman Mao in particular.
The first foreigner to interview the Dalai Lama after his signing
of the Seventeen-Point Agreement in 1951 was Alan Winnington.
In an interview that was obviously warm and respectful, the Tibetan
leader shared his convictions with the British journalist, who first
asked him what had happened since the signing of the agreement.
The Dalai Lama replied:
‘Before the agreement … Tibet could see no way ahead. Since
the agreement Tibet has left the old way that led to dark-
ness and has taken a new way leading to a bright future of
development.
‘... I heard Chairman Mao talk on different matters and I
received instruction from him. I have come to the firm convic-
tion that the brilliant prospects for the people of China as a
whole are also the prospects for us Tibetan people; the path of
our entire country is our path and not any other.’139
In 1954 he accepted an invitation to visit Beijing and represent
Tibet in the Chinese People’s National Assembly. It was the young
Dalai Lama’s first trip out of Tibet.
153
a great deception
‘It was only when I went to China in 1954-55 that I actu-

ally studied Marxist ideology and learned the history of the
Chinese revolution. Once I understood Marxism, my attitude
changed completely. I was so attracted to Marxism, I even
expressed my wish to become a Communist Party member. …
‘I ... went to China to meet Chairman Mao. We had several
good meetings.’140
While in Beijing the Dalai Lama agreed to be chairman of Mao’s
proposed Preparatory Committee for the Autonomous Region of
Tibet (PCART), whose purpose was to prepare Tibet for regional
autonomy under Chinese rule. At the inaugural festivities of the
PCART in Lhasa the Dalai Lama praised the Han in Tibet saying
they had:
‘... strictly adhered to the policy of freedom of religion, care-
fully protected the lamaseries and respected the religious
beliefs of the Tibetan people. … All this has greatly helped
to remove the apprehensions that previously prevailed … as
a result of the rumors and instigations made by the agents of
the imperialists.’141
Right up until the events in 1959 the Dalai Lama was working
closely with the Chinese to develop Tibet under communist rule.
He expressed ‘his most effusive support for China in speeches and
articles as late as January 1959 (published in Xizang Ribao)’. He
also continued to express admiration for Mao, speaking in 1955, for
example, of his joy at meeting him face-to-face.142 As Gelder and
Gelder have pointed out:
‘… the god-king … in his public statements had proved to be
Mao’s most valuable ally in Tibet.’143
The Myths Surrounding his Escape from Tibet

The release of the Hollywood movie Kundun in 1997 sparked fresh
interest in the Dalai Lama’s escape from Tibet in 1959. Careful
investigation into the actual stages of this escape reveal a variety of
154
conflicting versions, which when considered altogether expose one

common truth – the Fourteenth Dalai Lama is a shameless liar and
master at creating his own deceptive reality in the face of the truth.
Having a leader of the Tibetan people who was a communist
sympathiser and admirer of Mao placed those Tibetans rebelling
against the Chinese in a very difficult position. For the rebels it
became imperative to get him out of Lhasa and to sever his connec-
tion with the Chinese.
The image of a beleaguered Dalai Lama as a virtual prisoner, not
of the Chinese but of the Tibetan rebels, is reflected in a remark-
able series of letters between him and the Chinese General Tan
Yuan-san (see Appendix 1). In Lhasa at around 4 p.m. on 17 March
1959, two mortar shells landed harmlessly in a marsh inside the
palace grounds. The Tibetans say these were fired from the direction
of the Chinese camp, but this has always been open to question.
Grunfeld points out that at this time the Dalai Lama:
‘… was writing to General Tan, informing the Chinese of his

support and of his plans to move to their camp. Why would
the Chinese have fired shots, thereby precipitating a crisis?
On the other hand, the rebels, undoubtedly disturbed by
the Dalai Lama—Tan correspondence, needed some grand
gesture to get the Dalai to finally break with the Chinese.
Logically, the mortars could have come from the rebels.’144
The mortar shells created panic in the palace and the Dalai Lama
turned to his oracle for advice. But which oracle did he consult?
There are conflicting accounts; over forty years later the Dalai
Lama claims in his most recent autobiography that just before the
two mortar shells were fired he consulted the Nechung oracle:
‘I again sought the counsel of the oracle. To my astonishment,

he shouted, “Go! Go! Tonight!” The medium, still in his trance,
then staggered forward and, snatching up some paper and pen,
wrote down, quite clearly and explicitly, the route that I should
take out of the Norbulingka, down to the last Tibetan town
on the Indian border. His directions were not what might have
155
a great deception
been expected. That done, the medium, a young monk named

Lobsang Jigme, collapsed in a faint, signifying that Dorje
Drakden [Nechung] had left his body.’145
Eye-witnesses alive today however say that the Dalai Lama did
not consult the oracle of Nechung but rather the oracle of Dorje
Shugden.146 In 1998 Swiss National TV interviewed Lobsang Yeshe,
the assistant of the previous abbot of Sera Monastery and someone
who accompanied the Dalai Lama on his escape from Tibet. Lobsang
Yeshe stated that he went to the oracle of Dorje Shugden to request
exact instructions about the escape. In the SNTV programme:
‘Lobsang Yeshe tells us that the oracle gave precise instructions
as to how and by which route the escape should take place with
the monks as his bodyguard.’147
Helmut Gassner, for many years the German-language translator
for the Dalai Lama, has also pointed out:
‘… the Dalai Lama’s Chamberlain, Kungo Phala … organized
His Holiness’ escape from the Norbulingka Summer Palace …
The preparations for the escape were made in absolute secrecy
and strictly followed instructions received by [the oracle of]
Dorje Shugden. I asked him [Phala] what thoughts were on
his mind when he had to make his way through the crowds
surrounding the Norbulingka with the Dalai Lama, disguised
as a servant, just behind him. He said that everything happened
exactly as the Dorje Shugden Oracle from Panglung Monastery
had predicted …
‘According to all trustworthy witnesses I know and con-
sulted, the State Oracle [of Nechung] did not provide any help
on that occasion. After the Dalai Lama and his retinue had fled,
the State Oracle only found out the following day that he had
been left behind.’148
This last statement is supported by the testimony of the medium
of the Nechung oracle himself, except that he says he only found
out three days later! In Exile from the Land of Snows Lobsang Jigme,
the medium of the Nechung oracle, says that he was ill at this time
156
and mentions nothing about the Dalai Lama consulting Nechung

or telling him to go that night. After an invocation on March 20th,
three days after the Dalai Lama left, Lobsang Jigme and his attend-
ants ‘one and all lapsed into silence, pondering Dorje Drakden’s
other statement: the stunning news of the Dalai Lama’s flight from
the Norbulinka … .’149 This clearly contradicts the Dalai Lama’s
account.
Also, by revealing that the Nechung oracle, although sick, was
obliged to find his own way out of Tibet, this account shows the
lower level of respect and importance at which the Nechung oracle
was held at that time. It may also help to explain the subsequent
resentment of the Nechung oracle towards the Shugden oracle and
by extension towards Dorje Shugden.
It is therefore clear that much of what the Dalai Lama has said
about his escape from Tibet is untrue. A lot has been written of this
dramatic escape – how at any moment the Chinese could have caught
up with them, how brave the Tibetan soldiers were and how arduous
the journey was. However, two points are now seen to be glaringly
omitted from these popular accounts. First of these is that the party
was accompanied by a US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)-trained
operative who was in radio contact with the CIA network throughout
the escape. As reported in the American George Magazine:
‘Around 3 a.m. on March 18th, they rested for a few hours near
the Che-La pass separating Lhasa valley from the Tsangpo
valley. It was then that the first coded radio message on the
Dalai Lama’s progress was broadcast from Tibet to a CIA
listening post on Okinawa, Japan. The message was relayed to
CIA headquarters near Washington, D.C., where Allen Dulles
waited for news of the Dalai Lama’s journey. Soon Dulles
would brief President Eisenhower. Tibet’s war for independ-
ence was about to begin.’150
The CIA involvement was not just limited to radio operators:
‘… the Dalai Lama was accompanied by a Khampa who

had been trained and equipped with a movie camera and
157
a great deception
sufficient color film to preserve a visual record of the flight.

The Americans used a Lockheed C130 aircraft—modified
especially for flight over the thin air of Tibet—to drop food
and fodder for the Dalai’s party and were able to do so thanks
to the training other Khampas had in learning how to place
distinctive panels in the snow as targets for the pilots.’151
As Grunfeld has quoted:
‘… this fantastic escape and its major significance has been
buried in the lore of the CIA as one of the successes that are
not talked about. The Dalai Lama would never have been saved
without the CIA.’152
Another feature of this mythical flight that is rarely reported is the
Chinese claim to have deliberately let the Dalai Lama go. Two British
visitors to Tibet in the early 1960s report that the Dalai Lama’s party
was followed by observation aircraft, and that no attempt was made
to pursue the slowly-moving entourage, which included the Dalai
Lama’s mother, elderly people and children.153 Credence is given to
this claim by the fact that China announced his arrival in India before
anyone else did, causing the Indian government acute embarrass-
ment. The Chinese also state that Mao gave orders to the PLA to
allow the Tibetan leader to cross the border. Mao Zedong is reported
as telling the Soviet Ambassador in Beijing, ‘If we had arrested him,
we would have called the population of Tibet into rebellion.’154
The western and Indian media reacted immediately and with con-
siderable glee to these dramatic events on the roof of the world. One
journalist writing in the Atlantic magazine described how:
‘Kalimpong became deluged with journalists from around
the world, who were inundated with phone calls from frantic
editors pleading for colorful, descriptive accounts of burning
monasteries. So relentless was this pursuit of “information”
that one reporter from a major British newspaper was heard
to declare in exasperation, “Fiction is what they want. Pure
fiction. Well, by God, fiction is what they are going to get.” ’155
158
Grunfeld comments that ‘… fiction is what they got. Stories circu-

lated of two thousand to one hundred thousand Tibetans killed.’
The media feeding-frenzy was such that correspondents were filing
stories that had not even been witnessed.156
The Dalai Lama himself has contributed to the prevailing view of
Chinese destruction and mayhem, describing the Norbulingka Palace
after the rebellion had been quelled as ‘a deserted smoking ruin full
of dead’.157 He wrote in his autobiography:
‘The shelling had begun at two o’clock in the morning on
March twentieth, just over forty-eight hours after I left, and
before the Chinese had discovered that I had gone. All that day
they shelled the Norbulingka, and then they turned their artil-
lery on the city, the Potala, the temple, and the neighbouring
monasteries. Nobody knows how many of the people of Lhasa
were killed, but thousands of bodies could be seen inside and
outside the Norbulingka. Some of the main buildings within
the Norbulingka were practically destroyed, and all the others
were damaged in different degrees, … In the great monastery
of Sera there was the same useless wanton devastation.’158
The Dalai Lama further maintains that the Chinese soldiers
searched through the corpses in the Norbulingka looking for him,
and that having failed to find him ‘either alive or dead they continued
to shell the city and monasteries’, deliberately killing ‘thousands of
our people, who were only armed with sticks and knives and a few
short range weapons against artillery, … .’159
Yet European visitors in Lhasa shortly after this ‘wanton destruc-
tion’ describe little damage to the city, the Potala, the monastery of
Sera or the Norbulingka. Indeed, in 1962 the Gelders attended a
holiday celebration in the grounds of the Norbulingka and reported
no signs of serious damage. The book of their travels includes a
photograph of one of them sitting on the steps of the Dalai Lama’s
favourite residence in the palace, the Chensel Phodrang, with all its
contents meticulously preserved.160
From this we can see that the Dalai Lama lied repeatedly about
the events surrounding his leaving Tibet. These lies have been
159
a great deception
nurtured ever since by the Tibetan exile government, and perpetu-

ated by the world’s media who seems eager to believe whatever the
Dalai Lama says and portray him as the wronged ‘underdog’ in the
face of Chinese aggression.
Political Views and Failures
Since his journey into exile the Fourteenth Dalai Lama has done
much to popularise Tibetan Buddhism in the West, even to the extent
of becoming a ‘Hollywood’ icon in the process. He has drawn world-
wide attention to Tibet and has amassed hundreds of millions if not
billions of dollars for the cause of a free, independent Tibet. But
he has completely failed to accomplish the political objective of an
independent Tibet upon which his reputation and power have been
built. Why? The blatant reason for this is that the Dalai Lama knows
that he alone handed Tibet to China on a plate through his own
personal desire to embrace communism. How can he possibly undo
what he alone started and further consolidated with the Seventeen-
Point Agreement?
Such is the perverse nature of Lama Policy: one ruling lama mixes
their personal and selfish ambition with their political and spiritual
power, resulting in catastrophic life-changing consequences that
affect millions but from which the ruling lama alone remains aloof
and unscathed. Thus Lama Policy can be seen to be what is com-
monly referred to as ‘dictatorship’.
An assessment of the political views and failures of the Fourteenth
Dalai Lama while in exile reveals how his constant public rhetoric for
an independent Tibet is a mere front to disguise his actual deceptive-
ness and ineptitude as a leader of Tibetan people.
To assess the political record of the Dalai Lama, five areas of his
international and domestic activity will be examined: (1) the issue of
Tibetan independence; (2) negotiations with Beijing; (3) the Panchen
Lama affair; (4) the issue of democratization; and (5) how the Dalai
Lama’s political failures led to his ban on Dorje Shugden practice.
160
The Issue of Tibetan Independence

Contrary to the open hand with which the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
advocated communism and supported Mao and the Chinese com-
munist government while in Tibet, upon his arrival in India, like a
skilled actor, he completely changed roles and began advocating a
free, independent Tibet and repeatedly encouraged Tibetans to rise
up against China to accomplish this. What could have propelled
him to be so blatantly two-faced? Was it a smokescreen to hide
the shame of having failed to win the Tibetan populace over to
his personal ambition of being leader of a communist Tibet? Or
was he daunted by the task of now being under western public
scrutiny? Having clearly failed to convert Tibetans to his com-
munist ideology in the confines of Tibet the only way the Dalai
Lama could surely maintain his position as a political and spiritual
leader in exile was to fulfil the wish of his people – or at least give
the impression of striving to do so – and lead them to a free and
independent Tibet. Basically, he needed to undo all that his lama
policies had created!
Despite now being under the public spotlight in the international
arena, the Dalai Lama has not performed the actions of a true
leader and worked for the wishes of his people. Although most
Tibetans would never dare to question the Dalai Lama directly, it is
clear that for them ‘the cause of Tibet’ is full independence from
China, whilst for him it is a partial autonomy within China.
‘The vast majority of Tibetans, both within Tibet and in exile,
favor independence for Tibet.’161
Lhasang Tsering, once a member of the Tibetan resistance force
based in Mustang, Nepal, writes:
‘… I have no doubt in my mind that our people, even for
generations to come, will continue to struggle, to suffer and
sacrifice so long as independence remains the goal. However,
I cannot expect people to make similar sacrifices for a lesser
goal. I, for one, cannot struggle to be in association with
China.
161
a great deception
‘... so long as we do not recognise China’s rule and so long

as our goal remains independence, then China’s intrusion into
Tibet can be seen as a foreign aggression and our struggle will
be one of international dimension. But if we change our goal
to seeking some kind of accommodation within China, then
the issue is entirely different. And, as China always claims, ours
would be an “internal” affair and we would have no right to
seek international involvement and support.’162
Jamyang Norbu, another former Tibetan guerrilla fighter and now a
well-known author and playwright, writes:
‘… I am convinced that Tibetans must have independence if
only for survival as a people. With every passing year we are
getting closer to extinction. … No autonomy, or any kind of
understanding or accommodation with China will prevent it.
… Only full independence holds out some hope for Tibetan
survival …’163
Tashi-Topgye Jamyangling, a former official of the Tibetan exile

government and member of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s first fact-
finding delegation to China in 1979, writes:
‘As His Holiness the Dalai Lama always says, the final deci-
sion, with respect to the future of Tibet, must be made by the
Tibetans themselves. The choice is simple: Is it Independence
or is it Extinction?’164
However, despite initial rhetoric during the early years of his exile
advocating a free, independent Tibet, the independence of Tibet
has not been on the Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s true political agenda
for many years. As early as 1984, in secret meetings in Beijing,
independence of the Tibetan State had already been dropped in
favour of a Tibetan autonomous region within the sovereignty of
China.165 This decision by the Dalai Lama was taken unilaterally,
without any referendum of the people or even consultation with
his government.166
162
In April 1988, the Chinese offered to allow the Fourteenth Dalai

Lama to return to Tibet on the condition that he would publicly
abandon the goal of independence. In the Strasbourg Statement of
June 15th 1988, he set forth the conditions for his return, which
included, as the Chinese had requested, an acceptance of overall
Chinese sovereignty over Tibet, ‘… a kind of autonomous dominion
much as it had been under the Qing dynasty.’167 In accepting Chinese
sovereignty over Tibet, the Dalai Lama lost in one stroke the pos-
sibility of an independent Tibet.
The historian Edward Lazar has observed: ‘The Strasbourg
Statement was a surrender of the most important concerns of the
Tibetan people (independence and an end to the Chinese occupa-
tion) ...’ These two were relinquished before negotiations had even
begun. ‘It would be hard to recall so much being given up, not for so
little, but for nothing, in the annals of diplomacy.’168
‘Why’, asks Lazar, ‘do over one hundred countries recognize the
PLO [Palestinian Liberation Organization] and not one country in
the world recognizes Tibet? A major part of the reason for interna-
tional tolerance of China’s occupation of Tibet is that the Tibetan
leadership has maintained a consistent pattern of accommodation
with the Chinese occupiers, and that this spirit of accommodation is
currently maintained from exile …’ ‘The official policy of accommo-
dation’, Lazar observes, ‘translates into a legitimatization of colonial
status, a kind of national suicide.’169
‘The word itself, “independence”,’ Lazar observes, ‘is avoided
in official Tibetan pronouncements and is avoided at meetings.
“Independence” is not one of the hundreds of index entries in the
14th Dalai Lama’s new autobiography. The idea of independence
is so dangerous that it is only referred to as the “I” word in some
Tibetan circles.’170
The Dalai Lama’s present policy of accommodation with China is
a mere continuation of his own political ideology, first indicated by
his ratification of the Seventeen-Point Agreement in 1951.
It is obvious that from the beginning the Dalai Lama strongly
favoured communist ideology and the new developments it prom-
ised. ‘In 1955, after meeting Mao he was quoted as saying, “from
163
a great deception
the time I left Lhasa, I had looked forward to our meeting. I was
overjoyed to see him [Mao] face to face, and felt he was a dear friend
to our people.” ’171
The Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s first autobiography My Land & My
People confirms this enthusiasm. He says that his first meeting with
Mao was a ‘memorable interview’, and describes him as a ‘remark-
able man’.172 The Dalai Lama’s infatuation with Mao can be seen in a
remarkable poem he wrote while on his visit to China in 1954. The
following is an extract:
‘The great national leader of the Central People’s Government,
Chairman Mao, is a Cakravarti [Universal Ruler] born out of
boundless fine merits. For a long time I wished to write a hymn
praying for his long life and the success of his work. It hap-
pened that the Klatsuang-kergun Lama of Kantsu Monastery
in Inner Mongolia wrote me from afar, saluting me and asked
me to write a poem. I agreed to do so as this coincides with
my own wishes.
The Fourteenth Dalai Lama Dantzen-Jaltso
at Norbulin-shenfu Palace, 1954.
‘O, the Triratna, (Buddha, Dharma and Sangha) which
bestow blessings on the world,
Protect us with your incomparable and blessed light which
shines for ever.
‘O! Chairman Mao! Your brilliance and deeds are like those
of Brahma and Mahasammata, creators of the world.
Only from an infinite number of good deeds can such a
leader be born, who is like the sun shining over the
world.
‘Your writings are precious like pearls, abundant and
powerful as the high tide of the ocean reaching the
edges of the sky.
O! most honourable Chairman Mao, may you long live.
164
‘All people look to you as to a kind protecting mother,

they paint pictures of you with hearts full of emotion,
May you live in the world forever and point out to us the
peaceful road!
‘Our vast land was burdened with pain, with shackles
and darkness.
You liberated all with your brilliance. People now are
happy, full of blessings!
‘Your work for peace is a white jewelled umbrella, giving
shade over heaven and earth and mankind.
Your fame is like golden bells on the umbrella, ringing
and turning forever in the sky!
‘Our foe, the bloodthirsty imperialists, are poisonous
snakes, and messengers of the devil furtively crawling,
You are the undaunted roc which conquered the
poisonous serpent. To you be power!
‘The cultural and industrial constructions which make
the people prosperous and defeat the enemy’s
armed forces are like a vast sea;
These constructions develop continuously until they
shall make this world as full of satisfaction as heaven.
‘The perfect religion of Sakyamuni (Buddha) is like a
Moonlight pearl lamp shining bright.
It is like a perfumed pearl ornament which we wear
without prohibition. O! Of this we are proud.
‘Your will is like the gathering of clouds, your call
like thunder,
From these comes timely rain to nourish selflessly the earth!
‘As the Ganges River rushes precious and to all the earth
The cause of peace and justice will bring to all peoples
boundless joy!
165
a great deception
‘May our world gradually become as happy as paradise!

May the torch of our great leader, be lit forever.
‘May the powers of the benevolent Bodhisattvas,
the resourceful Dharma-Protector and the truthful
words of the Maharishis make these good hopes
true.’173
These verses of adulation do not give the impression of someone
unhappy with the Chinese presence in Tibet – quite the opposite!
The sentiments expressed go far beyond protocol, revealing
instead a genuine admiration for Mao and a heartfelt conviction
that communism could release his people from their ‘shackles and
darkness’.
We have seen how, right up until his flight from Tibet in 1959,
the Dalai Lama was working closely with the Chinese. The Dalai
Lama ‘... expressed his most effusive support for China in speeches
and articles as late as January, 1959,’ including Learn from the Soviet
Union and Construct Our Socialist Fatherland and Strive for a Glorious Leap
Forward in Tibet.174
Furthermore, many Tibetans can remember that in the 1970s the
Dalai Lama attempted to start a Tibetan Communist Party with the
intention to spread communism amongst the Tibetans in exile. The
Dalai Lama supported this group, which arose at a time when he
often spoke sympathetically of communism.175
In 1996 the Dalai Lama was reported in the Times of India as
saying:
‘Sometimes I think that, boldly stated, the Marxists’ socio-
economic theories can be considered Buddhist – a part of
Buddhism ... The capitalist West is simply thinking about
money and how to make more profit. My main consideration
is to find a closer working relation with the Communists.’176
In an interview with Pico Iyer that appeared in Time magazine
in December 1997 the Dalai Lama is reported as referring to him-
self as ‘half Marxist, half Buddhist’ and that Mao Zedong was
‘remarkable’.177
166
For the Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Marxism has formed his political
framework since the 1950s. It is clear that long before the Strasbourg
Statement in 1988, indeed throughout all of the years in exile, the
Dalai Lama’s own political ideology has been the main stumbling
block to the Tibetan people achieving their goal of an independent
Tibet. As the Dalai Lama said in August 2009 in an exclusive inter-
view with BBC Chinese.com, ‘The Chinese Government considers
our problem a domestic one. And we also.’178
Throughout all of this time there has never been within the Dalai
Lama’s political outlook a basis for developing a strong commitment
to the idea of an independent Tibet. As Lazar points out: ‘… the
goal of Tibet is not defined as independence, with the result that
there is not a clear overall strategy for change.’179
Negotiations with Beijing
In 1979, First Vice-Premier of the People’s Republic of China Deng

Xiaoping invited the Dalai Lama to send fact-finding delegations to
Tibet and to enter into a dialogue in which, ‘apart from the ques-
tion of total independence all other issues could be discussed and
settled.’ Beijing accompanied this initiative with two conciliatory
gestures, which included allowance for the regeneration of Tibetan
culture and religion and measures to increase the standard of living
of Tibetans.180 The Dalai Lama sent three fact-finding delegations to
Tibet between 1979-80, and secret talks took place in Beijing in 1982
and 1984. But the talks were fruitless.
With China’s sudden ascent as a powerful political and economic
player in the international scene in the 1980s, the perceived plight of
Tibet (and Taiwan) provided a forum for western powers to attack
China. From this point of view the Dalai Lama has become a pawn
in the ensuing political struggles between the West and China. With
confidence stemming from support received in the U.S. and Europe,
in 1987, in speeches in Washington and Strasbourg, the Dalai Lama
suddenly began to argue that the Chinese occupation was illegal and
that a ‘Greater’ Tibet should become a self-governing political entity
under a ‘democratic constitution’.181
167
a great deception
Encouraged by the Dalai Lama’s campaign in the U.S., monks in

Lhasa held demonstrations protesting against the Chinese occupa-
tion. Several of the monks were arrested, and a full-scale riot ensued.
After a series of further demonstrations and riots in 1988 and 1989,
Beijing declared martial law and introduced a new hard-line policy
limiting religious and cultural expression. It also initiated a pro-
gramme of rapid economic development in Tibet.182
‘Beijing has, in a sense, turned the tables back on the Dalai
Lama, and the triumphs of the Dalai Lama’s international
campaign look more and more like Pyrrhic victories. The inter-
national initiative won significant symbolic gains for the exiles
in the West and spurred Tibetans in Tibet to demonstrate their
support for the Dalai Lama, but it did not compel China to
yield and played a major role in precipitating the new hard-line
policy that is changing the nature of Tibet.
‘Beijing now has little interest in discussions with the Dalai
Lama. It feels he is not serious about making the kind of politi-
cal compromises they could agree to ….’183
The unexpected death of the Panchen Lama in Tibet in January
1989 produced another Chinese initiative, an invitation to the Dalai
Lama to attend memorial services in Beijing during which time infor-
mal talks could take place.
‘The Dalai Lama had suddenly been offered an exceptional op-
portunity to visit China without having to sort out complicated
political protocol issues.
‘... The Dalai Lama and his officials, however, were reluctant
to accept the invitation. … with events apparently going well
from their perspective, the exile leadership persuaded the Dalai
Lama to take the safe course and decline the invitation ... Many
look back at this as one of the most important lost opportuni-
ties in the post-1978 era.’184
In recent times the Dalai Lama has flipped back and forth, one day
adopting a conciliatory tone towards the Chinese185 and offering ever
increasing concessions,186 and the next accusing them of ‘cultural
168
genocide’,187 of turning Tibet into ‘a living hell’188 and comparing the

Chinese Government to the Nazis.189
Since 2002, eight rounds of talks have been held between the
Dalai Lama’s representatives and the Chinese government. The Dalai
Lama says ‘the talks did not yield any tangible result.’190 By the Dalai
Lama’s own admission, therefore, in 30 years of negotiating with
Beijing, he has achieved nothing for his people.
The reason for this, according to the Chinese side, is the Dalai
Lama’s lack of sincerity. Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson
Jiang Yu said in April 2008:
‘The Central Government has exerted great sincerity and
patience with regard to its dialogue with Dalai. However, the
Dalai side failed to respond to our position in a positive and
comprehensive manner. The door for dialogue is open, but
Dalai is the one to make the difference by exerting sincerity
for dialogue, particularly in his concrete actions. As we said
on many times, we are ready to continue contacts with Dalai,
provided that he gives up separatist activities against the moth-
erland, disruptive activities against the Beijing Olympic Games
and incitement of violent activities.’191
The following day in Ann Arbor, Michigan, the Dalai Lama held
a press conference and said:
‘From the very beginning I have supported the Olympics.
We must support China’s desires. Even after this sad situ-
ation in Tibet, today I support the Olympics.’192
And previously, in March 2008, in his ‘An Appeal to the Chinese
People’ the Dalai Lama had said:
‘Similarly, despite my repeated support for the Beijing
Olympics, the Chinese authorities, with the intention of
creating a rift between the Chinese people and myself, the
Chinese authorities assert that I am trying to sabotage the
games.’193
However, on 18 January 2008, (the UK) ITV News together with
the London-based ‘Free Tibet’ conducted an interview with the
169
a great deception
Dalai Lama. ITV News published a piece entitled ‘Dalai Lama calls
for Olympic Protests’ and broadcast excerpts of the interview.194
Perhaps realizing the Dalai Lama had let his guard down and
strayed from his public message, the Department of Information
and International Relations of the Tibetan exile government issued
a press release saying the Dalai Lama had been misquoted and that
he fully supported the Beijing Olympics.195
Free Tibet, however, had already printed a partial transcript of
the interview:
‘Asked by ITV’s China correspondent, John Ray, whether sup-
porters of Tibet “should be allowed to express, in China, at
the time of the Olympics, in a peaceful way, their support for
the people of Tibet” the Dalai Lama responded that peaceful
protests would be justified in order to bring the Tibetan issue
to the attention of the Chinese public:
‘ “It is worthwhile to remind. I think the (Chinese) govern-
ment knows that, but the Chinese people sometimes may not
realize the problem. So I think it is worthwhile. So in the eyes
of millions of Chinese I think worthwhile to remind them
there’s a problem. That I think is very important.”
‘Asked if now was the best time for peaceful protest, the
Dalai Lama responded: “I think so.” ’196
Throughout the build up to the Beijing Olympics, particularly dur-
ing the Olympic Torch relay, violent protests were organised by Tibet
Support Groups.197 The action plan for these protests was drawn up
at the Fifth International Conference of Tibet Support Groups held
in May 2007 in Brussels. This international gathering was convened
by the Department of Information and International Relations of
the Central Tibetan Administration [the Tibetan exile government].198
The conference was addressed by Samdhong Rinpoche, the Prime
Minister of the Tibetan exile government, and Lodi Gyari, the Dalai
Lama’s representative in negotiations with China,199 the two Tibetan
politicians most closely linked with the Dalai Lama.
On the steering committee of the conference was Dr. B. Tsering
Yeshi, the President of the Tibetan Women’s Association.200 Dr.
170
Tsering is also on the organizing committee of the ‘Tibetan People’s

Uprising Movement’201 that are accused of directly organising the
riots in Lhasa in March 2008.202
At its inception in January 2008, the Movement issued the follow-
ing declaration:
‘Through unified and strategic campaigns we will seize the
Olympic spotlight and shine it on China’s shameful repression
inside Tibet, thereby denying China the international accept-
ance and approval it so fervently desires.
‘We call on Tibetans inside Tibet to continue to fight Chinese
domination and we pledge our unwavering support for your
continued courageous resistance. We call on Tibetans in exile
and supporters in the free world to take every opportunity
to protest China’s Olympic Games and support the Tibetan
people’s struggle for freedom.’203
And in a press release in February 2008, the group declared:
‘We will bring about another uprising that will shake China’s
control in Tibet and mark the beginning of the end of China’s
occupation of Tibet.’204
Other press releases claimed that the Tibetan People’s Uprising
Movement ‘will launch an all-out struggle on a war-front scale’.205
Of the five principal groups that established the ‘Tibetan People’s
Uprising Movement’: two were founded directly by the Dalai Lama,
one was founded at his request, and another was founded under the
auspices of organisations funded by his government.206 The Tibetan
Youth Congress in particular has as its primary aim:
‘To dedicate oneself to the task of serving one’s country and
people under the guidance of His Holiness the Dalai Lama,
the Spiritual and Temporal Ruler of Tibet.’207
Despite these groups’ sworn allegiance to him, and the fact that
they carry out all their activities in explicit support of the Dalai Lama,
he himself claims to have neither involvement in their activities nor
power to influence them. At a meeting with the media on Sunday
171
a great deception
16 March 2008, at the time of the riots in Lhasa, the Dalai Lama was
asked if he could stop the protests. The Dalai Lama replied swiftly:
‘I have no such power.’208
Furthermore, as the New York Times reported in an article entitled
‘Dalai Lama won’t stop Tibet protests’ the Dalai Lama revealed that
he is in direct personal contact with those involved in the rioting in
Tibet.
‘He said he had received a call on Saturday from Tibet. “Please
don’t ask us to stop,” was the caller’s request. The Dalai Lama
promised he would not.’209
It should be noted that during the Lhasa riots many Han Chinese
and Hui Muslims in Lhasa were attacked, beaten, stabbed and killed.
Many shops were looted and destroyed and then set alight – those
trapped inside were left to burn to death.210 Since the Dalai Lama
would not ask his supporters in Tibet to stop, could their actions be
consistent with his idea of ‘non-violent protest’?
Dawa Tsering, the head of the Chinese Affairs Ministry of
the Tibetan exile government was interviewed by Radio France
International at the time of the riots. He displayed a chilling lack of
compassion for the victims, and exhibited the twisted Tibetan exile
government’s understanding of ‘non-violence’:
‘First of all, I must make it clear that the Tibetan [rioters]
have been non-violent throughout [the incident]. From
Tibetans’ perspective, violence means harming life. From the
video recordings you can see that the Tibetans rioters were
beating Han Chinese, but only beating took place. After the
beating the Han Chinese were free to flee. Therefore [there
was] only beating, no life was harmed. Those who were
killed were all results of accidents. From recordings shown
by the Chinese Communist government, we can clearly see
that when Tibetan [rioters] were beating on their doors, the
Han Chinese all went into hiding upstairs. When the Tibetan
[rioters] set fire to the buildings, the Han Chinese remained
in hiding instead of escaping, the result is that these Han
Chinese were all accidentally burnt to death. Those who set
172
and spread the fire, on the other hand, had no idea whatso-
ever that there were Han Chinese hiding upstairs. Therefore
not only were Han Chinese burnt to death, some Tibetans
were burnt to death too. Therefore all these incidents were
accidents, not murder.’211
In an interview back in 1997, Samdhong Rinpoche, the Prime
Minister of the Tibetan exile government, spoke about inserting
agents into Tibet to engage in direct action:
‘ “Many think this plan is nothing but a suicidal effort, but
we thought it worth trying. At the moment we are training
the people who might take part, though it’s a difficult thing to
accept that you might be imprisoned or even shot.” He adds:
“Whatever may come, they will be dedicated non-violent activ-
ists. If we are going to disappear, let it be with some positive
resistance. If we keep quiet it would amount to an acceptance
and we, too, would be guilty.” ’212
How can we reconcile these words of the Tibetan Prime Minister,
conjoined with the special Tibetan understanding of what non-
violent activists can do (as revealed by Dawa Tsering above) with the
Dalai Lama’s statement to the Chinese people:
‘It is unfortunate that despite my sincere efforts not to separate
Tibet from China, the leaders of the PRC continue to accuse
me of being a “separatist”. Similarly, when Tibetans in Lhasa
and many other areas spontaneously protested to express their
deep-rooted resentment, the Chinese authorities immediately
accused me of having orchestrated their demonstrations.’213
The Dalai Lama portrays himself in the western media as
untainted by any protest against the Olympics or any unrest in Tibet,
and yet behind the scenes organisations established by him and
dedicated to fulfilling his wishes carry out his ‘dirty work’ for him. Is
it any wonder that despite his declarations of sincerity the Chinese
government have little confidence in negotiations with him?
It is also of interest that many of the groups involved in the Tibetan
People’s Uprising Movement are supported by the U.S. organization
173
a great deception
‘National Endowment for Democracy’ (NED). Hundreds of thou-

sands of dollars have been poured into these groups over the last few
years as part of the NED’s efforts to undermine Communist China
and support the US government’s strategic interests.214
What exactly is the National Endowment for Democracy and who
are they? A brief history of how the NED was established has been
given by the South Asia Analysis Group:
‘After his election in November, 1980, and before his taking-
over as the President in January, 1981, Mr. Reagan appointed
a transition group headed by the late William Casey, an attor-
ney and one of his campaign managers, who was to later
take over as the CIA Director, to recommend measures for
strengthening the USA’s intelligence capability abroad.
‘One of its recommendations was to revive covert political
activities. Since there might have been opposition from the
Congress and public opinion to this task being re-entrusted
to the CIA, it suggested that this be given to an NGO with
no ostensible links with the CIA.
‘The matter was further examined in 1981-82 by the
American Political Foundation’s Democracy Programme
Study and Research Group and, finally, the National
Endowment for Democracy (NED) was born under a
Congressional enactment of 1983 as a “non-profit, non-
governmental, bipartisan, grant-making organisation to help
strengthen democratic institutions around the world.”
‘Though it is projected as an NGO, it is actually a quasi-
governmental organisation because till 1994 it was run
exclusively from funds voted by the Congress (average of
about US $16 million per annum in the 1980s and now about
US $30 million) as part of the budget of the US Information
Agency (USIA). Since 1994, it has been accepting contri-
butions from the private sector too to supplement the
congressional appropriations.’215
The New York Times exposed the secret side of the National
Endowment for Democracy:
174
‘Project Democracy, began as the secret side of an otherwise

open, well-publicized initiative that started life under the same
name. Project Democracy’s covert side was intended to carry
out foreign policy tasks that other Government agencies were
unable or unwilling to pursue, the officials said.
‘Although the public arm of Project Democracy, now
known as the National Endowment for Democracy, openly
gave Federal money to democratic institutions abroad and
received wide bipartisan support, officials said the project’s
secret arm took an entirely different direction ...
‘Project Democracy grew into a parallel foreign policy appar-
atus – complete with its own communications systems, secret
envoys, leased ships and airplanes, offshore bank accounts and
corporations.
‘It operated outside the established Government decision-
making process and beyond the purview of Congress and was,
officials said, an expression of the Administration’s deep frus-
tration that it could not push the foreign policy bureacracy or
Congress to embrace what Administration officials described
as the “Reagan doctrine” of supporting anti-Communist
insurgencies.’216
In an interview with the Washington Post in 1991, Allen Weinstein

(Programme Director of American Political Foundation’s
‘Democracy Programme’ which led to the establishment of the
NED) said: ‘A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years
ago by the CIA.’217
As has been widely reported by both the American operatives
and the Tibetan fighters involved, from the 1950s through to the
1970s, the Dalai Lama and his government were involved with the
CIA’s secret war in Tibet.218 Throughout that time the Dalai Lama
presented himself as a champion of non-violence and denied any
involvement with the CIA.219
Today the Dalai Lama again has groups working for him –
supported by a shady CIA-like American NGO – creating violent
unrest against Communist China, and yet in the media he presents
175
a great deception
himself with the opposite image. The Dalai Lama was dubbed in
Newsweek as ‘the Teflon Lama’,220 and while he usually succeeds
in mesmerising the western media, in the all-important matter of
negotiations with Beijing it is clear that his duplicity has brought no
result for the Tibetan people.
The Panchen Lama Affair

The Panchen Lama is considered to be the second highest ranking
incarnate lama after the Dalai Lama in the Gelugpa Tradition of
Tibetan Buddhism. The successive Panchen Lamas form a tulku
reincarnation lineage who are said to be incarnations of Buddha
Amitabha.221
After the death of the Panchen Lama in 1989, the Chinese
government agreed to permit the selection of a new Panchen Lama
and in 1993 the Fourteenth Dalai Lama was invited to cooperate in
the selection process. At the end of 1994, Chadrel Rinpoche, the
head of the search team, indicated that, of the twenty-five candi-
dates, Gendun Choekyi Nyima was the true reincarnation of the
Panchen Lama. ‘By early February the Dalai Lama got a message
back to Chadrel Rinpoche stating that he had done divination that
confirmed Gendun Choekyi Nyima.’222
Having obtained the Dalai Lama’s confirmation, Chadrel
Rinpoche tried to secure Chinese approval of the boy, but ‘… the
[Chinese] government asked Chadrel to submit three to five names
for the golden urn drawing.’223 The ‘golden urn drawing’ is a tradi-
tional divination lottery in which the reincarnation is determined
by selecting or ‘drawing’ one name from a golden urn containing
the names of all the short-listed candidates. In mid-May, before
the Chinese government had completed the arrangements for
the golden urn drawing, the Dalai Lama suddenly announced to
the world that he recognised Gendun Choekyi Nyima as the new
Panchen Lama. He ‘asserted that the Chinese government had no
authority over this selection by saying, “The search and recognition
of Panchen Rimpoche’s reincarnation is a religious matter and not
political.” ’224
176
‘This announcement, of course, embarrassed and infuriated

the Chinese government.
‘… Chadrel was sentenced to six years in prison … Beijing
... disqualified Gendun Choekyi Nyima and used the golden
urn lottery to select a different boy, whom the Chinese govern-
ment formally confirmed in November 1995.’225
The Dalai Lama’s premature announcement of his choice of the
Panchen Lama was a disaster, both politically and for those person-
ally involved. Melvyn Goldstein writes:
‘… the Dalai Lama’s decision to pre-emptively announce the
new Panchen Lama was, to say the least, politically inastute.
... To be sure, it made Tibetans and their Western supporters
feel good to see the Dalai Lama exert his authority over the
issue, but the price he paid was substantial and the gains were
minuscule. In practical terms, ... he has in effect relegated the
boy he chose to a life of house arrest.
‘… Moreover, his announcement has badly undermined the
credibility of the more moderate Chinese officials who sold the
State Council on the idea that the ethnically sensitive selection
process would be in China’s best interests. It has therefore
reinforced the hard-liners’ contention that China cannot trust
or work with the Dalai Lama and has set back chances that
China will agree to renew talks with him.’226
The Issue of Democratisation

The Dalai Lama’s proposal of a western-style democracy, put forward
in the 1988 Strasbourg Statement and repeated since, is designed to
gain western support, but does not reflect the Dalai Lama’s actual
intention. This can be understood from several different points of
view. Throughout the history of the Dalai Lamas, as shown above
(Chapter 8), there has never been any interest in democracy on their
part. The Tibetan government, with the Dalai Lama as its head, has
always been, and continues to be, a feudal theocracy.
The Dalai Lama’s system of government did not arise from the
wishes and aspirations of the Tibetan people; it did not arise through
177
a great deception
an electoral process or referendum. It was imposed ruthlessly and

even violently through a series of military campaigns and political
intrigues that in the end established the Fifth Dalai Lama’s absolute
political and religious supremacy over all of Tibet.
The continuing lack of interest in democracy shown by the
present Dalai Lama’s government is also evident in the fact that
even after fifty years in exile within the democratic state of India,
the Tibetan exile government is still undemocratic; the Dalai Lama
retains total authority and control. No decision of the Tibetan exile
parliament has ever gone against his wishes, and it is inconceivable
that this could ever happen. As the Tibetan writer and former editor
of Tibetan Review, Dawa Norbu, has commented:
‘It is unfortunate but equally true that the Dalai Lama in exile
has tended to discourage the emergence of alternative leaders,
unless officially approved by him.’227
And as Dr. Ursula Bernis has pointed out:
‘The effort to democratize has not extended to separating
the domains of religion and politics. Since the Tibetan exile
government in Dharamsala is not legitimately a government
by legal and international standards, it is difficult to analyze
this problematic [sic] in an easy or straightforward way.
Democratic it is not. The Tibetan people have never been
asked to vote on any of the major political decisions con-
cerning the future of their country either inside or outside
Tibet.
‘Often not even the Assembly and Cabinet (Kashag) are
asked. Even more basic, freedom of speech, the very founda-
tion of democratic striving, is woefully absent among exile
Tibetans. Criticism of official exile government business is
usually dismissed as being of Chinese origin.’228
In 1963 a draft Constitution for a free Tibet was laid down by the
Dalai Lama with the help of an Indian lawyer. Under this constitution
the Dalai Lama retained supreme authority, and as Grunfeld points
out: ‘If that statement [within the Foreword of the Constitution, that
178
the Constitution “takes into consideration the doctrines enunciated

by Lord Buddha”] is to be accepted at face value, then the Dalai
Lama can never be deprived of his powers―spiritual or temporal―
unless he abdicates.’229
In the Tibetan Constitution adopted on 14 June 1991, Article 19
on Executive Power reads:
‘The executive power of the Tibetan Administration shall be
vested in His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and shall be exercised
by Him, either directly or through officers subordinate to Him,
in accordance with the provisions of this Charter. In particular,
His Holiness the Dalai Lama shall be empowered to execute
the following executive powers as the chief executive of the
Tibetan people.
(a) approve and promulgate bills and regulations prescribed
by the Tibetan Assembly;
(b) promulgate acts and ordinances that have the force of
law;
(c) confer honors and patents of merit;
(d) summon, adjourn, postpone and prolong the Tibetan
Assembly;
(e) send messages and addresses to the Tibetan Assembly
whenever necessary;
(f) dissolve or suspend the Tibetan Assembly;
(g) dissolve the Kashag or remove a Kalon or Kalons;
(h) summon emergency and special meetings of major
significance; and
(j) authorize referendums in cases involving major issues in
accordance with this Charter.’
And Article 20 on the Kashag (elected Cabinet) and the Chief Kalon
(Chief Minister) specifically states:
‘There shall be a Kashag and a Chief Kalon primarily
responsible for exercising executive powers of the Tibetan
Administration subordinate to His Holiness the Dalai
Lama.’230
179
a great deception
Despite the appearance of attempting to separate the powers of

‘church’ and ‘state’, they still converge in the person of the Dalai
Lama, which results in a passive and powerless National Assembly
and a political system that follows advice received by its leader, the
Dalai Lama, from a spirit medium, the Nechung oracle.
As already quoted, in his autobiography Freedom in Exile the Dalai
Lama states:
‘I seek his [the Nechung oracle’s] advice in the same way as I
seek the opinion of my Cabinet and just as I seek the opinion
of my own conscience. I consider the gods to be my “upper
house”. The Kashag constitutes my lower house. Like any
other leader, I consult both before making a decision on affairs
of state.’
Not content with comparing unelected ‘gods’, to whom only he has
access, with a cabinet of ministers elected by the Tibetan people, the
Dalai Lama continues:
‘… my relationship with Nechung is that of commander to
lieutenant; I never bow down to him. It is for Nechung to bow
to the Dalai Lama.’231
With this attitude it seems highly unlikely that the Dalai Lama will
ever bow down to the will of the people, a fundamental principle of
democratic government.
In 1998 Swiss National TV (SNTV) reported that the Tibetan
National Assembly had never in its history made a decision against
the wishes of the Dalai Lama. The Swiss journalist Beat Regli asked
the Vice-President of the Assembly if this could ever happen. The
Vice-President smiled benignly and responded with a chilling, ‘No
… No’.232
As the unelected political and spiritual leader of the Tibetan peo-
ple, the Dalai Lama’s influence over his government, executive and
people is all-pervasive. Because of the exalted position he enjoys, his
decisions are beyond reproach or even serious debate. Indeed the
vast majority of Tibetans ‘are overawed [into silence] by the mere
mention of the name of their religious and temporal head’.233 So
180
powerful is this control that almost no Tibetan will dare criticise

the Dalai Lama’s activities for fear of the swift retribution that they
know would follow. Nowhere is this seen more clearly than in the
repression of freedom of speech in the Tibetan exile community.
An advertisement published in both the Times of Tibet and the
magazine Sheja (Knowledge), and which was widely circulated in
Tibetan communities, reads:
‘Anyone who is against the Dalai Lama must be opposed with-

out hesitation with men, money and possession. This is to say
with any means, including violence.’234
SNTV introduces Tashi Angdu as, ‘the general secretary of the
society that published the advertisement demanding ruthless action
against all critics of the Dalai Lama. He is a well known politician and
president of the Tibetan regional council.’ Willingly he confirmed to
SNTV earlier in 1998, ‘… their society also threatens to use violence
against those Dalai Lama critics who won’t listen to them.’235
Shortly after expressing concern about the Dalai Lama’s ban on
Dorje Shugden, in June 1996 a retired government minister was
stabbed and badly wounded; he barely survived.236
A free press is a sign of a healthy democracy, giving avenues of
expression and allowing views other than the official to be heard.
There is no independent press within the Tibetan exile community
in India. The only independent newspaper in Dharamsala, Democracy
(Mang-Tso), stopped publishing in March 1996 under pressure
from the Tibetan government. Palden Gyal, writing in Tibetan News,
explained that the newspaper Mang-Tso ‘… was started in 1990 by
a group of Tibetan intellectuals with the aim of providing interna-
tional and Tibetan news. It also hoped to educate young Tibetans
about democracy.’ It was popular and influential and had a healthy
circulation. He continues:
‘The newspaper has always dabbled with criticisms of govern-

ment ministers and open discussion of their policies. Then,
in May 1995, it published a piece about Shoko Asahara, the
Japanese cult leader, highlighting the fact that he had been
181
a great deception
friends with the Dalai Lama before being accused of killing

eleven people in a nerve gas attack on the Tokyo subway.
The article suggested that perhaps the government should be
careful about who it conducted relations with in the future.
Not long after that, in March 1996, the newspaper ceased
publication.’237
Among the reasons given by the publishers for shutting down was,
‘subjective antipathies towards the publishers which had made pub-
lication difficult.’ As Palden Gyal says, ‘Even running news stories
about the Dalai Lama, if they do not reflect on him well, can provoke
anger among Tibetans.’ He also quotes Robbie Barnett of Tibetan
Information Network concerning the pressures that are brought to
bear on publications that do not toe the party line, ‘… antipathy
towards the publishers usually comes in the form of anything from
death threats to ostracisation to whisper campaigns.’238 In short the
paper had dared to question the activities of the Tibetan leader and
paid the ultimate price.
As Jamyang Norbu, a leading Tibetan intellectual writing in 1996
says:
‘… not only is there no encouragement and support for a
free Tibetan press, there is instead a near extinguishing of
freedom of expression in Tibetan exile society … Samdong
Rinpoche, the Speaker of the Tibetan Parliament in exile,
… declared … that the Tibetan Parliament should find new
ways to control the Tibetan press.’239
This profound intolerance of criticism pervades all avenues of
expression. As the well-known Tibetologist Heather Stoddard has
written:
‘... [a] considerable number of new books written in Tibetan
... have been censored or banned from publication [by the
Tibetan exile government] because they do not conform to
the desired image of traditional Tibetan society. Any serious
discussion of history and of possible shortcomings in the
society before 1959 is taboo.’240
182
In the foreword to a collection of essays by Jamyang Norbu,

Lhasang Tsering, formerly twice president of the Tibetan Youth
Congress, writes:
‘The ban on books for the simple reason that the writers had
expressed ideas that do not conform to the official line of
thinking – be it on history or politics – has been among the
biggest blots against our exile government.’241
It is deeply ironic that the leader and government of a people who
have been treated so badly by a totalitarian regime that brooks no
criticism, cannot tolerate the slightest criticism themselves. On this
core issue of freedom of expression not much has changed since
the exodus from Tibet, despite some fifty years of open contact with
democratic societies.
As expressed in his remarks to The Times of India in May 1996,
the political-ideological attitude of the Dalai Lama is Marxist-
Socialist, which he considers ‘a part of Buddhism’; it is not
western-style democracy, and he dismisses the West as ‘… sim-
ply thinking about money and how to make more profit.’242 Even
after the numerous atrocities committed in the cause of Marxism
within the former Soviet Union and throughout Eastern Europe,
China and Tibet, the Dalai Lama’s political views still remain
unchanged.
The Dalai Lama has many faces, including a democratic face for
westerners and a communist face in the hope of influencing the
Chinese. But the face the Dalai Lama shows to westerners is false.
Although he has been in the West for fifty years he has made no
real efforts to establish true democracy within the exile Tibetan
community, and although for many westerners he is the figure-
head for Tibetan freedom he has never really worked for Tibetan
independence, and has long accepted that Tibet will remain under
Chinese rule.243 Even though he spoke in Strasbourg in 1988 of
Tibetan autonomy under the sovereignty of China, the Dalai Lama
continues to perpetuate the illusion among Tibetans and within
the popular culture of the West that he is still working for a free,
independent Tibet. Is it any wonder that he cannot be trusted?
183
a great deception
For years the Dalai Lama maintained a high level of expectation

within the Tibetan exile settlements that a return to a free Tibet was
imminent. Living within a closed society with no voice allowed to
his people – no freedom of speech, no freedom of press – the Dalai
Lama has managed to maintain the myth of promoting an independ-
ent Tibet as ‘the Tibetan Cause’, even though he already abandoned
that as a political objective many years ago.
These factors need to be taken into consideration in any assess-
ment of the Dalai Lama’s statements on democracy. The political
views he expresses to western audiences in the USA and Europe are
not the same as those he expresses in Asia. The Dalai Lama’s advo-
cacy of a western-style democracy for a future free Tibet is strictly
for western consumption. The type of government over which he
would actually preside if Tibet were ever to regain its independence
would be far from democratic.
How the Dalai Lama’s Political Failures Led to

His Ban on Dorje Shugden Practice
In March 1996, the Dalai Lama shocked the Tibetan communi-

ties and the wider international Buddhist community by taking the
unprecedented step of imposing a ban on the practice of Dorje
Shugden, blaming this very popular, centuries-old religious practice
for his failure to achieve political independence for Tibet, but with-
out giving any valid reasons. He was acting, he said, on the advice of
the Nechung oracle, the spirit medium that regularly advises him on
matters of state, and in letters sent by his Private Office in March
1996 to the abbots of the Tibetan monasteries in South India, the
Dalai Lama gave two reasons for imposing the ban:
‘... government oracles point towards there being a danger to

the health of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, as well as to the
cause of Tibet, due to the worship of Shugden. Banning this
is also the conclusion reached by His Holiness after years of
observation.’244
184
Then, as Dr. Ursula Bernis reported: ‘Immediately government

offices promulgated this advice, stated in no uncertain terms by the
Dalai Lama, and turned it into a full-fledged ban.’245 Shortly after-
wards the Kashag formalised the ban in a written statement:
‘The essence of His Holiness’ advice is this: “Propitiating

Dolgyal does great harm to the cause of Tibet. It also imperils
the life of the Dalai Lama. Therefore, it is totally inappropriate
for the great monasteries of the Gelug tradition, the Upper and
Lower Tantric Monasteries and all other affiliated monasteries
which are national institutions ever to propitiate Dolgyal ...’246
In this way, the Dalai Lama singled out practitioners of Dorje

Shugden as state enemies accounting for the failure of his policy to
achieve an independent Tibet, and as targets for the wave of frustra-
tion and disillusionment arising from the catastrophic collapse of
popular hope in ‘the cause of Tibet’ that he had artificially main-
tained for years. From this point of view, the ban against the practice
of Dorje Shugden is a smokescreen to obscure the Dalai Lama’s own
political failure; a device designed to divert the anger of the Tibetan
people at being no nearer returning to Tibet after 50 years, by creat-
ing an ‘enemy within’ against whom this anger can be directed.
In 2009, the Tibetan exile government began saying that the Dorje
Shugden issue is not even religious, but entirely political. Samdhong
Tulku is quoted as saying: ‘... it is not a question of religion; it falls
under the situation of politics only’, claiming that Shugden practi-
tioners are tools being used by the Chinese government.247
For centuries Buddhists have viewed Dorje Shugden as an enlight-
ened being who functions as one of the principal protectors of the
Gelugpa Tradition. How the practice of Dorje Shugden could have
the remotest connection to the achievement of Tibetan indepen-
dence or to the state of the Dalai Lama’s health has never been
explained. Nevertheless, as there is no objective closer to the heart
of the vast majority of Tibetans than ‘the cause of Tibet’ (equated in
their minds with a free, independent Tibet) and because of the care-
ful nurturing of the Dalai Lama’s image as the focus of the Tibetan
185
a great deception
people’s aspirations, the new ban was vigorously implemented. In

the McCarthyite witch-hunt that followed and which continues to
the present day, Tibetan society has been divided against itself at
every level.
186
Chapter 11
The Implementation, Effects and Alleged

Reasons for the Ban on the Practice
of Dorje Shugden
In March 1996, in an aggressive and threatening manner, the Dalai

Lama stated that there would be a forceful implementation of the
ban against those who persisted in the practice of Dorje Shugden.
In the following months, and over the years since then, at empower-
ments, in speeches, in interviews and through government decrees,
the Dalai Lama has made clear his views and intentions in impos-
ing the ban. A number of these statements against Dorje Shugden
practice and practitioners, as well as evidence of the persecution of
Dorje Shugden practitioners, can be seen in Chapter 5.
The Dalai Lama’s words shocked and wounded millions of
Dorje Shugden practitioners around the world, and sent waves
of confusion, resentment and fear sweeping through the Tibetan
communities. In the months following the Dalai Lama’s ban, a
transformation took place within the Tibetan community. Threats
and acts of terrorism against Dorje Shugden practitioners, who
have been steadily marginalised and isolated, have destroyed the
relative peace, joy and internal harmony normally enjoyed within
the Tibetan settlements.
Vigilante mobs of fanatical followers of the Dalai Lama, acting
in the spirit of his public pronouncements, stormed into temples
and private homes, seizing and destroying pictures and statues of
Dorje Shugden – even taking them from shrines. Mobs attacked
Dorje Shugden practitioners and their homes with stones and pet-
rol bombs, destroying their possessions and threatening their lives.
There were beatings, stabbings and even killings.
187
a great deception
People lost their jobs, children were expelled from schools, and
monks were expelled from monasteries; foreign travel permits and
visas were denied; refugee aid, monastic stipends and allowances
were cut off; and forced signature campaigns were undertaken. In
these and many other ways that made Tibetans outcasts from their
own already exiled community, the Dalai Lama, in the guise of his
government, ministers and associated organisations, introduced a
reign of terror against tens of thousands of his own people, mak-
ing restrictions similar to those imposed on the Jewish people in
Germany in the early years of Hitler’s rule.248
This persecution has been enforced since 1996 and still contin-
ues. The international news and current affairs television channel
France 24 reported:
‘Photos of Shugden leaders are posted on city walls, branding
them as traitors. Signs at the entrance of stores and hospitals
forbid Shugden followers from entry …
‘Our reporters followed an ostracised Buddhist monk as he
tried to confront the fellow villagers who have banned him.
“We’re not violating Buddha’s teachings, and we’re excluded
from everywhere just because of our religion” he complains
… “It’s apartheid, in a Buddhist land.” ’249
The television channel France 24 visited the south of India and
followed Delek Tong, a monk who practises Dorje Shugden, through
the streets of his Tibetan refugee settlement:
‘[Delek Tong] Pointing at a poster on the wall, “Look at this,
it says: ‘No Shugden worshippers allowed.’ ”
‘ “Hi, I worship Shugden, can I come in?”
‘[Shopkeeper] “No, I am sorry, I don’t want you or any
Shugdens in my shop.”
‘[Reporter] The Dalai Lama has asked the Tibetan commu-
nity to stop the worship of the 400 year old Deity Shugden.
‘[Delek Tong] “When you followed the Dalai Lama’s advice,
did you not forget that us Shugdens are also Tibetans like
you?”
188
the ban on the practice of dorje shugden
‘[Reporter] What this means in practice is that Delek Tong

cannot walk into this shop because of his religious beliefs.
‘[Shopkeeper] “I have taken an oath and I won’t have any-
thing to do with the Shugden people.” ’
This footage also appeared on the international channel Al Jazeera. 250
To maintain the pretence of a democratic referendum on the issue
of Dorje Shugden, the Dalai Lama has carried out forced signature
campaigns within the lay and monastic Tibetan communities world-
wide. The first were introduced in 1996, but these did not bring
about the Dalai Lama’s desired goal of completely marginalising
Shugden practitioners. Frustrated by this failure, he initiated another
such forced signature campaign in January 2008.
As a direct result of the Dalai Lama’s second campaign, 900
monks were driven out of their monasteries on 8 February 2008.
On 15 February 2008 in Bangalore, Samdhong Rinpoche (Prime
Minister of the Tibetan exile government) made a statement remin-
iscent of words used by Hitler:
‘If the monasteries are completely cleansed, the campaign of
taking the oath not to practise Shugden and not to share ma-
terial and religious resources with Shugden devotees will be
initiated throughout India, Nepal and Bhutan, then abroad and
gradually in Tibet.’251
Becoming aware of the international public horror at these vio-
lations, the Tibetan Prime Minister and other officials of the Tibetan
exile government attempted to distance the Dalai Lama from respon-
sibility for this referendum.
On 22 April 2008 at Colgate University (New York State, USA) a
public demonstration was held outside a public talk given by the Dalai
Lama, protesting against his religious persecution. Tashi Wangdu, the
Dalai Lama’s Representative and former Cabinet Minister, after being
asked repeatedly for a public statement, was obliged to respond and
said to gathered reporters:
‘I think there is a lot of misunderstanding. I was trying to
explain that there is no ban.’252
189
a great deception
And, as thousands of members of the Western Shugden Society

engaged in a series of demonstrations around the world to expose
the shameful facts of the Dalai Lama’s ban and his dictatorial behav-
iour, in an interview with BBC News on 27 May 2008 the Dalai Lama
himself could only resort to a direct lie to his audience, saying that
‘… he had not advocated a ban ... .’253
In the West the Dalai Lama’s representatives try to maintain the
fiction that there is not a ban and that the Dalai Lama has only
‘advised’ people not to practise Dorje Shugden. However, it is clear
from the statements made by the Dalai Lama himself and by his
Private Office as shown in Chapter 5 that there is a very real ban and
it is vigorously applied. The Tibetan words ‘kagdom’ (bkag.sdom),
‘damdrag’ (dam.bsgrag) and other expressions that are frequently
used clearly indicate this.
Through the Tibetan Kashag (Cabinet), the Dalai Lama origi-
nally gave two reasons for imposing the ban. They claimed that the
practice of Dorje Shugden: (1) ‘... does great harm to the cause of
Tibet’ (that is, Tibetan independence); and (2) ‘It also imperils the
life of the Dalai Lama.’254 The Dalai Lama has been asked repeat-
edly to give valid reasons to prove these assertions, but none have
been forthcoming. However, saying that Shugden practice harms the
Dalai Lama is as senseless as saying that one person taking medicine
causes another person to get sick. How can others’ practice of Dorje
Shugden harm the Dalai Lama? It is a ridiculous assertion.
Subsequently, the Dalai Lama and his government fabricated
a third reason for the ban: the bogey of sectarianism. This third
reason has been variously expressed in public statements made by
the Dalai Lama, and in documents issued by the exile government.
For example, on 16 July 1996 on The World Tonight, BBC Radio 4, the
Dalai Lama said:
‘It is well known that the worshipper of that spirit, usual
approach a little bit sectarian. So that does not go well with
my approach.’
And in 1998 on the Tibetan exile government website, ‘Shugden
Versus Pluralism and National Unity’ said:
190
‘Propitiation of Shugden has taken on the characteristics

of a fanatical cult, in which there is no place for the views
or practices of other schools of Tibetan Buddhism, par-
ticularly those of the ancient Nyingma tradition founded
by Padmasambhava. Naturally, such divisiveness does not
sit well with Tibetans’ need to unite and withstand external
threats to their very identity.’255
On 27 August 1998 at the annual convention of the Tibetan
Youth Congress in Dharamsala, the Dalai Lama said in his opening
address:
‘I have imposed this ban for three reasons: (1) Throughout

history this worship has been at odds with the Ganden
Phodrang ruling government of Tibet, (2) Buddhism, which
is very profound, is in danger of degenerating into spirit
worship, and (3) worship of Dholgyal (Shugden) creates
sectarianism. For these three reasons I have imposed the
ban.’256
More recently in 2009, as mentioned above, the Tibetan exile

government has said that the issue is entirely political and not
religious,257 thus undermining the Dalai Lama’s original ‘religious’
reasons for the ban. But if we look at these ‘reasons’ in turn, it is,
as we have seen, the Ganden Phodrang system of government of
mixing religion and politics that is the source of the many problems
that have afflicted the Tibetan people for generations. And it is the
Dalai Lama through his reliance on spirit-oracles who is degenerating
Buddhism. In saying that Dorje Shugden practitioners are worship-
pers of an evil spirit he is deliberately manipulating the superstitious
fears of many ordinary Tibetans. Instead of promoting Buddhism
as a religion chiefly concerned with developing inner qualities such
as love and compassion, it is the Dalai Lama who is causing it to
degenerate through his portrayal of Buddhists seemingly in a state of
constant warfare against invisible spirits. In this he is going against
even his own teachings:
191
a great deception
‘If … one … always puts the blame on external harmful spirits

and thinks of them as one’s own enemies, this is actually quite
contradictory to the practice of bodhichitta [the compassion-
ate wish to attain enlightenment for the benefit of others]. If
I were a harmful spirit and someone pointed his finger at me
and said, “You are a harmful spirit,” I would be happy because
that shows that my accuser has not been able to identify his
own enemy, and hence is vulnerable to my harms. If one
actually practices bodhichitta properly and views all beings as
friends, then harmful spirits will not harm one, for one will be
invulnerable.’258
As for the charge that Shugden practice causes sectarianism, in

reality every Tibetan knows there were no problems of disharmony
between Nyingmapas and Gelugpas before the ban was imposed.
There is not a single instance of disagreement between Nyingmapas
and Gelugpas; although there have been disagreements histori-
cally between Gelugpas and Kagyupas, such as those at the time
of the Fifth Dalai Lama coming to power. Nyingmapas practised
Nyingma teachings purely and Gelugpas practised Gelug teachings
purely without any problem. The problem was created only by the
Dalai Lama himself in saying such things as: ‘Say I want to prac-
tise Nyingma. They say this Protector will harm me. Now, that’s an
obstacle to religious freedom’. Within the Tibetan community no
one has the opportunity, power or confidence to say such a thing to
the Dalai Lama; and even if someone had said something like this
to him it doesn’t prove that ‘Shugden people’ say this. There is no
reason for him to be angry with innocent Shugden people in general
just because of one person’s view; any individual can say anything,
this is their personal choice.
Division and sectarianism within Tibetan society has been caused
only by the ban imposed by the Dalai Lama himself. Of course, the
Dalai Lama has freedom to choose his own practice. If he wants to
stop practising Dorje Shugden and choose another practice, follow-
ing indications in his personal dreams and so forth, then he is free to
do so, but he should not interfere with the freedom of others who
192
wish to worship as they choose in accordance with their individual

human right of religious freedom.
In reality, Dorje Shugden practitioners are seeking religious free-
dom from the Dalai Lama’s dictatorial behaviour, and it is the Dalai
Lama who is maintaining a sectarian attitude of religious intolerance,
destroying people’s happiness and resulting in other serious conse-
quences. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso explains:
‘For instance, although Sera, Ganden and Drepung (in Tibet)
were Gelug monasteries, many Nyingmapa and Bön practition-
ers joined to study the philosophical teachings. In my class in
Sera-Jey [Monastery] I had some friends from a Nyingma mon-
astery in eastern Tibet. Their daily practice was Nyingma, and
no one was unhappy about this. They had complete freedom.
We never had any problems because the Abbot gave complete
freedom for individual practice.
‘Although most of my family are Gelugpas who rely on
Dorje Shugden, some of them are Nyingmapas. My younger
sister married a Nyingmapa Lama from western Tibet from a
renowned lineage; he was called Ngora Lama. They had many
children and I visited them frequently, sometimes he and I
would do puja together. I would do Dorje Shugden puja and
he would do his own practice. We had a very good relationship
until his death in Mussourie, India.
‘When I lived in Mussourie I had many good friends from
the Nyingma tradition, one of whom in particular was called
Ngachang Lama. He was an old man, a lay practitioner; one
winter he and I did retreat in the same house. In between
sessions we talked Dharma, each talking about our experi-
ences. His oldest son would often invite me to his house to
do puja. Also, I was often invited to do puja at houses of
other Nyingma families. I was so surprised to hear the Dalai
Lama and others saying that Dorje Shugden practitioners and
Nyingmapa practitioners are like fire and water!’259
This attitude of following one tradition but being open to and
accepting of other traditions was widely prevalent in Tibet and is
193
a great deception
confirmed by many other contemporary accounts. For example

Khyongla Rato writes:
‘… although my grandparents and parents had quite different
attitudes towards religion, there was never any discord between
them or disagreement in the matter of belief. My grandparents
had been initiated, at one time or another, into all four of the
main Buddhist sects of Tibet … and had found in them no
real conflict.
‘My mother and father, on the other hand, unlike my father’s
parents, belonged only to the orthodox Gelugpa “Yellow Hat”
sect, and it would never have occurred to them to accept initia-
tion from any other. Yet they respected all, and had friends
from all.’260
Because of the present Dalai Lama’s view, this attitude of follow-

ing one tradition but respecting others is now regarded as a sectarian
crime. However, many respected masters from all traditions of
Tibetan Buddhism have spoken of the importance of maintaining
each tradition. For example, the late highly respected Kagyu teacher
Kalu Rinpoche was quoted as saying:
‘In general, to have faith in all the traditions is a sign of a pro-
found understanding of the teachings. However, it is absolutely
necessary to engage in one given tradition, to receive detailed
instructions in it, and to be introduced to its essential practices;
and then, it is proper to practice mainly those teachings.’261
In an interview with Professor Donald Lopez in Tricycle Magazine,

Geshe Kelsang Gyatso stated very clearly his own completely non-
sectarian attitude toward other traditions:
‘Of course! Of course we believe that every Nyingmapa
and Kagyupa have their complete path. Not only Gelugpa.
I believe that Nyingmapas have a complete path. Of course
Kagyupas are very special. We very much appreciate the
example of Marpa and Milarepa [in the Kagyu lineage].
Milarepa showed the best example of guru devotion. Of
194
course the Kagyupas, as well as the Nyingmapas and the

Sakyapas, have a complete path to enlightenment. Many
Nyingmapas and Kagyupas practice very sincerely and are
not just studying intellectually. I think that some Gelugpa
practitioners need to follow their practical example. But
we don’t need to mix our traditions. Each tradition has its
own uncommon good qualities, and it is important not to
lose these. We should concentrate on our own tradition and
maintain the good qualities of our tradition, but we should
always keep good relations with each other and never argue
or criticise each other. What I would like to request is that we
should improve our own traditions while maintaining good
relations with each other.’262
The Dalai Lama has made public statements about why he has
imposed this ban but as we have seen they are completely flawed and
have no valid basis. So what are the real reasons? One is the influence
of the spirit Nechung, the protector of the Dalai Lama. The spirit-
medium of Nechung has wanted predominant power to advise the
Dalai Lama for many years, and has consequently developed jealousy
towards the practice of Dorje Shugden, which was and still is very
popular among many lamas, including the tutors and root Gurus of
the Dalai Lama, many scholars and millions of other practitioners.
There are also the factors of ignorance and superstition, because as
the Dalai Lama publicly admits, he has based all of his decisions for
the implementation of this ban on divinations, oracles and dreams.
He has affirmed this in many discourses, including the one in July
1978 when he first spoke out in public against the practice of Dorje
Shugden.
When asked what he thought was the main reason for the Dalai
Lama’s ban, Kundeling Rinpoche explained:
‘All of the different traditions of Tibet have their own unique
protectors. So why is Dorje Shugden being singled out as the
big enemy of unity and being singled out as the main object of
sectarianism? That is absolutely not true that Dorje Shugden
is an enemy of unity and a cause of sectarianism. It’s a big lie.
195
a great deception
‘Actually, the main reason behind the ban on Dorje Shugden

is because Dorje Shugden has been very, very popular. You see,
Gelugpas have been a majority in Tibet. They happen to be
a majority also in exile. Dorje Shugden worship is very, very
popular amongst the Gelugpas. It’s also very popular amongst
the Sakyapas. So I think this popularity may have caused some
constraint and jealousy with Nechung oracle. Now jealousy and
competition, in connection to growing popularity, is a common
occurrence in Tibetan history. There have always been some
minor quarrels and disagreements and arguments over fame,
popularity, patrons, property, disciples. These are typical human
feelings, human problems. They have nothing to do with the
protectors of Gelugpas such as Dorje Shugden.’263
In The Dalai Lama: A Report on the Dalai Lama’s Abuses of Human
Rights and Religious Freedom James Belither notes:
‘Many people believe the real reason why the Dalai Lama has
banned the worship of Dorje Shugden is because he wants
to integrate all the four schools of Tibetan Buddhism into
one. The leaders of the other traditions will gradually dis-
appear leaving him as the sole head of Tibetan Buddhism.
In this way he will be able to control all aspects of Tibetan
Buddhism, thereby consolidating his own power. By destroying
the practice of Dorje Shugden, a popular practice within the
Gelug tradition, he is trying to change, and thereby weaken, the
Gelug tradition itself. By weakening the Gelugpas, relatively the
most powerful of the four schools, the Dalai Lama has cleverly
gained the support of the other schools. His next step will be
to integrate them all into one.’264
And this is exactly what the Dalai Lama is doing as confirmed in his
own words:
‘... what I say [is] – “We should try to practice all the four
traditions in a complete form within one single physical
basis.” ’265
196
As Kundeling Rinpoche points out, the ban and the wish to inte-
grate the four traditions relates to the Dalai Lama’s hidden political
agenda (see Chapter 9):
‘The Dalai Lama’s other reason for the ban, that Dorje Shugden
is an obstacle to the unity of all the Tibetan traditions, is def-
initely not true. You see, there was no such problem before
this ban. When the Dalai Lama talks about bringing unity, he
means making one tradition out of all the existing traditions
of Tibet ... What the Dalai Lama is talking about is unifying all
of the different practices to make one tradition.
‘Now if you ask, who’s going to be the head of this new, one
tradition, of course it’s the Dalai Lama himself who is going to
be the head. It is very clear in the Dalai Lama’s mind that when
he goes back to Tibet, he’s never going to be the temporal
leader. That’s very clear. Since he’s opted for autonomy, he’s not
going to be a temporal leader anymore. So the only option left
for him is to be a spiritual leader. To be spiritual leader of the
Gelugpas alone means his power is marginalised, is reduced.
Therefore, in order to be the common spiritual leader of all
Tibetans, he is trying to create one tradition here in exile. He
believes that when he goes back to Tibet he will be able to
exercise power over all the traditions by having created this
one tradition in which he is the supreme leader. So this is also
a power struggle. This is also a power game. So this is the Dalai
Lama’s hidden political agenda.’266
Although the Dalai Lama clearly has a political motive in imposing
the ban on Dorje Shugden practice, he is acting against the basic
principles of Mahayana Buddhism. With this ban he has totally
rejected the view of his Spiritual Guide, Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche,
his ‘root guru’267, thus breaking the commitment to rely upon the
Spiritual Guide, the cornerstone of Mahayana Buddhist practice.
197
Chapter 12
Open Secrets concerning the

Fourteenth Dalai Lama
What emerges from our analysis of the Dalai Lama so far is a portrait
of someone who has the external appearance of a spiritual personal-
ity, a holy being, but in truth is ordinary, self-centred and ruthless. As
the following chapter reveals, behind the mask of Avalokiteshvara
hides an ordinary person, engaged in the same kinds of unsavoury
actions and with the same kind of motivation that we associate with
corrupt politicians.
The Recognition of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
As explained in Chapter 2, fundamental questions are now being

asked publicly about the veracity of many aspects of the selec-
tion process by which the current Dalai Lama was identified, and
therefore about the true identity of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
himself.
The Illusion of Government
Gradually over the years since the Dalai Lama left his homeland,
145,000 Tibetans have moved from Tibet and made settlements in
India, Nepal and Bhutan or settled further afield in exile communi-
ties throughout the world.268
The Dalai Lama himself, together with many of his closest
followers, eventually settled in the old British hill station of McLeod
Ganj, near the small Indian town of Dharamsala in northern India.
199
a great deception
The Tibetan town that has grown up around him there is now the
principal Tibetan refugee community.
At enormous expense an administration was established in
Dharamsala to maintain effective control over the widely-spread
refugee population.269 This administration has become known as
‘The Government of Tibet in Exile’ though it has no legal status
either within or outside India and is not officially recognised by any
country, least of all by India.270
An official statement, published by the Department of
Information of the Tibetan government in exile, reads:
‘In exile, the Tibetan Government has been reorganized
according to modern democratic principles. It administers all
matters pertaining to Tibetans in exile, including the restora-
tion, preservation and development of Tibetan culture and
education, and leads the struggle for the restoration of Tibet’s
freedom.’271
There is a Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile (TPiE) (formerly called
the ‘Assembly of Tibetan People’s Deputies’, and before that the
‘Commission of Tibetan People’s Deputies), which consists of forty-
six representatives. However, of these representatives only thirty are
directly elected by the Tibetan people. The five major religious traditions
(Gelug, Kagyu, Sakya, Nyingma and Bön) elect two represent-
atives each, and the remaining six are direct appointees of the Dalai
Lama. This in itself represents a breach of democratic principles, since
only two-thirds of the delegates are directly elected by the people. The
TPiE nominally appoints the members of the Cabinet (‘Kashag’ in
Tibetan), but in practice these are often directly appointed by the Dalai
Lama. And for a time in the early 1980s the Dalai Lama even took it
upon himself to appoint unilaterally all delegates of the TPiE.272
Tsering Wangyal writing in the Tibetan Review in 1979 pointed out
that ‘every important office-bearer in Dharamsala has to be approved
by the Dalai Lama before formally taking his office.’273 In the same
article he continued:
‘Despite the introduction in 1963 of some of its external
paraphernalia, Tibetan democracy is yet to come of age. The
200
open secrets concerning the fourteenth dalai lama
Commission of Tibetan People’s Deputies (The National

Assembly), the most consciously democratic institution in the
exiled Tibetan community, has at its last public appearance
failed to alter its image of being an impotent body – subservi-
ent for all practical purposes to the dictates of the government
(the Dalai Lama). … The experience so far has shown that the
old-world values and ideas continue to dominate the positions
of power in the Tibetan community …’
In the last fifty years, the Tibetan exile government functioning in

Dharamsala has never faced an opposition party, nor even an indi-
vidual who could be called an opposition member. It has never taken
a decision contrary to the Dalai Lama’s position, and such an event
is even considered to be inconceivable. With all authority (executive,
legislative, judicial and religious) invested solely in the person of the
Dalai Lama, this government has ceased to uphold any pretence of
constitutional democracy.
The Tibetan government is the Dalai Lama, and the Dalai Lama is
the Tibetan government. Behind the trappings of government with
its illusion of democracy, the Dalai Lama’s position, with its central
tenet, ‘L’etat, c’est moi’ (‘I am the State’), extends its domain of
authority over all aspects of policy and decision-making. There is no
decision of government that is not the Dalai Lama’s decision.
Because the Dalai Lama is commonly held to be an infallible being,
the embodiment of a Buddha, it is not only inconceivable but would
also be heretical to formulate a policy or make a decision contrary to
his wishes. Furthermore, because it would again be an act of heresy
to criticise the policy or decision of a supposedly enlightened being,
all criticism and blame for the Dalai Lama’s mistakes are directed at
the Tibetan government, which has no means of redress.
In this way, the so-called Tibetan government is blamed for all of
the Dalai Lama’s mistakes, and the untarnished image of the Dalai
Lama is maintained. This very convenient system has enabled the
Dalai Lama, through the illusion of government, to destroy the repu-
tation and activities of others, to intimidate and persecute them, and
to instigate violence against them, all while maintaining a faultless
201
a great deception
public image, and knowing full well that all subsequent blame will be
carried by his ‘government’.
In September 1995, an unprecedented ‘open letter’ from the
Tibetan people to the Dalai Lama was given anonymously to an
English woman travelling in Nepal. Called the Mongoose-Canine Letter
(see Appendix 2), it revealed to Westerners for the first time another
side of the Dalai Lama, one which was already an open secret within
the Tibetan community. For the first time ever, the Dalai Lama
and his government were publicly accused of such things as illegal
international trading in arms; persecution and assassination; and of
creating schism and disharmony within the Tibetan spiritual trad-
itions and community.
The Dalai Lama’s Brother, Gyalo Dondrub
According to Tibetan sources, an older brother of the Dalai Lama

called Gyalo Dondrub has taken advantage of the exile situation to
gain increasing personal influence.
‘In Tibet, the family of the Dalai Lama was respected, but had
no political power. Gyalo Dondrub, however, has used the
changed situation in exile to gain a powerful influence over
Tibetan politics.’274
Various established Tibetan ‘noble families’ such as Phala,
Surkhang and Yuthog actively used their influence to achieve great
benefits for the Tibetan exile community.
‘In old Tibet, political matters were in the hands of the nobility.
After the successful escape from Tibet, it was these families
in particular who established settlements, schools and political
representation in foreign countries.
‘They however stood in the way of Gyalo’s ambition. In
the mid-1960s he succeeded in setting public opinion against
Surkhang and Yuthog, who were thus forced to leave India
and move to Taiwan. Phala was assigned as representative in
Switzerland and thereby lost his direct influence in India.’275
202
To this day Gyalo Dondrub remains one of the most powerful

figures in the Tibetan government and community.
‘He [Gyalo] is continuously occupied with ‘‘secret’’ business

behind the scenes, and although he maintains contact with the
CIA, he is the only direct contact the Dalai Lama has with the
communist leadership in Beijing. He is regarded as the ‘‘secret
boss’’, and his role, as well as his goals are unclear.’276
Kensaku Okawa comments on a speech given in Taiwan on 29

October 1967 by a former minister of the Tibetan exile government,
Yuthok Tashi Dhundup:
‘Yuthok criticized many of Gyalo’s activities, for example, (1)

Gyalo dominates DL [Dalai Lama] and controls TGE [Tibetan
government in exile] through his brother; (2) Gyalo embezzles
TGE’s budget and invests it into his own business; (3) Gyalo
embezzles the donations intended for the Tibetan guerrilla
force; (4) Gyalo controls TGE by tactics involving bribery and
boycott against its officials. This talk reveals not only Gyalo’s
growing influence in TGE, but also the discord between him
and officials such as Yuthok.’277
A picture begins to emerge of a government dominated and con-

trolled by the Dalai Lama and his family.
‘In Tibet, a family member of a Dalai Lama was legally barred

from holding office, something that changed in exile, where Gyalo
Thondup [or Dondrub] and others later became ministers. Much
controversy surrounds Gyalo Thondup whom Tibetans believe to
be the main architect of the Dalai Lama’s plan to integrate Tibet
into China under increased cultural autonomy.
‘Recently, another brother of the Dalai Lama has claimed
that today only three families, including his, run the exile gov-
ernment … “the Tibetan exile government is run by three
families, one of which is mine’’ [that is, the Dalai Lama’s family,
or Yapshi Taklha family] … the old Gelugpa elite in the exile
government had largely been replaced in the 1960s. The family
203
a great deception
of the Dalai Lama, [admits] to running the government from

behind the scenes for decades …’278
And as Michael Backman reports in his article Behind the Dalai Lama’s
holy cloak:
‘Like many Asian politicians, the Dalai Lama has been remark-
ably 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 parlia-
ment 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.’279
It is not only Gyalo Dondrub’s position on Tibetan independ-

ence that has attracted the most censure from Tibetans, but also the
way in which he has manipulated his position as the Dalai Lama’s
older brother and thus the secular head of the Yapshi Taklha fam-
ily, the Dalai Lama’s family, which has been automatically co-opted
into the Tibetan aristocratic system.
204
As it is clear that the source of Gyalo Dondrub’s power lies in

his closeness to the Dalai Lama, and that the Dalai Lama has done
nothing to restrain his brother, it is the Dalai Lama who must take
responsibility for his brother’s bullying and destructive actions.
The Dudjom Rinpoche Affair
Dudjom Rinpoche was one of the important modern masters

of the Nyingma tradition, and a great spiritual teacher. Shortly
after his arrival from Tibet, in the early 1960s, he gave extensive
teachings in Kalimpong and Darjeeling. These were very popular
and he became famous throughout the Tibetan community. But
suddenly Dudjom Rinpoche was arrested and jailed in Siliguri,
falsely accused by the Dalai Lama’s exile government of being a
Chinese spy. As Kundeling Rinpoche notes:
‘This is the favourite accusation of the Tibetan government in
exile made against anyone who they perceive as posing a threat
to the absolute authority of the Dalai Lama.
‘Dudjom Rinpoche became very popular; he became very
famous and that posed a threat to their absolute authority. That
is basically what an autocratic system is all about. Except for
the leader, nobody can be smarter or more famous or more
good looking or more prosperous than that particular person.
You can’t outshine your ruler. If you do, you have to be cut
down to size.’280
It may also be that Dudjom Rinpoche was not interested in the
Dalai Lama’s desire for a union of all Tibetan traditions. In replying
to the question ‘If some people have been practising according to
one lineage, is it necessary for them to change lineages in order to
create unity in the community?’ Dudjom Rinpoche replied:
‘Certainly not. Whatever practice a person is well-grounded
in is what he should continue. Part of our purpose is to
preserve all lineages as methods for attaining enlightenment.
… as practitioners we should sustain our own tradition
205
a great deception
while respecting and rejoicing in the virtue of other

traditions.’281
The Assassination of Gungtang Tsultrim
Gungtang Tsultrim was the leader of an organisation known as

the ‘Thirteen Settlements’ or ‘Thirteen Groups of Tibetans’. This
organisation consisted of thirteen (later fourteen) Tibetan exile
groups and settlements that wished to establish themselves under
Indian law, independent of the jurisdiction of the Dalai Lama’s
exile government. Although this organization had its origins
in a grassroots movement in Tibet, the principal impetus for its
formation in India occurred shortly after the Dalai Lama’s arrival
in Dharamsala.
When the Dalai Lama first arrived in Dharamsala, he held a
series of meetings with other senior leaders from all the traditions.
The purpose of these meetings was for the Dalai Lama to intro-
duce a proposal for the integration of all four schools of Tibetan
Buddhism into one. At the time the Gelugpa did not reject the
Dalai Lama’s ideas directly because of their close relationship with
the institution of the Dalai Lama; they remained neutral. But the
proposal was rejected by the Sakya, Nyingma and Kagyu lamas.
Practitioners of these other traditions were extremely worried about
this proposal, fearing that their traditions would soon be destroyed.
In response to the proposal, and against the Dalai Lama’s wishes,
they organised thirteen groups which then associated to form the
‘Thirteen Settlements’.
Over the years many conflicts developed between the Dalai Lama
and these thirteen settlements, until in 1976 their secular leader
Gungtang Tsultrim was murdered. Without the strong leadership
of Gungtang Tsultrim, and with no other leader of his capacity to
replace him, the coalition disintegrated. This had been the motive
for the assassination.
A website dealing mainly with controversies regarding the
Karmapa adds:
206
‘In 1964, the government-in-exile of the Dalai Lama wanted

to introduce social, economic and religious reforms to the
recently evicted Tibetans. Gyalo Thondrub, the Dalai Lama’s
audacious brother, decided that the best answer to Mao’s inva-
sion and destruction of their country was to adapt Tibet and
Tibetan policy in exile to the new Communist realities. He
boldly proposed to abolish the old Buddhist schools, to do
away with the rich, religious show, and thus bring the high lamas
to the ground. “No more thrones, rituals, or gold brocades,”
he was rumoured to have uttered. The spiritual hierarchies of
the Nyingma, Kagyu, Sakya and the corollary sub-orders fell
victim to slander and reproach. His words struck fear into the
lamas’ hearts. As more details of the elaborate plan began to
emerge, it became clear that a coup against three of the schools
was being hatched. The new religious body that would replace
the traditional lineages was to be controlled by the Gelugpa
hierarchy. The worried lamas rushed to Karmapa for help.
‘When in 1976, Gungthang Tsultrim, the political head of
the alliance, was murdered, the assassin confessed to operate
on orders from the Tibetan cabinet. Hired for the job, he was
paid rupees three hundred thousand by the Tibetan govern-
ment-in-exile in Dharamsala. The Tibetan government-in-exile
had also offered him more money for eliminating the 16th
Karmapa, he confessed.’282
The Karmapa Affair
The Sixteenth Karmapa, the head of the Karma Kagyu Tradition, was
one of the most famous and highly-revered spiritual masters within
the Tibetan community in India, and gradually his reputation also
spread throughout the West. He was regarded as one of the greatest
spiritual masters of the twentieth century. He had a strong following
throughout the Himalayan region including India, Nepal, Bhutan
and Sikkim, and a growing discipleship in the West. The Thirteen
Settlements had wished to make the Karmapa their spiritual head.
The Dalai Lama’s government therefore tried directly and indirectly
207
a great deception
to eclipse the popularity and fame of the Karmapa. It is well known

that the Dalai Lama and the Karmapa were in open conflict in the
last years of the Karmapa’s life.
In an interview the Dalai Lama has talked of his relationship with
the Sixteenth Karmapa:
‘ “On a personal level, still old friends; no problem. But as
to the Tibetan community and the politics, a little bit of doubt,
a little distance …” The Karmapa, he went on, had refused to
contribute to the booklet for independence. “And later, I heard
that in talking to some of his centres in Europe and America
he said the Tibetan freedom struggle is politics, and that as
spiritual practitioners they should not be involved.”
‘ “… So Karmapa Rinpoche, I think perhaps he misled
people a little bit, and that made me a little sad …” ’283
The Karmapa was here actually exposing the truth about the Dalai
Lama’s use of ‘Lama Policy’, so in light of the Dalai Lama’s views
on the union of religion and politics, and his identification of the
Tibetan state under his control with the continued development of
Buddhism, it is unlikely that the Dalai Lama’s reaction was merely
one of sadness.
After the Sixteenth Karmapa passed away, the Dalai Lama took
the unprecedented step of using his own power to force the selec-
tion of the Karmapa’s reincarnation. This was entirely unwarranted
because historically the selection has always been an internal matter
solely under the jurisdiction of the Kagyu spiritual tradition itself.
There were two candidates: one born in Chinese-occupied Tibet, the
candidate officially recognised by the Chinese authorities; and the
other born in India and recognised by the great Kagyu spiritual mas-
ter Shamar Rinpoche. Shamar Rinpoche’s lineage has been closely
connected with the Karmapa lineage since the 13th century, and he
has been considered second only to the Karmapa himself within
the Kagyu tradition. The Dalai Lama sided with the Chinese and
‘officially’ recognised their candidate, a decision that caused chaos
within the Kagyu tradition, producing a deep schism between those
who follow the Dalai Lama and those who follow Shamar Rinpoche.
208
This schism has divided this spiritual tradition against itself, and at
times has led to violence.
As an article in the Indian Sunday magazine commented:
‘The Dalai Lamas have never held any right over the con-
firmation, let alone recognition, of a Karmapa at any time
throughout history. In fact, the Karmapa line precedes that of
the Dalai Lamas by over three hundred years and their lineages
are and always have been entirely separate.
‘The Dalai Lama does not have historic or religious author-
ity to approve Karmapa reincarnations, or head lamas for any
school of Tibetan Buddhism besides his own Gelugpa lin-
eage. This point may be confusing to non-Tibetans because,
as head of the Tibetan government-in-exile, the Dalai Lama
has a claim on the political loyalty of many Tibetans. Yet, his
political role does not give the Dalai Lama spiritual authority
to validate the head lamas of Buddhist schools outside his
own. The four Buddhist schools of Tibet have always had
separate administrations and have chosen their own head
lamas, much as Protestants and Catholics choose their own
leaders. So, just as the Pope has no role in choosing the
Protestant Archbishop of Canterbury, so the Dalai Lama is
not authorized to recognize the Karmapa, who is the leader
of the Karma Kagyu school. Only the administration of the
late 16th Karmapa is authorized to validate its own chief
lama’s reincarnation.’284
In a letter to the Dalai Lama in February 1997, Shamar Rinpoche

stated clearly that the Dalai Lama has no authority in confirming a
Karmapa reincarnation and no business throwing his ‘weight’ at the
Kagyu lineage:
‘This amounts to a medieval dictatorial command and I

understand that this is the approach that you desire. But it is
completely unacceptable to me ... Therefore, my final request
to the Private Office of the Dalai Lama is that [it] does not
involve His Holiness’s name in this problematic issue ... with
209
a great deception
respect to our lineage it is up to us, who are part of that lin-

eage, to achieve its aims ... you ought to be cautious in your
undertakings!’285
As a consequence of his outspoken criticism of the Dalai Lama
on this issue, the Tibetan government has done everything possible
to turn this lama into a pariah within Tibetan society.
As the Mongoose-Canine Letter addressed to the Dalai Lama says:
‘… when in the 1960’s you tried to get rid of the influence
of one great Lama’s power, such as Dujom Rinpoche and
Karmapa, the side-effect was felt by many Tibetan Lamas,
and you caused them to unite in opposition. You could not
leave it lightly and you had to do something that caused a split
within Tibetan society ... Your ministers will have told you
that a Karmapa established in the Himalayas will affect the
name and power of the Dalai Lama as before since he is very
popular in the Himalayas. If the Tibetan exile government of
Dalai Lama is really for the independence of Tibet, for the
democracy of Tibet, ... how can a private organisation like that
of the Karmapa, affect your government?
‘... When your Holiness Dalai Lama gave support for this
(backed the Chinese candidate) how badly will this harm
Tibet’s future? You think that if within your life you cannot
be the leader of the Tibetans in Tibet, at least you must keep
your position as leader of Tibet in India by using Dharma
and politics. For that you calculate that it does not matter
what happens for the future of Tibet after your life, as long as
you can keep your power now. It is really sad.’ (see Appendix
2)
In an interview in 1994, Jigme Rinpoche, a leading Kagyu lama,

made the following comments on the Karmapa situation:
‘... in my opinion a mistake was made right at the beginning,
there were miscalculations, control was lost and it was neces-
sary to go that way … The mistakes were not just made now
but centuries ago, and led to the loss of the country. Many
210
people in the West think that everybody in Tibet was wise,

and they wonder why Tibetans lost Tibet. But when one looks
objectively one finds that mistakes like those led to the loss of
Tibet and will lead to the loss of the freedom of Tibet in the
future. ...
‘If this continues, Tibet has only [a] few years left … The
16th Karmapa said something like that to Gendun Rinpoche.
He said, “You should go to Europe and establish the Dharma.”
Gendun Rinpoche asked Karmapa what will happen in Tibet
and Asia, and Karmapa said, “Only the outer form of Dharma
will continue to exist there, and it will be very difficult in the
future to maintain its essence.” ’286
When other Tibetans achieve fame or influence the Dalai Lama
destroys their reputations, their security and even sometimes their
lives, acting with political motivations of jealousy and clinging
to power. This is what he did to the Panchen Lama, to Dudjom
Rinpoche, to Gungtang Tsultrim, even to his own Spiritual Guide
Trijang Rinpoche, and his Spiritual Guide Je Phabongkha Rinpoche.
This is what he did to the Karmapa and what he is trying to do to the
few holy spiritual masters who are left within the Gelugpa Tradition
today.
The Politics of the Kalachakra Initiations
On this subject the Mongoose-Canine Letter says:

‘Normally the Kalachakra initiation is not given in public. Then
you [Dalai Lama] started to use it continuously in a big way
for your politics … Nowadays you have given the Kalachakra
initiation so many times you have made the Tibetan people
into donkeys. You can force them to go here and there as you
like.’ (see Appendix 2)
When people receive a Tantric Buddhist initiation or empower-
ment they are encouraged to establish a close connection with the
person giving the initiation. It has been said that the main reason
211
a great deception
for the Dalai Lama giving so many Kalachakra initiations in the West
is to create many western disciples as a powerful basis of support
for his political actions – such as the ban on the practice of Dorje
Shugden.
According to some sources, in the past Kalachakra initiations were
mainly given by those holding the Panchen Lama’s position, and that
this is because of a special connection, the Panchen Lama being a
manifestation of Shambhala’s god-king. Gradually the Fourteenth
Dalai Lama has taken over this position, until finally now no other
lama has the opportunity to give the Kalachakra initiation in public.
For the Dalai Lama, giving the Kalachakra empowerment is the best
method to make money, to control people through spiritual devo-
tion, and to spread his reputation. In this way he can use people’s
religious faith to fulfil his political aims. It is shameful that Buddha’s
precious teachings of Highest Yoga Tantra are being used for such
worldly achievements.
Defamation of Je Phabongkhapa
Je Phabongkhapa, or Phabongkha Rinpoche, (1878-1941) ‘was one

of the great lamas of the twentieth century. He attained his geshe
degree at Sera Monastic University, Lhasa, and became a highly
influential teacher in Tibet. He was the root Guru of both tutors
of the present Dalai Lama, and the teacher of many of the other
Gelug lamas who have been bringing the Dharma to the West since
they fled Tibet in 1959.’287
But the Fourteenth Dalai Lama now defames this great Teacher.
As recently as 27 March 2006 the Dalai Lama implied that Je
Phabongkhapa developed a sectarian bias due to his association with
Dorje Shugden:
‘In the case of Kyabje Pabongkha Rinpoche, he was, in the
earlier part of his life, a practitioner of ecumenical faith.
Gradually, he developed a relationship with Dholgyal. Need
I say more?’288
212
But the Dalai Lama gives no evidence for saying that Je Phabongkhapa
was sectarian later in his life.
On another occasion the Dalai Lama said that although ‘Kyabje
Phabongkha Rinpoche was really an incredibly great master. ... virtu-
ally the supreme holder of the Stages of the Path (Lam rim) and
Mind Training (Lo jong) traditions’ and ‘was a highly realized being’,
that nevertheless ‘with regard to Dholgyal [Dorje Shugden] he seems
to have made mistakes.’289
The following account illustrates the low esteem in which Je
Phabongkhapa is held within certain sections of the Gelugpa
Tradition as a result of the Dalai Lama’s defamation. In August
2009 there was a Rigchung degree ceremony (for those who have
successfully completed their study of the Perfection of Wisdom Sutra)
held at Sera-Mey Monastery in South India. During the ceremony
for a monk from the Gungru Khamtsen section of the monas-
tery, the disciplinarian of the monastery Geshe Ngawang Yonten
publicly read out the ‘refuge letter’ (in which a patron writes the
names of his family and spiritual masters for blessing by the
assembled monks). The refuge letter included the names of Kyabje
Phabongkha Rinpoche and Drana Rinpoche (another prominent
Dorje Shugden practitioner).
After the ceremony the disciplinarian received phone calls from
monks complaining about his reading out the names of these two
Lamas. The next day in the assembly hall, the disciplinarian apologised:
‘I didn’t get any prior notice before reading the letter. The person who
wrote the names has accumulated negativity, as I did for reading it [the
letter]. Therefore we should purify our sin by offering katag [traditional
Tibetan offering scarf] to the Protector Thawo. These Lamas did not
sign and pledge that they will never worship Shugden, and we will
never share material and religious ties with Shugden followers.’
During the Thirteenth Dalai Lama’s time, Je Phabongkhapa was
the most famous and influential Lama who engaged practically in
spreading the doctrine of Je Tsongkhapa throughout Tibet. He
was greatly influential in reviving the Gelug Tradition at this time,
emphasising the practical application of Buddha’s teachings instead
of just scholastic knowledge, and he was the lama most involved in
213
a great deception
promoting the practice of Dorje Shugden. Because of this, detrac-

tors of this practice such as the present Dalai Lama have tried either
to maintain that Je Phabongkhapa rejected the practice of Dorje
Shugden towards the end of his life, or to smear him with the accu-
sation of being sectarian and of promoting Dorje Shugden practice
as a way of damaging other Buddhist traditions.
There may be another reason for the present Dalai Lama’s defam-
ation of Je Phabongkhapa. As Goldstein says ‘Phabongka was famous
for his view that lamas should not become involved in politics ...’290,
which is not an attitude the Dalai Lama can accept, especially from
such an important figure within the Gelug Tradition.
With regard to the many rumours being circulated about Je
Phabongkhapa rejecting the Nyingma Tradition, Geshe Kelsang
Gyatso commented:
‘When I lived in Tibet I checked very carefully with local
Geshes about the truth or falsity of these assertions. I under-
stood that when Je Phabongkhapa visited eastern Tibet (Kham)
and gave teachings there, many people came to his teachings.
He was widely respected and received a lot of devotion from
many people, but at the same time some local people jealous
of his success spread rumours, saying that he caused the statue
of Padmasambhava to be destroyed and so forth.
It is so sad that people are now using this rumour to destroy
the reputation of this precious Lama. It is a clear indication
that these are spiritually degenerate times. Je Phabongkhapa
had great devotion for Je Tsongkhapa. Je Tsongkhapa praised
Padmasambhava, so it is impossible for Je Phabongkhapa to
show disrespect for Padmasambhava, impossible.’291
There are a number of personal accounts of Je Phabongkhapa that
testify to his enormous spiritual power and his ability to turn people’s
minds towards spiritual practice. Geshe Lobsang Tharchin, who was
for fifteen years abbot of Rashi Gempil Ling, a Kalmuck Mongolian
temple in New Jersey, USA, and founder of the Mahayana Sutra
and Tantra Centers, recalls attending Lamrim teachings given by Je
Phabongkhapa:
214
‘Like so many others in the audience, I was stunned by the

power of his teaching. Most of it I had heard before, but the
way in which he taught it and, I felt, the blessing I had received
from him made it suddenly strike home for me. Here I was,
living the short precious life of a human, and fortunate enough
to be a student at one of the greatest Buddhist monasteries in
the world. Why was I wasting my time? What would happen
if I suddenly died?’
Geshe Tharchin remembers a Tibetan nobleman who held a
‘powerful position equivalent to Minister of Defense’ attending Je
Phabongkhapa’s teachings, showing up in his:
‘... best finery … decked out in silk, his long hair flowing
… A great ceremonial sword hung from his belt, clanging
importantly as he swaggered in. … By the end of the first
section of the teaching he was seen leaving the hall quietly,
deep in thought—he had wrapped his weapon of war in a
cloth to hide it, and was taking it home. … finally one day he
threw himself before the Rinpoche and asked to be granted
the special lifetime religious vows for laymen. Thereafter he
always followed Pabongka Rinpoche around, to every public
teaching he gave.’292
In his autobiography Khyongla Rato, founder of the Tibet Center
in New York, writes that Tibetans referred to Khangser Rinpoche
and Phabongka Rinpoche respectively as ‘the Sun’ and ‘the Moon’.
He also writes of the tremendous power of Je Phabongkhapa’s
teachings:
‘During that summer session several traders and at least two
high government officials found their lives transformed by his
eloquence: they forsook their jobs to study religion and to give
themselves to meditation.’
Khyongla Rato requested and received full ordination from
Je Phabongkhapa and would often pray ‘… that like Pabongka
Rinpoche, I might learn to help people by teaching, writing, and
discussion.’293
215
a great deception
In a short account about his life, Rilbur Rinpoche says:

‘That was the time of the great lama Pabongka Dorje Chang,
who was the most outstanding unsurpassable lama of that
time. It was him and nobody else. I’m not saying there weren’t
any lamas except Pabongka – there were Kyabje Kangsar
Rinpoche, Tatra Rinpoche, and many other great lamas – but
he became the principal teacher, the one who was giving con-
tinuous teachings.’294
And:
‘I have had some success as a scholar, and as a lama I am
somebody, but these things are not important. The only
thing that matters to me is that I was a disciple of Pabongka
Rinpoche.’295
None of these highly-respected teachers who knew Je
Phabongkhapa personally make mention of any sectarian bias
whatsoever. In an interview given in the FPMT Mandala magazine,
Mogchok Rinpoche, shortly after being appointed resident teacher
of the FPMT centre in Lavaur, France, said that his previous incar-
nation had first belonged to the Shangpa Kagyu tradition:
‘In my past life, Mogchok Rinpoche was a student of Kyabje
Pabongka Rinpoche; it was then that he changed to the Gelug
tradition. He received many initiations and teachings from
Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche.’
However, it is clear that Je Phabongkhapa did not put any sectar-
ian pressure on his new disciple. As the interview continues:
‘Q: Do you know why he chose to change tradition?
‘A: I think he found that the Gelugpa tradition contained
a lot of wisdom. But the previous Mogchok Rinpoche didn’t
abandon Shangpa Kagyu completely, he practiced according
to that tradition as well.’296
Je Phabongkha’s spiritual influence – over government ministers
and even lamas from other traditions – was undoubtedly a source
216
of jealousy. As a Gelugpa lama he was responsible for promoting

the pure teachings of Je Tsongkhapa, but there is no evidence of
him acting out of sectarianism, or in any way that was damaging
to other traditions. The claims made by the present Dalai Lama are
completely false.
The Dalai Lama’s involvement with the CIA

and the Tibetan Guerrillas
Of all the lies that surround the Dalai Lama, surely the greatest is
that he is a champion of non-violence. This aspect of the image that
he likes to portray of himself and with which he has mesmerised
the media and much of the world is actually just another part of the
myth.
The truth of the matter is that from the mid-1950s through to
the mid-1970s there was an active and violent Tibetan resistance
movement that was funded by the CIA.297 Even the Dalai Lama’s
notorious brother Gyalo Dondrup, who was the principal link
between the Tibetan guerrillas and the CIA, called this ‘a very dirty
business’.298 The question is, how involved was the Dalai Lama in this
‘very dirty business’?
In 1974, the Dalai Lama claimed: ‘The accusation of CIA aid
has no truth behind it’.299 But gradually as more and more US State
Department documents have been declassified he has been forced
to admit the truth.
In 1999, discussing the early CIA operations involving his peo-
ple, he said: ‘They gave the impression that once I arrived in India,
great support would come from the United States.’300 The CIA
provided $1.7 million dollars annually to train and support the guer-
rillas, including setting up training camps in the US (Camp Hale,
Colorado) and elsewhere, flying the guerrillas there and parachut-
ing them back into Tibet, and providing weapons, equipment and
intelligence.301 The Dalai Lama himself received $180,000 annually
to maintain himself in India, a grant for which he did not have to
account.302
217
a great deception
The reason for the Dalai Lama’s expectations could well be the
letter sent to him by the United States ambassador to India, Loy
Henderson, in 1951. Henderson was passing on a message from the
State department that said, amongst other things:
‘The United States ... is prepared to support resistance now
and in the future against Communist aggression in Tibet, and
to provide such material aid as may be feasible.’303
Indeed, as CIA documents uncovered under the Freedom of
Information Act reveal, when the Dalai Lama did finally flee Tibet
one of the first messages sent to Americans demanded an air-drop of
substantial quantities of weapons:
‘Please inform the world about the suffering of the Tibetan
people. To make us free from the misery of the Chinese
Communist operations [you] must help us as soon as possible
and send us weapons for 30,000 men by airplane.’304
The Dalai Lama has tried to conceal the level of the CIA’s
involvement in Tibet and his own involvement with the CIA.
Thomas Laird recounts how the Dalai Lama was apprehensive
when he explained that he was to publish a book revealing when
CIA activity began in Tibet:
‘The Dalai Lama worried aloud to me when I interviewed him
for this book. He wondered if revealing the covert American
presence in Tibet in 1950 would give the Chinese some excuse
for their invasion. After all, when China invaded Tibet in 1950
it said its motivating reason was to halt the imperialist plots of
American agents in Tibet. At the time, America denied that
there were any American agents in Tibet prior to the inva-
sion. Until now that denial has stood unchallenged. This book
proves, for the first time, not only that there were Americans
in Tibet, but that several agents, in and out of Tibet, worked
actively to send military aid to the Tibetans prior to the Chinese
invasion. It proves that the highest levels of the US govern-
ment were involved in that planning – despite government
denials ever since.’305
218
The Dalai Lama’s military intrigues are not limited to the CIA.
In 1962, some of the Tibetan guerrillas became part of the Indian
Army’s Special Frontier Forces with the intention that they would
be dropped into Tibet to fight the Chinese. However the Indian
Army instead deployed them to fight the war in East Pakistan. As the
official website of the Tibetan guerrillas declares:
‘The SFF never had a chance of being used in operations

against its intended enemy, Red China, but it was used against
East Pakistan with the consent of His Holiness the Dalai Lama
in 1971.’306
Having been forced out of Tibet, the guerrillas set themselves

up in Mustang, across the border in Nepal. For some time the
Nepalese tolerated them ‘because it was the wish of the Dalai
Lama’.307 But the guerrillas’ continued attacks on the Chinese
army put greater and greater strain on the Nepalese government’s
relationship with China, and eventually the Nepalese government
decided to wipe out the guerrillas. Finally, in 1974, the Dalai Lama
sent a recorded message to the guerrillas instructing them to sur-
render to the Nepalese.308
The CIA had previously ordered the guerrillas to stop their
offensives against the Chinese, but they had ignored their US com-
manders.309 However, as soon as the Dalai Lama gave them the
order, all but a handful handed over their weapons.310 If the Dalai
Lama really wanted non-violent resistance, why did he wait until
1974 to give his message to the guerrillas – after nearly two decades
of fighting during which thousands of Tibetans and Chinese had
died in violent combat?
The Attempted Coup in Bhutan
A serious problem (not mentioned in the Mongoose-Canine Letter)

that emerged in the early 1970s was the ‘so-called Tibetan con-
spiracy organised by the Dalai Lama’s brother’ [Gyalo Dondrub or
Thondup] to overthrow the government of Bhutan.311
219
a great deception
Between four and six thousand Tibetan refugees chose to settle

in this tiny country, which is geographically similar and ethnically
and culturally related to Tibet. At first these Tibetans were warmly
received, but in 1973 more than thirty people, twenty-two of them
prominent Tibetan refugees, were arrested by the Bhutanese authori-
ties in response to an alleged plot to assassinate the young Bhutanese
king, just months before his official coronation. Among those
arrested was the Dalai Lama’s personal representative in Bhutan,
Lhading.312
Derek Davies, reporting in the Far Eastern Economic Review, writes
that behind the group that planned the assassination:
‘ …is alleged to be the sinister figure of the Dalai Lama’s

brother, Gyalo Thondup, who runs a well-funded Tibetan
refugee group in Darjeeling, India. It is reliably reported that
the group mounts raids across the Himalayan valleys via Sikkim
into the Chinese province of Tibet.’313
With the involvement of both Gyalo Dondrub and the Dalai

Lama’s own personal representative in this attempted coup, is it not
reasonable to ask what role did the Dalai Lama himself play in it?
The Tibetan Arms Trade
Other problems mentioned in the Mongoose-Canine Letter include

the Tibetan government dividing the Tibetan guerrilla fighters in
Mustang against themselves, which ultimately led to their destruction;
and the role played by the Dalai Lama’s brother, Gyalo Dondrub, in
illegal arms trading carried on by exile Tibetans between Taiwan,
Pakistan and Burma. It is said that Losang Gyatso, the senior lama
of the three monks who were murdered in Dharamsala in February
1997, had just returned from Taiwan carrying a very large amount
of cash from one such arms sale, and that this money was a possible
motive for the murders.
220
The Hypocrisy over Taiwan
After the People’s Liberation Army of communist China entered

Tibet and the Dalai Lama made his journey into exile in 1959, any
Tibetan having ties with China was considered a traitor.314 This view
was not confined only to those who dealt with the People’s Republic
of China (‘PRC’) but even to those who had association with the
Republic of China (‘ROC’, that is, Taiwan).315
The Dalai Lama banned Tibetans from travelling to Taiwan.
Those who wished to take up opportunities to study or work in
Taiwan therefore had to circumvent this ban. Some obtained forged
passports through Nepal, putting themselves at great personal risk
and becoming illegal citizens abroad.316 But the ROC (Taiwan) was
itself in conflict with the PRC, so why did the Dalai Lama adopt
this extreme view in the first place?
Not only was the ROC the sworn enemy of the PRC, but it
was actively involved in supporting the Tibetan guerrillas in their
fight against the PRC, supplying them with weapons and provid-
ing training.317 The Dalai Lama’s brother Gyalo Dondrub – the
so-called ‘spymaster of Lhasa’318 – was good friends with General
Chiang Kai-Shek,319 the first leader of the ROC, and had married
a daughter of one of Chiang Kai-Shek’s senior generals.320 Given
that they were allies with close connections at the highest levels of
government, why were ordinary Tibetans not allowed to associate
with the ROC in Taiwan?
A clue may come from the Dalai Lama’s own official visits to
Taiwan. According to reports the Dalai Lama’s visit in 1997 raised
NT$17 million (New Taiwan dollars) in donations, and his next
visit a further NT$15 million.321 Who knows how much money
had previously reached the Dalai Lama’s coffers from this wealthy
nation? With no competition to their fundraising efforts, for years
the vast wealth of the ROC in Taiwan could be exclusively tapped
by the Dalai Lama’s family. No other Tibetan could gain access to
this wealth without having their reputation destroyed by the Tibetan
exile government.
221
a great deception
The Dalai Lama’s fascination with war and Nazism
Renowned as a champion of non-violence, the Dalai Lama revealed

a shocking side to himself in an interview with the New York Times
in 1993:
‘Dalai Lama: War – without an army, killing as few people as
possible – is acceptable ...
‘New York Times: Did you say that killing sometimes is
acceptable?
‘Dalai Lama: Comparatively.’322
Later in the interview, he is asked what he does to relax. The reply
is astonishing.
‘Dalai Lama: 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. ... I
find many of the machines of violence very attractive. Tanks,
airplanes, warships, especially aircraft carriers. And the German
U-boats, submarines. . . .’323
The Dalai Lama had plenty of opportunity to find out about the
military machinery of the Nazi regime; as a child he was under the
tutelage of Heinrich Harrer – a former sergeant in the SS, Hitler’s
most loyal soldiers – who for some years in Tibet before the Chinese
occupation taught the young Dalai Lama about the outside world.324
Heinrich Harrer enjoyed the fame his book Seven Years in Tibet gave
him but concealed his Nazi past. When Disney made a film version
of the book, journalists uncovered his dark secrets. Harrer played
down his role in the SS, but Gerald Lehner’s book Between Hitler and
the Himalayas: Heinrich Harrer’s Memory Lapses provides a much more
complete version of events.325
Indeed throughout his life the Dalai Lama has had close associa-
tions with many Nazis, including Bruno Beger, who was convicted
for his ‘scientific research’ at Auschwitz;326 and Miguel Serrano, head
of the Nazi Party in Chile and the author of several books that
elevate Hitler to a god-like status.327
222
Despite his supposed omniscience, the Dalai Lama could be for-

given for not knowing the perverted views of these people when he
first met them, as each tried to hide their dark pasts. But even once
they had been exposed, the Dalai Lama didn’t distance himself from
them or their views.
For example, while working as a Chilean ambassador, Miguel
Serrano kept silent about his view of Hitler as a god on earth, but
even after he published books expounding his views in 1978, the
Dalai Lama maintained a close personal friendship, having private
meetings with him in 1984 and 1992.328
In 2006 and 2007, the Dalai Lama publicly gave Jorg Haider his
blessings with a ceremonial white scarf (Katag). Haider had been the
leader of the Far-Right Austrian Freedom Party (FPÖ), and known
for publicly airing his appreciation of the policies of Nazi Germany.
So much so that when his party was brought in to form a coalition
government in Austria the European Union imposed a diplomatic
boycott on Austria because of the FPÖ’s extreme views.329
So, how deep does the Dalai Lama’s appreciation of the Nazi
regime go? The German Stern magazine reports some comments he
made at a teaching in Nuremberg (the site of the major Nazi party
rallies in the 1930s) in 2008:
‘The Dalai Lama greeted the crowds with his lovely child-like
waving of hands. But his speech in the town hall made people
gasp, ...
‘He recalled seeing Nuremberg on photographs when he
was still a child. “Very attractive” with “generals and weapons”
and with “Adolf Hitler and Hermann Goering”.
‘Some of the listeners seemed to be embarrassed, some
were “alienated for a second”. Nuremberg’s chief mayor Ulrich
Maly called it a “moment of shock”.’330
Stern reflected that:
‘... the Tibetan court used to have close ties with the Nazi
regime, SS-expeditions were welcomed to Lhasa with full
mark of respect. To this day, His Holiness has never distanced
himself from these inglorious relationships.’331
223
a great deception
The Friendship with Shoko Asahara
Shoko Asahara, the leader of the Japanese AUM Cult, claimed

to have attained enlightenment in the Himalayas in 1986. In the
following year he visited the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, the first of
at least five such meetings.332 Russell Skelton reporting in the Sydney
Morning Herald writes that:
‘... [Asahara] repeatedly claimed the Dalai Lama gave him a
divine mission to spread “real Buddhism” in Japan. He said
the Tibetan leader had told him he was ideal for the mission
because he had the “mind of a Buddha”.’333
According to the Dalai Lama’s representative in Japan, Karma
Gelek Yuthok, Asahara made financial donations to the Dalai Lama
from 1988 onwards. Over the next four years these were to amount
to over $2 million, in an attempt to win over the Dalai Lama’s ‘favor
and endorsement’.334
It is clear that Asahara’s financial largesse to the Tibetan cause
was successful. The Dalai Lama helped Asahara by writing letters of
‘recommendation guaranteeing that Aum Shinrikyo was a sect that
raised public awareness through religion and social activity and
promoted social kindness through religious teaching and yoga exer-
cises.’ As the German magazine Focus also comments, the Dalai Lama
‘served as Shoko’s guarantor for tax-exemption while Shoko used
tax-exempt funds to produce lethal gases.’335
Russell Skelton also says, ‘Posters depicting Asahara and the Dalai
Lama and carrying the Tibetan leader’s endorsement were used
extensively in cult promotions.’336 It is also clear that in the minds
of many Japanese the Dalai Lama’s endorsement was a powerful
incentive to believe in Asahara.
The Dalai Lama visited Tokyo a month after the cult released
lethal gas into the city’s subway system. Shoko Asahara was standing
trial for the attack that killed twelve people and left nearly 5,500
suffering the effects of sarin nerve gas.337 He was also facing seven-
teen further charges of murder, attempted murder, abduction and
the production of illegal chemical and biological weapons. At that
224
time the Dalai Lama said of Asahara, ‘I consider him as my friend,

but not necessarily a perfect one.’338
As mentioned earlier, Palden Gyal writing in Tibetan News spoke
of this scandal in relation to freedom of the press within the Tibetan
community:
‘In May 1995, [the only independent Tibetan newspaper,
Democracy] published a piece about Shoko Asahara, the Japanese
cult leader, highlighting the fact that he had been friends with
the Dalai Lama before being accused of killing eleven [sic]
people in a nerve gas attack on the Tokyo Subway. The article
suggested that perhaps the government should be careful
about who it conducted relations with in the future. Not long
after that, in March 1996, the newspaper ceased publication.’339
Incitements to Murder
In August 1996, a group calling itself ‘The Secret Society of

Eliminators of the External and Internal Enemies of Tibet’ made
public its death threats against the two young incarnations of highly
realized Tibetan masters:
‘Anyone who goes against the policy of the government must
be singled out, opposed and given the death penalty ... As for
the reincarnations of Trijang [the Dalai Lama’s own Spiritual
Guide] and Zong Rinpoche [another great Tibetan spiritual
master of the Gelug Tradition], if they do not stop practising
Dolgyal and continue to contradict the word of H.H. the
Dalai Lama, not only will we not be able to respect them,
but their life activities will suffer destruction. This is our first
warning.’340
These two young incarnate lamas were subsequently forced into
hiding.
In an interview with the Dalai Lama appearing in the November
1997 issue of the American magazine Mother Jones, Robert Thurman
asked the Dalai Lama:
225
a great deception
‘The loss of your own nation to China has been used as an

example of the futility of non-violence and tolerance. When
is something worth fighting for?’
In his reply 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
ten enemies to be eliminated—if there was no other way.’341
Following the Dalai Lama’s words ‘for one or ten enemies to be
eliminated’, and mistakenly believing that Shugden practitioners
worked with the Chinese authorities, in February 1998 posters of
the ‘Ten Most Hated Enemies of the Dalai Lama and Tibet’ were
circulated throughout Tibetan settlements in India and Nepal.
Prepared by the Research and Analysis Wing of the Department of
Security of the Tibetan exile government, they were complete with
photographs and biographical information, and encouraged Tibetan
people to kill these ten innocent Dorje Shugden practitioners. Since
first published, this list has been distributed to Tibetan communities
throughout the world.
The ten individuals listed included highly respected spiritual mas-
ters, both in the Tibetan settlements and in the West, and they had
been so identified only because they openly encourage the practice
of Dorje Shugden.342
The individuals identified in the posters were listed in the follow-
ing order:
1. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso Rinpoche [Founder and Spiritual
Director of the New Kadampa Tradition – International
Kadampa Buddhist Union, which has over 1,200 Buddhist
Centres and branches worldwide. He is the author of twenty
one authoritative and highly acclaimed books on Buddhism
covering every aspect of the path to enlightenment.]
226
2. Geshe Dragpa Gyaltsen (Chime Tsering) [General Secretary

of the Dorje Shugden Society in Delhi, India].
3. Lama Gangchen Tulku Trinlay Yorphel Rinpoche [Spiritual
Director of Gangchen Kunphen Ling Buddhist centres
throughout the world].
4. Gen Chatring Jampel Yeshe [President of the Dorje Shugden
Society in Delhi, India].
5. Lama Serkong Tritul Rinpoche [Abbot of the Gelugpa
Buddhist Centre in Singapore and of the Chinese Gelugpa
Society in Taiwan].
6. Tseten Gyurme [a well known supporter of Dorje Shugden
practitioners].
7. Tenzin Chodak [a Dorje Shugden practitioner living in
the UK, who spoke out against the ban at demonstrations in
London in 1996].
8. Dr. Losang Thubten [a scholar who advises the Dorje
Shugden Society, and who had already been attacked and
severely injured on November 7th 1996].
9. Geshe Konchog Gyaltsen [Vice-President of the Dorje
Shugden Society in Delhi, India].
10. Kundeling Lama Losang Yeshe Rinpoche [Abbot and
Founder of Atisha Charitable Trust and Monastery in
Bangalore, India and Spiritual Director of Buddhist centres
in Italy and the Netherlands].
With regard to this issue, the Western Shugden Society holds that
by publishing this list the Dalai Lama and his ministers have given
explicit encouragement to Tibetan people to kill the ‘one or ten
enemies’ listed; and declares that if in the future any of these ten
people is killed then the Western Shugden Society will automatically
recognize the principal perpetrator to be the Dalai Lama himself
and will pursue necessary investigative and legal action to ensure his
eventual conviction under criminal law.
227
a great deception
How did the Dalai Lama achieve the

Nobel Peace Prize?
In December 1989 the Fourteenth Dalai Lama was awarded the

Nobel Peace Prize. Having been awarded to terrorists and war-
makers before, the Nobel Peace Prize is no stranger to controversy
– even Hitler, Mussolini and Stalin are among previous nominees
for the prize!343 In his presentation speech to the Fourteenth Dalai
Lama, Egil Aarvik said:
‘This year’s Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded ... first and
foremost for his consistent resistance to the use of violence in
his people’s struggle to regain their liberty. ...
‘This is by no means the first community of exiles in the
world, but it is assuredly the first and only one that has not set
up any militant liberation movement.’344
Was he unaware that the Dalai Lama had spoken since 1961
of the Tibetan guerrillas who were waging war on the People’s
Liberation Army?345 Had he not read any of the accounts of the
Tibetan guerrilla war that were in wide circulation, such as Jamyang
Norbu’s Warriors of Tibet – a book commissioned by the Tibetan
exile government itself ?346
Given that Tibetan ‘non-violence’ is merely a facade, why was the
Dalai Lama awarded the prize? Tom Grunfeld says:
‘Everything having to do with Tibet is subject to mythologiz-

ing. That the Dalai Lama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize
for his efforts on behalf of Tibetan independence is one of
these myths.’347
According to the New York Times, the prize was awarded to the Dalai
Lama ‘largely because of the brutal suppression of the democracy
movement in China and the international outrage that followed.’348 A
source close to the Norwegian Nobel Committee revealed:
‘the choice of the Dalai Lama, was an attempt both to influ-
ence events in China and to recognize the efforts of student
228
leaders of the [Chinese] democracy movement, which was

crushed by Chinese troops in June.’349
In addition to criticising the Chinese by implication, awarding the

prize to the Dalai Lama was an explicit attempt by the committee to
atone for what is widely considered to be its greatest embarrassment:
failing to award Mahatma Gandhi the Nobel Peace Prize, despite
his having been nominated five times!350 As Egil Aarvik said in the
presentation speech:
‘The Dalai Lama likes to consider himself one of Gandhi’s

successors. People have occasionally wondered why Gandhi
himself was never awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, and the
present Nobel Committee can with impunity share this sur-
prise, while regarding this year’s award of the prize as in part a
tribute to the memory of Mahatma Gandhi.’351
The Nobel Peace Prize is considered by some to be the easiest

Nobel Prize to win because no actual achievement needs to be
demonstrated. What the Dalai Lama has clearly achieved, though, is
to deceive the world utterly as to his real nature and intentions. By
awarding him the Peace Prize the Nobel Committee has helped him
to continue to dupe the world.
229
Chapter 13
Judging the Dalai Lama by his Actions
What has the Dalai Lama achieved?
The Fourteenth Dalai Lama moves with impunity through his many
roles as politician and religious leader. When he does something
wrong as a politician, he is excused as a religious leader; and when he
does something wrong as a religious leader, he is excused as needing
to act as a politician. It seems that no one can ‘pin him down’; no one
can blame him for anything and he is able to get away with whatever
he likes.
With a role for every occasion – holy man, politician, international
statesman, simple monk, pop icon, Buddhist Pope, socialist, movie
star, autocrat, democrat, Marxist, humanitarian, environmentalist,
Nobel Peace prize winner, nationalist, Buddha of Compassion,
communist, God-King – the Dalai Lama weaves a complex web of
religion and politics that entraps his audiences wherever he goes.
Nobody has ever seen anything like it. People are easily swayed by
the historical mystique of Tibet and its ‘God-King’, and feel capti-
vated and convinced by his charm.
Wearing the robes of a monk and using the Buddha’s profound
words, the Dalai Lama has presumed to teach the world how to
accomplish all of the things that he has in fact failed to achieve him-
self. Through words alone, and a vast and very expensive publicity
machine, the Dalai Lama has established for himself the position of
a ‘God-King’ in the minds of most people of the world. But behind
the rhetoric, the public image and the charisma that has dazzled the
world is someone who has failed repeatedly.
231
a great deception
‘It’s not clear what practical benefit Tibetans in Tibet have

received from the Dalai Lama’s activities abroad, though.
Arguably, they have made their plight worse. The Dalai Lama’s
main achievement has been to turn himself into an interna-
tional celebrity, a status that ironically is dependent on the
continued subjugation of Tibet.’352
If we look behind the charisma, the antics and charm of the Dalai
Lama, behind the illusion and the calculated deception that he has
been working all these years for an independent Tibet, and we ask,
‘What has the Dalai Lama actually done for Tibet?’, the answer is
‘Nothing’. Actually it is worse than nothing, because he has given up
Tibet, he has lost Tibet totally.
If we ask, ‘What has the Dalai Lama done for world peace, for the
environment, for human rights and religious freedom?’, the things
he constantly talks about, the answer is again ‘Nothing’. We cannot
point to an acre of earth anywhere in the world that the Dalai Lama
has rescued from deforestation, strip-mining, exhaustive agriculture
or contamination. The Dalai Lama talks about world peace, human
rights and religious freedom, but except for the prizes and awards
he personally has received, we cannot point to a single achievement
in any of these areas that has been accomplished through his own
efforts. In fact, through his violation and abuse of human rights and
religious freedom he contributes directly to conflict and disharmony
in the world.
If we look behind the Dalai Lama’s attacks against so-called ‘fun-
damentalists’ and ‘sectarians’ we find to the contrary that he himself
is in fact destroying the peace, harmony and happiness of his own
faithful community, and of other Buddhist practitioners around the
world. If we look behind the Dalai Lama’s call for harmony and unity
among the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions, we find a plan through
which he is actually destroying the four traditions, thus securing for
himself a position of prime power and influence in the event of his
return to Tibet.
After so many years in exile, the Dalai Lama stands in the wake
of a series of international and domestic political failures that has
232
judging the dalai lama by his actions
produced deep crisis and division within the Tibetan exile commu-
nity and now threatens the Buddhist community worldwide. He has
created nothing but problems for the Tibetan people he claims to
represent including vicious discrimination against innocent religious
practitioners. In the international sphere, we see a political leader
who has been overwhelmed and marginalised, not so much by the
course of history but as a result of his own political views, misjudge-
ments and mistakes.
The Dalai Lama has not been able to do anything to reverse
Beijing’s integrationist policy in Tibet, the prospects for the exiled
Tibetans’ return to Tibet are as remote as ever, negotiations with
the Chinese are in deadlock, and there is no inclination amongst the
world’s governments to recognise Tibet as an independent state. The
Dalai Lama has become a world-famous figure, but has failed to gain
anything concrete for his people.
The Dalai Lama’s endorsement of Marxist ideas and praise of Mao
Zedong’s activities clearly shows that he does not like democracy or
wish to share his power with other people. On the other hand he
does not like the present Chinese government. In his own newspaper
Sheja he is always criticising the Chinese government, calling them
‘ten-dra China’, or ‘China, enemy of Buddha’s doctrine’.
The main reason why he continually criticises the Chinese is that
at present Tibet is controlled by the Chinese, and he wants to take
back the power and control for himself. For this reason he devised
a scheme: to regain his power and position he told the Chinese that
though he accepted the loss of Tibetan independence he neverthe-
less wanted autonomy, which would give him alone sole control of
Tibet.
He applied effort to achieve this for many years, but when he
finally realized that his scheme was not working and that the Chinese
would not fulfil his wishes he became frustrated and began organ-
ising international demonstrations whose violent nature disturbed
people in many countries. Through this we can see the Dalai Lama’s
hypocritical behaviour and selfish nature: he is not concerned with
the future of Tibet but only with his own position and power. He
received the Nobel Peace Prize, apparently indicating that he is a
233
a great deception
peacemaker, but in truth he is a troublemaker who has destroyed

the hitherto unquestioned trust, peace and harmony within Tibetan
communities throughout the world.
As a direct result of the Dalai Lama’s disastrous domestic poli-
cies and inflammatory speech, the Tibetan community is deeply
and even violently divided against itself on an increasing number
of critical issues. These include: (1) the Dalai Lama’s unilateral deci-
sion to drop the aim of Tibetan independence, without consultation
with government or the Tibetan people; (2) his failure to fulfil his
avowed commitment to democratise the Tibetan government; (3)
his acquiescence in, or even instigation of, press censorship and the
repression of freedom of expression; (4) his ruthless suppression of
freedom of religion through banning the practice of Dorje Shugden;
and (5) his sanctioning or instigation of many violations and abuses
of human rights, including threats, coercion, intimidation, excom-
munication, physical violence and even murder.
There are many causes of the Dalai Lama’s failures to achieve
anything substantial for the Tibetan people, including his own
political-ideological views and attitudes, his incompetence as ‘head
of state’, the dubious role played by the Nechung oracle and the
participation of the Dalai Lama’s immediate family in the generation
and execution of government policy.
But the fundamental factor underlying the present crisis lies
within the very nature and function of the Dalai Lama’s Tibetan
government as a feudal theocratic system – with its endemic mixing
of religion and politics, its translation of religious ideas into govern-
ment policy, its deep confusion over the roles of religious leader and
head of state, and its retrogressive view of the position of the Dalai
Lama as the ‘God-King’ of Tibet.
After fifty years, we do not see in this Dalai Lama a ‘God-King’, a
saviour, or even a wise statesman skilfully shaping the destiny of his
country and its people through a difficult time. What we see instead
is a desperate and cynically self-seeking man who has precipitated the
greatest catastrophe in Tibetan history.
With these points in mind, we should note John Goetz’s remark in
the conclusion of his article, ‘On the Outs with the Dalai Lama’:
234
‘The tragedy of Tibet is not only the brutal Chinese occupation

but also the desperation that has led so many to believe that
return to the Dalai Lama is the only alternative.’353
‘Free Tibet’ - Where has all the Money Gone?
For decades, support groups and organisations throughout the West

have been raising funds for a ‘Free Tibet’. From government dona-
tions to sale of buttons, bumper-stickers, bags and hats through
organising concerts, dinners and exhibitions; and through every
other imaginable fund-raising device, these organisations continue
to raise a vast amount of money for what most western benefactors
believe is the goal of a free, independent Tibet.
In his article Selling Tibet to the World printed on 5 June 2008,
Michael Backman reported:
‘GUCCI, iPod, Facebook, Tibet – these are among the world’s
hot brands, for which brand integrity is everything.
‘Tibet, as a brand, works particularly well. It brings in
millions, and Hollywood A-listers queue to endorse it. What’s
more, they do it for free. Creative director and brand chief
executive, the Dalai Lama, will visit Australia again next week.
He will preside over a five-day Tibetan prayer instruction
course in Sydney. A company has been set up to handle the
visit – Dalai Lama in Australia Limited.
‘Tickets for the event can be bought online even from The
Age’s own Box Office website along with tickets for Bjorn
Again and The Pink Floyd Experience. But few are as expen-
sive as the Dalai Lama experience, with tickets ranging from
$800 for front seats to $450 for seats at the back. Tickets for
good seats for the Sunday session alone are $248. Lunch is
extra – between $18 and $27 for a pre-ordered lunch box. A
clothing range has even been created. There are polo shirts,
baseball caps - even men’s muscle tees emblazoned with the
endless Buddhist knot. From street chic to urban cool, baby,
this monk has funk.
235
a great deception
‘Saving Tibet, like Saving Private Ryan, is a good earner.

Everyone’s into it, even China. Back in April, a factory in
China’s Guangdong province was exposed as one of the
manufacturers of the Free Tibet flags so prominent in the
anti-Olympic torch protests in Britain, France and the US. The
factory workers claimed they had no idea what the colourful
flags represented. Blame China’s state-controlled media for
that.’354
In addition, every Tibetan, whether male or female, infant,
infirm or old, and whether living in the East or West, is expected
to pay an ‘independence-tax’ to the Tibetan exile government. A
record of these payments is kept in the ‘Green Book’ that every
Tibetan is expected to carry. This book is essential for Tibetans
in India wanting a permit for travel outside India; and those who
do not pay lose benefits and services, and are often ostracised,
risking persecution and exile from their own community.355 The
Dalai Lama’s government also receives large donations from other
sources including national governments, private individuals of
many countries, philanthropic institutions, businesses and many
other types of organizations (including the Japanese Aum cult, as
already documented).
The funds collected from the ‘independence-tax’ and all these
other fund-raising activities are not used for the support or relief
of the Tibetan community. Most of the funds for the relief of
refugees, for the orphaned, for education, for medical care and hos-
pitals, are obtained directly from the Indian government, from the
major worldwide relief agencies, western governments and private
charitable trusts.356 This funding includes $1.7 million a year from the
United States CIA.357
In this regard Grunfeld says:
‘One of the major sources of political power for the Dalai
Lama is his ability to control relief funds, educational schol-
arships, and the hiring of Tibetan teachers and bureaucrats.
These powers only continue as long as there are many stateless
refugees. Consequently, it is to the benefit of the leadership to
236
keep Tibetans in children’s homes, transit camps and tempo-

rary facilities―not unlike the situation among the Palestinian
refugees.’358
There has been widespread corruption and mismanagement of
relief funds by the Tibetan administration.359 A case in point is the
nursery administered by the Dalai Lama’s late sister, Tsering Dolma.
Grunfeld notes:
‘ …while the children in her care were frequently on the verge
of starvation, she was noted for her formal twelve-course
luncheons. Meanwhile, in bitterly cold weather the children
were clad in thin, sleeveless cotton frocks―though when VIPs
visit the Upper Nursery, every child there is dressed warmly in
tweeds, wool, heavy socks, and strong boots.’360
The amount of money raised for the Tibetan causes over the
last few decades – which most contributors in the West have been
led to believe is for a free Tibet – probably runs into hundreds of
millions, if not billions, of dollars. If these funds are not being used
in the support or relief of the exiled Tibetan community, or for a
free, independent Tibet (because the Dalai Lama stopped aiming for
this as early as the 1980s), then what is this money being collected
for? How much money has been collected? And where is all this
money being kept? These are questions to which many benefactors,
including national governments around the world, should demand
answers.
The author, Michael Backman did ask these questions, and
reported:
‘Little is known about the government-in-exile’s finances. I did
contact its Department of Finance in Dharamsala with a series
of questions about how it funds itself and expenditure. I was
sent a series of spreadsheets in reply.
‘The government-in-exile claims that its total budget for
2002-03 amounted to the equivalent of US$22.028 million.
The budget was spent on various programs such as health,
education, religion and culture. The biggest item was for
237
a great deception
“political-related expenditure” at US$7 million. The next big-

gest was administration, which runs to US$4.5 million. Around
US$1.8 million was allocated to running the government-in-
exile’s offices of Tibet overseas.
‘For all that the government-in-exile claims to do, these
sums appear too low. Nor is it clear how donations enter its
budgeting. These are likely to run to many millions but there
is no explicit acknowledgment of them or their sources.’361
After making this report Michael Backman received anonymous

death threats.362
Who is the real Dalai Lama?
Who, after all, is the Dalai Lama, the mythical ‘God-King of

Shangri-la’? In the 1920s after her fifteen-year sojourn in Tibet, the
writer and explorer Alexandra ‘David-Néel’ wrote:
‘… these writers, men who not only had never set foot on
Tibetan soil but who possessed no reliable information as to its
inhabitants, have indulged in fables utterly without foundation.
Some represented the Dalai Lama as one who understood and
spoke every language on earth. Others peremptorily asserted
that he was the ‘pope’ of all Buddhists. Others again, spoke
of him as a magician usually engaged in working miracles of
the most fantastic nature, while some imagined his palace of
Potala to be a kind of ‘holy of holies’, inaccessible to the pro-
fane and peopled with supermen, hierophants, guardians of
dreaded mysteries. All of this is pure fancy. The Dalai Lama is
pre-eminently a temporal sovereign: the autocrat-monarch of
Tibet.’363
And as a journalist recently reported, the same fantastic notions of

the Dalai Lama still exist:
‘The state of denial in the West about some of the Dalai Lama’s
alleged power-tripping, or at least the unquestioning attitude
238
towards the Dalai Lama and everything that he does, highlights

the role that he plays for many Western celebs, commenta-
tors and politicians today: he’s a cartoon ‘good guy’, giggling,
pure and righteous, who apparently should be unconditionally
applauded for standing up to the ‘Evil Chinese’. All of the Dalai
Lama’s bad points – his origins in the stifling medievalism of
1930s Tibet; his archaic practices; his disregard for ‘concepts
like democracy and freedom of religion’; his backing from the
CIA in its Cold War with the Chinese – are simply ignored, as
His Holiness is invited to guest-edit French Vogue, attend char-
ity auctions with Sharon Stone, and rub shoulders with Richard
Gere. Pema shows me the Independent on Sunday, published the
day before we met, which has a feature about the Dalai Lama
‘charming the West’. There are around 12 photos showing him
meeting celebrities and other do-gooders. Yet in two of the
photos, it isn’t the Dalai Lama at all; it’s a different Lama. Maybe
these Tibetans all look the same to British picture editors.
‘ “He’s just a photograph and a symbol to many people in
the West”, says Pema.’364
For over 360 years, it has not been really certain which or for
that matter whether any of the occupants of the Potala, was a real
Dalai Lama, a real reincarnation of Gendun Drub, including the
present Dalai Lama. But whether or not the present Dalai Lama
is the real Dalai Lama – a true embodiment of Buddha’s compas-
sion – should be judged not on the Dalai Lama’s words or on the
mystique surrounding his position, but by his actions. And on the
evidence presented in this book the Dalai Lama’s actions have fallen
short of even ordinary standards of decent behaviour let alone the
enlightened actions of a Buddha.
Broadly speaking, this book has considered three kinds of actions
of the current Dalai Lama: (1) deceptive actions; (2) unethical or
non-virtuous actions; and (3) actions of violence and persecution.
Many of these actions constitute major or minor transgressions
of the Dalai Lama’s three sets of Buddhist vows (Pratimoksha,
Bodhisattva and Tantric). Because he has incurred root downfalls
239
a great deception
in all three sets, he has lost all three levels of ordination. As he has
broken his monastic vows, the Dalai Lama is actually no longer a
monk, although he continues to dress like one.
Examples of some of the Dalai Lama’s direct and indirect actions
are summarised below to illustrate each of the categories and
sub-categories.
Deceptive actions:
1. Advocating human rights and religious freedom, while engaged
in systematic violation and abuse of human rights and religious
freedom.
2. Advocating democratic government, values and principles,
while operating a repressive autocratic theocracy in Dharamsala
and holding a Marxist-communist ideology.
3. Deceiving Tibetan communities into thinking that he is work-
ing for a return to a free, independent Tibet, and collecting
an ‘independence-tax’ from every Tibetan for decades for the
purpose, having already unilaterally abandoned the idea of
Tibetan independence over fifteen years ago.
4. Deceiving the West into thinking that he is working for Tibetan
independence, and collecting vast sums of money through
‘Free Tibet’ concerts, banquets and other fund-raising sources
for this purpose.
5. Including deceptions and lies within his writings such as his
autobiography and the biographical film on his life, Kundun
(in which he played a major role in directing), specifically
concerning:
i. The nature of the Tibetan Rebellion as a popular
reaction of the masses against atrocities of the Chinese;
ii. His commitment to working with the Chinese in the
development of Tibet under communism, and the
extent of his support and advocacy of Chinese
communism;
iii. The extent of the killing of Tibetans by the Chinese,
and of their destruction of the Norbulingka Palace,
Potala and city of Lhasa at the time of his escape;
240
iv. The nature and organisation of the escape to India,

including which oracle was consulted before his escape
to India.
6. Lying and deceiving others as to the reasons for banning the
practice of Dorje Shugden, through numerous Tibetan exile
government statements, and for orchestrating a campaign of
propaganda and slander against Dorje Shugden practitioners.
7. Denying having imposed a ban on Dorje Shugden practice,
while at the same time ruthlessly implementing such a ban in
the lay and monastic Tibetan communities worldwide.
8. Claiming to be creating harmony, unity and non-sectarianism
within the four Tibetan Buddhist traditions, while actually
dividing Tibetan society, creating deep schisms within the four
traditions and systematically trying to destroy them.
9. Claiming to be the Fourteenth Dalai Lama and to be within
the lineage of the Fifth and Thirteen Dalai Lamas when
actually he is not.
Unethical or non-virtuous actions:

1. Complicity in actions of violence, slander, coercion and
intimidation.
2. Complicity in illegal arms trading; and in a conspiracy to over-
throw the government of Bhutan, that would have involved
assassination.
Actions of violence and persecution
The Fourteenth Dalai Lama’s activities of physical, verbal, social and
religious violence and persecution, carried out directly and indirectly,
by edict, threat, coercion and blackmail, by slander and propaganda,
by excommunication and banishment, have been well documented
above. Many of these actions, in addition to being the most serious
transgressions of the moral discipline of an ordained person, also
involve civil and constitutional illegalities. Most of them are also
gross abuses of human rights and religious freedom.
In these and many other ways, the Fourteenth Dalai Lama has
been deceiving the world, and causing suffering and problems.
241
a great deception
In democratic countries, Presidents and Prime Ministers are held

accountable for the actions of their ministers, their governments and
the politicians and political parties that support them. In the same
way the Dalai Lama bears direct or indirect responsibility for all of
these actions because they were carried out by him personally or on
his behalf. He, and he alone, should be held to account for these
actions and for their consequences.
242
APPENDIX 1
1959 Correspondence between the Dalai Lama

and General Tan Kuan-san
The release of the Hollywood movie Kundun in 1997 sparked fresh

interest in the uprising of March 1959 and the Dalai Lama’s epic
escape from Tibet. Speaking of these events, an article in George
Magazine says:
‘The operation was guided by CIA director Allen Dulles, whose

wartime experience with anti-Nazi resistance movements
inspired the Tibetan covert war. But the mission’s success
hinged upon a case officer ... [who] was still in his 30s when
he and Gyalo Thondup, one of the Dalai Lama’s brothers,
planned the spiritual leader’s flight.’365
To rally the people of Lhasa around the rebels, a rumour was

deliberately circulated that the Chinese were about to kidnap or even
kill their precious leader. The perfect opportunity to promote the
rumour arose because the Dalai Lama agreed to attend a theatrical
performance at the camp of the Chinese Military Command on a
specified date. Grunfeld comments on this invitation:
‘China ... emphatically denies that the Dalai Lama was coerced
in any way to set that date. Beijing has maintained, in fact, that
it was the Dalai [sic] who set the date and, indeed, had done so
one month earlier [italics by Grunfeld]. For years this claim was
roundly ridiculed as “communist lies and propaganda” until
Dawa Norbu publicly acknowledged that a former Tibetan
official had confided in him that the Chinese account was
correct. When confronted with this contradiction in 1981
243
a great deception
the Dalai Lama admitted that his original story was incorrect,
agreeing that he had selected the date several weeks prior to
the event.’366
At the time, the rumour that the Dalai Lama’s life was threat-
ened spread like wildfire. On 10 March 1959, between ten and
thirty thousand Tibetans, together with the entire Tibetan army,
converged on the Norbulingka – the 300-year-old summer palace
where the Dalai Lama was residing.367
The atmosphere was highly charged as the people assembled to
thwart the feared Chinese plot. A Tibetan monastic official who
arrived at the palace to defuse the situation was stoned to death.
After reassurances from the Dalai Lama that he would not visit the
camp of the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) the crowd partially
dispersed. However, that evening a meeting of rebel leaders and
seventy members of the Tibetan government was held outside
the palace to support a resolution declaring that Tibet no longer
recognized China’s authority, thus repudiating the ‘Seventeen-Point
Agreement’, and calling for the expulsion of the Chinese from
Tibet.368
The rebels posted guards around the palace and told ministers
they would not be allowed to leave. They also erected barricades
north of Lhasa on the main road to China. Realizing the incendiary
nature of their proclamation the Dalai Lama called a meeting with
the seventy rebel members of his government.369
‘He told them that General Tan had not compelled him to
accept his invitation [to the theatrical performance]. He had in
fact been consulted and given his consent before the invitation
was formally issued. He assured them he was in no personal
danger from the Chinese. They agreed it was impossible to
disobey his orders but ignored them just the same.’370
The image of a beleaguered Dalai Lama, a virtual prisoner of the
rebels, is reflected in a remarkable series of letters between him and
the Chinese General Tan Kuan-san. At first it was assumed that the
letters:
244
correspondence between dalai lama and general tan
‘... could not be anything but the cleverest of forgeries. This

rush to judgment caused considerable embarrassment when
China published photocopies of the letters, half of them in
the Dalai’s [sic] handwriting, whereupon the cleric was obliged
to verify their authenticity.371
After hearing that the Dalai Lama could not leave the Norbulingka
to attend the theatrical performance in the Chinese camp, the
Chinese commander wrote to him that day, March 10th:
‘Respected Dalai Lama,
‘It is very good indeed that you wanted to come to the
Military Area Command. You are heartily welcome. But since
the intrigues and provocations of the reactionaries have caused
you very great difficulties, it may be advisable that for the time
being you do not come.
‘Salutations and best regards,
‘Tan Kuan-san’372
The Dalai Lama replied on March 11th:
‘Dear Comrade Political Commissar Tan,
‘I intended to go to the Military Area Command to see the
theatrical performance yesterday, but I was unable to do so,
because of obstruction by people, lamas and laymen, who were
instigated by a few evil elements and who did not know the
facts; this has put me to indescribable shame. I am greatly
upset and worried and at a loss what to do. I was immediately
greatly delighted when your letter appeared before me―you
do not mind at all.
‘Reactionary, evil elements are carrying out activities endan-
gering me under the pretext of ensuring my safety. I am taking
measures to calm things down. In a few days, when the situ-
ation becomes stable, I will certainly meet you. If you have
any internal directives for me, please communicate them to
me frankly through this messenger.
‘The Dalai Lama,
‘written by my own hand.’373
245
a great deception
In response to the rebels putting up fortifications and posting

large numbers of guerrillas with machine guns along the national
highway, General Tan wrote to the Dalai Lama later that day, March
11th, explaining that the Chinese forces had asked the rebels to
withdraw from the highway immediately or face the consequences.374
In his reply dated March 12th the Dalai Lama wrote:
‘... The unlawful activities of the reactionary clique cause me

endless worry and sorrow. Yesterday I told the kasa [Kashag,
or Tibetan Cabinet] to order the immediate dissolution of
the illegal conference [of the underground Tibetan resistance
movement] and the immediate withdrawal of the reaction-
aries who arrogantly moved into the Norbulingka under the
pretext of protecting me. As to the incidents of yesterday and
the day before, which were brought about under the pretext
of ensuring my safety and have seriously estranged relations
between the Central People’s Government and the Local
Government, I am making every possible effort to deal with
them.’375
In his reply on March 15th General Tan wrote:
‘... We are very much concerned about your present situation

and safety. If you think it necessary and possible to extricate
yourself from your present dangerous position of being held
by the traitors, we cordially welcome you and your entourage to
come and stay for a short time in the Military Area Command.
We are willing to assume full responsibility for your safety. As
to what is the best course to follow, it is entirely up to you to
decide.’376
On March 16th the Dalai Lama wrote his third and last letter to
the General:
‘Dear Comrade Political Commissar Tan,

‘Your letter dated the 15th has just been received at three
o’clock. I am very glad that you are so concerned about my
safety and hereby express my thanks.
246
correspondence between dalai lama and general tan
‘The day before yesterday, the fifth day of the second month
according to the Tibetan calendar, I made a speech to more than
seventy representatives of the government officials, instructing
them from various angles, calling on them to consider present
and long-term interests and to calm down, otherwise my life
would be in danger. After these severe reproaches, things took
a slight turn for the better. Though the conditions here and
outside are still very difficult to handle at present, I am trying
tactfully to draw a line separating the progressive people among
the government officials from those opposing the revolution.
In a few days from now, when there are enough forces I can
trust, I shall make my way to the Military Area Command.
When that time comes, I shall first send you a letter. I request
you to adopt reliable measures. What are your views? Please
write me often.
‘The Dalai Lama’377
247
APPENDIX 2
The Mongoose-Canine Letter
This anonymous letter was given by Tibetan people to an English woman now
living in Italy while she was travelling in Nepal in September 1995. Much of
this information is widely known within the Tibetan Community in India and
Nepal.
This is a letter called the ‘Mongoose-Canine’ sent to H.H. Dalai
Lama.
‘Your Holiness, in 1959 your country was invaded by the com-
munist Chinese army. You and about 90,000 Tibetans had to flee
to India, Nepal and Bhutan. At that time you began to take the
main responsibility for Tibet. Looking at what happened from then
until now, Tibetan refugees have received aid from the Red Cross
and India. They were given land to settle down. The Tibetans have
survived and they have managed to become quite well off and have
a comfortable life.
‘Your Holiness, you are the one who established the exile govern-
ment. Therefore, I want to mention what has been going on under
your rule:
‘1. The problem of Dujom Rinpoche (the spiritual leader of the
Nyingma tradition) caused by the jealousy of your government: your
government made the Indian government accuse Dujom Rinpoche
of being a Chinese spy and have him arrested in 1963 in Siliguri, after
he had given an impressive religious teaching in Kalimpong.
‘2. The problem of thirteen Tibetan settlements uniting against
your exile government: In connection with the events regarding
Dujom Rinpoche and others, thirteen Tibetan settlements united
against your exile government in Dharamsala from 1964 until 1981.
249
a great deception
‘3. The problem of your government splitting the Tibetan guerrilla

fighters in Mustang. In fact, they were originally organised by your
government with the help of the CIA. In 1969, as a consequence of
Nixon’s policy with China, you provoked a fight among the Tibetan
guerrillas over their weapons. This fight finally destroyed them.
‘4. The problem of Mr. Alo Choedzoe connected with your eco-
nomics minister. Your government cheated Mr. Choedzoe’s factory.
‘5. The problem of your government assassinating (Mr.) Gongtang
(Tsultrim) in 1975. He was the leader of the thirteen groups.
‘6. The problem regarding the late Gyalwa Karmapa Rigpay Dorje
(the spiritual leader of the Kagyu tradition) because of his influence
and the fact that the thirteen groups had appointed him as their
spiritual leader.
‘7. The problem regarding the misunderstanding between you
and your tutor Yongdzin Trijang Rinpoche (one of the principal
Spiritual Guides of the Gelug tradition) because of your brother’s
slandering.
‘8. The problem with the Tibetan-Mongolian Association in
Taiwan. You were making money by sending your brother Mr.
Dondrub to Taiwan to trade arms between Taiwan, Pakistan and
Burma. Because of the danger of this information leaking out to the
public, you claimed that Taiwan goes along with China in the Tibet
issue. Therefore, in order to keep Tibetans from going to Taiwan,
you accused everyone travelling to Taiwan, even those engaged in
private business only, of siding with China.
‘9. The problem of Kunzang Lama pointing out faults in your
government. In 1989 Mr. Kunzang Lama found out that your
government had received large amounts of money from the Tibetan-
Mongolian Association in Taiwan and for this reason he accused
your government.
‘10. The current problem of the issue of the reincarnation of
the Karmapa. You back up the candidate established by communist
China; this causes tremendous harm within Tibetan politics.
‘11. The problem of Chu Shi Gang Druk [‘Four Rivers, Six
Mountains’ Khampa Organisation’] finding another way for the
future of Eastern Tibet. You made a secret deal with communist
250
the mongoose-canine letter
China offering them the area of Kham in favour of your personal

benefit. Chu Shi Gang Druk found out about this and the result has
been continual heavy fighting.
‘During the last forty years your exile government has created
problems non-stop. As for you, Your Holiness, what have you been
doing during this time? You have treated your own Tibetan people
as your enemies and, rather than working for Tibetan democracy,
you have thoroughly challenged them as your main responsibility.
If you had focused on making a proper democracy and thus had
given up any concern for protecting your own power in religion and
politics, these problems would not have had ground in which to
grow. Even if these kinds of problem had occurred, they would
not have been connected with your government and they would not
have kept recurring. How has this happened? If Your Holiness had
really tried to be like Mahatma Gandhi, as you yourself repeatedly
mentioned, all these matters would be problems of your children and
not of you, the father. These problems arose not from the efforts of
working for the freedom of Tibet, but from your trying to protect
your own power.
‘Here I would like to comment a little further on what actually
happened. First Your Holiness had good intentions. In 1959 you were
young and it was a period of many great people, such as Mahatma
Gandhi, Johala Nehru, J.F. Kennedy. Your Holiness had a hard and
painful time being the leader of Tibet, but you were also dynamic.
That is why you were able to challenge the power of Red China. You
had joy in committing and dedicating yourself in being the number
one leader of Tibet. Your plan was to make Tibet into a modern and
democratic country as many other countries in the world. However,
you still remained orthodox and hung onto your position as being
the boss over religion.
‘In the beginning you expelled the hierarchical officials who
accompanied you from Tibet. This was because it was clear that
those who hold such positions could not sacrifice their prestige.
They would not have accepted democracy and modernisation but
would instead have objected to any reform. You also strongly went
against re-establishing in exile the orthodox system of big monastic
251
a great deception
institutions with hundreds of monks. However, you did not succeed

and what was the real cause for that? The cause is the invisible dis-
ease which is still there and which develops immediately if met with
various conditions. And what is this disease? It is the clinging to your
own power. It is a fact that even at that time if someone would have
used democracy on you, you would not have been able to accept it.
The habit of being the powerful boss of the Potala palace woke up
and showed its ugly face.
‘Look at the example of the great Mahatma Gandhi who served
his country selflessly and managed to establish pure democracy in the
great land of India. The secret behind his success was that he realised
from the beginning that one must sever all ties and attachments to
one’s own life and welfare thoroughly. If only a little self-concern is
still there it can break out at any time and destroy everything, just as
a small match can cause a whole forest to burn.
‘Look at Stalin and Chairman Mao on the other hand. They did
not know that the ego has to be removed in order to serve the nation
properly. When they reached the peak of their power they were so
concerned about holding onto it that they became paranoid. To elim-
inate what they saw as dangerous threats to their power, they had to
kill the people who had worked with them from the beginning. Then
those people who know about this killing had to be killed as well.
So it went on and on and on until hundreds, thousands, and even
millions of people had to be killed.
‘The Buddha said that one needs “right view”, “right meditation”,
and “right conduct”. To fulfil this, one has to truly commit and dedi-
cate oneself with a pure mind; a mind of a Bodhisattva. The result,
good or bad, of one’s work, whether religious or political, depends
upon the degree of one’s dedication. Your Holiness, you wish to be
a great leader, but you do not know that in order to fulfil this wish,
a “political Bodhisattva vow” is required. So you entered instead the
wrong “political path of accumulation” (tsog lam) and that has led you
on a continuously wrong path. You believed that in order to be a great
leader you had to secure your own position first of all, and whenever
any opposition against you arose you had to defend yourself, and this
has become contagious.
252
‘When I talk about the consequences of your work, I am not

calculating the personal victories you have gained for your own
fame. I am calculating how much benefit the Tibetan people have
gained for their future aims. For example, when in the 1960’s you
tried to get rid of the influence of one great Lama’s power, such
as Dujom Rinpoche and Karmapa, the side-effect was felt by many
Tibetan lamas, and you caused them to unite in opposition. You
could not leave it lightly and you had to do something that caused
a split within Tibetan society. Moreover, to challenge lamas you
have used religion for your aim. To that purpose you had to develop
the Tibetan people’s blind faith. In the end you adopted the same
activity that you yourself had pointed out was mistaken in other
lamas. For instance, you started the politics of public Kalachakra
initiations. Normally the Kalachakra initiation is not given in
public. Then you started to use it continuously in a big way for your
politics. The result is that now the Tibetan people have turned to
exactly the same muddy and dirty mixing of politics and religion
of lamas which you yourself had so precisely criticised in earlier
times. The current event in relation to the controversy about the
Karmapa reincarnation is one such instance. Your ministers will
have told you that a Karmapa established in the Himalayas will
affect the name and power of the Dalai Lama as before, since he is
very popular in the Himalayas. If the Tibetan exile government of
Dalai Lama is really for the independence of Tibet, for the democ-
racy of Tibet, and for the civilisation of Tibet, how can a private
organisation, like that of the Karmapa, affect your government?
There is no connection and no relevance. Or did the communist
Chinese devise a deeply political game by establishing a Karmapa
in Tibet? When your Holiness Dalai Lama gave support for this
(backed the Chinese candidate) how badly will this harm Tibet’s
future? You think that if within your life you cannot be the leader
of the Tibetans in Tibet, at least you must keep your position as
leader of Tibet in India by using Dharma and politics. For that you
calculate that it does not matter what happens for the future of
Tibet after your life, as long as you can keep your power now. It is
really sad.
253
a great deception
‘Seen from another angle. In 1985-86 the Nyingma Shingchong

Tulku of Karok Monastery, Dzongnang Tulku of Clementown,
Dehradun, and Mr. Lingtsang Gyalsaw went to Tibet as guests of
the communist Chinese government. At that time your exile govern-
ment commanded us Tibetans to revolt against them because they
were siding with the Chinese and we made a thorough attack on
them. Today the Situ and Gyaltsab Rinpoches of the Kagyupa do
everything with regard to the Karmapa reincarnation in favour of
the politics of communist China. Instead of objecting your Holiness
is giving them your full support. Isn’t this surprising? This is what I
meant when I mentioned above that you always give priority to your
own well-being and power, even at the cost of Tibet’s future. I am
not trying to tell you that you should be concerned with the future
Dalai Lamas regarding them being leaders of Tibet. I am telling you
that you are not working for the future progress and democracy
of the Tibetan people in Tibet. Also, I am telling you that you are
extremely dishonest and hypocritical.
‘When Katok Shingchong Rinpoche and the others went to Tibet
and proclaimed that they will get the Kham autonomous region
from China, your exile government told us to challenge them and
we did very well. Nowadays you yourself have accepted both secretly
and openly that the Tibet Autonomous Region and Kham is under
China. Whenever you give objections, be it to Katok Shingchong
Tulku earlier on or to the Chu Shi Gang Druk nowadays, you do
it only for yourself and solely out of jealousy and for power. It is
very sad. Nowadays you have given the Kalachakra initiation so
many times you have made the Tibetan people into donkeys. You
can force them to go here and there as you like. In your words you
always say that you want to be Gandhi but in your action you are
like a religious fundamentalist who uses religious faith for political
purposes. Your image is the Dalai Lama, your mouth is Mahatma
Gandhi and your heart is like that of a religious dictator. You [are]
a deceiver and it is very sad that on top of the suffering that they
already have, the Tibetan people have a leader like you. Tibetans
have become fanatics. They say that the Dalai Lama’s name is more
important than the principle of Tibet. You have achieved your goal.
254
In brief, if somebody like Mr. Dawa Norbu who is totally dedicated

to Tibetan politics and society says something very important for the
Tibetan cause, but his talk might affect your power, you send your
men secretly to encourage the public of fanatic devotees to protest
and to spread the wrong information that Mr. Dawa Norbu is against
the Dalai Lama and so on. Simultaneously you appear publicly and
praise this man. Due to this double game, not one dedicated person
can appear to do something for the good of Tibet. You are already
so confident that you can use the Kalachakra initiation for repairing
everything you might have done wrong, and, as a matter of fact, it
works, because the situation of Tibet nowadays is based on blind
faith and continual talking.
‘I request you with my eyes filled with tears, ‘‘Please, if you feel
like being like Gandhi, do not turn the Tibetan situation into the
church dominated style of 17th Century Europe.’’ ’
255
REFERENCES
Abbreviations:
Bell refers to Charles Bell, A Portrait of a Dalai Lama: The Life and
Times of the Great Thirteenth (London: Wisdom Publications, 1987).
Dhondup refers to K. Dhondup, The Water-bird and Other Years: A
History of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama and After (New Delhi: Rangwang
Publishers, 1986).
Gelder refers to Gelder and Gelder, The Timely Rain: Travels in New
Tibet (London: Hutchinson, 1964).
Goetz refers to John Goetz, ‘On the Outs with the Dalai Lama’,
NOW Magazine (Toronto, Canada) Vol. 17, No. 21, 22-28 January
1998.
Goldstein (1) refers to Melvyn C. Goldstein, The Snow Lion and the
Dragon – China, Tibet and the Dalai Lama (Berkeley: University of
California Press, 1997).
Goldstein (2) refers to Melvyn C. Goldstein, A History of Modern
Tibet Volume 1: 1913-1951 The Demise of the Lamaist State (Berkeley, Los
Angeles & London: University of California, 1989).
Grunfeld refers to Tom A. Grunfeld, The Making of Modern Tibet
(New York & London: M.E. Sharpe 1996).
Kundeling Rinpoche refers to Kundeling Rinpoche, Interview with
Gen Kelsang Tharchin, New York & Washington, May 1998, (unpublished).
Lazar refers to Edward Lazar (ed.), Tibet, the Issue is Independence
(Parallax Press/Full Circle, 1998).
Norbu refers to Jamyang Norbu, Shadow Tibet: Selected Writing 1989-
2004 (New York: High Asia Press, 2004)
Powers refers to John Powers, Introduction to Tibetan Buddhism, (New
York: Snow Lion Publications, 2007).
Shakabpa refers to Tsepon W. D. Shakabpa, Tibet: A Political History
(New York: Potala Publications, 1984).
257
a great deception
Swiss TV refers to Beat Regli, ‘Dalai Lama: Discord in Exile’, 10 vor

10, (DRS Swiss Television), January 1998.
Yamaguchi refers to Zuiho Yamaguchi, The Sovereign Power of the Fifth
Dalai Lama: sPrul sku gZims-khang-gong-ma and the Removal of Governor
Norbu, Memoirs of the Research Department of the Toyo Bunko (The
Oriental Library) No.55, (Tokyo: The Tokyo Bunko, 1995).
References and notes:
1. Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche (tr. David Molk), Music Delighting an

Ocean of Protectors, [http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=52].
2. Fifth Dalai Lama, in Tibetan: ’Jam.mgön rgyal.wa’i bsten.srung
rdo.rje shugs.lden kyi ’phrin.bchol bhjoks.bsdus, published by
Sera Mey Monastery, p14; English translation (unattributed.),
Prayer by the 5th Dalai Lama to Gyelchen Dorje Shugden, [ http://
dorjeshugden.com/wp/?page_id=341, 21 September 2009].
For another English translation (unattributed.), see Fifth Dalai
Lama, Propitiation of Shugden by the Great Fifth Dalai Lama, [www.
shugdensociety.info/Bernis2EN.html, 21 September 2009].
3. [http://dorjeshugden.com/wp/?p=220] See also Trinley
Kalsang, [http://www.dorjeshugdenhistory.org/trode-khangsar.
html].
4. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, in Tibetan: ’Jam mgon rgyal ba’i bstan
srung rgyal chen rdo rje shugs ldan rtsal la ’phrin las bcol ba
’gag med rdo rje sgra dbyangs bzhugs so; English translation,
Melody of the Unceasing Vajra: A Propitiation of Mighty Gyalchen Dorje
Shugden, Protector of Conqueror Manjushri Tsongkhapa’s Teachings, (tr.
Western Shugden Society). For another and complete English
translation, see www.dorjeshugden.com/Prayers/Melody of the
Unceasing Vajra by the 14th Dalai Lama.
5. Anonymous, Ocean of Truth Explained (in Tibetan: gtam drang
bden rgya mtsho). The author worked for the Tibetan govern-
ment and concealed his identity. The other sources of personal
testimony referred to in this chapter have requested that their
identities be withheld, to protect their own lives and the lives of
their friends and relatives.
258
references
6. ‘Boy chosen by Dalai Lama as reincarnation of spiritual leader

turns back on Buddhist order’, [http://www.guardian.co.uk/
world/2009/may/31/dalai-lama-osel-hita-torres, 31 May 2009].
7. ‘Osel’s awakening, a kid against his destiny’, Babylon Magazine,
[http://www.magazinebabylon.com/BabylonMagazine5.pdf].
8. ‘Hypocrite Dalai Lama, Report from India’, The Tibetan
Situation Today, (Western Shugden Society, London, 2008)
[http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/files/tibetan_situation.
pdf]
9. Tony Clifton, ‘Cult Mystery’, Newsweek, 28 April 1997.
10. [http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/en/reports/
open-letter-from-western-shugden-society/].
11. Phuntsog Wangyal, ‘The Influence of Religion on Tibetan Politics’,
The Tibet Journal, ed., Tsering, Vol.1, July-Sept 1975, 78-86.
12. Ibid.
13. ‘Nechung – The State Oracle of Tibet’, The Government of Tibet
in Exile Official Website, [http://www.tibet.com, 23 August 2008].
Although this website says that word ‘oracle’ refers to a spirit that
enters a human being, an oracle normally means a human being
through whom a spirit is believed to speak.
14. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Freedom in Exile (Great Britain, Abacus
edition, 2002), 233-4.
15. Ibid. 233-4.
16. Ibid. 235.
17. Ibid. 236.
18. Norbu, 290-1.
19. Ibid. 291.
20. Dhondup, 148.
21. Bell, 440
22. Ibid. 436
23. Ibid. 436-7.
24. Goldstein (2), 141
259
a great deception
25. Prince Peter of Greece and Denmark, quoted in Norbu, 290-1.

26. Norbu, 292.
27. Tibet in Exile, [www.dorjeshugden.com/articles/TibetinExile.
pdf, 29 September 2008].
28. Ibid.
29. Goldstein (1), 108-9.
30. Norbu, 292.
31. Helmut Gassner, ‘Dalai Lama, Dorje Shugden’, Speech
to Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation, Hamburg, 26 March
1998, 3, 4 & 8, [http://www.dorjeshugden.com/articles/
HelmutGassner01.pdf & http://www.tibet-internal.com/
SpeechAtNaumannFoundation.PDF, 23 September 2009]
32. Norbu, 293-4.
33. James Belither, ‘Chronicle of Events’, The Dalai Lama: A Report
on the Dalai Lama’s Abuses of Human Rights and Religious Freedoms,
(Ulverston, 1997), 40.
34. Victor & Victoria Trimondi, Shadow of the Dalai Lama – Part II –
7. 2003, [www.iivs.de].
35. See reference 33.
36. John Goetz & Jochen Graebert, Panorama ARD – German TV,
20 November 1997.
37. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Freedom in Exile, (Great Britain,
Abacus edition, 2002), 133.
38. Dorje Tseten, ‘Tibetan Art of Divination’, The Government of
Tibet in Exile website, (Tibetan Bulletin, March-April 1995), [www.
tibet.com/Buddhism/Divination.html, 22 September 2009].
39. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Talk at Sera Monastery, 1980. The Dalai
Lama also mentions making decisions by using oracles, dream
and divination by throwing dough-balls in A Talk Concerning
Shugden Practice 13 July 1978, from An Anthology of Talks Given by
His Holiness The Dalai Lama Concerning Reliance Upon the Dharma
Protectors, (Dharamsala: LTWA).
40. J. C. Deus, ‘Is the Dalai Lama a Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing?’, Mas
Alla de la Ciencia No.103, September 1997.
260
references
41. Grunfeld, 28.

42. Quoted in H.R.H. Prince Peter of Greece and Denmark’s chapter,
Tibetan Oracles, in James F. Fisher, Himalayan Anthropology. The
Indo-Tibetan Interface (The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1978), 287.
43. Powers, 475.
44. Ram Rahul, Dalai Lama: The Institution (New Delhi: Vikas
Publishing House, 1995), 29.
45. Powers, 163-4; & Shakabpa, 100-3.
46. Yamaguchi.
47. Ibid.
48. Shakabpa, 103.
49. Ibid. 105.
50. Ibid. 105.
51. Goldstein (1), 9.
52. Yamaguchi, 8.
53. Powers, 168.
54. Yamaguchi, 10.
55. Marylin M. Rhie & Robert A. F. Thurman, Wisdom and
Compassion: The Sacred Art of Tibet (Tibet House/Abradale Press,
1997), 300-1
56. Quoted in Yamaguchi, 16.
57. For details of Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen’s death see: Yamaguchi; &
Kundeling Rinpoche, An Authority in Question, (unpublished thesis),
28-30; & A Talk Concerning Shugden Practice 13 July 1978, from An
Anthology of Talks Given by His Holiness The Dalai Lama Concerning
Reliance Upon the Dharma Protectors, (Dharamsala, LTWA).
58. Kundeling Rinpoche, An Authority in Question, (unpublished
thesis), 28-30.
59. Yamaguchi, 17.
61. This was a ‘blessing empowerment’ and not a ‘life empowerment ’.
261
a great deception
62. From an unpublished transcript of oral teachings.

64. Yamaguchi, 19.
65. Ibid.
66. Ibid. 23.
67. Ibid. 25.
68. Elliott Sperling ‘Orientalism’ and Aspects of Violence in the
Tibetan Tradition, Imagining Tibet, Thierry Dodin & Heinz Räther
(eds.), (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2001), 319.
69. Ibid. 318.
70. Shakabpa, 123.
71. Elliott Sperling ‘Orientalism’ and Aspects of Violence in the
Tibetan Tradition, Imagining Tibet, Thierry Dodin & Heinz Räther
(eds.), (Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2001), 318
72. Cabinet of the Tibetan Government in Exile (Dharamsala),
‘Kashag’s Statement concerning Dhogyal,’ May 31st 1996,
[http://www.dalailama.com/page.134.htm (accessed September
24, 2009)]
73. Shakabpa, 125.
74. Ibid. 126.
75. K. Dhondup, Songs of the Sixth Dalai Lama, (Dharamsala: LTWA,
1996).
76. Shakabpa, 128 & 132.
77. Inder L. Malik, Dalai Lamas of Tibet: Succession of Births (New
Delhi: Uppal Publishing House, 1984), 29.
78. Grunfeld, 43.
79. Shakabpa, 129.
80. Ibid. 129.
81. Ibid., 137-8
82. Ibid. 141.
83. Ibid. 140-1.
262
references
84. Ibid. 147.

85. Ibid. 147-50.
86. Ibid. 152.
87. Powers, 173.
88. Ram Rahul, Dalai Lama: The Institution (New Delhi: Vikas
Publishing House), 54.
89. Dhondup, 2-3.
90. Bell, 70 & 72.
91. Goldstein (2), 49-50.
92. Goldstein (1), 27-8.
93. Dhondup, 39.
94. Ibid. 43.
95. Ibid. 44.
96. Ibid. 45-6 & 66.
97. Ibid. 46 & Bell, 141-2.
98. Thirteenth Dalai Lama, ‘Political Testament’, quoted in Inder L.
Malik, Dalai Lamas of Tibet: Succession of Births (New Delhi: Uppal
Publishing House, 1984), 51.
99. Dhondup, 50.
100. Bell, 141.
101. Dhondup, 56, 67-9 & 75-6; & Goldstein (2), 112-20.
102. From A Journey to Lhasa and Central Tibet by Sarat Chandra Das,
William Woodville Rockhill, (Great Britain: Royal Geographical
Society 1902), quoted in The Opening of Tibet: An Account of Lhasa and
the Country and People of Central Tibet and of the Progress of the Mission
Sent There by the English Government in the Year 1903-4 by Perceval
Landon (London: Doubleday Page & Co., 1905), 116. The full text
of which can be found: [http://www.archive.org/stream/openingti-
betana01youngoog/openingtibetana01youngoog_djvu.txt].
103. Perceval Landon, The Opening of Tibet: An Account of Lhasa and the
Country and People of Central Tibet and of the Progress of the Mission
Sent There by the English Government in the Year 1903-4 (London:
Doubleday Page & Co., 1905), 116. (An account of this
263
a great deception
incident also appears in L. Austine Waddell, Lhasa and its Mysteries

(London: Methuen & Co, 1929), 7-9, where it recounts that even
the Lama’s relatives were imprisoned for life.)
104. Ibid. 212 & 341; & Goldstein (2), 42-3.
105. Bell, 62-3.
106. Ibid. 178.
107. Perceval Landon, The Opening of Tibet: An Account of Lhasa and the
Country and People of Central Tibet and of the Progress of the Mission
Sent There by the English Government in the Year 1903-4 (London:
Doubleday Page & Co., 1905).
108. Ibid.
109. Bell, 180.
110. Ibid. 179.
111. Ibid. 62.
112. Alan Winnington, Tibet: Record of a Journey (London: Lawrence &
Wisheart 1957), 98-9.
113. Grunfeld, 24.
114. Robert W. Ford, Wind Between the Worlds: Captured in Tibet (1957)
37.
115. Grunfeld, 24.
116. Anna Louise Strong, When Serfs stood up in Tibet (Peking: New
World Press, 1960) Chapter 8, [http://www.marxists.org/refer-
ence/archive/strong-anna-louise/1959/tibet/ch08.htm].
117. Bell, 183.
118. Bell, 197.
119. Dhondup, 64.
120. Ibid. 65 & Bell, 438.
121. Dhondup, 148-9.
122. Quoted in John Goetz & Jochen Graebert, Panorama ARD –
German TV, 20 November 1997.
123. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, Heart Jewel (Ulverston: Tharpa
Publications, 2009), 122.
264
references
124. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Union of Bliss and Emptiness (Snow Lion
125. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso, Heart Jewel (Ulverston: Tharpa
edition, 2002), 90.
127. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, My Land and My People (New York:
Warner Books Edition, 1997), 24.
128. Goldstein (1), 45.
129. Ibid. 45.
130. Ibid. 44.
131. Goldstein (2), 772.
132. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, My Land & My People (New York:
133. Goldstein (2), 743.
134. Grunfeld, 109.
135. Goldstein (1), 47.
136. Goldstein (2), 800 & 812-3.
137. Ibid. 643-4.
138. Goldstein (1), 52.
139. Alan Winnington, Tibet: A Record of a Journey (Lawrence and
Wisheart 1957), 132 & 135.
140. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, ‘His Journey’, Time, 4 October
1999.
141. Quoted in Grunfeld, 119.
142. Ibid. 141.
143. Gelder, 210.
144. Grunfeld, 143.
edition, 2002), 149.
265
a great deception

147. Swiss TV Part 3.
148. Helmut Gassner, ‘Dalai Lama, Dorje Shugden’, Speech
to Friedrich-Naumann-Foundation, Hamburg, 26 March
1999, 3, 4 & 8, [http://www.dorjeshugden.com/articles/
HelmutGassner01.pdf & http://www.tibet-internal.com/
SpeechAtNaumannFoundation.PDF, accessed 23 September 23
2009].
149. John F. Avedon, In Exile from the Land of Snows (Wisdom Books,
1985), 269.
150. John Roberts, ‘How the CIA Saved the Dalai Lama’, George
Magazine, October 1997.
151. Grunfeld, 155.
152. Quoted, ibid. 155-6.
153. Gelder, 220.
154. Grunfeld, 138-9.
155. Ibid. 144.
156. Ibid. 144.
158. Ibid. 167-8.
159. Ibid. 168.
160. Gelder, illustration facing 160.
161. Edward Lazar, ‘Independence or Accommodation?’ in The
Anguish of Tibet, eds. Kelly, Bastien, Aiello, (Berkeley: Parallax
Press, 1991), 306.
162. Lhasang Tsering, ‘The Issue is Independence’ in Lazar, 37.
163. Jamyang Norbu, ‘The Heart of the Matter’ in Lazar, 32.
164. Tashi-Tobgye Jamyangling, ‘The Issue is Independence’, in Lazar, 72.
165. Goldstein (1), 88.
166. Lhasang Tsering, quoted in Goetz.
266
references
167. Goldstein (1), 87-8.

Press, 1991), 308.
169. Ibid. 307-8.
170. Ibid. 306.
171. Grunfeld, 141.
Warner Books Edition, 1977), 85 & 87.
173. Gelder, 204-5.
174. Grunfeld, 141.
175. James Belither, ‘A Cry for Help’, The Dalai Lama: A Report on
the Dalai Lama’s Abuses of Human Rights and Religious Freedoms,
(Ulverston, 1997), 10 & Norbu, 18.
176. The Times of India, Delhi, 30 May 1996.
177. Pico Iyer, ‘The God in Exile’, Time, 22 December 1997.
178. Shirong Chen, ‘Tibet ‘‘Chinese issue’’ says Dalai: The Tibetan
spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, has said the Tibetan issue is a
Chinese domestic problem’, 10 August 2009, [http://news.bbc.
co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8194138.stm].
Press, 1991), 306.
180. Melvyn C. Goldstein, The Dalai Lama’s Dilemma, Foreign Affairs,
Jan-Feb. 1998.
181. Ibid.
182. Ibid.
183. Ibid.
184. Goldstein (1), 90.
185. An Appeal to the Chinese People, by the Dalai Lama, 28 March
2008 [http://www.dalailama.com/page.226.htm].
267
a great deception
186. BBC News, Tibet ‘Chinese Issue’ says Dalai, 10 August 2009,
[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8194138.stm].
187. Dalai Lama meets with Media, March 16 2008, [http://www.
dalailama.com/page.214.htm].
188. March 10th Statement of the Dalai Lama, [http://www.
dalailama.com/news.350.htm 9 March 2009].
189. The Daily Telegraph, 15 August 1998
190. Address by the Dalai Lama to the Tibetan-Chinese Conference in
Geneva, Thursday 6 August 2009 [http://www.dalailama.com/
news.411.htm].
191. Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Jiang Yu’s Press Conference on 17
April 2008 [http://au.china-embassy.org/eng/fyrth/t426648.htm].
192. Tina Lam, Detroit Free Press, 18 April 2008 [http://www.dalailama.
com/news.239.htm, Dalai Lama speaks on Chinese Olympics].
193. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, ‘An Appeal to the Chinese People’, 28
March 2008 [http://www.dalailama.com/page.226.htm].
194. John Ray, ITV News, ‘Dalai Lama calls for Olympic Protests’, 18
January 2008, [http://www.itv.com/News/Articles/Dalai-Lama-
calls-for-Olympic-protests.html].
195. ‘Dalai Lama reaffirms his support for Beijing Olympics’, 8 March
2008, [http://tibetaffairs.blogspot.com/2008/03/dalai-lama-
reaffirms-his-support-for.html].
196. Free Tibet, ‘Dalai Lama calls on supporters to stage peaceful
protests during the Olympics’, 22 January 2008, [http://www.
freetibet.org/newsmedia/dalai-lama-calls-supporters-stage-
peaceful-protests-during-olympics].
197. BBC News, Report on protests in London [http://news.bbc.
co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7332942.stm] & Report on protests in
Paris, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7334545.stm];
Andrew Buncombe, The Independent, ‘Violence in Nepal as
Tibetans protest Olympics’, 31 March 2008, [http://www.
independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/violence-in-nepal-as-
tibetans-protest-olympics-802732.html].
198. Conference Press Statement: ‘Tibet Conference comes up with a
Roadmap for Peace in Tibet’, Central Tibetan Administration Official
Website [http://www.tibet.net/en/index.php?id=266&rmenuid=11].
268
references
199. Ibid.
200. Voice – Tibetan Woman’s Association Quarterly Newsletter,
April-June 2007, Volume 2 Issue 1 [http://www.tibetanwomen.
org/publications/newsletters/2007/2007.5-twa_newsletter.pdf].
201. [http://www.tibetanwomen.org/press/2008/2008.01.04-
press_conf.html]
202. Xinhua, ‘China publishes evidences of Dalai clique’s mastermind-
ing of riots’, 1 April 2008 [http://www.chinaembassy.org.nz/
eng/xw/t420234.htm].
203. Phayul, ‘Exiled Tibetans plan protest March to Tibet ahead of
Beijing Olympics’, 4 January 2008 [http://www.phayul.com/news/
article.aspx?id=18982].
204. Phayul, ‘Tibetan People’s Uprising Movement to reinvigorate the
Tibetan freedom movement’, Wednesday, 20 February 2008 [http://
www.phayul.com/news/article.aspx?id=19302].
205. Phayul, ‘Tibetan People’s Uprising Movement declares more pro-
tests worldwide’, 22 July 2008 [http://www.phayul.com/news/
article.aspx?id=22059].
206. TYC official site [http://www.tibetanyouthcongress.org/aboutus.
html]; TWA official site [http://www.tibetanwomen.org/about/];
Gu Chu Sum official site [http://www.guchusum.org/AboutUs/
WhatWeDo/tabid/86/Default.aspx], 25 September 2009.
207. TYC official site [http://www.tibetanyouthcongress.org/aboutus.
html#aims_and_objectives].
208. Somini Sengupta and Hari Kumar, New York Times, ‘Dalai Lama
won’t stop Tibet protests’, 16 March 2008 [http://www.nytimes.
com/2008/03/16/world/asia/16cnd-tibet.html]. The news confer-
ence itself can be seen on: [http://www.dalailama.com/news.217.
htm (22 September 2009)].
209. Ibid.
210. Bill Schiller, The Toronto Star, ‘Canadians caught in Tibet Violence’,
17 March 2008, [http://www.thestar.com/News/World/arti-
cle/346763]; Chris Johnson, The Toronto Star, ‘I can’t just let this guy
die on the ground’ 17 March 2008 [http://www.thestar.com/News/
World/article/346769]; CCTV, ‘March 14: The Lhasa Riots’, [http://
www.cctv.com/english/special/tibetriots/01/index.shtml].
269
a great deception
211. Radio France International, 2 April 2008 [http://www.rfi.fr/actucn/

articles/100/article_6734.asp (in Chinese)].
212. Isabel Hilton, The Independent (London), ‘Tibet: Desperate nation
prepares to defy might of Peking’, 20 October 1997 [http://
www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4891144.html].
213. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, ‘An Appeal to the Chinese People’, 28
March 2008 [http://www.dalailama.com/page.226.htm].
214. Grants awarded by the NED to Tibetan groups:
[http://www.ned.org/grants/08programs/grants-asia08.html
#ChinaTibet in 2008]; [http://www.ned.org/grants/
07programs/grants-asia07.html#ChinaTibet in 2007];
[http://www.ned.org/grants/06programs/grants-asia06.html
#ChinaTibet in 2006], etc.
215. B.Raman, ‘The National Endowment for Democracy of the US’,
South Asia Analysis Group, 13 April 2000 [http://www.southa-
siaanalysis.org/papers2/paper115.html].
216. Joel Brinkly, New York Times, ‘Iran sales linked to wide program
of covert policies’, 15 February 1987 [http://www.nytimes.
com/1987/02/15/world/iran-sales-linked-to-wide-program-of-
covert-policies.html].
217. David Ignatius, The Washington Post, ‘Innocence Abroad: The
New World of Spyless Coups’, 22 September 1991 [http://www.
highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1086157.html].
218. Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison, The CIA’s Secret War in
Tibet, (University Press of Kansas, 2002); BBC Documentary,
‘The Shadow Circus: The CIA in Tibet’, 1998, [http://www.
whitecranefilms.com/film/circus.html]; Jamyang Norbu, Warriors
of Tibet (Wisdom Publications, 1986).
219. In 1974, the Dalai Lama claimed that: ‘The accusation of CIA
aid has no truth behind it’, (Quoted in Grunfeld:) ‘Diplomacy
and the Dalai Lama,’ FEER (Far Eastern Economic Review)18
March 1974, 32.
220. Kenneth L Woodward, Newsweek, ‘A Scratch in the Teflon Lama’,
May 1998 [http://www.newsweek.com/id/92429].
221. Wikipedia, Panchen Lama, 15 September 2009.
222. Goldstein (1), 100-3.
270
references
223. Ibid. 106

224. Tibet Press Watch, May 1995, 13; as quoted in Goldstein (1), 106.
225. Goldstein (1), 106-9.
226. Ibid. 108-10.
227. Dawa Norbu, Tibet: The Road Ahead (London: Rider, 1997),
quoted in Imagining Tibet, eds. Thierry Dodin & Heinz Räther, 301
(Boston: Wisdom Publications, 2001).
228. Ursula Bernis, Exiled from Exile 1996-1999, [http://www.
shugdensociety.info/Bernis0EN.html, October 6th 2008].
229. Grunfeld, 200-1.
230. Tibet - Constitution, [http://www.servat.unibe.ch/icl/t100000_.
html].
edition, 2002), 233-4.
232. Swiss TV, Part 2.
233. Ibid.
234. Ibid.
235. Ibid.
236. Ibid.
237. Palden Gyal, Tibetan News, ‘Paper Tigers’, No. 22, Spring 1997.
238. Ibid.
239. Jamyang Norbu, Tibetan News, ‘Tibet’s Cultural Confusion’, No.
21, Autumn 1997.
240. Heather Stoddard, ‘Tibetan Publications and National Identity’,
Robbie Barnett and Shirin Akiner (eds.), Resistance and Reform in
Tibet, 121-56 (London: Hurst and Co.), quoted in Imagining Tibet,
Thierry Dodin & Heinz Räther (eds.), 368 (Boston: Wisdom
Publications, 2001)
241. Lhasang Tsering in Foreword to Illusion and Reality by Jamyang
Norbu (Dharamsala: Tibetan Youth Congress, 1989), 10.
242. The Times of India, Delhi, 30 May 1996.
243. The Dalai Lama, Tibet Foundation Newsletter No. 22, ‘Meaningful
Dialogue’, November 1997.
271
a great deception
244. As quoted by James Belither, The Dalai Lama: A Report on the

Dalai Lama’s Abuses of Human Rights and Religious Freedoms,
shugdensociety.info/Bernis0EN.htm, 6 October 2008].
246. Cabinet of Tibet Government in Exile – Dharamsala, ‘Kashag’s
Statement concerning Dhogyal’, May 31st 1996, [http://www.
dalailama.com/page.134.htm, 1 August 2008].
247. Statement by Samdhong Rinpoche, 30 August 2009, Radio Free Asia
(Tibetan Service), Washington D.C., USA. [tibetnews@rfa.org].
248. James Belither, ‘Chronicle of Events’, The Dalai Lama: A Report
on the Dalai Lama’s Abuses of Human Rights and Religious Freedoms,
(Ulverston, 1997).
249. C. Henry & N. Haque, ‘The Dalai Lama’s Demons’ France 24
Special Reports, 8 August 2008, [http://www.france24.com/
en/20080808-dalai-lama-demons-india-buddhism-dorje-shugden,
21 August 2008].
250. Al Jazeera, 7 October 2008 [http://www.
wisdombuddhadorjeshugden.blogspot.com/2008/10/al-jazeera-
news-documentary-video.html, 22 September 2009]
251. http://www.westernshugdensociety.org/en/chronicle/
dalai-lama-events-events-of-2008-march-april10/
252. Video interview and transcript, 29 April 2008, [http://www.
westernshugdensociety.org/en/news/kelsang-pema-responds-to-
comments-by-the-dalai-lamas-representative-tashi-w/, 8 October
2009].
253. BBC News, ‘Protest at Dalai Lama prayer ban’, 27 May
2008, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/nottingham-
shire/7421888.stm, 22 September 2009].
254. Cabinet of Tibet Government in Exile – Dharamsala: ‘points
of the Kashag’s Statement concerning Dolgyal’, 31 May 1996,
[http://www.dalailama/com.page.134.htm, 1 August 2008].
255. The Government of Tibet in Exile (posting by Tseten Samdup):

‘Shugden verses pluralism and national unity controversy and clarifica-
tion’, 2 November 1997, [http://www.tibet.com/dholgyal/CTA-book/
chapter-1.html, 29 July 2008].
272
references
256. Quoted in: ‘Chronicle of Events – 2008’ The Tibetan Situation

Today, (Western Shugden Society, London, 2008), [http://media.
westernshugdensociety.net/Tibetan_Situation_Today.pdf, August
17th 2008].
258. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Union of Bliss and Emptiness (Snow Lion
259. Geshe Kelsang Gyatso ‘Replies to Chris Fynn – Part One’, 19
December 1997, [talk.religion.Buddhism – Google group groups.
google.com/group/talk.religion.buddhism/msg/c594eec-
c8ff4934b, 30 July 2008].
260. Khyongla Rato, My Life and Lives, (New York: Rato Publications,
1977 & 1991), 12.
261. Kalu Rinpoche, Adarsha Magazine, ‘The Spirit of all Traditions’,
1997.
262. Donald Lopez, Tricycle: The Buddhist Review, ‘An Interview with
Geshe Kelsang Gyatso’, Vol.3 Spring 1998.
263. Kundeling Rinpoche.
(Ulverston, 1997).
265. Fourteenth Dalai Lama, ‘Concerning Dhogyal with reference to the
views of past masters and other related matters’, Dharamsala, October
1997 [http://www.dalai lama.com.page.155.htm, 25 September 2009].
267 Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Union of Bliss and Emptiness (Ithaca: Snow
Lion Publications, 1988), 26
268. Official website of the Central Tibetan Administration: Projected
population in 2007, [www.tibet.net/en/index.php?id=9, 25
September 2008, 4 October 2008].
269. Grunfeld, 200.
270. Nation Master Encyclopedia, ‘Government of Tibet in Exile’ [www.
nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Government-of-Tibet-in-exile,
5 October 2008].
273
a great deception
271. Dept. of Information, Government of Tibet in Exile, ‘Structure

of the Tibetan Government-In-Exile’, 1996, [www.tibet.com/
Govt/brief.html].
272. Grunfeld, 200-2 & 228.
273. Tsering Wangyal, Tibetan Review Vol XIV No.9, September 1979,
[http://editola.blogspot.com, 5 October 1998].
274. Tibet in Exile, [http://www.dorjeshugden.com/articles/
TibetinExile.pdf, 29 September 2008].
275. Ibid.
276. Ibid.
277. ‘Lessons from Tibetans in Taiwan’, [http://repository.dl.itc.u-
tokyo.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2261/8135/1/ioc152014.pdf].
shugdensociety.info/Bernis0EN.html, 6 October 2008].
279. Michael Backman, ‘Behind the Dalai Lama’s holy cloak’, [http://
www.theage.com.au/news/business/behind-dalai-lamas-holy-
cloak/2007/05/22/1179601410290.html].
281. Chagdud Tulku, Lord of the Dance (Junction City, CA, USA:
Padma Publishing, 1992), 188.
282. From http://karmapa.controverse.free.fr/VA/VAdifficultes.
html, 25 September 2009.
283. Mick Brown, Dance of 17th Lives: The Incredible True Story of Tibet’s
17th Karmapa (London: Bloomsbury, 2004).
284. G. Chhetri, Sunday Magazine, New Delhi, 13-19 December 1998.
285. Shamar Rinpoche, ‘Letter to the Private Office of the Dalai
Lama’, 7 February 1997.
286. ‘Interview with Jigme Rinpoche, 20 March 1994’, Kagyu Life
International No.1, 1994.
287. Kyabje Pabongka Rinpoche, Heart-Spoon, ‘Biographies’, (Wisdom
Publications, 1995).
288. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama, Talk given 27 March 2006, [www.
dalailama.com/page.135.htm].
274
references
289. The Fourteenth Dalai Lama, ‘Concerning Dholgyal with refer-

ence to the views of past masters and other related matters’, A
talk on Dholgyal by the Dalai Lama during the course of reli-
gious teachings in Dharamsala, October 1997, [www.dalailama.
com/page.155.htm].
290. Goldstein (2), 362
291. Some clarification surrounding the present debate regarding the Dalai Lama
and Dorje Shugden by Geshe Kelsang Gyatso. Newsgroup discussion,
December 1st 1997, [http://groups.google.com/group/talk.
religion.buddhism/msg/e476372b2853b4f3?hl=en&].
292. Geshe Lobsang Tharchin, Foreword to Tsongkapa, The Principal
Teachings of Buddhism, (Howell, NJ, USA: Mahayana Sutra and
Tantra Press, 1988).
293. Khyongla Rato, My Life and Lives, (New York: Rato Publications,
1977 & 1991).
294. Mandala magazine, ‘Holy Beings: Transforming suffering into
pure joy’, March/April 1997.
295. ‘Pabongka Rinpoche: A Memoir by Rilbur Rinpoche’, in
Pabongka Rinpoche, Liberation in the Palm of Your Hand, (Boston:
Wisdom Publications, 1991).
296 Mandala magazine, ‘Lamas’, May-June 1997.
297. Department of State Publication 11342, Foreign Relations, 1969-
1976, Volume XVII, ‘Questions pertaining to Tibet’, [http://
www.state.gov/documents/organization/70146.pdf]; Paul
Salopek, ‘The CIA’s Secret War in Tibet’, Chicago Tribune, 26
January 1997, [http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/chicagotribune/
access/10937786.html?FMT=ABS]; Jim Mann, LA Times,
‘CIA Gave Aid to Tibetan Exiles in ‘60s, Files Show’, Sept
1998, [http://articles.latimes.com/1998/sep/15/news/mn-
22993?pg=3]; Kenneth Conboy and James Morrison, The CIA’s
Secret War in Tibet, (University Press of Kansas, 2002).
298. Melinda Liu, ‘When Heaven Shed Blood’, Newsweek, 19 April
1999, [http://www.newsweek.com/id/88042/page/1].
299. Diplomacy and the Dalai Lama, FEER (Far Eastern Economic
Review)18 March 1974, 32. Quoted in Grunfeld, 151
1999, [http://www.newsweek.com/id/88042/page/1]
275
a great deception
301. BBC Documentary, ‘The Shadow Circus: The CIA in Tibet’,

1998, [http://www.whitecranefilms.com/film/circus.html].
302. Department of State Publication 11342, Foreign Relations, 1969-
1976, Volume XVII, ’Questions pertaining to Tibet’, [http://
www.state.gov/documents/organization/70146.pdf, p1148].
303. Melvyn C. Goldstein, A History of Modern Tibet: The Calm Before
the Storm: 1951 – 1955, (University of California Press, 2007), 35.
304. ‘Re: Dalai Lama and officials arrived safely in India’ 2 April 1959,
[www.foia.cia.gov].
305. Thomas Laird, Into Tibet: The CIA’s First Atomic Spy and his Secret
Expedition to Lhasa, (Grove/Atlantic Press, 2002).
306. History of Chushigangdruk: Establishment 22, [http://www.
chushigangdruk.org/history/history11.htm].
307. Michael Peissel, The Cavaliers of Kham, the Secret War in Tibet, p216
(London: Heinemann 1972 & Boston: Little, Brown & Co. 1973).
Quoted in Grunfeld, 163
308. Grunfeld, 163
309. BBC Documentary, ‘The Shadow Circus: The CIA in Tibet’,
1998, [http://www.whitecranefilms.com/film/circus.html].
310. Grunfeld, 163
311. Leo E. Rose, The Politics of Bhutan (Ithaca, NY, USA: Cornell
University Press 1977), 122.
edition, 2002), 209.
313. Derek Davis, Coups, Kings, and Castles in the Sky, Far Eastern
Economic Review, 10 June 1974.
314. For example, for the common Tibetan view of the Panchen
Lama, Ngabo Ngawang Jigme or Bapa Phuntsok Wangyal, see
‘Interview with Kasur Thubten Juchen Namgyal (Former Chief
Kalon of the Tibetan Cabinet)’, Claude Arpi, Dharamsala,
15 March 1997 [http://www.claudearpi.net/maintenance/
uploaded_pics/ThubtenJuchen.pdf].
315. Kensaku Okawa, ‘Lessons from Tibetans in Taiwan: their history,
current situation and relationship with Taiwanese Nationalism’,
276
references
in The memoirs of the Institute of Oriental Culture, Volume

152, (University of Tokyo, 2007), 2 & 10 [http://repository.
dl.itc.u-tokyo.ac.jp/dspace/bitstream/2261/8135/1/ioc152014.
pdf].
316. Ibid. 16 & 21
317. Ibid. 6-8
1999, [http://www.newsweek.com/id/88042/page/1].
319. Wall Street Journal, ‘Gyalo Thondup: Interview with the Wall
Street Journal’, 20 February 2009, [http://online.wsj.com/
article/SB123510349274730343.html].
320. Peter Wonacott, Wall Street Journal, ‘In Tibet, a Clash of
Approaches’, 20 February 2009, [http://online.wsj.com/article/
SB123508535435527541.html].
321. People’s Daily, Wednesday, 11 April 2001, [http://english.people.
com.cn/english/200104/11/eng20010411_67409.html].
322. Claudia Dreifus, New York Times, ‘The Dalai Lama’, Sunday, 28
November 1993, [http://www.nytimes.com/1993/11/28/maga-
zine/the-dalai-lama.html].
323. Ibid.
324. Gerald Lehner and Tilman Müller, Stern Magazine 23 1997, ‘Ein
Held mit braunen Flecken’; Gerald Lehner, Zwischen Hitler und
Himalaya – Die Gedächtnislücken des Heinrich Harrer (Vienna, Czernin
Verlag, 2007); Heinrich Harrer, Seven Years in Tibet, 1952.
325. Gerald Lehner, Zwischen Hitler und Himalaya – Die Gedächtnislücken
des Heinrich Harrer (Vienna, Czernin Verlag, 2007); Heinrich
Harrer, Seven Years in Tibet, 1952.
326. Robert J. Lifton, The Nazi Doctors : Medical Killing and the Psychology
of Genocide (New York, NY: Basic Books, 1988), 286, [http://
www.holocaust-history.org/lifton/LiftonT286.shtml]; Bruno
Beger, Meine Begegnungen mit dem Ozean des Wissens, Konigstein
1986. Beger’s memoirs of Tibet which appeared on The
Government of Tibet in Exile Official Website on April 15 2008
but have since been removed, can still be seen here: [http://
web.archive.org/web/20021220183452/http://www.tibet.com/
Status/bruno.html].
277
a great deception
327. Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke, Black Sun: Aryan Cults, Esoteric Nazism

and the Politics of Identity, (New York University Press, 2002),
[http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=xaiaM77s6N4C&printsec
=frontcover#v=onepage&q=&f=false].
328. For interview with Serrano where he discusses being the Dalai
Lama’s guest in Dharamsala shortly after Indira Gandhi’s funeral
in 1984, [http://web.archive.org/web/19990508175302re_/
www.satanism.net/iss/wot/Miguel_Serrano2.html]; Mike
Billington, Why Nazis love the Dalai Lama, includes a photo of the
Dalai Lama with Serrano in Chile in 1992 (Serrano was the head
of the Nazis in Chile at the time), [http://www.larouchepub.
com/eiw/public/2008/2008_10-19/2008_10-19/2008-18/
pdf/69-71_3518.pdf].
329. Andrew Purvis and Angela Leuker, Time, ‘Jorg Haider’s New
Clothes’, 10 April 2005, [http://www.time.com/time/nation/
article/0,8599,1047318,00.html].
330. Originally from Nürnberger Abendzeitung, 19 May 2008, ’Dalai
Lama in Nürnberg’: Fans Jubeln, Gegner schimpfen - Steffen
Windschall; quoted by German magazine Stern No. 32, 30 July
2009; part of the original German article can be found: [http://
www.iivs.de/~iivs01311/Lamaismus/NS-Tibet-8-Harrer.htm].
331. Stern No. 32, 30 July 2009, [http://www.stern.de/magazin/heft/
magazin-die-zwei-gesichter-des-dalai-lama-707441.html; English
translation available: [http://www.dorjeshugden.com/forum/
index.php?topic=504].
332. Victor and Victoria Trimondi, “The Japanese doomsday Guru
Shoko Asahara and the XIV. Dalai Lama,” Shadow of the Dalai
Lama (2003) [http://www.trimondi.de/SDLE/Part-2-13.htm].
333. Russell Skelton, Sydney Morning Herald, ‘Cult gave Dalai Lama
$2m’, 26 April 1996.
334. Ibid.
335. Werner von Bloch, Focus No. 38, ‘Unholy Guarantee’, 18
September 1995.
336. Russell Skelton, Sydney Morning Herald, ‘Cult gave Dalai Lama
$2m’, 26 April 1996.
278
references
337. Norimitsu Onishi, New York Times, February 28, 2004 [http://
www.nytimes.com/2004/02/28/world/after-8-year-trial-in-
japan-cultist-is-sentenced-to-death.html]
338. BBC SWB (BBC Summary of World Broadcasts) 7th April
1995 quoting Tokyo News Services, [http://www.tibet.ca/en/
newsroom/wtn/archive/old?y=1995&m=4&p=7_2].
340. ‘Chronicle of Events’ August 1996, [http://www.western-
shugdensociety.org, 14 August 2008].
341. Robert Thurman, ‘The Dalai Lama: A Conversation with Robert
Thurman’, Mother Jones Nov-Dec 1997.
342. Research and Analysis Wing, Department of Security, Tibetan
Administration, Dharamsala [10 Most Hated Enemies of the
Dalai Lama and Tibet], Report No.28/7.8/1997.
343. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_peace_prize.
344. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1989/
presentation-speech.html.
345. ‘The Red Terror in Tibet: Interview with the Dalai Lama’, US
News and World Report 24 April 1961, 79. (Quoted in Grunfeld,
151).
346. Jamyang Norbu, Warriors of Tibet, 1986, [http://books.google.
com.au/books?id=epuSaZhmklAC&printsec=frontcover].
347. http://thechinabeat.blogspot.com/2009/04/dalai-lama-and-
nobel-prize-correcting.html.
348. http://www.nytimes.com/1989/10/13/world/how-and-why-
the-dalai-lama-won-the-peace-prize.html.
349. Ibid.
350. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_peace_prize.
351. http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1989/
presentation-speech.html.
352. Michael Backman, The Asian Insider, ‘The Dalai Lama Eats Meat’,
2006, 247
353. Goetz.
279
a great deception
354. Michael Backman, ‘Selling Tibet to the world’, 5 June 2008,

[http://business.theage.com.au/business/selling-tibet-to-the-
world-20080604-2lx7.html].
356. Grunfeld, 194-6.
357. New York Times,‘World New Briefs: Dalai Lama Group Says it
Got Money from CIA’, 2 October 1998.
358. Grunfeld, 201-2.
359. Ibid. 201.
360. Ibid. 201.
361. Michael Backman, The Asian Insider, ‘The Dalai Lama Eats Meat’,
2006, 240-1
362. Michael Backman, ‘Western media miss the real Tibet story’, The
Age, April 9, 2008, [http://business.theage.com.au/business/
western-media-miss-the-real-tibet-story-20080408-24nz.html, 9
April 2008].
363. Alexandra David-Néel, Initiations and Initiates in Tibet (New York:
University Books, 1959), 128-9.
364. Brendan O’Neill, ‘Is the Dalai Lama a “religious dictator”?, 20
May 2008, [http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/
article/5170/]
365. John Roberts, George Magazine, ‘How the CIA Saved the Dalai
Lama’, October 1997.
366. Grunfeld, 137.
367. Ibid. & Gelder, 212-3.
368. Gelder, 213.
369. Ibid. 213. For details of the events of March 1959, see also
Grunfeld, 134-9.
370. Gelder, 214.
371. Grunfeld, 144.
280
references
372. Gelder, 216

373. Ibid. 217.
374. Ibid. 213-4.
375. Ibid. 218.
376. Ibid. 219.
377. Ibid. 219.
378. Peter Mierau, Nationalsozialistiche Expeditionspolitik: deutsche Asien-
Expeditionen 1933 – 1945, (Munich: Herbet Utz Verlag, 2006) 357.
379. Thomas Laird, ‘INTO TIBET: The CIA’s First Atomic Spy
and His Secret Expedition to Lhasa’ Grove Press, 1st edition
May 2002. Original document can be found here: [http://www.
thelongridersguild.com/bessac.htm]
380. Allen W. Dulles, Foreign Relations of the United States
Eisenhower Administration 1958-1960, Volume XIX, U.S.
Response to the Rebellion in Tibet, 3-4 & 24 [http://www.claudearpi.
net/maintenance/uploaded_pics/Tibet1958.pdf]
381. Capucine Henry (text) and Nicolas Haque
(video), France 24, The Dalai Lama’s Demons,
August 08, 2008 [http://www.france24.com/
en/20080808-dalai-lama-demons-india-buddhism-dorje-shugden]
382. Al Jazeera, The Dalai Lama: The Devil Within, September 30,
2008 [http://english.aljazeera.net/programmes/peopleand-
power/2008/09/200893014344405483.html]
281
Index
A D
Altan Khan 120–121, 138 Dalai Lama
Atisha 118–119, 150 connection with Gelug
Avalokiteshvara 11, 53, 105, 106, Tradition 119
124, 134, 138, 145, 199 institution of 105–106
meaning of 120–121
B Dalai Lama, Eighth to Twelfth
Beger, Bruno 222. 138–139
See also reference 326 Dalai Lama, Fifth 12–13, 17–21,
Bhutan 219–220 104–107, 122–133, 134,
Buddha Shakyamuni 116–117, 136, 138
150 appointing Nechung spirit 108
Buddha’s teachings 39, 103, 117, establishing Shugden Temple
212, 213 20
mixing religion and politics 17,
C 105–107, 122
relationship with Spiritual
China 34, 158, 160–171, 175, Guide 105–107
177, 183, 218, 221, 228, reliance upon Dorje Shugden
233, 236, 243, 250, 251 19–20, 130
Chinese invasion of Tibet Dalai Lama, First 119–120, 138
151–154
Dalai Lama, Fourteenth 9–13,
Choktul [Trijang] Rinpoche 55,
27–28, 106, 146, 149–186
61
abusing faith 39
achieving Nobel Peace Prize
228
283
a great deception
affinity with Fifth 17, 43, 133 217–219

ambition of 21–22, 29, 34, 197 involvement with Panchen
as dictator 18, 31–35, 39, 78, Lama affair 176–177
79, 86, 90, 160, 199–202, Lama Policy of 17–18, 43–45,
209 51–54, 73, 86, 92, 160,
attitude to democracy 177–184 201–202, 234
attitude to non-Tibetans 54 lying of 27–28, 32, 95, 155,
attitude to Tibetan 159–160, 190
independence 161–167 many faces of 17, 79, 81,
banning practice of Dorje 83, 87, 88, 89, 161, 183,
Shugden 187–197 231–232, 238–241
breaking law 38 Mongoose-Canine Letter sent
breaking vows 239–240 to 249–255
celebrity status 81–82, 96, 231 myths surrounding escape from
comparison with Fifth 20–21 Tibet 154–160
correspondence with General non-achievements of 231–235
Tan 243–247 petitions to 50, 56, 57, 71–72,
damaging reputation of 86
Buddhism 27, 39 poem to Mao Zedong
demonstrations against 53, 57, 164–166
71–73, 75–77, 87–92 political views and failures
duplicity over involvement in 160–184
Olympic Games riots recognition of 23–29, 199
169–173 rejecting Spiritual Guide 28,
education of 35, 150 197
embracing communism reliance on Dorje Shugden
150–153, 166 20–21
fascination with war and reliance upon oracles.
Nazism 222–223 See Nechung oracle
friendship with Shoko Asahara reputation of 75, 78–79, 91,
224–225 149
harmful actions of 33–35, 37, taking ordination vows 25
39, 187–188, 240–242 The ‛Saffron-Robed Muslim’
hidden political agenda of 197 24, 29
hypocrisy of 18, 37–40, 88–91, views on terrorism and war in
93–94, 96, 116, 221, Iraq 80–81
231–235 Dalai Lama, Fourth 121, 138
incitements to murder Dalai Lama, Second 120, 138
225–227 Dalai Lama, Seventh 136–138
involvement with CIA 77–78, Dalai Lama, Sixth 133–136, 138
87, 89, 157–158, 175–176, Dalai Lama, Third 120–121, 138
284
index
Dalai Lama, Thirteenth 139–148 requests audience with Dalai

as dictator 147 Lama 56–57
ban on Shugden practice 142 Dorje Shugden statues
death of 23, 109–111, removal of 42, 46, 48, 50
147–148 Dorje Shugden Temple 20, 48
punishments during time of Dragpa Gyaltsen, Tulku 43, 122,
144–147 125–131
shameful actions of 141, 145 as Dorje Shugden 19
democracy, lack of 31, 42, 51, murder of 19, 128
69, 76, 82–83, 94, previous incarnations 127
177–184, 200–201 rejection of Lama Policy
Deng Xiaoping 167 18–19
Dolgyal 37 Drepung Monastery 48,
Dorje Shugden 19, 20, 33, 41, 120–121
99, 112 Duldzin Dragpa 19
arising after Ngatrul Dragpa
19 F
nature and function of 19, 87, feudal theocratic system 177,
129–130, 185
234
Dorje Shugden International
Coalition 72–73 G
Dorje Shugden practice 33, 130,
212–213 Ganden Monastery 42, 49
ban on 20–21, 28, 41–65, 67, Ganden Oral Lineage 119
87, 103, 160, 184–186, Ganden Phodrang 120–121,
212, 234 126, 128
flourishing of 142 Ganden Tradition. See Gelug
reasons for ban 190–191, Tradition
196–197 Gassner, Helmut 156
‛referendum’ on 37–38 Gelugpa monasteries 121
Dorje Shugden practitioners 18, Gelugpa practitioners 192–197
29, 33, 73 Gelug Tradition 17, 21, 29, 32,
accused of sectarianism 21, 42, 45, 90, 120–121, 150,
32–33, 190–192, 194–195 176, 185, 192, 196, 200,
actions against 31–32, 33, 35, 211, 213–214
37–38, 44, 46, 48–49, 52, arose as 119
53, 55–56, 63, 65, 69, 70, destruction of 29, 34
71, 76, 79, 80, 91–93, 93, Gendun Drub. See Dalai Lama,
226–227 First
Dorje Shugden Society 52, 62, Gendun Gyatso. See Dalai Lama,
80, 114 Second
285
a great deception
General Tan 155 K

correspondence with Dalai
Lama 243–247 Kadampa Tradition 118–119
Geshe Kelsang Gyatso 52, 99, Kagyupas 34, 105, 192, 194, 195
100, 214, 226 Kagyu Tradition 17, 119,
194–195, 207–210
about Dorje Shugden 129–130
Kalachakra initiation 52, 114,
about religious tolerance
211–212, 253, 254, 255
193–195
Karma Tenkyong Wangpo
view on oracles 115
17–18
Gungtang Tsultrim 34, 206–207 Kelsang Gyatso. See Dalai Lama,
Guru Deva Rinpoche 42 Seventh
Gushri Khan 17–19, 123–124 King Trisong Detsen 117
Gyalo Dondrub 34, 202–205, Kundeling Rinpoche 50, 71, 79,
207, 217, 219–220, 221 94, 128, 195–196, 197,
205, 227
H threats to life 50
Haider, Jorg 223 Kyabje Ling Rinpoche 28, 46
Harrer, Heinrich 222 Kyabje Trijang Rinpoche 26, 46,
human rights violations 10, 31, 55, 61, 99, 112, 127, 129,
51, 73, 89, 94, 232, 234, 150, 197, 211, 212
240, 241 lineage holder of Gelug
Tradition 26–29
I request to stop ban of Dorje
Shugden practice 28
independence-tax 236
Indian constitution 60–61 L
J Lama Policy 17–22, 160, 208
founder of 18
Jamyang Norbu 162, 182, 183, meaning and function of
228 17–18
Je Phabongkhapa 29, 99, 127, Langdun 23, 26
142, 211, 212–216 Lhamo Dondrub 25–28
Je Tsongkhapa 19, 29, 56, 119, Lhasang Tsering 74, 97, 161, 183
120, 142, 150, 217 Lhundrub Doma 19
relationship to Dorje Shugden Ling Rinpoche. See Kyabje Ling
129–130 Rinpoche
tradition of 35, 121, 138, 213 Lobsang Yeshe 156
Losang Chokyi Gyaltsen. See
Panchen Lama, First
Losang Gyatso. See Dalai Lama,
Fifth
286
index
M Nyingma Tradition 17, 21, 28,

32, 118, 191, 192, 200,
Manchu Chinese 135–137 205–207, 214, 249
Mao Zedong 151, 153–154, 158,
161, 164, 166, 233 O
Marpa the Translator 118
Marxist-communist ideology Ocean of Truth Explained 23, 24,
240 28
‛matrilineal relations’ 130–132 Olympic Games, demonstrations
Milarepa 119, 194 169–174
mixing religion and politics 104 oracle, meaning of 107. See also
Nechung oracle
Mongolia 120
Mongoose-Canine Letter, P
The 202, 210–211, 220,
249–255 Panchen Lama Affair, the 160,
176–177
N Panchen Lama, First 19, 120,
122–123, 125, 142
Namgyal Dratsang Monastery
death of 131
133–134
relationship with Fifth Dalai
National Endowment for
Lama 105, 125–128
Democracy 174–175
Panchen Lama Losang Chokyi
Nechung oracle 19, 21, 45, 76, Gyaltsen. See Panchen
99, 105, 107, 143, 180, Lama, First
184, 234 Panchen Losang Chogyen.
involvement in death of See Panchen Lama, First
Thirteenth Dalai Lama Phuntsog Wangyal 104–105
109–111, 147 Potala Palace 134
jealousy of 195–196 construction and function of
non-involvement in escape 105–106
of Fourteenth Dalai naming of 124
155–157 punishments in Tibet 143–146
reliance of Fourteenth Dalai
Lama upon 108–109, R
112–116
religious discrimination/
unreliability of 109–114
persecution 31, 33–35,
Ngatrul Dragpa. See Dragpa
38–39, 49, 60, 70, 73, 76,
Gyaltsen, Tulku 77, 87–92, 193, 232, 240
Norbulingka 159 Reting Lama 23–29
Nyingma practitioners 21,
192–195, 206, 254
287
a great deception
S Thurman, Robert
lying of 32–33
Sakya Tradition 17, 119 WSS letter to 32
Samdhong Rinpoche 53, 55, 86, Tibet 10, 12, 34, 52, 64–65, 71,
170, 185 128
criminal actions of 29 Chinese invasion of 26–27,
Sangye Gyatso 133–134, 136 152
sectarianism, accusations of constitution of 76, 85,
192–196. See also Dorje 178–179
Shugden practitioners changes made 58
Sera Monastery 120–121 criminal code and harsh
Serrano, Miguel 222–223 punishments of 143–146
Seventeen-Point Agreement dominant myth about 138
152–153, 160, 163, 244 secret war in 69, 175, 217–219
Shamar Rinpoche 208–210 Tibetan Buddhism, four schools
Shugden Research Group of 21, 32, 90, 196–197,
Dhomed, refutation of 205, 206–207, 209
99–100 destroying 17, 22, 34–35, 232,
signature campaigns/ 241
declarations 31, 189 Tibetan Communist Party 166
Sonam Dragpa 19 Tibetan exile Government 29,
Sonam Gyatso. See Dalai Lama, 38, 62, 85, 96, 185, 205,
Third 221
Sonam Rabten 123, 126–131 contraditory statements of 55
Strasbourg Statement 163, 167, creation of 27
177 legal status of 200–201
lying of 27, 50
T
involvement in murder of
Taktra Rinpoche 25–27 Gungthang Tsultrim 207
Tashi Lhunpo Monastery 106, nepotism within 203–204
120 reliance upon Nechung oracle
Tenzin Gyatso. See Dalai Lama, 107, 114
Fourteenth Tibetan Freedom Movement 47
The Dalai Lama Tibetan independence 34–35,
many faces of 94 71, 73, 107, 141, 160, 183,
Thirteen Groups of Tibetans/ 185, 234, 240
Settlements 206, 207 abandonment of 67–68
death of members of 34–35 Dorje Shugden practice
Thirteenth Dalai Lama 99 blamed for lack of
Thubten Gyatso. See Dalai Lama, 184–185
Thirteenth failed policies 95
288
index
the issue of 161–167 Tsangyang Gyatso. See Dalai

undemocratic decision 69, 162 Lama, Sixth
Tibetan National Assembly 29, Tulku Dragpa Gyaltsen. See
51, 52, 54, 200, 201 Dragpa Gyaltsen, Tulku
Tibetan Parliament-in-Exile 200
Tibetans, suffering of 33–35, W
37–39, 187, 232–234 western Buddhists 39
accusations of being chinese Western Shugden Society 22,
supporters 38 31–33, 88, 89, 91–92, 190,
ostracism of 18, 38 227
Tibetan system of government protests of 85
103, 104–107 worship of Dorje Shugden. See
Tibetan Youth Congress 46, 191 Dorje Shugden practice
Torres, Osel Hita 27–28
Trijang Rinpoche. See Kyabje Y
Trijang Rinpoche Yonten Gyatso.
Trode Khangsar 20 See Dalai Lama, Fourth
289

A Great Deception 2011-08

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Great Deception 2011-08

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Great Deception 2011-08

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Great Deception

Western Shugden Society

A Great Deception; The Ruling Lamas’ Policies

PART ONE: The Tibetan Situation Today

Appendix 1: 1959 Correspondence between the Dalai Lama

Since the Dalai Lama first created this international problem in

information, and we hope that the world’s media will investigate

Western Shugden Society

The Tibetan Situation Today

The explanations given in this book are to encourage people not to

wanted Buddhism to be maintained purely without being used for

With wrathful turbulent power, swifter than lightning,

‘Robes of a monk, crown adorned with rhinoceros

‘Samaya substances, offerings and tormas, outer, inner and

‘Now respectfully praising with body, speech and mind,

‘Moreover, swiftly accomplishing all wishes,

Later he ordered a Shugden Temple to be built in Lhasa called

Later, having received advice from the oracle of the Nechung

leader of all traditions of Tibetan Buddhism by making all the

Reting Lama – How he chose the

The following information has been compiled from various sources,

that the mother (ma) of the reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai

reincarnation of the Thirteenth Dalai Lama. In saying this he

good imprints of a Buddhist way of life. I am worried about our

‘As a toddler, he was put on a throne and worshipped by monks

situation in which I suffered a great deal,” said Torres, 24,

It is commonly known that in this age the great Lama Je

‘10th September 2008

is working for the Chinese. You should show your evidence

his destructive policies, the Gelug Tradition is divided into those

so-called referendum 900 innocent monks were then summarily

To liberate millions of innocent people from suffering we request

Dalai Lama to accept the following four points:

The Ban on the Practice of Dorje Shugden:

‘Whether outside of Tibet or within Tibet, this Deity is [in]

worship Gyalchen ... it happens that Dolgyal [Dorje Shugden]

people aware of this through government offices, monasteries, asso-

‘... government oracles [such as Nechung] point towards there

silently as a disappointed man. This would be a more apt

at this time, Ganden Shartse Monastery convenes a meeting to dis-

Late April, 1996

27-30 April 1996

10-11 May 1996

In short, the great monastic institutions and those under the

13-14 July 1996

Monastery expressing appreciation for the expulsion of the eleven

‘Everyone who is affiliated with the Tibetan society of Ganden

‘I myself, in early age, I also did practise this. I was also a

against the worship of Dolgyal ... however, if a person is a

‘Anyone who goes against the policy of the government must

4-6 October 1996

7-8 November 1996

19-21 November 1996

‘When I was visiting Sera Monastery [in Bylakuppe, November

‘Likewise, in Tibet in the future, if any monastery practises

After these pronouncements, the Dalai Lama stands up from his

5-8 January 1998

and the Tibetan exile government in seeking to suppress evidence

settlement and welfare officer on the strength of authorisa-