El·e·na [el-uh-nuh, uh-ley-nuh; It. e-le-nah] /ˈɛlənə, əˈleɪnə; It. ɛˈlɛnɑ/ –noun a female given name, form of Helen // A proud student of His Eminence Tsem Rinpoche // Personal assistant with a BSc (Hons) Psych from Uni of Warwick // These are snapshots of my life, in words and pictures

A Comment on "Reuters Anti-Dorje Shugden Report Backfires"

January 8, 2016 0

This news report was the same accusation that has been rehashed over and over again (I know, I know, it is redundant to use ‘rehashed’ and ‘over and over again’ in the same sentence!). I was just amazed that a reputable news agency like Reuters would use the testimony of someone who has been discredited beyond belief, and publish such a lengthy report without any evidence at all.


People say we should stop talking about the ban and just get on with our lives. So are they suggesting that we should just sit and accept the segregation? To me, staying silent means we become complicit in the wrongdoings. Moving on with our lives means the perpetrators of the discrimination get away with what they are doing.

Who will be the next victims and targets then, and which freedoms will be the next ones to be eroded? I paraphrase here something I truly believe in: “All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”

If you want me to keep quiet and to stop talking about the ban, then end it and stop giving me a reason to speak up.


Blog post:



Trust Rinpoche to see this incident differently, and to see how it could result in something positive. When I first heard the news, I was a little worried about the impact it would have. I wasn’t worried about the information – I knew it was going to be untrue, as are all anti-Shugden allegations – but we are talking about Reuters. It’s a well-respected news agency and syndicate responsible for transmitting news to media agencies all over the world, so how far would these lies spread?

I have to say, not very far because it would appear anti-Shugden people are developing a more moderate view, and Reuters made the error of using the testimony of someone like Lama Tseta.

If Lama Tseta was such a prominent member of the anti-Shugden movement, how come no one has heard of him prior to his testimony? We have heard of Geshe Konchok Gyaltsen, Geshe Jangchup Gyaltsen, Geshe Chime Tsering, Geshe Lobsang Sopa, Kundeling Rinpoche, etc. but never Lama Tseta. Who was he prominent to?

The more missteps the media makes by publicising anti-Shugden views without evidence, the worse it will make Dharamsala look. If Dharamsala doesn’t have evidence for how Shugden is bad, but they keep insisting over and over again that it is bad, sooner or later people are going to ask, “Hang on. You keep saying they’re bad. But where’s the proof?”

Would the Tibetan leadership rather backtrack on the ban now, or wait until their own supporters turn on them and start asking them why they implemented the ban 19 years ago when there was no evidence? Which option would be less embarrassing, voluntarily lifting the ban or being pressured into it? It would be to Dharamsala and the Tibetan leadership’s benefit to end this ban because as it is, the hole they’ve dug for themselves is so deep, it’s getting harder and harder to climb and excuse their way out of it.

Reflections and Teachings, Dorje Shugden

Leave a Reply