Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators
I agree. There's a very similar situation with the NKT. Outsiders only focus on the protector issue without being aware that the group itself and the way it treats its followers is also very wrong, with a lot of cult like control exerted on members to conform and give as much time and money to the group as they can.Alfredo wrote:I regard the protector issue as a distraction from the more pressing concern of whether Tsem is behaving as a cult leader.
Sadness is realizing those you trusted shouldn't have been trusted
One loses all his spiritual powers if he even thinks ill of Guru. ~ Lord Shiva (Guru Tantra)
Avoiding beneficial dharma work is saying ur laziness wins. Don't cite policies & feelings. U leave it to others to do it
Sometimes you can explain something till your blue to people. They get it. They understand but too complacent,...
Why disparage ur guru behind his back and in front smile?
Leaving an important job for an easier & more 'fun' job reflects ur selfish mind especially if u were needed so much
When we always find reasons to complain, your like the little boy who cried wolf, eventually u'll be ignored
Creating schism will make u look 'good' very short term, then u will be discovered & all respect is gone
When ur guru say this work is beneficial & should be done, u whisper behind to others u don't think so, u create schism
When ur guru says this work is good/beneficial & u say it isn't, then u have more wisdom than ur guru. You winOnce u lose my respect, I don't hate u,but I will not work with u again nor trust u. I just smile at u & send good prayers.
Saying u love someone but avoiding all works & necessaries to help the person shows who u really are. U love yourself & no one else
The evidence that you provide for the nature of the group is an anonymous blog where the author talks in vague terms terms about some organisation ("the company"). It could be anybody talking about any organisation.Alfredo wrote:I regard the protector issue as a distraction from the more pressing concern of whether Tsem is behaving as a cult leader. I suspected as much based on his the details of his own organization's literature, but these other accounts certainly reinforce the impression, and have the ring of authenticity. Are they unsubstantiated gossip? Well, in view of Tsem's history of suing his critics (actually he has his students do it), a desire for anonymity is quite understandable. I find them at least as solid as the numerous accounts PRAISING Tsem--which, you'll notice, Kechara tends to churn out en masse. Really, I've never met a lama more obsessed with self-promotion. They say his students have quotas to meet in terms of blog comments and social media activity, much like China's famous "fifty cent-ers," and many of the posts in this thread have that tenor. You might even say that Tsem's status as a lama is unsubstantiated, except in the tautalogical social sense that he has managed to attract followers.
If you insist on focusing on supernatural issues--as opposed, for example, to the allegation that he has installed "security" cameras all over Kechara for the purpose of spying on people, and gleaning little bits of information which he can then use to impress them with his supposed psychic abilities--then may I suggest, as a more fruitful line of discussion, the issue of his emphasis on protecting his followers from black magic? Or the supernatural threats which he assures them await anyone who abandons or opposes their guru (who, you'll notice, is assumed to be Tsem)? You're probably right about the Setrap thing, though.
The larger point which this raises is, how can anyone know from afar who is a lama, let alone a lama worthy of respect? Just because they look the part, or have a glowing website about themselves, is no guarantee of authenticity. Too often Western followers of Tibetan Buddhism automatically side with the presumed authorities of their religion over their critics (see Chungyam Trungpa), without stopping to consider whether (as in that Zen story about the rampaging elephant) the critics have a Buddha Nature which also deserves to be heeded. We might stop to ask whether we, the sort of audience represented by Dharma Wheel, are not part of the problem.
I tweet daily and about different subjects. I don’t particularly enjoy social media, but it is a necessity to bring about more teachings and knowledge to reach people.
This morning I got up and tweeted all these which I include below. It is a teaching on our views, our relationship with our teacher, practice and dharma learning. It is also on the relationship between what we tend to protect within ourselves because it’s too much to deal with. But we have to deal with it. It will not serve us to not deal with it.
That assumes that he knows that his students are acting that way.JKhedrup wrote:Well, they are posted on his own twitter page, just google twitter and tsem tulku.
And he speaks in the first person about there being no Wifi in his hotel room, etc.
It is him speaking, I don't think he would allow his students to impersonate him in that way.
People come and go, but look at the ‘quality’ of the minds of those who left. Look carefully and think carefully about how they were. - Tsem Rinpoche
Do we really deserve a kind, compassionate and loving guru? Or do we deserve to perish with the weight of our deeds and negativities? - Tsem Rinpoche
Your wrong views about your guru is correct and everyone else right views are wrong. You are the only one who is correct? – Tsem Rinpoche
Your Dharma wisdom is greater than your guru’s and it ‘allows’ you to criticise your guru. Is that what you think is correct? – Tsem Rinpoche
You profess don’t be judgemental, but you spend your days and nights judging your guru and criticising to those around you. – Tsem Rinpoche
Criticising your gurus is your way to cover your negativities that you wish to hide from others. – Tsem Rinpoche
Criticise your guru all you want, lets ‘compare’ where you are in a few years and where your guru is. Results count! The end. – Tsem Rinpoche
The evidence that you provide for the nature of the group is an anonymous blog where the author talks in vague terms terms about some organisation ("the company"). It could be anybody talking about any organisation.
Do you have any hard facts? Fior example: the twitter statements posted here by Ven Khedrup. But even these are not hard facts because how can one prove that these were "said" by Tsem Tulku?
Sherab Dorje wrote:Dear Ven Khedrup, I don't know if you were a member of e-sangha back when Marcos had logged into the site (as moderator) and his kid brother jumped onto the computer when Marcos was out and raised hell all over the forum?
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests