Kritik am Buch „The Shadow Of The Dalai Lama ... - Neues von Shi De

However, in an official communiqué from May 14, 1996, the government in exile denied all
accusations. In contrast — they announced that death threats had been sent from Shugden to the
offices of His Holiness and the Tibetan Women's Association. “If there comes division among
prominent persons in the Yellow Hat Sect, there will be bloodshed in the monasteries and settlements
across India”, one of the threatening letters is said to have stated (Newsweek, April 28, 1997, p. 26;
retranslation). Both sides clearly fear that their lives are threatened by the other side.
All these mutual fears, accusations, and slander in the battle between the two oracle gods reached
their climax in the ritual murder of the lama Lobsang Gyatso on February 4, 1997 which we have
described above. Lobsang Gyatso was considered a special friend of the Dalai Lama and a
pronounced opponent of the Shugden sect. A few days after the murder a press release from the
government in exile coursed around the world in which Dorje Shugden followers were said to
certainly be responsible for the murder. There was talk of confessions and arrests. This opinion
remains current among a broad public to this day.
As evidence, among other things a letter to the murder victim (Lobsang Gyatso) was cited in which (it
was said) the secretary of the Dorje Shugden Society had threatened the abbot with murder. Tashi
Wangdu, a minister of the Tibetan government in exile, held this document, written in Tibetan, in his
hand and showed it again on January 25, 1998 in Swiss Television (on the “Sternstunde”[Star Hour]
program). However, this turned out to be a deliberate and very blatant attempt to mislead, then the
Tibetan document, which was later translated, does not contain a single word of a murder threat.
Rather, it contains a polite invitation to Lobsang Gyatso to discuss “theological” questions with the
Dorje Shugden Society in Delhi (Gassner, 1999).
But this document was enough to arrest all known followers of the protective god (Shugden) in Delhi
and illegally imprison them. However, they denied participating in the crime in any form whatsoever.
[4] Indeed, despite interrogations lasting weeks by the Indian criminal police, nothing has been
proven. The evidence is so meager that it is most likely that the crime was committed by another
party. The matter was also seen so by a court in Dharamsala, which negated any connection between
the Dorje Shugden Society and the murders of February 4.
For this reason, there are claims from the Shugden followers that the Dalai Lama’s circle tried to pin
the blame on them in order to muzzle and marginalize them. In light of the power-political ambitions
and relative strength of the sect — it is said to have over 20,000 active members in India alone — this
version also makes sense. Some western worshippers of the protective god even go so far as to claim
that a higher order from the Kundun lay behind the deed. Until the murderers are convicted, a good
criminologist must keep his or her eye on all of these possibilities.
Reactions of the Tibetan parliament
Within the Tibetan parliament in exile, the incidents have led to great nervousness and high tension. A
resolution was passed demanding that “in essence government departments, organizations,
associations, monasteries and their branches under the direction of the exile Tibetan government
should abide by the ban against worship of Dhogyal” (Burns, Newsgroup 1).
In the further reactions of the people’s representatives one can read just how risky the whole matter is
seen to be. Hence, during the parliamentary session of September 20, 1997 one of the members
established that “an unprecedented amount of literature is being published everywhere that criticizes