Dorje Shugden

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Doryhe Shugden (en tibetano: རྡོ་རྗེ་ཤུགས་ལྡན་, Wylie : rdo rje shugs ldan), también conocido como Dolgyal y Gyalchen Shugden, es una entidad asociada a la escuela Gelug, la más nueva de las escuelas del budismo tibetano.^[1]A Doryhe Shugden se le considera de diversas maneras: un gyalpo destruido, un protector mundano menor, un protector mundano mayor, un protector mayor iluminado cuya apariencia exterior es la de un gyalpo, o un protector mayor iluminado cuya apariencia exterior es iluminada.

En el budismo tibetano, Doryhe Shugden es considerado el protector del dharma puro de Yhe Tsongkhapa, tradicionalmente considerado como el fundador de la escuela Gelug.^[2] La controversia sobre Dorje Shugden surgió en la década de 1930 en todas las escuelas del budismo tibetano, incluida la propia escuela Gelug, en relación con la naturaleza de Dorje Shugden, su estado de iluminación, las diferencias con las enseñanzas tradicionales Gelug, la sustitución de los protectores tradicionales Gelug, las funciones y las acciones de los seguidores occidentales de la Nueva Tradición Kadampa.^[3]

Orígenes

Protector menor

Dorje Shugden, también conocido como Dolgyal, era un " gyalpo", "espíritu enojado y vengativo" del sur del Tíbet, que fue adoptado posteriormente como un "protector menor" de la escuela Gelug, la más nueva de las escuelas del budismo tibetano,^[4]encabezados por los Dalai Lamas (aunque nominalmente los Ganden Tripas).^[5]^[6] Georges Dreyfus dice que "Shuk-den no era más que un protector menor de los Ge-luk antes de la década de 1930, cuando Pa-bong-ka comenzó a promoverlo como el principal protector de los Ge-luk".^[6] Dreyfus afirma que "la propiciación de Shukden como protector Geluk no es una tradición ancestral, sino una adopción relativamente reciente de la tradición asociada con el movimiento de avivamiento dentro de los Geluk encabezado por Pabongkha".^[7]

La transformación de Pabongka

Pabongka transformó la "práctica marginal de Doryhe Shugden en un elemento central de la tradición Ge-luk", "reemplazando así a otros protectores designados por el propio Dzong-ka-ba" y "a los protectores supramundanos tradicionales de la tradición Ge-luk".^[5] Este cambio se refleja en las obras de arte, ya que hay "una falta de arte de Doryhe Shugden en la escuela Gelug antes de finales del siglo XIX".^[8]

Pabongka presentó a Shugden como un violento protector de la escuela Gelug, que actúa contra otras tradiciones.^[9]^[10]Shugden fue un elemento clave en la persecución de Phabongkha al movimiento Rimé.^[11] Dentro de la propia escuela Gelug, Pabongka construyó Shugden para reemplazar a los protectores tradicionales Gelug Pehar, Nechung, Palden Lhamo, Mahakala, Vaisravana y Kalarupa, quien fue designado por Tsongkhapa.^[12]^[13]^[14]

El decimotercer Dalai Lama implementó restricciones a la práctica de Shugden.^[6] Pabongka se disculpó y prometió no practicar más Shuk-den.^[5]^[15]

Kelsang Gyatso

David Kay señala que Kelsang Gyatso se aparta de Phabongkha y Trijang Rinpoche al afirmar que la apariencia de Doryhe Shugden es iluminada, más que mundana.^[16] Kay afirma: Kay cita la interpretación de Kelsang Gyatso de la aparición de Shugden:

His character is fierce and violent and he destroys all enemies. Animals are sacrificed to him symbolically. His abode is full of skeletons and human skulls, weapons surround him and the blood of men and horses form a lake. His body has a dark-red colour and his facial expressions are similar to the well-known descriptions of rakshasas. However, all these attributes are not unique, they are more or less stereotypes for dharma-protectors in general.^[17]

Dreyfus describe la visión de que Shugden está iluminado como la de los "seguidores más extremos de Shugden" y agrega:

Shukden is … depicted as a fearsome deity, holding in his right hand a sword dripping with blood and in his left hand the heart torn out from the chest of its enemies.^[18]

Características

Nombre

Pabongka se refirió a Shugden como "Dol-gyel":

The yidam and Shugden are kept apart, and the dharmapāla is to be controlled. The master transfers the power to control Shugden to the disciple, and this is common practice.^[19]

Iconografía y simbolismo

La entrada sobre Doryhe Shugden en la enciclopedia de entidades budistas de Frederick Bunce describe la apariencia de Doryhe Shugden de la siguiente manera:

Face: one, fearsome, bared fangs, three bloodshot eyes, orange flame sprouts from eyebrows and facial hair, yellow brown hair stands on end, from his nostrils issue rain clouds with violent lightning; arms/hands: two, right hand holds flaming sword (khadga, ral-gri), left hand holds skull-cup (kapala, thod-pa) filled with the organs of the five senses, hearts, brains, and blood, in the crook of his left arm rests a mongoose (ichneumon or nakula, nehu-li) and golden goad/hook (ankusha, lcags-kyu); body: bejeweled, elephant skin upper garment, loin cloth of tiger skin; legs: two; ornaments: five-skull crown, wristlets, anklets, necklace, garland of fifty freshly severed heads, tiger or elephant skin as a body covering and apron of carved human bones; color: dark red; vahana: carpet of human skins on one hundred thousand thunderbolts (vajra, rdo-rje) on the back of a garuda-like bird (khyung); companion: include Zhi-ba'i-rgyal-chen, rGyas-pa'i-rgyal-chen, dBang-'dus-rgyal-chen, Drag-po'i-rgyal-chen.^[20]

Mientras tanto, von Brück describe la apariencia de Doryhe Shugden de la siguiente manera:

His character is fierce and violent and he destroys all enemies. Animals are sacrificed to him symbolically. His abode is full of skeletons and human skulls, weapons surround him and the blood of men and horses form a lake. His body has a dark-red colour and his facial expressions are similar to the well-known descriptions of rakshasas. However, all these attributes are not unique, they are more or less stereotypes for dharma-protectors in general.^[17]

Una característica de la iconografía de Doryhe Shugden es la figura central rodeada por cuatro emanaciones cardinales. Según Nebresky-Wojkowitz:

"En Oriente reside la 'emanación del cuerpo' (sku'i sprul pa) Zhi ba'i rgyal chen, blanca con una expresión suave" (Vairochana Shugden)
"En el Sur habita la 'emanación de excelencia' (yon tan gyi sprul pa) rGyas pa'i chen". (Ratna Shugden)
"En Occidente habita la 'emanación del habla' (gsung gi sprul pa) dBang 'dus rgyal chen, de color blanco, con una expresión ligeramente salvaje". (Pema Shugden)
"En el Norte reside la 'emanación del karma' ('phringyi sprul pa) Drag po'i rgyal chen. Su cuerpo es de color verde y está de un humor feroz". (Karma Shugden)^[21]

Dreyfus describe la iconografía de Doryhe Shugden:

Shukden is … depicted as a fearsome deity, holding in his right hand a sword dripping with blood and in his left hand the heart torn out from the chest of its enemies.^[18]

Control bajo Vajrabhairava

En el texto de Phabongkhapa, Shugden debe ser controlado por Vajrabhairava. Como explica von Brück:

The yidam and Shugden are kept apart, and the dharmapāla is to be controlled. The master transfers the power to control Shugden to the disciple, and this is common practice.^[19]

von Brück proporciona una traducción del texto de Phabongkhapa que dice:

....the disciples visualize themselves as the yidam Vajrabhairava and as such invoke and control Shugden. The dharmapāla Shugden is presented to the disciples as the one who abides by their commands.^[19]

Destrucción por el Quinto Dalai Lama

Según las primeras historias, el quinto Dalai Lama destruyó a Shugden mediante magia negra y rituales tántricos. Como explica Bultrini (con frases citadas del quinto dalái lama):

Oráculo

Como ocurre con otros espíritus en el Tíbet, existe un oráculo de Doryhe Shugden.^[22]

Kay señala que la presencia de un oráculo de Shugden entra en conflicto con la representación de Kelsang Gyatso de Shugden como un Buda, ya que los Budas no tienen oráculos.

Según Nebesky-Wojkowitz, "El más conocido de los videntes proféticos que actúan como portavoz de Doryhe Shugden vive en un santuario en Lhasa llamado sPro bde khang gsar Trode Khangsar (rgyal khang) o sPro khang bde chen lcog. Este es uno Uno de los pocos sacerdotes-oráculo tibetanos a quienes no se les permite casarse. En una casa cercana a este santuario se encuentra también uno de los médiums más renombrados de Kha che dmar po.^[23]

Según Joseph Rock, había dos oráculos principales de Doryhe Shugden: Panglung Choje y Trode Khangsar Choje. Rock fue testigo y documentó una invocación pública del Oráculo Panglung en Kham (Tíbet oriental) en 1928. En ese momento, el oráculo tomó una espada de acero mongol y la retorció formando muchos bucles.^[24] Choyang Duldzin Kuten Lama fue el oráculo de Doryhe Shugden durante muchos años.^[25]

Véase también

La controversia sobre Doryhe Shugden
Gyalpo

Otras lecturas

Fuentes secundarias

Bell, Christopher Paul. «Tibetan Deity Cults as Political Barometers». UVaCollab. University of Virginia.

. American Academy of Religion. 2009.

Bultrini, Raimondo (2013). The Dalai Lama and the King Demon: Tracking a Triple Murder Mystery Through the Mists of Time. New York: Tibet House / Hay House Incorporated. ISBN 978-0-9670115-23.

Dreyfus, Georges (1998). «The Shuk-Den Affair: Origins of a Controversy». Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies (IABS) 21 (2 (1998)): 227-270.

Dreyfus, Georges (October 2005). «Are We Prisoners of Shangrila?». Journal of the International Association of Buddhist Studies (1): 6-10.

Dreyfus, Georges (2011). «The Predicament of Evil: The Case of Dorje Shukden». En Eckel, M. David; Herling, Bradley L., eds. Deliver Us From Evil. Boston University Studies in Philosophy and Religion. pp. 57-74. ISBN 9780826499677.

Richard, Frédéric (2020). «Shugs ldan and the Dalai Lama: A Conflict of Political Legitimation Processes?». Revue d'Études Tibétaines (55 (July 2020)): 440-461. ISSN 1768-2959. Consultado el 8 de febrero de 2021.

Gardner, Alexander (4 de junio de 2013). «Treasury of Lives: Dorje Shugden». Tricycle. The Tricycle Foundation. Consultado el 27 de abril de 2014.

Hillman, Ben (1998). «Monastic Politics and the Local State in China: Authority and Autonomy in an Ethnically Tibetan Prefecture». The China Journal (The University of Chicago Press) (54 (July, 2005)): 29-51. doi:10.2307/20066065.

Kay, David N. (2004). Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, development and adaptation. London: Routledge Curzon. pp. 44-52. ISBN 0-415-29765-6.

Kay, David N. (1997). «The New Kadampa Tradition and the Continuity of Tibetan Buddhism in Transition». Journal of Contemporary Religion (Routledge) 12 (3): 277-293. doi:10.1080/13537909708580806. Archivado desde el original el 2 de julio de 2015.

King, Matthew (2020). «Binding Buddhas and Demons to Text: The Mongol Invention of the Dorjé Shukden and Trülku Drakpa Gyeltsen Literary Corpus (1913–1919)». Asiatische Studien - Études Asiatiques 73 (4): 713-750. doi:10.1515/asia-2019-0036.
Lopez, Donald (1998). Prisoners of Shangri-La: Tibetan Buddhism and the West. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press. pp. 188–196. ISBN 978-0-226-49310-7.

(Tesis) http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/available/etd-04092007-003235/unrestricted/lgm_thesis.pdf. Falta el |título= (ayuda)

Löhrer, Klaus (December 2009). «Pluralism the Hard Way: Governance Implications of the Dorje Shugden Controversy and the Democracy- and Rights Rhetoric Pertaining to It». Tibetan Buddhism in the West. Michael Jaeckel. Consultado el 28 de abril de 2014.

Thurman, Robert (23 de mayo de 2013). «The Dalai Lama And The Cult Of Dolgyal Shugden». Huffington Post. Consultado el 28 de abril de 2014.

. Oxford University Press. 2001. pp. 328-349. ISBN 0195654536. Falta el |título= (ayuda)

Watt, Jeff (23 de mayo de 2013). «Himalayan Buddhist Art 101: Controversial Art, Part 1 - Dorje Shugden». Tricycle. The Tricycle Foundation. Consultado el 27 de abril de 2014.
^[26]

Rinpoche, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu (2005). «Provocations of the Gyalpo». Merigar Dzogchen Community, Italy. Consultado el 21 de noviembre de 2012.

Dalai Lama (October 1997). «Concerning Dolgyal with Reference to the Views of Past Masters and other Related Matters». Archivado desde el original el 22 de junio de 2015. Consultado el 31 de diciembre de 2013.

Watt, Jeff (23 de mayo de 2013). «Himalayan Buddhist Art 101: Controversial Art, Part 1 - Dorje Shugden». Tricycle. The Tricycle Foundation. Consultado el 27 de abril de 2014.
^[26]

Watt, Jeff (23 de mayo de 2013). «Himalayan Buddhist Art 101: Controversial Art, Part 1 - Dorje Shugden». Tricycle. The Tricycle Foundation. Consultado el 27 de abril de 2014.
^[26]

Fuentes primarias

Rinpoche, Chogyal Namkhai Norbu (2005). «Provocations of the Gyalpo». Merigar Dzogchen Community, Italy. Consultado el 21 de noviembre de 2012.

Dalai Lama (October 1997). «Concerning Dolgyal with Reference to the Views of Past Masters and other Related Matters». Archivado desde el original el 22 de junio de 2015. Consultado el 31 de diciembre de 2013.

Referencias

[1]
Matthews, Carol S. (2005). «New Kadampa Tradition». New Religions. Religions of the World. Philadelphia: Chelsea House Publishers. pp. 128-143. ISBN 9780791080962.
[2]
Sparham, Gareth (13 de julio de 2020). «Tsongkhapa». www.oxfordbibliographies.com. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-539352-1. doi:10.1093/obo/9780195393521-0169. Archivado desde el original el 17 de enero de 2021. Consultado el 28 de septiembre de 2021.
[3]
Kay, David N. (2004). «The New Kadampa Tradition: The Identity of the NKT». Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development, and Adaptation. Routledge Critical Studies in Buddhism. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 100-113. ISBN 9780415753975. OCLC 51315294.
[4]
Schaik, Sam van. Tibet: A History. Yale University Press 2011, page 129.
[5]
Georges Dreyfus. «The Shugden affair: Origins of a Controversy (Part I)». Archivado desde el original el 3 de noviembre de 2013.
[6]
Georges Dreyfus. «The Shugden affair: Origins of a Controversy (Part II)». Archivado desde el original el 11 de diciembre de 2016.
[7]
Are We Prisoners of Shangrila? Orientalism, Nationalism, and the Study of Tibet by Georges Dreyfus, JIATS, no. 1 (October 2005), THL #T1218, 21, section 3: The Shukden Affair and Buddhist Modernism, retrieved 2014-05-09.
[8]
Himalayan Buddhist Art 101: Controversial Art, Part 1 - Dorje Shugden by Jeff Watt, retrieved Feb. 16, 2014.
[9]
Kay, David (2004). Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation. London: RoutledgeCurzon. p. 43. "A key element of Phabongkha Rinpoche’s outlook was the cult of the protective deity Dorje Shugden, which he married to the idea of Gelug exclusivism and employed against other traditions as well as against those within the Gelug who had eclectic tendencies."
[10]
Georges Dreyfus. «The Shugden affair: Origins of a Controversy (Part I)». Archivado desde el original el 3 de noviembre de 2013. «For Pa-bong-ka, particularly at the end of his life, one of the main functions of Gyel-chen Dor-je Shuk-den as Ge-luk protector is the use of violent means (the adamantine force) to protect the Ge-luk tradition...This passage clearly presents the goal of the propitiation of Shuk-den as the protection of the Ge-luk tradition through violent means, even including the killing of its enemies...Pa-bong-ka takes the references to eliminating the enemies of the Ge-luk tradition as more than stylistic conventions or usual ritual incantations. It may concern the elimination of actual people by the protector.»
[11]
Kay, D. N. (2004). Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, development and adaptation. RoutledgeCurzon critical studies in Buddhism. London: RoutledgeCurzon. p.43."As the Gelug agent of the Tibetan government in Kham (Khams) (Eastern Tibet), and in response to the Rimed movement that had originated and was flowering in that region, Phabongkha Rinpoche and his disciples employed repressive measures against non-Gelug sects. Religious artefacts associated with Padmasambhava – who is revered as a ‘second Buddha’ by Nyingma practitioners – were destroyed, and non-Gelug, and particularly Nyingma, monasteries were forcibly converted to the Gelug position. A key element of Phabongkha Rinpoche’s outlook was the cult of the protective deity Dorje Shugden, which he married to the idea of Gelug exclusivism and employed against other traditions as well as against those within the Gelug who had eclectic tendencies." p.47. "His teaching tour of Kham in 1938 was a seminal phase, leading to a hardening of his exclusivism and the adoption of a militantly sectarian stance. In reaction to the flourishing Rimed movement and the perceived decline of Gelug monasteries in that region, Phabongkha and his disciples spearheaded a revival movement, promoting the supremacy of the Gelug as the only pure tradition. He now regarded the inclusivism of Gelug monks who practised according to the teachings of other schools as a threat to the integrity of the Gelug tradition, and he aggressively opposed the influence of other traditions, particularly the Nyingma, whose teachings were deemed mistaken and deceptive. A key element of Phabongkha’s revival movement was the practice of relying upon Dorje Shugden, the main function of the deity now being presented as ‘the protection of the Ge-luk tradition through violent means, even including the killing of its enemies’."
[12]
Kay, David (2004). Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation. London: RoutledgeCurzon. p. 48. "It seems that during the 1940s, supporters of Phabongkha began to proclaim the fulfilment of this tradition and to maintain that the Tibetan government should turn its allegiance away from Pehar, the state protector, to Dorje Shugden."
[13]
Kay, David (2004). Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation. London: RoutledgeCurzon. p. 48. "Phabongkha’s claim that Dorje Shugden had now replaced the traditional supramundane protectors of the Gelug tradition such as Mahakala, Vaisravana and, most specifically, Kalarupa (‘the Dharma-King’), the main protector of the Gelug who, it is believed, was bound to an oath by Tsong Khapa himself."
[14]
Georges Dreyfus. «The Shugden affair: Origins of a Controversy (Part I)». «These descriptions have been controversial. Traditionally, the Ge-luk tradition has been protected by the Dharma-king (dam can chos rgyal), the supra-mundane deity bound to an oath given to Dzong-ka-ba, the founder of the tradition. The tradition also speaks of three main protectors adapted to the three scopes of practice described in the Stages of the Path (skyes bu gsum gyi srung ma): Mahakala for the person of great scope, Vaibravala for the person of middling scope, and the Dharma-king for the person of small scope. By describing Shuk-den as "the protector of the tradition of the victorious lord Manjushri," Pa-bong-ka suggests that he is the protector of the Ge-luk tradition, replacing the protectors appointed by Dzong-ka-ba himself. This impression is confirmed by one of the stories that Shuk-den's partisans use to justify their claim. According to this story, the Dharma-king has left this world to retire in the pure land of Tushita having entrusted the protection of the Ge-luk tradition to Shuk-den. Thus, Shuk-den has become the main Ge-luk protector replacing the traditional supra-mundane protectors of the Ge-luk tradition, indeed a spectacular promotion in the pantheon of the tradition.»
[15]
Bultrini, Raimondo. The Dalai Lama and the King Demon. Tibet House 2013. Phabongka said "I shall perform purification and promise with all my heart that in the future I will avoid propitiating, praying to, and making daily offerings to Shugden. I admit to all the errors I have made, disturbing Nechung and contradicting the principle of the refuge, and I beg you, in your great heartfelt compassion, to forgive me and purify my actions."
[16]
Kay, David (2004). Tibetan and Zen Buddhism in Britain: Transplantation, Development and Adaptation. London: RoutledgeCurzon. p. 101-2.
[17]
von Brück, Michael (2001). "Canonicity and Divine Interference" in Dalmia, V., Malinar, A., & Christof, M. (2001). Charisma and Canon: Essays on the Religious History of the Indian Subcontinent. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 337.
[18]
Dreyfus, Georges (2011). “The Predicament of Evil: The Case of Dorje Shukden” in Deliver Us From Evil, p. 60, Editor(s): M. David Eckel, Bradley L. Herling, Boston University Studies in Philosophy and Religion.
[19]
von Brück, Michael (2001). "Canonicity and Divine Interference" in Dalmia, V., Malinar, A., & Christof, M. (2001). Charisma and Canon: Essays on the Religious History of the Indian Subcontinent. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 340-341.
[20]
Bunce, Frederick. An Encyclodpaedia of Buddhist Deities, Demigods, Godlings, Saints and Demons. p. 441
[21]
Nebesky-Wojkowitz (1998:138-139)
[22]
von Brück, Michael (2001). "Canonicity and Divine Interference" in Dalmia, V., Malinar, A., & Christof, M. (2001). Charisma and canon: Essays on the religious history of the Indian subcontinent. New Delhi: Oxford University Press. p. 337
[23]
Nebesky-Wojkowitz (1998:144)
[24]
Rock, Joseph F. Sungmas, the Living Oracles of the Tibetan Church, National Geographic, (1935) 68:475-486.
[25]
Autobiography of His Eminence Choyang Duldzin Kuten Lama (1989). p. 1. retrieved 2008-12-07
[26]
Birgit, Zotz (18 de abril de 2018). «Zur europäischen Wahrnehmung von Besessenheitsphänomenen und Orakelwesen in Tibet». othes.uivie.ac.at. Consultado el 18 de abril de 2018.